Irn-Bru wrote:DEHog wrote:As for our Skins, the future starts with admitting you’re a very poorly run football team/organization. I may be wrong but to me the Skins act like they are a perennial playoff team, they aren’t even a perennial playoff contender!!
I have no idea what this means. Did something about the team's mentality or the way they carried themselves on the field scream "we're a perennial playoff team" to you this year? Did anything Snyder or Bruce Allen said give you that impression? Anything Gruden said? Everyone top to bottom appears to recognize that we are a team who has lost more than won in recent years and is looking to "right the ship" (to borrow a phrase the organization likes to use).
I do not get the same impression as you from the Redskins at all.
The formula for success just doesn’t seem that difficult to me. It’s a copycat league; they’re plenty of examples to follow. When you look at organizations like the Pats, Steelers, Ravens and now even the Hawks its not that they draft BETTER than us, it’s that they draft MORE than us.
I disagree; it's definitely that they draft better than us.
Total draft picks, 2010-2014:
Ravens: 42
Steelers: 44
Patriots: 44
Seahawks: 48
Redskins: 42
Are you telling me that 2 extra players over the course of five years is what has made the difference in depth and talent between some of the league's best teams and the Redskins?
Something else to consider, total draft picks during the same time period of selected interesting good/bad teams:
Vikings: 47
Texans: 44
Cowboys: 37
Saints: 27
If you are looking for correlations, it seems to me like a smart head coach + QB has a much higher match with the good teams than something like "lots of draft picks."
I don’t know the numbers but I’d be willing to bet that the percentage of players drafted (who play meaningful years) by those teams is similar to the ones we draft.
It might be worth checking out the numbers to figure this out, rather than dismissing the idea. We've had some years where almost no players make any impact and almost all are gone within 2-3 seasons. When you look at the Ravens recent drafts, most all of their picks are at least contributors to a team that is considered to have decent talent generally. That tells me that there is a quality dimension to this which you may be leaving out.
It’s just that while we are drafting 3 to 7 players a year they are drafting upward of 10 to a dozen.
Your info is outdated. I think you have in mind the 2006 Redskins, not the 2014 Redskins.
This organization, for whatever reason, hasn’t had the patients to build through the draft.
I'm not sure what this means. We've drafted as many players as some of the big boys. Are you saying that we didn't give some of those players enough of a chance to be starters on the team, choosing instead to go after free agents? Who do you have in mind?
The model has been that we are only a few players away and we go out and make the big slash, for the life of me I don’t understand why or who believes that will work.
Again, 2006 Redskins, not 2014.
Look, I sympathize with a lot of what you say, DEHog, but your winning formula reminds me of Homer Simpson's investment advice: "I like to buy low and sell high." Easy to say, but the real question is how to do it.