The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

CanesSkins26 wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:

Contrary to the belief of armchair fans like Ray, 2 1/2 year is not long enough to overhaul a roster and build a winning organization when we were as bad as we were. I expect to see progress this year, and I did. I expect to see more progress next year. If at the end of year four we're still 6-10 or so, then yeah, you're getting my attention. But advocating starting over now is just crazy.

If 2.5 years isnt enough, how do you explain the Colts' turnaround? Do you really think that they have more talent than the Redskins? A 2-14 team is now 5-3, and they are in year 1 of a switch to a 3-4 and playing better than our D in year 3. And all of this with their head coach away from the team fighting cancer.

I always love the "Tom Brady" argument. I actually don't need to "explain" anyone who turned around in less than 2.5 years to argue that it's not normal. There are 32 teams, many of them bad and most of them stay that way more than 2.5 years. And you didn't even support the Colts were as bad as all around bad as our Jim Zorn team was, you just pointed to a one year record.

The Colts are just one example. Take the Lions. They were in far worse shape after what Millen did to them then we were when Shanahan took over. In 2008 and 2009 they were a combined 2-30. In 2010 they improved to 6-10 and last year to 10-6 and a playoff spot.

Gotcha. We've gone past the "Tom Brady" argument and now it's the "Tom Brady and Kurt Warner" argument.

Tom Brady? That would be silly. That's one guy. Tom Brady AND Kurt Warner did it, now that's an argument.

Here's an exercise for you. List all the teams who have ever sucked. Now, list how many of them still sucked 2.5 years later. In fact more than two didn't suck 2.5 years later. But the vast majority...

And that even gives you that you didn't show either of your not one but two examples didn't come with demonstration the team was actually as bad from top to bottom as ours.

CanesSkins26 wrote:In 2008 and 2009 they were a combined 2-30.

Who'd they beat those two games?

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:

I don't care if I'm wrong. I advocate in politics freedom from government. I am not on a side, I advocate whoever supports that.

Thanks for the laugh I needed that.

The next post will not be your backing that up

So, Romney then, right?

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:

Contrary to the belief of armchair fans like Ray, 2 1/2 year is not long enough to overhaul a roster and build a winning organization when we were as bad as we were. I expect to see progress this year, and I did. I expect to see more progress next year. If at the end of year four we're still 6-10 or so, then yeah, you're getting my attention. But advocating starting over now is just crazy.

If 2.5 years isnt enough, how do you explain the Colts' turnaround? Do you really think that they have more talent than the Redskins? A 2-14 team is now 5-3, and they are in year 1 of a switch to a 3-4 and playing better than our D in year 3. And all of this with their head coach away from the team fighting cancer.

I always love the "Tom Brady" argument. I actually don't need to "explain" anyone who turned around in less than 2.5 years to argue that it's not normal. There are 32 teams, many of them bad and most of them stay that way more than 2.5 years. And you didn't even support the Colts were as bad as all around bad as our Jim Zorn team was, you just pointed to a one year record.

The Colts are just one example. Take the Lions. They were in far worse shape after what Millen did to them then we were when Shanahan took over. In 2008 and 2009 they were a combined 2-30. In 2010 they improved to 6-10 and last year to 10-6 and a playoff spot.

Gotcha. We've gone past the "Tom Brady" argument and now it's the "Tom Brady and Kurt Warner" argument.

Tom Brady? That would be silly. That's one guy. Tom Brady AND Kurt Warner did it, now that's an argument.

Here's an exercise for you. List all the teams who have ever sucked. Now, list how many of them still sucked 2.5 years later. In fact more than two didn't suck 2.5 years later. But the vast majority...

And that even gives you that you didn't show either of your not one but two examples didn't come with demonstration the team was actually as bad from top to bottom as ours.

Kurt Warner?

CanesSkins26 wrote:

langleyparkjoe wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:You're a fair weather fan anyway, whatever.

Proof????

Since when does Kazoo offer proof for anything that he says?

Dude! Wake up!! The burden is never on him!!!

CanesSkins26 wrote:

I don't care if I'm wrong. I advocate in politics freedom from government. I am not on a side, I advocate whoever supports that.

Thanks for the laugh I needed that.

Just metaphorically spit up some coffee.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:

I don't care if I'm wrong. I advocate in politics freedom from government. I am not on a side, I advocate whoever supports that.

Thanks for the laugh I needed that.

The next post will not be your backing that up

That he needed a laugh?

DarthMonk wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:

I don't care if I'm wrong. I advocate in politics freedom from government. I am not on a side, I advocate whoever supports that.

Thanks for the laugh I needed that.

The next post will not be your backing that up

That he needed a laugh?

Canes whines then in fact doesn't back it up.

Deadskins thinks word association is an argument.

Then you go playground.

Wow, how do I compete with playground? It's a devastating tactic. Well played, my friend. Well played...

CanesSkins26 wrote:

It's easy to bash the team when we lost three in a row. Too easy. Pointlessly easy. But you want to do that then whine about me? How dare I defend the Redskins on ... The Hogs ...

This is football, I advocate my team. And defend them against people who hate on them.

If I don't like the direction the team is headed I'm going to speak my mind. When I think the coaches are making excuses to justify their underperformance I'm going to call them on it. Especially when there are teams accomplishing things that the coaches say can't be done. You can defend Shanahan all you want, but at the end of the day a team is only as good as its record, and right now we are 3-6 in year 3 of a rebuild, which is pathetic.

Damn dude spot on assessment but evidently we can't put that on this board without rose colored glass wearing Shanahan followers shouting one more year don't bash we have injuries a hard schedule....And if that isn't whining and pathetic excuses then what the heck is?? We are to simply stew to ourselves and continue to watch a once proud organization continue to be the Rodney Dangerfield of the NFL and like it.......Gotcha!!!

DaSkinz Baby wrote:evidently we can't put that on this board without rose colored glass

Yes, "The Hogs" means we're a neutral NFL site for random NFL fans with no affiliation to any team. Anyone who defends a team ... any team ... like one based in the DC area ... is what the heck??? .. You and Canes seriously need some cheese with your whine...

DaSkinz Baby wrote:Damn dude spot on assessment but evidently we can't put that on this board without rose colored glass wearing Shanahan followers shouting one more year

I guess you missed the post where Canes said that right now he thinks Shanahan should get one more year?

Children, Children ... PLEASE

Can we go back to the topic of the thread and stop the chest thumping as to who is the best and most righteous fan and who is a fair weather fan?

Let's stick to the topic. I do not see or want a change in the coaching staff before the end of the season.

Jim will be judged for the WHOLE season and not only part of it. Bruce Allen is staying.

Those of you who need to just VENT can go to the SMACK forum and settle it among yourselves.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Deadskins thinks word association is an argument.

Can you point to an example of this?

Irn-Bru wrote:

DaSkinz Baby wrote:Damn dude spot on assessment but evidently we can't put that on this board without rose colored glass wearing Shanahan followers shouting one more year

I guess you missed the post where Canes said that right now he thinks Shanahan should get one more year?

I guess you missed the post where Canes said 2.5 years is enough?

CanesSkins26 wrote:If 2.5 years isnt enough, how do you explain the Colts' turnaround?

I also like Canes invite you to read the side he's arguing and the ... title .. of the thread he's arguing it ...

While I do not agree with the replace Shanny now thought.....I am certainly thinking more along the lines that our coaching staff is a big part of this problem.

We were not competitive against a good (but beatable) Steeler team, and then we laid an egg at home against the Panthers. Our defense has been pathetic all year....and while the salary cap certainly impacted our FA selections, our coaching staff STILL brought in the players we now see on the field.

There is a difference between being 3-6, but the feeling that the team is truely competitive week in and week out....and 3-6 where the trend is down vice up.

I am onboard with a coaching shakeup at the end of the season, beginning with the D Coord....

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:

DaSkinz Baby wrote:Damn dude spot on assessment but evidently we can't put that on this board without rose colored glass wearing Shanahan followers shouting one more year

I guess you missed the post where Canes said that right now he thinks Shanahan should get one more year?

I guess you missed the post where Canes said 2.5 years is enough?

CanesSkins26 wrote:If 2.5 years isnt enough, how do you explain the Colts' turnaround?

I also like Canes invite you to read the side he's arguing and the ... title .. of the thread he's arguing it ...

I think you're missing what side CS26 is arguing.... Not sure how that's possible considering he has has the same opinion for about 2.5 years

First of all Canes is far from a fair-weather fan, but once he has a opinion he will NOT change it regardless what the FACTS show. That's cool when it's a opinion and he rarely post his opinion as fact...

His opinion is that Shanny as a coach should get another year, as he has pointed out a few times in this thread. He also said 2.5 years was long enough... AND he was giving his opinion of Shanny as a TALENT EVALUATOR... he only said 2.5 years because MS has only had the job that long. If we could go back a year or two his post would have read:

CanesSkins26 wrote:If 1.5 years isnt enough, how do you explain the Colts' turnaround?

or

CanesSkins26 wrote:If .5 years isnt enough, how do you explain the Colts' turnaround?

He just don't like Poppa Shanny (or his history of) wearing the HC and GM hats, it's mostly that GM hat that he wants to turn in, that's what he meant about 2.5 years being enough. He gave you the Colts (no coach, but they had someone other than the coach build the team) as proof that it doesn't take 2.5 five years to turn around a team, he even included the fact that the GM gutted the team and installed the same defensive scheme that Shanny the GM/HC installed but somehow that became nis "Tom Brady argument" (although YOU are the one that memtioned Brady...)

I'm not sure why or how Brady fits but Canes then pointed to the Lions less than 2.5 turn around after Matt Millen (the GM) was canned... You called that the "Kurt Warner argument (another guy only YOU have mentioned).

You want I-B to go back and read what CS26 is arguing? It's the same argument that he has had since Shanny was hired.

Can you explain WTF Brady had to do with the Colts one year turn around after they brought in a new HC and a new GM who weren't the same person (which was CS26's argument) and while you're at it WTF did Warner ever do in Detroit after they lost to ever team they played for two years except when the played the Redskins (there ya go DS ).

Now on to what the title of this thread is about...

I'm starting to see Canes' POV more and more... Let someone other than ANYBODY in the current front office evaluate and sign the players, so Shanny can focus on coaching (of course Mike will have input but not the final word), also might not be a bad idea for him to take over the offensive play calling (weather it's just in certain instances or full time). I don't really have a problem with Klye remaining the OC and it would give Kyle more time with RGIII which would make Grossman a former Redskins roster holder

OH YEAH...

Haslett has to go... should have been gone 2.5 years ago

This just in - EVERYTHING that is posted is basically that poster's OPINION

this is a Redskins' fan site and there are obviously different OPINIONS about how to resolve the issues


I like the fact (that's my OPINION, of course) that this franchise finally has a FO and they are working to try and undo the mess created by Snyder

AFTER this season there will be some changes made - many players and a few of the coaches will not be here next season - those decisions will be made AFTER this season .... NOT before


not sure if Mike is still here next year but hopefully he is able to be a part of the success that results from the trade that brought us RG3

personally I hope that Jim and Kyle are gone and I'm not a big Mike as HC fan


but ... that's just my OPINION

1niksder wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:

DaSkinz Baby wrote:Damn dude spot on assessment but evidently we can't put that on this board without rose colored glass wearing Shanahan followers shouting one more year

I guess you missed the post where Canes said that right now he thinks Shanahan should get one more year?

I guess you missed the post where Canes said 2.5 years is enough?

CanesSkins26 wrote:If 2.5 years isnt enough, how do you explain the Colts' turnaround?

I also like Canes invite you to read the side he's arguing and the ... title .. of the thread he's arguing it ...

I think you're missing what side CS26 is arguing.... Not sure how that's possible considering he has has the same opinion for about 2.5 years

First of all Canes is far from a fair-weather fan, but once he has a opinion he will NOT change it regardless what the FACTS show. That's cool when it's a opinion and he rarely post his opinion as fact...

His opinion is that Shanny as a coach should get another year, as he has pointed out a few times in this thread. He also said 2.5 years was long enough... AND he was giving his opinion of Shanny as a TALENT EVALUATOR... he only said 2.5 years because MS has only had the job that long. If we could go back a year or two his post would have read:

CanesSkins26 wrote:If 1.5 years isnt enough, how do you explain the Colts' turnaround?

or

CanesSkins26 wrote:If .5 years isnt enough, how do you explain the Colts' turnaround?

He just don't like Poppa Shanny (or his history of) wearing the HC and GM hats, it's mostly that GM hat that he wants to turn in, that's what he meant about 2.5 years being enough. He gave you the Colts (no coach, but they had someone other than the coach build the team) as proof that it doesn't take 2.5 five years to turn around a team, he even included the fact that the GM gutted the team and installed the same defensive scheme that Shanny the GM/HC installed but somehow that became nis "Tom Brady argument" (although YOU are the one that memtioned Brady...)

I'm not sure why or how Brady fits but Canes then pointed to the Lions less than 2.5 turn around after Matt Millen (the GM) was canned... You called that the "Kurt Warner argument (another guy only YOU have mentioned).

You want I-B to go back and read what CS26 is arguing? It's the same argument that he has had since Shanny was hired.

Can you explain WTF Brady had to do with the Colts one year turn around after they brought in a new HC and a new GM who weren't the same person (which was CS26's argument) and while you're at it WTF did Warner ever do in Detroit after they lost to ever team they played for two years except when the played the Redskins (there ya go DS ).

Now on to what the title of this thread is about...

I'm starting to see Canes' POV more and more... Let someone other than ANYBODY in the current front office evaluate and sign the players, so Shanny can focus on coaching (of course Mike will have input but not the final word), also might not be a bad idea for him to take over the offensive play calling (weather it's just in certain instances or full time). I don't really have a problem with Klye remaining the OC and it would give Kyle more time with RGIII which would make Grossman a former Redskins roster holder

OH YEAH...

Haslett has to go... should have been gone 2.5 years ago

Wow thank you another spot on post. I will also say that if Bruce can get the power Shanny has and Shanny sticks at being the HC cool keep him but evidently he can't do both jobs well. I think he also needs to go back to calling plays and not allowing his son too, at least in the red zone. So to me a few changes and I would be accepting of him staying and most importantly Jim Hasbeen HAS TO GO NOW!! SERIOUSLY....

WHY do we HAVE TO get rid of the DC now?

WHY can this decision not wait until after the season is over?


Should we also get rid of ALL the other coaches AND players that are not doing their jobs?

what is wrong with some of you guys?

SkinsJock wrote: what is wrong with some of you guys?

dramatic. emotional. irrational.

spot on CLL - and it goes for me too - I'm a little pissed at how things are going - but geez

anyhow - we DO need to make some changes but these changes are best made at the end of the season, after the whole body of work is evident


we have a lot to look forward to here and despite what some guys are VERY determined not to see - there have been some good things from having Bruce and Mike in charge here - hopefully they can continue their work and surround RG3 with the players and coaches we need

1niksder wrote:in Detroit after they lost to ever team they played for two years except when the played the Redskins (there ya go DS ).

My question was to counter his argument that those Lions were a more messed up team than the Skins.

This is a real dilemma...do we keep the current staff and hope things are gonna improve (which I don't think they will), or should Shanny be fired and we start anew? The problem with this move is I don't see a large pool of proven, Superbowl winning ex-coaches standing in line to take this job...if Shanny goes, who's next?

grampi wrote:This is a real dilemma...do we keep the current staff and hope things are gonna improve (which I don't think they will), or should Shanny be fired and we start anew? The problem with this move is I don't see a large pool of proven, Superbowl winning ex-coaches standing in line to take this job...if Shanny goes, who's next?

Chucky
Malcolm in the Middle
The Crimson Chin
All three SB winning coaches, who will be FAs after the season.

This comparison to the Colts is completely off base. The Colts were a playoff team two years ago. They lost their franchise QB and fell apart for a year because they didn't have a good backup option in place. It shouldn't be a big surprise that they're doing well with Luck.