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

The one point that I haven't seen mentioned is this, when you compare personnel other than coaches, what do you have? The Bengals had what, 15 straight cellar-dweller seasons, guaranteeing them a lot of first picks or near first picks every year in the draft. Face it folks, that's one way to get some real talent. The Giants had recently been to a Super Bowl, there was already a lot of talent in there for Coughlin to build on. Vermiel took over teams that had been under-performing for some time, but had gathered a fair amount of talent, so in each case the cupboard was pretty well stocked. Contrast that to Joe Gibbs, who came in to a team that was a team in name only, who lacked discipline, who had a bunch of over-paid individuals, and not much else going for it, except for an owner who finally, possibly in desperation, stepped away from his own ego and his desire to play Fantasy Football owner, and let someone else call the shots. Gibbs has had to come in and take these men, mold them into the start of a "Joe Gibbs team", and is 1 1/2 seasons into that. Can he improve? Of course. Could an offensive coordinator help? Couldn't hurt, if for no other reason than to give him some fresh input. But cut the man some slack. For a number of reasons, the talent level on the Redskins hasn't been what it should have been for a number of years, and he's doing a heck of a job getting some of these players to over-achieve. IMHO, that gets him the benefit of the doubt, even if I didn't have very fond memories of the first Joe Gibbs era!

I'm not among those ready to run anybody out of town...but I really want to see some improvement ASAP, as do we all.
There are some very inexplicable things during games...and they are repetitive.
I appreciate the work you did with the comparisions...but I want to see it on the field.
Tired of being paper tigers.

tcwest10 wrote:I'm not among those ready to run anybody out of town...but I really want to see some improvement ASAP, as do we all.
There are some very inexplicable things during games...and they are repetitive.
I appreciate the work you did with the comparisions...but I want to see it on the field.
Tired of being paper tigers.

There are a few I'm almost willing to risk felony charges to get off the roster.

Ofcourse Gibbs gets the full 5 years. Even if we struggle he still deserves the chance to try to win because he has done it before. However, that doesn't mean that changes shouldn't be made. The first change that needs to happen is the hiring of a real GM. Gibbs is best at coaching so let him stick to that and bring in an experienced GM to make the personnel decisions. Our biggest problems the last 10 years or so have been bad contracts, bad drafts, and wasting of draft choices. The blame for this goes to everybody: Snyder, Cerrato, Spurrier, Gibbs, etc.

I agree a GM would be great. I'd also like to see an offensive coordinator. At the very least, it leaves offensive control in Coach Gibbs' hands, while infusing a new perspective, and having someone who can coach up a young QB.

Having said that, there do have to be some changes on the field as well. I mean, the talent argument is a good one when you perhaps compare us to the Chargers, etc, but how about comparing us to the Spurrier skins? Do you think Steve Spurrier had dramatically more talent on his team than Coach Gibbs? And yet, through their first 27 games (which I admit is an arbitrary number), they have the same record...

weneedcharlesmann wrote:I agree a GM would be great. I'd also like to see an offensive coordinator. At the very least, it leaves offensive control in Coach Gibbs' hands, while infusing a new perspective, and having someone who can coach up a young QB.

Having said that, there do have to be some changes on the field as well. I mean, the talent argument is a good one when you perhaps compare us to the Chargers, etc, but how about comparing us to the Spurrier skins? Do you think Steve Spurrier had dramatically more talent on his team than Coach Gibbs? And yet, through their first 27 games (which I admit is an arbitrary number), they have the same record...

Again, the team went 8-8 the year before Spurrier took over and he turned it into a 5-11 team. It is also silly to compare their first 27 games because Spurrier also lost four of his last five! Gibbs took over Spurrier's mess and has obviously done a lot to get the team back to the level it was at before Spurrier took over. The fact that over their first 27 games they have had the same record actually shows that Gibbs is a far superior coach to Spurrier as he started with crap and turned it into something decent while Spurrier did the opposite!

Only someone who is blind could not realize that this team is better than it was last year, and head and shoulders above what it was 2 years ago.

5 of our losses this year are by a total of 19 points... 2 touchdowns, 2 2-pt conversions, and a field goal, i hate talkin about what we could be, but that shows alot there.

Gibbs has already worked miracles even though you may not realize it, it has effected most all of us, he has brought some pride and confidence back to an entire area and fanbase that had none. No longer can you write off games as losses before the season starts, no longer are there more opposition fans than skins fans in the stands, no longer do we think theres a game we cant win.

I dont know how much that means to some of you, but to me that means alot, i know good things are coming to this team and that the whole atmosphere of this town is different and we can thank gibbs for that, over 10 years of give up football are over.

Were not trying to simply win games here, were trying to win a superbowl and it takes alot more than instant success to be champions, and if the tradeoff is one 14-2 year with no championship for acouple years of tough times and a superbowl then i will take the latter.

Ok, well that argument would suggest that Spurrier is a worse coach than Marty, since he turned Marty's team into a worse team. The point is the talent differential between Spurrier's team and Coach Gibb's team. Determining that Spurrier ruined a possibly good team just means that he created a bag of spit and he couldn't win with it. Now, Coach Gibbs, having been handed a roughly equivalent bag of spit, hasn't done any better, at least on paper. That's the point about talent differential.

As for comparing their records---well, we have yet to see what Coach Gibbs will do in his last 5 games, and so his record may indeed beat out the ole ball coach...i suppose that's a benchmark of sorts....

in the end, look, the games themselves don't lie...we've won some close games, and lost some close games...but there can be no doubt that playcalling had something to do with some of those losses and some of those wins...now, if a team has more losses than wins, then, perhaps tweaking the playcalling might help, right? I'm not saying we need some massive overhaul of the offense, but we do need to do the following things, i think:

1) develop a more effective use for clinton portis--he can catch out of the backfield (drops last week aside); he can be a homerun kind of back in the right system (if you doubt that, go back and look at his #s at denver, and compare them to any of the others); he is not at his best when running off tackle, etc...

2) get away a little bit from max protect on every play...you want the santana moss of the first 5 games? get the double and triple teams off him...how does that happen--get more open receivers....

Now, I know everyone is going to ask for my coaching credentials, so i'll just go ahead and say i don't have any...ignore if you'd like on that basis....

weneedcharlesmann wrote:Ok, well that argument would suggest that Spurrier is a worse coach than Marty, since he turned Marty's team into a worse team. The point is the talent differential between Spurrier's team and Coach Gibb's team. Determining that Spurrier ruined a possibly good team just means that he created a bag of spit and he couldn't win with it. Now, Coach Gibbs, having been handed a roughly equivalent bag of spit, hasn't done any better, at least on paper. That's the point about talent differential.

But he has done better because this team has been improving and not going backwards. It hasn't gone from 8-8 to 7-9 to 5-11. It's gone from 5-11 to 6-10 to 5-6 and hopefully better. So he obviously has done better because this team is improving and not going down the toilet as it did with Spurrier in charge! He took the talent and financial nightmare that Spurrier left him and improved by one game last year and even more this year after not having coached any football in twelve years!

And Spurrier obviously destroyed the talent level. Who in the world would CUT Stecen Davis?

Gibbs, on the other hand, has brought in Portis, Moss, Washington, ey, Taylor, Griffin, Springs... Those guys are probably the seven BEST players on our team! The talent level on this team is increasing every year and our record is improving too.

I just don't understand how people cannot be impressed by this and cannot see how much this team has improved. If you don't think so you must be blind!

I do agree that the playcalling must improve though!

Well, hkhog, if you read my other posts (which i don't really recommend), i think you'll see that we actually agree...i do think this team is better than it's been in awhile...what i'm saying is that coach gibbs can't get a free pass for being coach gibbs...

and as for talent, there have been some destructive moves for sure...smootie signing somewhere else for $500K more was bad...had we had him, we could have gone after merriman in the draft...pierce's loss is clearly having an effect...

having said all that, i think that the attitude is slowly turning around...not sure if all the football decisions have been the right ones, but the ethic seems to be different, and that's what makes this team better than at least the spurrier teams...

and yes, the playcalling must, must improve...

Love that expression! I think we are an improved team from last year and I think we have a chance to win our division this year which at the begining of the year seemed to be a stretch. Now, the disapointing truth is we might win the division because the rest of our division is not very good (bad?) but we'll take it!
I also believe that at the begining of this year we all were hoping to be deep in the playoffs next year (and beyond). I think that with the additions this offseason (and with Gibbs' guidance) we will continue to be a force in the years to come. This is what Gibbs has been building towards and I love the way our players are beginining to play with an aggressive attitude. We are a much better team and we can be proud to be Redskin fans again!

Also seems so appropriate at Thanksgiving time to be looking back (and ahead). Wish that some others here could be enjoying the progress too, oh well, some of us are grateful for the improvement and look forward to some more glory from our great coach and our Redskins.

These next 5 weeks are the begining of the new dynasty!

And Spurrier obviously destroyed the talent level. Who in the world would CUT Stecen Davis?

Gibbs, on the other hand, has brought in Portis, Moss, Washington, ey, Taylor, Griffin, Springs... Those guys are probably the seven BEST players on our team! The talent level on this team is increasing every year and our record is improving too.

We pretty much had to cut Davis because of the salary cap. Sure Gibbs has brought in some good players. Our problem hasn't been a lack of "star" players. Our problem is the constant trading of draft picks and the misuse of the ones that we have. Any coach can draft Sean Taylor or sign the best DL available at that time (Griifin) or the best available LB (Washington) and CB (Springs). I'm still a huge fan of the Portis trade but an experieinced GM wouldn't have given up that second round pick. The main problem is that we never seem to draft players in the late rounds that turn out to be key contributors. We have stars but we lack the mid-level players that you acquire through the draft that you need to be a solid team. It's not a coincidence that the Eagles and Patriots have been succesful the last five years. They value their picks and don't waste them. The reason for that is the set up of our front office. We need a real GM!

I'm still a huge fan of the Portis trade but an experieinced GM wouldn't have given up that second round pick. The main problem is that we never seem to draft players in the late rounds that turn out to be key contributors. We have stars but we lack the mid-level players that you acquire through the draft that you need to be a solid team. It's not a coincidence that the Eagles and Patriots have been succesful the last five years. They value their picks and don't waste them. The reason for that is the set up of our front office. We need a real GM!

AMEN !!! At least someone agrees with me about that 2nd rounder we shipped to Denver. I mean come on ... both teams get rid of their headache player and we have to be the ones to give a pick (a 2nd no less)???!!! Then we do the stupid trade for Campbell where we give alot of picks this year and next (including our 1st next year) for a guy who is not going to see the starting lineup for at least 2 years??

thaiphoon wrote:

I'm still a huge fan of the Portis trade but an experieinced GM wouldn't have given up that second round pick. The main problem is that we never seem to draft players in the late rounds that turn out to be key contributors. We have stars but we lack the mid-level players that you acquire through the draft that you need to be a solid team. It's not a coincidence that the Eagles and Patriots have been succesful the last five years. They value their picks and don't waste them. The reason for that is the set up of our front office. We need a real GM!

AMEN !!! At least someone agrees with me about that 2nd rounder we shipped to Denver. I mean come on ... both teams get rid of their headache player and we have to be the ones to give a pick (a 2nd no less)???!!! Then we do the stupid trade for Campbell where we give alot of picks this year and next (including our 1st next year) for a guy who is not going to see the starting lineup for at least 2 years??

First on the Davis thing, the reason we couldn't afford him was because we brought guys like Coles and Morton in. We also gave up many draft picks for those guys. Sure Gibbs gave up a 2nd rounder but that was not nearly as bad as the things this team did before he showed up.

As for the Campbell trade, the fact that a Gibbs QB won't be starting for a couple years makes it even more important that the QB is drafted sooner rather than later! Say it takes the QB two years to become the starter. Then draft him THIS year so he will be in the system ASAP and ready a year from now, it doesn't do you any good to just wait for this coming draft and then have to wait two more years. It doesn't matter that we don't have a first rounder in this coming draft because we used it last year on a guy we really wanted. We gave up a couple of picks but the only pick we're missing from next year is our fourth rounder. All our other picks are intact. How is that stupid? Better to get a QB who we like right away so he will be ready soon than to pick a guy next year who will take even longer to develop.

As for the Campbell trade, the fact that a Gibbs QB won't be starting for a couple years makes it even more important that the QB is drafted sooner rather than later! Say it takes the QB two years to become the starter. Then draft him THIS year so he will be in the system ASAP and ready a year from now, it doesn't do you any good to just wait for this coming draft and then have to wait two more years. It doesn't matter that we don't have a first rounder in this coming draft because we used it last year on a guy we really wanted. We gave up a couple of picks but the only pick we're missing from next year is our fourth rounder. All our other picks are intact. How is that stupid? Better to get a QB who we like right away so he will be ready soon than to pick a guy next year who will take even longer to develop

This makes sense if you don't have a QB. We had Ramsey and Brunell at the time of the draft. We've needed a dominant DE for God knows how long now?? And we're still waiting for one ... Ramsey will still develop into a starting calibre QB if whomever is his coach can put a good OL around him. We weren't going to get rid Brunell even after last year so there were our 2 QB's going into this year. With 2 QB's on your roster and looking to "develop" a QB the 1rst round is not the place to take a "developmental QB". At least not one that could've been obtained in the 2nd round ... oh wait ... thats right ... we shipped our second rounder to Denver ...silly me.

Go back to the first trade. Bailey wanted out of here. Portis wanted out of Denver. 1000yd RB's are easier to come by than cover CB's. Why were WE the ones to give up the 2nd round pick? It shoulda been the other way around. But yet here we were bending over and giving a 2nd rounder. Thats just STUPID ...

Without a 2nd rounder Gibbs panicked and made an even worse blunder by trading so many picks to draft Campbell in the 1rst.

I see your point about the need to get a QB sooner than later, but Gibbs has proven that with a good OL it doesn't matter who is at QB (Schroeder took us to an NFC conf championship game if you remember). If your OL and DL are strong the rest falls into place. It starts at the line of scrimmage. We need a dominant DE badly ... we need OL depth ... we need WR depth and CB depth. Not gonna get a dominant DE without a 1rst rounder so forget that. We might get decent WR and OL depth with the 2nd and 3rd but that leaves rounds 5-7 to get decent CB depth and training camp fodder. Not going to happen given our propensity to not get good players after the 3rd round with Cerrato in this organization.

So basically the defense stays the same as this year.

And that QB you say needs "seasoning" (Campbell)... this extra year better be worth it.