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

"But if you ask me the biggest offseason blunders came the year before last. Smoot and Pierce. If we had kept both we could have Lemar Marshall, Pierce, and Washington as our starting LB and C Rog as our nikcle back , or we could have drafted Shawn "lights out" Merrimam instead of Roggers."


I agree. You have to find a way from letting people take your talent away. It's nearly like handing over your draft picks. Smoot, what a great great second-round pickup. Here there Redskins finally scored a hit, to make up for all of their early-round misses. I guess they (Cerrato chiefly) thought he was overvalued, much in the same way that the Rams thought Archuleta was overvalued and the 49'ers though Carter was overvalued. Well, it's looking like Cerrato was largely wrong. I think much of it is because of Cerratos live-for-today, die tomorrow philosophy. It disgusts me.

TincoSkin wrote:gibbs is essentially morphing into a GM like position. isnt that his plan? to take a more back seat to the field and focus on bringing in the right people?

If so, he's done a pretty crappy job so far.

If we do get a GM one day, watch Gibbs hire Matt Millen because he is a high-character man, who was at one time a great Redskin.

Yikes.

In my opinion, people calling Saunders a mistake this early are going to be mildly embarassed that they ever said that in the next couple of seasons.

redskins12287 wrote:

TincoSkin wrote:gibbs is essentially morphing into a GM like position. isnt that his plan? to take a more back seat to the field and focus on bringing in the right people?

If so, he's done a pretty crappy job so far.

you mean like bringing in portis and moss and williams? what about getting rid of lavar before his legs were made of jelly? yeah hes a terrible judge of personel.

Irn-Bru wrote:In my opinion, people calling Saunders a mistake this early are going to be mildly embarassed that they ever said that in the next couple of seasons.

right on

I'm still waiting to hear the real reason we got TJ Duckett and gave up a 3rd round draftpick to do it. I wonder if a GM with half a brain would've done that for a guy we're obviously never going to use.

you mean like bringing in portis and moss and williams? what about getting rid of lavar before his legs were made of jelly? yeah hes a terrible judge of personel.

The Moss trade worked out great. Getting Portis was awesome, but the trade itself was crap. There was no reason whatsoever to give the Broncos a second round pick. Gibbs traded a draft pick for Brunell even thought the Jaguars were going to cut him. He let Pierce, Smoot, and Clarck go. We traded a 3rd rounder for TJ Duckett, who never plays. We drafted Carlos "Butterfingers" Rogers when we could've drafted Merriman instead. We signed AA and Carter who are garbage. We came into this season with no depth at key positions, yet we have 5 running backs on the roster. We have already traded 3 (or is it 4) draft picks in next year's draft. We traded 3 picks for a qb who has yet to throw a pass in a real NFL game. We drafted up to get Macintosh, who can't even get into a game despite playing behind one of the worst linebackers in the NFL. The personnel choices in the kicking game have been terrible (why didn't we replace Hall in the offseason). We brought in an offensive coordinator to install his offense, yet we still haven't given him a qb that would allow him to properly run that offense. Yea Gibbs has done a really great job in the personnel department

SkinzCanes wrote:

you mean like bringing in portis and moss and williams? what about getting rid of lavar before his legs were made of jelly? yeah hes a terrible judge of personel.

The Moss trade worked out great. Getting Portis was awesome, but the trade itself was crap. There was no reason whatsoever to give the Broncos a second round pick. Gibbs traded a draft pick for Brunell even thought the Jaguars were going to cut him. He let Pierce, Smoot, and Clarck go. We traded a 3rd rounder for TJ Duckett, who never plays. We drafted Carlos "Butterfingers" Rogers when we could've drafted Merriman instead. We signed AA and Carter who are garbage. We came into this season with no depth at key positions, yet we have 5 running backs on the roster. We have already traded 3 (or is it 4) draft picks in next year's draft. We traded 3 picks for a qb who has yet to throw a pass in a real NFL game. We drafted up to get Macintosh, who can't even get into a game despite playing behind one of the worst linebackers in the NFL. The personnel choices in the kicking game have been terrible (why didn't we replace Hall in the offseason). We brought in an offensive coordinator to install his offense, yet we still haven't given him a qb that would allow him to properly run that offense. Yea Gibbs has done a really great job in the personnel department

Actually, Gibbs has been good with personnel. You name every transaction that was not great, exagerate with some of them, and stretch out your sentences to try and make the paragraph look as big as possible and therefore your respective critique of Gibbs all that more decisive. In fact, like this paragraph, we see a lot of words that aren't terribly conclusive. What we do see is a lot of evidence from only one side laid out on the table describing things as terribly as possible so that we all feel the full effect of doomsday.

So, in the interest of balance, here's some evidence on the other side of the argument. Look at our roster in Spurrier's final year:
http://www.jt-sw.com/football/pro/roste ... l/2003-was

Then look at this year's squad:
http://www.the-hogs.net/html/Team/depth.php

Our WR, DL, OL, RB, QB, have improved greatly in these years. The only place where we could be called weaker is possibly in our kickers and our secondary--but even that is highly questionable.

It isn't very meaningful right now (at this point in this season) to talk about draft picks used on players "who haven't played yet." In Campbell's case, it's clear that he hasn't been ready. If he works out and plays for 7-10 seasons here in Washington, are we still going to be whining that he sat on the bench for two seasons or that he cost us more than 1 draft pick?

Sean Taylor sat for his rookie season--granted, not as long as McIntosh has sat so far (Rocky is of course only a 2nd round pick and not a top 10 pick like Sean)--are we still mad that he didn't play right away but sat behind safeties whose names we have forgotten?

If Gibbs has been such a bad personnel manager (I can't tell 100% if that's what you're saying, since sarcasm is a convenient mask), then the roster wouldn't be this good.

We're just now getting our starting defense on the field, and the offense will click (it's only a matter of time).


I think there's far more to the debate than you're leaving room for.

In Campbell's case, it's clear that he hasn't been ready.

It's clear?? Really? Based on what? His running of the scout team?

Saying that Gibbs' moves have been better than Spurrier's also isn't much of an argument IMO. Just because Gibbs has done better than Spurrier doesn't mean that his moves have actually been good. Gibbs might have assembled a roster with more talent, but this roster is highly flawed and poorly assembled. Gibbs and Co. haven't exactly learned from their mistakes either. They still prefer the big free agents to homegrown guys (AA over Clarck) and still haven't realized that continuity, youth (we are the oldest team in the NFL), and the draft are important. It boggles my mind that a Hall of Fame coach could make some to the idiotic decisions that have been made the last few years.

Sean Taylor sat for his rookie season--granted, not as long as McIntosh has sat so far (Rocky is of course only a 2nd round pick and not a top 10 pick like Sean)--are we still mad that he didn't play right away but sat behind safeties whose names we have forgotten?

You mean Ryan Clarck? That's who was our FS in 2004. I certainly haven't forgotten his name and think that the should still be on this team.

SkinzCanes wrote:

Sean Taylor sat for his rookie season--granted, not as long as McIntosh has sat so far (Rocky is of course only a 2nd round pick and not a top 10 pick like Sean)--are we still mad that he didn't play right away but sat behind safeties whose names we have forgotten?

You mean Ryan Clarck? That's who was our FS in 2004. I certainly haven't forgotten his name and think that the should still be on this team.

He played beside Clark, he didn't sit and watch him play as a rookie. The guy that played in front of Taylor has the same iniails as the guy everyone loves to hate.

I should have checked before writing that--I hadn't realized that it was Clark that Taylor was behind; instead I had thought it was Iffy or perhaps someone else. From the looks of it though, you also had to go back and check, (showing it seems) that whoever Sean was playing behind didn't make that big of an impression in that season. Most Skins fans were waiting for Sean to get in there. (I agree that Clark should still be on the team, though).

Your main argument doesn't seem to counter what I was saying: I didn't say that Gibbs was a better personnel manager than Spurrier (although this is also a true statement). I merely pointed to the team that Gibbs inhereted and showed how far it's come. We've got a team that is solid on paper, and one that is good on paper not in the 2000 Skins sense, but in a true, 'this team can compete' sense. That's the very reason why people are so upset with this team. . .the potential is there.

I personally don't think that the roster is highly flawed and poorly assembled. Your main examples are Carter and AA, both of whom have struggled but both of whom may yet prove themselves. (Nevertheless I would agree with you in calling them mistakes). But again, that's not nearly enough evidence to out and out assert that Gibbs is a terrible personnel manager.

I have yet to really look into just how our draft picks were used--either in trades or in college players--and examine whether or not Gibbs seems to have done a bad job, mediocre job, or good job. I don't find either sweeping argument (that Gibbs is awesome or horrible at personnel management) particularly convincing on the surface. I'd need to look at each move to figure out what I think about it.

1niksder wrote:

SkinzCanes wrote:

Sean Taylor sat for his rookie season--granted, not as long as McIntosh has sat so far (Rocky is of course only a 2nd round pick and not a top 10 pick like Sean)--are we still mad that he didn't play right away but sat behind safeties whose names we have forgotten?

You mean Ryan Clarck? That's who was our FS in 2004. I certainly haven't forgotten his name and think that the should still be on this team.

He played beside Clark, he didn't sit and watch him play as a rookie. The guy that played in front of Taylor has the same iniails as the guy everyone loves to hate.

Ah yes, Matt Bowen. Are you sure? I had assumed that SkinzCanes had done his homework and then came back to make that second post. . .now I don't know what to believe.

Ah yes, Matt Bowen. Are you sure? I had assumed that SkinzCanes had done his homework and then came back to make that second post. . .now I don't know what to believe. Neutral

I could very well be wrong. It was my understanding that Bowen was the SS and Clarck the FS, and that Taylor took over for Bowen when he blew out his knee. I thought that prior to that injury Taylor was behind Clarck.

Irn-Bru.....the things that have bothered me most about the decisions made by Gibbs and Co. have the been the trading of draft picks and the inabiliy or unwillingness to resign our own players. Not resigning Pierce and Smoot during the 2004 season was a huge mistake IMO. I think that deals could def have been done if we hadn't waited until after the season to negotiate with them. It just bothers me that the coaches have undervalued players that have really done a great job while playing here, for example Ryan Clarck. Reading lately about how popular he was in the locker room and how much of a positive influence he had on Sean Taylor really makes it hard for me to understand why the team would let him go for a guy like AA.

As for the use of draft picks, this list of players that we could've had just confirms for me that it is a big mistake to favor free agency over the draft.

http://www.examiner.com/a-365299~Suspect_architect.html

As for my comments about the highly flawed roster, the reason I say that is because of how much depth we have at certain positions and how little depth we have others. For example, we have 5 very good running backs and only one very good corner back (Springs). We brought in 2 new wide receivers yet did little to address the lack of oline depth. Additionally, we brought back Holdman even though he had a terrible season last year and still have Marshally playing in the middle, even though he appears more suited to play on the outside. It just seems to me that if you are going to have the oldest roster in the NFL then need to make sure that you have enough depth to withstand injuries. Spring hasn't played a full season since 2000 so not bringing in adequate backups for him makes no sense.

It's the overall "quick fix" mentality of this organization that I really don't like.

Irn-Bru wrote:In my opinion, people calling Saunders a mistake this early are going to be mildly embarassed that they ever said that in the next couple of seasons.

No! I don't care how good he is in a couple of years, right now this team is worse off offensively than it was last year under Gibbs and he had less talent to work with!

No! I don't care how good he is in a couple of years, right now this team is worse off offensively than it was last year under Gibbs and he had less talent to work with!

I disagree to a certain extent. The offense has talent but he doesn't have the type of qb that he needs to run his offense. Brunell's strength is throwing short passes, not turning the ball over, and throwing to the sidelines. For his offense to really work the way it is supposed to, Saunders needs a qb that can throw the ball downfield, in the middle of the field, and can fit the ball into tight spaces. Saunders also isn't afraid of turnovers the way Gibbs is. Gibbs places a huge emphasis on not turning the ball over, whereas Saunders is willing to accept turnovers because of the types of throws that he asks his qb's to make.

We have a GM and his name is Joe Gibbs period end of discussion.

Gibbs4Life wrote:We have a GM and his name is Joe Gibbs period end of discussion.

You might want to run that by Gibbs, he's carring some of the duties that a GM would have but he doesn't get paid for it. After you run this by him, let us know how much of a pay cut Vinny will take now that Joe will be doing it all

SkinzCanes, these are all very good points.

SkinzCanes wrote:

Ah yes, Matt Bowen. Are you sure? I had assumed that SkinzCanes had done his homework and then came back to make that second post. . .now I don't know what to believe. Neutral

I could very well be wrong. It was my understanding that Bowen was the SS and Clarck the FS, and that Taylor took over for Bowen when he blew out his knee. I thought that prior to that injury Taylor was behind Clarck.

Irn-Bru.....the things that have bothered me most about the decisions made by Gibbs and Co. have the been the trading of draft picks and the inabiliy or unwillingness to resign our own players.

Fair enough for all of this. . .

Not resigning Pierce and Smoot during the 2004 season was a huge mistake IMO. I think that deals could def have been done if we hadn't waited until after the season to negotiate with them. It just bothers me that the coaches have undervalued players that have really done a great job while playing here, for example Ryan Clarck. Reading lately about how popular he was in the locker room and how much of a positive influence he had on Sean Taylor really makes it hard for me to understand why the team would let him go for a guy like AA.

It's starting to look like Adam Archuleta was really a mistake (I'm not 100% there yet), and it definitely was a mistake to let Clark go. Same thing with Pierce. Smoot, however, wanted a lot of money to stay in Washington, and he's one of those salary casualties that happen--I didn't mind seeing him go as much as you did.

As for the use of draft picks, this list of players that we could've had just confirms for me that it is a big mistake to favor free agency over the draft.

http://www.examiner.com/a-365299~Suspect_architect.html

Thanks a ton for that reference. I've been looking for something like that for a while.

It's the overall "quick fix" mentality of this organization that I really don't like.

I understand your arguments about our roster a bit better. I also hate the "quick fix" mentality, although I think that with Gibbs here we are seeing a much better approach than in years past. Still, there are signs that the FO isn't where this team needs it to be in order to compete.

That list of draft picks does reveal the damage that we have done. The good news is that this team can easily recover from these mistakes as early as next year--provided we don't give away 2008's draft as easily and we retain the players that count. We're almost there, I think (this season has been made it tough to hold that view, though), and I'm still holding hope.

It's the overall "quick fix" mentality of this organization that I really don't like.

I am very pleased with the "quick fix" results we got by replacing AA with Troy Vincent.

I am upset that we let our hard-working blue collar guys go and bring in high-priced players who are unproven in our system.

That must be terrible for morale.

I would like to see this team go in a more anonymous direction, particularly on defense. Smaller contracts. More depth. More rotation. More "system" guys.

I'm not going to defend AA's play this far, but Prioleau's injury left us in a bind. With Vincent, we have that guy so now GW can use AA as a hybrid Safety-LB, which is what he had envisioned when they lured him here, I do believe.

Yes, Archuleta is a mistake and a big one at that. A 35 year-old CB/S walks right in and takes his job. Not only has Vincent taken his job but he has also taken over as the leader on the defense, specifically in the Secondary. He's doing the same things that Clark did last year. Making sure that guys are lined up, keeping the guys up at halftime, etc....

When I saw Archuleta lined up over Witten, I knew Romo was going to throw to him. He just let Witten run right by him without even a bump or anything. If not for the Cowpukes line breaking down and the "new starting safety", that was a loss because Arhuleta could not do his friggin' job and cover Witten. What is it, $40 million down the drain.

The "Animal Trainer" did all he could do to try and not say that Archuleta has lost his job.

roybus14 wrote: What is it, $40 million down the drain.

Actually it would be less than a 3rd of that about halfway down the article you'll see what it would cost to let him go