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

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

aswas71788 wrote:Good editorial about the Redskins. It points to what I have thought and asked several times. What is going on internally in the Redskins that has destroyed a team that played inspired football for the last half of last year?

With the talent on this team, it should not be in such disarray. Maybe it is time to get rid of some coaches.

Good editorial? It is repeatious and shallow with the author demonstrating a firm grasp of the obvious. He simply repeats issues everyone has been poiting to all year with a lot of smack thrown in.

I'm not defending anyone on the Redskins, but I'd like to hear some insights or specific proposals, not just another Redskin hater jumping at the chance to pile on and repeat what everyone knows.

Are you sure that you read the piece? This isn't a feel good piece but it points to a lot of things that were previously unreleased. It discusses specifics about the playcalling that we wouldn't have insight into with the aid of this piece. Did you know that the Safeties and Corners weren’t meeting together? Did you know that Williams insists on calling a Cover 2 in obvious running situations? Did you know that Jackson has the Safeties play Cover 2 differently than anyone else in the league?

You can argue that the piece isn’t balanced, or that it’s sensational. But you can’t argue that it doesn’t shed light on previously unknown situations.

chaddukes wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

aswas71788 wrote:Good editorial about the Redskins. It points to what I have thought and asked several times. What is going on internally in the Redskins that has destroyed a team that played inspired football for the last half of last year?

With the talent on this team, it should not be in such disarray. Maybe it is time to get rid of some coaches.

Good editorial? It is repeatious and shallow with the author demonstrating a firm grasp of the obvious. He simply repeats issues everyone has been poiting to all year with a lot of smack thrown in.

I'm not defending anyone on the Redskins, but I'd like to hear some insights or specific proposals, not just another Redskin hater jumping at the chance to pile on and repeat what everyone knows.

Are you sure that you read the piece? This isn't a feel good piece but it points to a lot of things that were previously unreleased. It discusses specifics about the playcalling that we wouldn't have insight into with the aid of this piece. Did you know that the Safeties and Corners weren’t meeting together? Did you know that Williams insists on calling a Cover 2 in obvious running situations? Did you know that Jackson has the Safeties play Cover 2 differently than anyone else in the league?

You can argue that the piece isn’t balanced, or that it’s sensational. But you can’t argue that it doesn’t shed light on previously unknown situations.

You have a valid point and I'm not arguing against it, just discussing it. In my opinion it's hard to separate the two. We have an author who clearly has an axe to grind and an unknown player whose motives we don't know.

Consider the example of the corners and safties not "meeting together." That sounds bad, maybe it is. But maybe they have other processes in place the other teams don't. Maybe they meet separately inside and together on the field. We don't know. I do know if they do this hugely biased author would not tell us. I have in my life heard so many things that totally seemed irrefuteable ... until I heard the other side.

The author is certainly going after the obvious targets and clearly has no interest in points that contradict his and again clearly is going to make his points as sensational as possible.

So to me since everything said must be doubted because of extreme bias which still leaves a critical mind with no new understanding of where we are or where to go.

Though to your point it provides us with some questions to ask.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:...it provides us with some questions to ask.

Yes, it does. And its the only thing so far that seems to have explained the drop from 9th to 31st place in the defense. Letting go some of the "core" guys like Clark, Harris, Stoutmire, etc. was an important loss. However, with the exception of Clark none of those guys were starters. Can losing a couple of back ups really be that detrimental to a team? I mean, should we have realistically expected a setback? Maybe. But, from 9th to 31st....thats huge. And more that losing Clark should account for.

However, this points to something that makes sense. That Williams has lost his guys. Perhaps they were lost because of the decisions to let too many guys go. Perhaps because he is arrogant. Either way its seems to me that the guy has his finger on the button.

And the "player" has to be Shawn Springs!

chaddukes wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:...it provides us with some questions to ask.

Yes, it does. And its the only thing so far that seems to have explained the drop from 9th to 31st place in the defense. Letting go some of the "core" guys like Clark, Harris, Stoutmire, etc. was an important loss. However, with the exception of Clark none of those guys were starters. Can losing a couple of back ups really be that detrimental to a team? I mean, should we have realistically expected a setback? Maybe. But, from 9th to 31st....thats huge. And more that losing Clark should account for.

However, this points to something that makes sense. That Williams has lost his guys. Perhaps they were lost because of the decisions to let too many guys go. Perhaps because he is arrogant. Either way its seems to me that the guy has his finger on the button.

And the "player" has to be Shawn Springs!

Maybe he's just having a bad year. It's easy to attack when someone's down. I'm not impressed by the Skins critics on this site or in the press and particularly not with this author who not only makes no attempt to conceal his bias but revels in it. Given GW's history of success I think it's at best overstated. If all these accusations were true he would not have the track record he does.

In the case of the article it just seems the author took a list of the obvious every day attacks, found a disgruntled player, and got him to rant. Then took only the points that served his purpose. I find little use for that.

Just so you know, Tom Friend was a beat reporter for the skins during Gibbs first tenure. He's regarded as being pretty pro-skins.

BTW, I posted this article on a Buffalo Bills forum to get there reaction.
http://www.buffalorange.com/showthread. ... ost1465801

chaddukes wrote:Just so you know, Tom Friend was a beat reporter for the skins during Gibbs first tenure. He's regarded as being pretty pro-skins.

Good to know. So he's not necessarly a Skins hater, but I still say it's easy to pile on a 3-7 team. There's nothing insightful or curageous about that. And I'm not defending them, I"ve been a regular criticizer of their play and MB and AA in particular.

The big issue that I have with the article is the unending use of subjective words and the repeated use of the word "arrogant." Once an author does that they are bound to defend their accusation and drive bias analysis. The best way to bury someone you want to get is to stay factual. Once he gets around to facts he has already planted his flag.

Maybe he is a Skins lover, and I am sure are most of those who are piling on them on this site are too. Though I firmly belive some are Pukes fans who think it's "funny." I just think it's being overdone and in particular gives no credit to their past successes or inspires future success.

And I am seeing no solutions offered. Between Gibbs stints, we have tried the experienced D route (Pettibone), experienced O (Turner), college prodigy (Spurrier) and blasts from the past (Schottenheimer).

Gibbs got us to the playoffs his second year and had a setback his third. For those who want to argue with me, please argue the point I am making and don't say I am blind to the horrible team on the field this year. It sucks big time. My point is we should try the one thing we haven't, consistency.

If anyone wants to argue that Gibbs and co must go, OFFER SOLUTIONS!!!! I queried one poster on their plan and got "New Orleans has been successful with a new coach and system." I asked but they were not willing to explain how that was an action plan.

chaddukes wrote: I'm pretty confident that its Shawn Springs. It has to be a secondary guy, and it can't be Carlos, or Taylor, because the "player" mentions them in the third person.

Yes, I hear talk in the locker room that all is needed to fix the secondary is to bring this guy Redskin in Canada as an advisor. I hear he may not be a quick-fix but he has some ideas and given sufficient time he'll get them back in shape. John Elway used to speak about himself in third person all the time.

And as if this was not enough, I good story can be "developed" when you quote others in third person. This is a very well tried and true trick in the Public Relations field. Guys, for people living in DC, some of you sound like rookies. Washington DC is the SPIN CITY capital of the world. You can take a couple of hear says and write a "credible" piece if there is a swamp of FERTILE GROUND in the minds of fans.

It does not have to be true. It is sufficient that it sounds POSSIBLY TRUE at a time that fans are searching for answers.

You guys are so negative and so thirsty for BLOOD that I will remind you when this team turns it around and you then PRAISE the fantastic job done by coaches and players.

In the time being, it is only frustration. We all handle it in different ways. This is your way and I respect it. I only feel that you are allowing yourselves to be carried away with a hear-say because it is SIMPLE and you are looking for SIMPLE answers.

"Yeah, GW is arrogant, THERE it is. I solved the problem. That is why the defense stinks this season". Hellooo? Where were you bright guys over the last couple of seasons. GW may not be a sweet guy. I could care less. He is a hell of a good Defensive Coach and one sub par season you are ready to call for blood. Pretty pitiful.

Loosing seasons breed discontent. I suspect the truth lies somewhere in the middle, away from the frustrated players and the spinning, byline-hungry, press.

We won't know the truth for a long time. Let's just see what develops.

Countertrey wrote:Loosing seasons breed discontent. I suspect the truth lies somewhere in the middle, away from the frustrated players and the spinning, byline-hungry, press.

We won't know the truth for a long time. Let's just see what develops.

Yes, I agree. This is a far more cautious and intelligent position. I, for one, do not have the answers either. Probably nobody really knows the whole truth. We only get different perspectives. The worst thing we can do is to call for blood at a time that thinking and learning is more important.

Let us try to be the most intelligent fans in the Redskin Nation and not the thirstiest for blood at the Coliseum in Rome.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Good to know. So he's not necessarly a Skins hater, but I still say it's easy to pile on a 3-7 team. There's nothing insightful or curageous about that. And I'm not defending them, I"ve been a regular criticizer of their play and MB and AA in particular.

I can't say it's piling on becuase he didn't really beat the team down he's trying to say "This is what's wrong with the D".

If true it would explain a lot.
Why are the safteies ALWAYS out of postion?

Tom Friend wrote:On the field, the corners will start making a call or doing something, and the safeties will be, 'What are you talking about? We didn't go over that.' So now the corners are expecting help in certain situations, and the safeties aren't getting there in time. And people got beat in the secondary.

he even tried to explain how this could happen....

Tom wrote:That means that the Redskins' safeties and corners do not meet together, which is practically unheard of.

It appears one would explain the other, is there any truth involed here? I don't know. But if this is true He told us how it happened...

Jackson was ticked.

So Williams threw him a bone, a bone which has literally torn up the secondary. He made Jackson safeties coach and Gray cornerbacks coach

This is GW, Gibbs gave him full control of the D from day one. He brought in Jerry Gray when he wasn't needed, or he should have brought in a second guy also. We have a coach for the Safeties and one for the CBs. Where is the Secondary coach?

KazooSkinsFan wrote:The big issue that I have with the article is the unending use of subjective words and the repeated use of the word "arrogant." Once an author does that they are bound to defend their accusation and drive bias analysis. The best way to bury someone you want to get is to stay factual. Once he gets around to facts he has already planted his flag.

Arrogant was used for times in the article and it was attributed the un-named player each time and directed towards Williams, though once might have been aimed at Jackson. And he pointed out the reasoning behind the use of the word.

"They thought they figured it all out. They thought, 'We can win with scheme, we don't need players.'

and

they think they can stop the run in Cover 2. When it's an obvious running down, he calls Cover 2. That's a seven-man front. They're going to get 4 yards a carry every time.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Maybe he is a Skins lover, and I am sure are most of those who are piling on them on this site are too. Though I firmly belive some are Pukes fans who think it's "funny." I just think it's being overdone and in particular gives no credit to their past successes or inspires future success.

Puke fans wouldn't know funny if it smacked them upside the head. He has shed light on things that had been behind closed doors.Archulete was told he would be used to blitz the QB and that plus the money is what got him to sign. Now all he has is some of the money and no playing time.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:And I am seeing no solutions offered. Between Gibbs stints, we have tried the experienced D route (Pettibone), experienced O (Turner), college prodigy (Spurrier) and blasts from the past (Schottenheimer).

Gibbs got us to the playoffs his second year and had a setback his third. For those who want to argue with me, please argue the point I am making and don't say I am blind to the horrible team on the field this year. It sucks big time. My point is we should try the one thing we haven't, consistency.

Your point is well taken but about a year too late.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:If anyone wants to argue that Gibbs and co must go, OFFER SOLUTIONS!!!! I queried one poster on their plan and got "New Orleans has been successful with a new coach and system." I asked but they were not willing to explain how that was an action plan.

I'm not going to argue Gibbs and Co. must go but changes have to be made.
1. Get a Secondary Coach... Gray can coach the Corners and and Jackson can coach the Safeties but someone has to be in control of the secondary. One or the other must be responsble for the whole unit or someone else needs the job. Do we need 3 coaches in the secondary? Do we need 2?
2. The handcuffs need to be removed from Sean Taylor. Jackson didn't tinker with him last year, does the present of Gray make him feel he needs to show he can do more in player development? (doesn't matter Taylor shouldn't be his case study)
3. Gibbs may have already done this but. These coaches need to get there acts together. Someone needs to tell them if "the Danny" starts cutting them lose there is no Cap Hit and that Extra Million he promised GW would be nothing more than dead cap.
4. Gibbs will have to go back to being more hands on with Redskins and the CEO role will have to be put on the back burner.

His plan is to leave the Redskins in a position were they won't fall apart once he's gone (see the previous decade) but we are losing ground.

old-timer wrote:And I don't think there is any question, based on the article, that Williams' ego has been instrumental in getting rid of some very good, solid players, and replacing them with people who are not performing. Since he chooses to play GM, he should be judged on his GM abilities. And the record says, they suck. This guy needs a major ego downsizing, and if he doesn't get it, he needs to be shown the door.

No doubt Gregg Williams deserves the blame on this one, but do you honestly think we would have this problem if we had a front office structure that resembled that of the 31 other teams in the league?

A GM that was responsible for drafting or signing players wouldn't have stood by idly as the gems he found among undrafted free agents, lower round draftees and the lower tier of NFL free agents moved onto other teams.

Gibbs also deserves blame for letting the Arrington situation escalate the way it did. It's clear as day that Williams and his assistants made an example out Lavar in pretty much the same fashion as they are doing with Archuletta right now. Did this happen with or without the knowledge of coach Gibbs?

"Yeah, GW is arrogant, THERE it is. I solved the problem. That is why the defense stinks this season". Hellooo? Where were you bright guys over the last couple of seasons. GW may not be a sweet guy. I could care less. He is a hell of a good Defensive Coach and one sub par season you are ready to call for blood. Pretty pitiful.

It's not just this season. The defense has regressed each of the past two seasons. The defense really struggled early last year, especially against the run, before Williams let Lavar play again. And each season GW has allowed core Redskins, who he thought were replaceable, to leave. Pierce and Smoot after the 2004 season. Clark, Stoutmire, and Lavar after last season. All 5 of those players started games for their new teams. And at each position that they vacated we have replaced them with inferior players.

In addition, like the article points out, young players on our team have regressed, instead of progressed, from last season to this season. Taylor, Rogers, and Marshall are all performing worse this year than they did last. The blame for that falls on the coaching staff.

You can say what you want about our offensive players, but the players on that side of the ball atleast look like they are playing hard on every play. The defensive players, on the other hand, look like they don't really care anymore. The same thing happened to GW in his third season as HC of the Bills (he was fired) and it looks to be happening here.

Also, how can GW coach his players if he wont even talk to them....

Wichard says that Jackson and Williams haven't spoken to Archuleta since the Redskins' bye four weeks ago, and that rookie Reed Doughty, who's been mostly inactive this year, is getting reps ahead of him in practice this week.

Hi 1niksder. I always enjoy discussing with you, you focus on football and not petty insults like "some." Anyway, good points, let's discuss.

1niksder wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Good to know. So he's not necessarly a Skins hater, but I still say it's easy to pile on a 3-7 team. There's nothing insightful or curageous about that. And I'm not defending them, I"ve been a regular criticizer of their play and MB and AA in particular.

I can't say it's piling on becuase he didn't really beat the team down he's trying to say "This is what's wrong with the D".

You don't call this piling on?

- Gibbs "appears to be a burned out coach"
- "it is a fractured team"
- "The Washington Redskins are the biggest flop, the biggest turkey of the season"
- "the decisions to throw cash at every problem, or free agent, or coach, has created ego and narcissism"
- "The almighty dollar has created too many power trips at Redskin Park"
- (the new assistants "appeared bumbling and overmatched"

At this point I got tired of cutting out the same quote and stopped. They are 3-7, obviously something's wrong. Bashing them is a low hurdle. Yet he insists on pounding it into the ground. Pounding on the no duh point there are problems with a 3-7 team to me is piling on. And at that point he is committed to showing how screwed up they are rather than fair analysis.

And note my point on the use of subjective terms: burned out, fractured, flop, turkey, ego, narcissism, power trips, bumbling go on too.

1niksder wrote:If true it would explain a lot.
Why are the safteies ALWAYS out of postion?

1niksder wrote:This is GW, Gibbs gave him full control of the D from day one. He brought in Jerry Gray when he wasn't needed, or he should have brought in a second guy also. We have a coach for the Safeties and one for the CBs. Where is the Secondary coach?

I agree with your point here, but it doesn't contradict mine. Remember I said that he went on piling on using loaded subjective terms then when he finally got to the "facts" had already dug a credibility hole.

I do have the question he doesn't go into of why the wheels fell off now. He has been a long term successful coach. You cite good points, but why now? What did he do differently before? How did he turn into an out of touch idiot this year? That was the first question that popped into my head, I'm still wondering.

1niksder wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:The big issue that I have with the article is the unending use of subjective words and the repeated use of the word "arrogant." Once an author does that they are bound to defend their accusation and drive bias analysis. The best way to bury someone you want to get is to stay factual. Once he gets around to facts he has already planted his flag.

Arrogant was used for times in the article and it was attributed the un-named player each time and directed towards Williams, though once might have been aimed at Jackson. And he pointed out the reasoning behind the use of the word.

I already addressed a list of other subjective terms, I waited to address arrogent here since you address it here. Quoting arrogant once, maybe twice makes sense as just a quote. When he keeps doing it, we are now been there, done that and he's using it for his own purposes. Particularly when you combine that with his own list of subjective words. It's not necessary or productive to keep repeating the player is calling GW arrogant. Point made. And made. And made.

1niksder wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Maybe he is a Skins lover, and I am sure are most of those who are piling on them on this site are too. Though I firmly belive some are Pukes fans who think it's "funny." I just think it's being overdone and in particular gives no credit to their past successes or inspires future success.

Puke fans wouldn't know funny if it smacked them upside the head. He has shed light on things that had been behind closed doors.Archulete was told he would be used to blitz the QB and that plus the money is what got him to sign. Now all he has is some of the money and no playing time.

We agree on the Pukes, that's why I quoted "funny."

We agree on AA too. I supported you on another thread AA was not being used the way he was signed. I am still dissapointed in his play but you didn't defend that either. Actually in another thread I cited AA and Duckett as being the best examples of just flat out poor decisions Gibbs and co have made. I'm not and have not said they haven't made any mistakes.

I'm not sure I see in terms of the article though as AA being any real counter to my point though.

1niksder wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:And I am seeing no solutions offered. Between Gibbs stints, we have tried the experienced D route (Pettibone), experienced O (Turner), college prodigy (Spurrier) and blasts from the past (Schottenheimer).

Gibbs got us to the playoffs his second year and had a setback his third. For those who want to argue with me, please argue the point I am making and don't say I am blind to the horrible team on the field this year. It sucks big time. My point is we should try the one thing we haven't, consistency.

Your point is well taken but about a year too late.

This is probably your only poor point, you went for flip.

#1) I wanted to stay with Spurrier. I was not convinced he couldn't make it. I did want Snyder to require he hire an NFL experienced staff though to stay. Then I was thrilled with Gibbs coming back and have advocated we stick with him to rebuild for the long run. I am still arguing the same thing. I am not a year too late because I said this a year ago. And two years ago...

#2) We are still facing the same issue and we can't go back a year and we still need to tweek and jell, not keep churning. We should have done it last year, we didn't, we should still do it now. We still have a lot of talent.

1niksder wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:If anyone wants to argue that Gibbs and co must go, OFFER SOLUTIONS!!!! I queried one poster on their plan and got "New Orleans has been successful with a new coach and system." I asked but they were not willing to explain how that was an action plan.

I'm not going to argue Gibbs and Co. must go but changes have to be made.
1. Get a Secondary Coach... Gray can coach the Corners and and Jackson can coach the Safeties but someone has to be in control of the secondary. One or the other must be responsble for the whole unit or someone else needs the job. Do we need 3 coaches in the secondary? Do we need 2?
2. The handcuffs need to be removed from Sean Taylor. Jackson didn't tinker with him last year, does the present of Gray make him feel he needs to show he can do more in player development? (doesn't matter Taylor shouldn't be his case study)
3. Gibbs may have already done this but. These coaches need to get there acts together. Someone needs to tell them if "the Danny" starts cutting them lose there is no Cap Hit and that Extra Million he promised GW would be nothing more than dead cap.
4. Gibbs will have to go back to being more hands on with Redskins and the CEO role will have to be put on the back burner.

His plan is to leave the Redskins in a position were they won't fall apart once he's gone (see the previous decade) but we are losing ground.

This all makes sense to me

I do have the question he doesn't go into of why the wheels fell off now. He has been a long term successful coach. You cite good points, but why now? What did he do differently before? How did he turn into an out of touch idiot this year? That was the first question that popped into my head, I'm still wondering.

I'm assuming that you're referring to GW when u say "long term succesful coach." I'm not sure how accurate that statement really is. GW was a great defensive coordinator when he was with the Oilers/Titans. Since then, however, his career his been somewhat rocky. He bombed as the Bills HC and after a succesful first year here, his defense has gotten worse each of the last 2 seasons. The same problems that he had towards the end of his tenure in Buffalo appear to be surfacing here. Interestingly, it was in his 3rd season in Buffalo that he was fired and in his third season with the Skins he is starting to have problems.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:You don't call this piling on?

- Gibbs "appears to be a burned out coach"
- "it is a fractured team"
- "The Washington Redskins are the biggest flop, the biggest turkey of the season"
- "the decisions to throw cash at every problem, or free agent, or coach, has created ego and narcissism"
- "The almighty dollar has created too many power trips at Redskin Park"
- (the new assistants "appeared bumbling and overmatched"

Opinionated but nothing we haven't heard at some point over the past 3 years

KazooSkinsFan wrote:At this point I got tired of cutting out the same quote and stopped. They are 3-7, obviously something's wrong. Bashing them is a low hurdle. Yet he insists on pounding it into the ground. Pounding on the no duh point there are problems with a 3-7 team to me is piling on. And at that point he is committed to showing how screwed up they are rather than fair analysis.

In a way it comes across like HE expects more from Gibbs and to a lesser extent the team. More like he is saying "Where is the Joe I know?", when he said - Gibbs appears to be a burned out coach, it was preceded by Gibbs I would have had this fixed already, and the fractured team "needs" the old Gibbs. Even I take shots at "the Danny" but I count the $$ before I do

KazooSkinsFan wrote:And note my point on the use of subjective terms: burned out, fractured, flop, turkey, ego, narcissism, power trips, bumbling go on too.

Again not too original and not much substance to support most of it

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

1niksder wrote:If true it would explain a lot.
Why are the safteies ALWAYS out of postion?

1niksder wrote:This is GW, Gibbs gave him full control of the D from day one. He brought in Jerry Gray when he wasn't needed, or he should have brought in a second guy also. We have a coach for the Safeties and one for the CBs. Where is the Secondary coach?

I agree with your point here, but it doesn't contradict mine. Remember I said that he went on piling on using loaded subjective terms then when he finally got to the "facts" had already dug a credibility hole.

Here actually added something to his argument as far as egos and arrogance

KazooSkinsFan wrote:I do have the question he doesn't go into of why the wheels fell off now. He has been a long term successful coach. You cite good points, but why now? What did he do differently before? How did he turn into an out of touch idiot this year? That was the first question that popped into my head, I'm still wondering.

According to the article it's explains why AP, Smoot, Clark and Merriman aren't Redskins. Which means it's not something new but something that has been building. Redskins don't normally come out in the media like this, so I guess once Gibbs blew up - players are following suit.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

1niksder wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:The big issue that I have with the article is the unending use of subjective words and the repeated use of the word "arrogant." Once an author does that they are bound to defend their accusation and drive bias analysis. The best way to bury someone you want to get is to stay factual. Once he gets around to facts he has already planted his flag.

Arrogant was used for times in the article and it was attributed the un-named player each time and directed towards Williams, though once might have been aimed at Jackson. And he pointed out the reasoning behind the use of the word.

I already addressed a list of other subjective terms, I waited to address arrogent here since you address it here. Quoting arrogant once, maybe twice makes sense as just a quote. When he keeps doing it, we are now been there, done that and he's using it for his own purposes. Particularly when you combine that with his own list of subjective words. It's not necessary or productive to keep repeating the player is calling GW arrogant. Point made. And made. And made.

Point taken but I think he was trying to get across how the un-named player was feeling.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

1niksder wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Maybe he is a Skins lover, and I am sure are most of those who are piling on them on this site are too. Though I firmly belive some are Pukes fans who think it's "funny." I just think it's being overdone and in particular gives no credit to their past successes or inspires future success.

Puke fans wouldn't know funny if it smacked them upside the head. He has shed light on things that had been behind closed doors.Archulete was told he would be used to blitz the QB and that plus the money is what got him to sign. Now all he has is some of the money and no playing time.

We agree on the Pukes, that's why I quoted "funny."

We agree on AA too. I supported you on another thread AA was not being used the way he was signed. I am still dissapointed in his play but you didn't defend that either. Actually in another thread I cited AA and Duckett as being the best examples of just flat out poor decisions Gibbs and co have made. I'm not and have not said they haven't made any mistakes.

I'm not sure I see in terms of the article though as AA being any real counter to my point though.

Looking at the Archuleta situation and you can see ego and arrogance. They told him he'd be doing one thing but didn't take in to account he may be force to use him as a every down Safety, I still won't concede Clark's offer wouldn't have been match if given the chance. In the end when Vincent played the cover roll better, ego kept AA on the bench on running downs will Taylor and Vincent had to support the run (from cover 2)

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

1niksder wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:And I am seeing no solutions offered. Between Gibbs stints, we have tried the experienced D route (Pettibone), experienced O (Turner), college prodigy (Spurrier) and blasts from the past (Schottenheimer).

Gibbs got us to the playoffs his second year and had a setback his third. For those who want to argue with me, please argue the point I am making and don't say I am blind to the horrible team on the field this year. It sucks big time. My point is we should try the one thing we haven't, consistency.

Your point is well taken but about a year too late.

This is probably your only poor point, you went for flip.

You missed my point, We didn't stay consistant.... He gave up play calling and Williams added a coach we did pretty go without the year before.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:[#1) I wanted to stay with Spurrier. I was not convinced he couldn't make it. I did want Snyder to require he hire an NFL experienced staff though to stay. Then I was thrilled with Gibbs coming back and have advocated we stick with him to rebuild for the long run. I am still arguing the same thing. I am not a year too late because I said this a year ago. And two years ago...

#2) We are still facing the same issue and we can't go back a year and we still need to tweek and jell, not keep churning. We should have done it last year, we didn't, we should still do it now. We still have a lot of talent.

Didn't like Spurrier, I agree on point #2

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

1niksder wrote:]

KazooSkinsFan wrote:If anyone wants to argue that Gibbs and co must go, OFFER SOLUTIONS!!!! I queried one poster on their plan and got "New Orleans has been successful with a new coach and system." I asked but they were not willing to explain how that was an action plan.

I'm not going to argue Gibbs and Co. must go but changes have to be made.
1. Get a Secondary Coach... Gray can coach the Corners and and Jackson can coach the Safeties but someone has to be in control of the secondary. One or the other must be responsble for the whole unit or someone else needs the job. Do we need 3 coaches in the secondary? Do we need 2?
2. The handcuffs need to be removed from Sean Taylor. Jackson didn't tinker with him last year, does the present of Gray make him feel he needs to show he can do more in player development? (doesn't matter Taylor shouldn't be his case study)
3. Gibbs may have already done this but. These coaches need to get there acts together. Someone needs to tell them if "the Danny" starts cutting them lose there is no Cap Hit and that Extra Million he promised GW would be nothing more than dead cap.
4. Gibbs will have to go back to being more hands on with Redskins and the CEO role will have to be put on the back burner.

His plan is to leave the Redskins in a position were they won't fall apart once he's gone (see the previous decade) but we are losing ground.

This all makes sense to me

Hope Joe visits the site

SkinzCanes wrote:

I do have the question he doesn't go into of why the wheels fell off now. He has been a long term successful coach. You cite good points, but why now? What did he do differently before? How did he turn into an out of touch idiot this year? That was the first question that popped into my head, I'm still wondering.

I'm assuming that you're referring to GW when u say "long term succesful coach." I'm not sure how accurate that statement really is. GW was a great defensive coordinator when he was with the Oilers/Titans. Since then, however, his career his been somewhat rocky. He bombed as the Bills HC and after a succesful first year here, his defense has gotten worse each of the last 2 seasons. The same problems that he had towards the end of his tenure in Buffalo appear to be surfacing here. Interestingly, it was in his 3rd season in Buffalo that he was fired and in his third season with the Skins he is starting to have problems.

If we don't learn from our mistakes History will repeat itself

I still won't concede Clark's offer wouldn't have been match if given the chance.

From the LaConfora's Washington Post blog...

Clark told the team repeatedly that he would immediately sign, at any point, for $1.5 mil bonus on a four year deal worth a maximum, yes, that's maximum, of $5.8 million, according to sources. Snyder told him he would never see that kind of money. It was brought up to Snyder that in fact, all Ryan was asking for was in essence the contract that injured safety Matt Bowen had signed with the Redskins a few years prior, and, given the passage of time, and Clark's production, that was a plenty fair salary request for a starting safety on a top-10 defense.

Snyder told Clark that the team was through overspending on players like it did for Bowen, and he had learned from his mistakes. Yes, you read that last sentence correctly. He actually said that prior to last March's ridiculous free agent splurge.

Clark received $7 million over four years, with $1.65 million guaranteed, from the World Champion Pittsburgh Steelers, and has been making plays for them all season. The Redskins could be facing another LaVargate with Archuleta. Some things never change.

To his credit, Snyder ducked out of a meeting to calll and congratulate Clark on his contract from Pittsburgh in March , to thank him for his service to the team and to tell him he would always have a home at Redskins Park. Classy move, but, like with Antonio Pierce, it came way too late.

SkinzCanes wrote:

I still won't concede Clark's offer wouldn't have been match if given the chance.[quote/]

From the LaConfora's Washington Post blog...

Clark told the team repeatedly that he would immediately sign, at any point, for $1.5 mil bonus on a four year deal worth a maximum, yes, that's maximum, of $5.8 million, according to sources. Snyder told him he would never see that kind of money. It was brought up to Snyder that in fact, all Ryan was asking for was in essence the contract that injured safety Matt Bowen had signed with the Redskins a few years prior, and, given the passage of time, and Clark's production, that was a plenty fair salary request for a starting safety on a top-10 defense.

Snyder told Clark that the team was through overspending on players like it did for Bowen, and he had learned from his mistakes. Yes, you read that last sentence correctly. He actually said that prior to last March's ridiculous free agent splurge.

Clark received $7 million over four years, with $1.65 million guaranteed, from the World Champion Pittsburgh Steelers, and has been making plays for them all season. The Redskins could be facing another LaVargate with Archuleta. Some things never change.

To his credit, Snyder ducked out of a meeting to calll and congratulate Clark on his contract from Pittsburgh in March , to thank him for his service to the team and to tell him he would always have a home at Redskins Park. Classy move, but, like with Antonio Pierce, it came way too late.

That's BEFORE free agency hit, Clark didn't come back he just signed the offer that the Steelers put out there.

Too bad too, He could have threw it right back at "the Danny" - Saying see I got more offered on my 1st stop "the Danny" would have given him whatever he wanted out of fear of rumores that he had been out bidded for a player.

Wow, after reading that I'm stunned.

Now I'm sure most of that stuff was probably exagerated, but none the less what is going on here?

Not only do we need to get rid of Jackson, but whoever leaked that information to ESPN...

I'm surprised that know one has tried to guess who the unnamed player is? I'm pretty confident that its Shawn Springs.

It's interesting that you say that. When I read the article I also thought that it was Springs. When I first read it I emailed the link to 2 of my buddies that are also Skins fans. I didn't tell them who I thought the anonymous source was and both, after reading it, both also assumed that Springs was the source.

That's BEFORE free agency hit, Clark didn't come back he just signed the offer that the Steelers put out there.

Too bad too, He could have threw it right back at "the Danny" - Saying see I got more offered on my 1st stop Wink "the Danny" would have given him whatever he wanted out of fear of rumores that he had been out bidded for a player.

I'm not really seeing your point regarding the Clark signing. Nobody knows for sure whether he gave the Skins a chance to counter after he received Pittsburgh's offer. However, I don't think that it can be disputed that Clark gave the Skins plenty of chances to sign him to a very reasonable deal and they failed to do it. It's not like he refused to negotiate during the season and then once free agency hit he took the first deal that he got. He told the Skins what they needed to do to keep him and they didn't think that he was worth it. Bottom line is that the Skins dropped the ball and screwed up.

SkinzCanes wrote:

That's BEFORE free agency hit, Clark didn't come back he just signed the offer that the Steelers put out there.

Too bad too, He could have threw it right back at "the Danny" - Saying see I got more offered on my 1st stop Wink "the Danny" would have given him whatever he wanted out of fear of rumores that he had been out bidded for a player.

I'm not really seeing your point regarding the Clark signing. Nobody knows for sure whether he gave the Skins a chance to counter after he received Pittsburgh's offer. However, I don't think that it can be disputed that Clark gave the Skins plenty of chances to sign him to a very reasonable deal and they failed to do it. It's not like he refused to negotiate during the season and then once free agency hit he took the first deal that he got. He told the Skins what they needed to do to keep him and they didn't think that he was worth it. Bottom line is that the Skins dropped the ball and screwed up.

Same old; same old. Nobody is disputing that the Skins made a mistake in letting Clark go. 1nik's point was that it's quite probable that things didn't go the way that the Skins thought they might. They probably thought they'd be able to match a contract, and they lost that gamble. Are they still culpable even if that's true? Sure. . .yet you can't plan for every disaster.

The Skins lost out on this one and all the armchair franchise owners come out of the woodwork. Not that Danny doesn't deserve the criticism. Still, I gotta look at the source and shrug my shoulders a little bit. . .but only because people can be so smug when discussing this whole thing.

It's a lot easier to criticize letting Clark go now that we're 3-7. We did fine last year without Pierce and Smoot. Would we have been better with them? Perhaps. If we went 5-11 instead of 10-6, would we have heard about it every day on these boards? Almost certainly. Funny how that works. . .losing begs for a scapegoat.

But now that we're 3-7 it's a lot easier to talk about the most recent mistake and point to other 'mistakes' as prophetic moments that the Skins ignored.

Until something new comes up, I don't see any original points being made whenever Clark gets brought up on the board (which has been often, to say the least). I see the same things over and over again. Nice, safe criticisms that make us fans look like geniuses. . .confused only because we can't figure out why we're not running the team.

Next time, I hope I see more critiques right as we let a player go, rather than after the season goes south.

As for the article: I don't know what to say. They have their sources and all I really have is time to wait and see if what they are saying is really true, or if this is just a case of losing spreading its curse over every aspect of our team.

Irn-Bru wrote:Same old; same old. Nobody is disputing that the Skins made a mistake in letting Clark go. 1nik's point was that it's quite probable that things didn't go the way that the Skins thought they might. They probably thought they'd be able to match a contract, and they lost that gamble. Are they still culpable even if that's true? Sure. . .yet you can't plan for every disaster.

My concern is that there's an ever-growing file of times the Redskins mis-judged the FA market.

They miss high in regards to other teams' FAs and seem to miss low when it comes to their own.

Actually, we didn't do fine the year after Pierce and Smoot left. That year, the defense was not as good as it had been and has been getting worse very year.

I would not be suprised if it is Shawn Springs. I've heard some of his interviews and he is quite honest when he speaks and I've seen him on Comcast Postgame ready to say what is on his mind but he cuts it off with a "I don't know" or just shakes his head...