Page 2 of 3
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:26 pm
by UK Skins Fan
USAFSkinFan wrote:side note: I didn't realize last season was the first time since 1959 that we didn't score 30 in a season... I'm saying we're putting up 30+ on Tampa this week...
So, the last time our offence was this bad, Buddy Holly hadn't got on the plane? Well, I guess it doesn't matter anymore....
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:45 pm
by aywale21
First off, whether we like it or not, we still have 13 games remaining. Firing Zorn during the season would cause nothing by chaos, who would replace him midseason? Why go through all that because of 2 bad games, 1 in which we won. Second of all, blaming all of this on campbell would be unfair, he has been playing as good as our offense lets him. We just have to regroup for this Sunday, play this season out and hope for the best. At years end we can make evaluations, after 16 GAMES. Then we can decide whether Zorn stays or go, whether we draft another Qb, whether we add more wr weapons.
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:51 pm
by PulpExposure
DEHog wrote:BarrelORum wrote:Countertrey wrote:Secondly, you never get rid of a shut down corner that you draft. They are not found every day.
Non-starter. Gibbs had 2 choices here. Find someone willing to trade a pick or player of value to the skins, OR lose Bailey in 2 months to FA, with NO compensation. It was not a question of "getting rid" of a shut down corner. Bailey was not returning to the Skins one way or another. HE had made that very clear.
Huh? What about the Franchise Tag? All we'd have to do is ensure him that he is the top paid player at his position. Still don't like the move.
Yep that what I was going to say.
Franchise tag doesn't make a player
play for you. They just hold out instead.
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:57 pm
by chiefhog44
aywale21 wrote:First off, whether we like it or not, we still have 13 games remaining. Firing Zorn during the season would cause nothing by chaos, who would replace him midseason? Why go through all that because of 2 bad games, 1 in which we won. Second of all, blaming all of this on campbell would be unfair, he has been playing as good as our offense lets him. We just have to regroup for this Sunday, play this season out and hope for the best. At years end we can make evaluations, after 16 GAMES. Then we can decide whether Zorn stays or go, whether we draft another Qb, whether we add more wr weapons.
Welcome.
I like your thoughts up to "play this season out and hope for the best." Hope does not work in any business. We need to fire Vinny this week and get a GM in here immediately to assess the situation for the rest of the season. Then we can play the remaining games and KNOW that we are headed in the right direction. There is no hope, there is do or do not. We need a GM
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 4:01 pm
by chiefhog44
PulpExposure wrote:DEHog wrote:BarrelORum wrote:Countertrey wrote:Secondly, you never get rid of a shut down corner that you draft. They are not found every day.
Non-starter. Gibbs had 2 choices here. Find someone willing to trade a pick or player of value to the skins, OR lose Bailey in 2 months to FA, with NO compensation. It was not a question of "getting rid" of a shut down corner. Bailey was not returning to the Skins one way or another. HE had made that very clear.
Huh? What about the Franchise Tag? All we'd have to do is ensure him that he is the top paid player at his position. Still don't like the move.
Yep that what I was going to say.
Franchise tag doesn't make a player
play for you. They just hold out instead.
Again, let's stay on topic. This was not my point. Just a small part of a larger example. It doesn't ultimately make any sense to debate it.
Big picture is...We need a GM
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 4:14 pm
by Countertrey
PulpExposure wrote:DEHog wrote:BarrelORum wrote:Countertrey wrote:Secondly, you never get rid of a shut down corner that you draft. They are not found every day.
Non-starter. Gibbs had 2 choices here. Find someone willing to trade a pick or player of value to the skins, OR lose Bailey in 2 months to FA, with NO compensation. It was not a question of "getting rid" of a shut down corner. Bailey was not returning to the Skins one way or another. HE had made that very clear.
Huh? What about the Franchise Tag? All we'd have to do is ensure him that he is the top paid player at his position. Still don't like the move.
Yep that what I was going to say.
Franchise tag doesn't make a player
play for you. They just hold out instead.
Thank you...
Re: The Fundamental Problems of the Washington Redskins
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 4:21 pm
by RayNAustin
BarrelORum wrote:I think JoeGibbs is one of the greatest football minds ever, but his second coming wasn't exactly looked at by the unbiased outside world as a strong move. It was more like an admission by the owner that "Hey, I don't know what the #@%&! I'm doing, can you come in here and help me?"
I was amazed that Gibbs drafted Jason Campbell. Campbell was a top rated highschool player by Auburn, who in 5 years at Auburn was widely considered a disappointment. It wasn't until Campbell's senior year when he had two first round RB's in Cadillac Williams and Ronnie Brown behind him that he had a decent season.
Campbell has all the measurables, but bottom line is he was never a winner and he made way too many mistakes at the college level. In 2003 an undermanned GT defense totally annhilated a #3 ranked Auburn team with Campbell at the helm by confusing him with multiple blitz schemes. He came off the hinges. When the Skins drafted him, I was shocked.
Very astute observations, but this one regarding Campbell is dead on the money. (everyone considers me THE Campbell hater of the board).
At the time, I read the scouting report on Campbell, and it concerned me given the number of College QBs drafted in the 1st round who fail to make an impact in the NFL. And Campbell's weaknesses outlined in that report put him in the high risk of failure category .... locks on to targets ... slow reading coverages ... tendency to hold the ball too long .. inaccurate short passes .. all of these things are the kiss of death when transitioning to the speed of the NFL. If he had trouble with these things at the college level, that just wasn't a good sign.
Enter Joe Gibbs. And as much as I've always loved Gibbs the coach .. he was NEVER a great talent evaluator. And we saw that in spades in the Gibbs II era. Gibbs "1" enjoyed the luxury of coaching a team primarily built by Bobby Beathard, and later, Gibbs had Bobby to help sanitize Gibbs choices as Gibbs influence increased in the eyes of Jack Kent Cooke. Finally, as Gibbs ultimately won Cooke's deciding votes when Gibbs and Beathard were in conflict over talent ... Beathard left. And the decline of the Redskins followed not long after.
Example: Joe Gibbs didn't want Joe Theisman, or John Riggins, or Darrel Green. These were players Beathard insisted on despite Gibbs protestation. And in those days, Beathard held Cooke's total confidence. Later, as Gibbs stock rose, Cooke forgot who the real talent man was ... so Beathard, fed up, went west to build another Super Bowl team in San Diego, while the Redskins talent declined under Gibbs until he ultimately retired, leaving the Redskins as but a shell of the team it had been a few years previous. And ultimately, it was Richie Petibone who got the shaft by inheriting a talent drained team which ended his head coaching career before it ever had a chance to get started.
Snyder was juts a puppy when all this went down.
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 4:22 pm
by Fios
Countertrey wrote:PulpExposure wrote:DEHog wrote:BarrelORum wrote:Countertrey wrote:Secondly, you never get rid of a shut down corner that you draft. They are not found every day.
Non-starter. Gibbs had 2 choices here. Find someone willing to trade a pick or player of value to the skins, OR lose Bailey in 2 months to FA, with NO compensation. It was not a question of "getting rid" of a shut down corner. Bailey was not returning to the Skins one way or another. HE had made that very clear.
Huh? What about the Franchise Tag? All we'd have to do is ensure him that he is the top paid player at his position. Still don't like the move.
Yep that what I was going to say.
Franchise tag doesn't make a player
play for you. They just hold out instead.
Thank you...
Fans who don't like or disagree with the Bailey trade have terrible memories. He made it crystal clear that he did not -- no matter what -- want to play in Washington again. Whatever revisionist history has been advanced since then is just garbage.
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 4:25 pm
by chiefhog44
Fios wrote:Countertrey wrote:PulpExposure wrote:DEHog wrote:BarrelORum wrote:Countertrey wrote:Secondly, you never get rid of a shut down corner that you draft. They are not found every day.
Non-starter. Gibbs had 2 choices here. Find someone willing to trade a pick or player of value to the skins, OR lose Bailey in 2 months to FA, with NO compensation. It was not a question of "getting rid" of a shut down corner. Bailey was not returning to the Skins one way or another. HE had made that very clear.
Huh? What about the Franchise Tag? All we'd have to do is ensure him that he is the top paid player at his position. Still don't like the move.
Yep that what I was going to say.
Franchise tag doesn't make a player
play for you. They just hold out instead.
Thank you...
Fans who don't like or disagree with the Bailey trade have terrible memories. He made it crystal clear that he did not -- no matter what -- want to play in Washington again. Whatever revisionist history has been advanced since then is just garbage.
](./images/smilies/eusa_wall.gif)
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 4:28 pm
by crazyhorse1
Skinsfan55 wrote:Yeah, I can understand a coach preferring one system to another but trying to install the WCO with this group of guys is like driving a square peg into a round hole. A coach should be able to adapt better than this.
Totally wrong, from start to finish. First, WCO has worked great up and down the field. We stall in the redzone because suddenly Zorn backs off from it.
Also, we only have personel for the WCO. We simply do not have an OL that can allow any quarterback adequate downfield shots, nor can the OL block anyone at all in re. to the running game. We have to establish the short pass as a basis of our offense or wind up with one of the worse final records in Skin's history.
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 4:28 pm
by RayNAustin
I remember that well ... about Bailey ... but I never heard an explanation as to why he was so adamant about leaving. Anyone got the scoop on that?
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 4:39 pm
by MEZZSKIN
Bailey wanted out and did not want to be a Skin anymore
Champ Bailey walked right into Gibbs office and told him straight to his face ..It was Gibbs first few months on the job and BAILEY basically threw him for a loop and insulted everything Gibbs stood for
Our HOF Coach just comes back and you march into his office and say...IM OUT
good Riddance--this is old news
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 4:42 pm
by chiefhog44
So if we got rid of Vinny this week, who would you replace him with?
Holmgren? Shannahan?
Re: Key Matchup Problems
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 5:00 pm
by crazyhorse1
brad7686 wrote:Hall and Landry were focused on CJ, it was up to Rogers and Horton to cover Bryant friggin Johnson. Massive fail.
Andre Carter was against one of the worst pass blockers in the league, Jeff Backus. They did max protect a lot, but still, massive fail.
The offensive line was against a bunch of no names and couldn't push, and the d-line was against a bunch of no names and got pushed, massive fail.
The passing game also gets a massive fail for the time between the two TD's being scored. Two routes short of the first down on third down, and a pick by Campbell.
Zorn gets the biggest fail for bad playcalling and bad game management. The team proved last week that they need to kick field goals. Don't decline 3rd down penalties, make the guy kick a 50 yarder, If he drills it, fine, it SHOULD only be 3-3 at that point. I realize you want a big play, but Malcolm Kelly isn't Greg Jennings. Get him loose over the middle and get his receptions up. Use his hands and size to his advantage.
The post should have been a massive pass except that the added absudity of the paragraph about passing causes a huge credibily cap. First, it ignores other valid drives achieved by passing and then, second, it throws out the two scoring drives. Any passing attack would get a failing mark if you ignored its lesser successes, threw out major ones, and graded what was left. For the love of Mike, the passing game produced 340 yards and two touchdowns and gave up one interception. Campbell got a qb rating of 97.6. If posts were sane on this board, the passing attack would get an A-- and we wouldn't get so much made up stuff and inventive interpretations to make Campbell look bad. Enough is enough. Campbell this year has been a legit NFL quarterback doing his job. Period. The problem is that other players on the team have not been able to do their jobs. End of story.
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 5:06 pm
by KazooSkinsFan
Fios wrote:Fans who don't like or disagree with the Bailey trade have terrible memories. He made it crystal clear that he did not -- no matter what -- want to play in Washington again. Whatever revisionist history has been advanced since then is just garbage.
I remember it fine. Bailey wanted to retire here and said so publicly, when Gibbs held a press conference where he rubbed his hands and cackled that he hated Bailey and was going to run him out of town and take "whatever he could get, even a running back" and he did. What's wrong with that memory? Dude, that's just history.
Re: Key Matchup Problems
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 5:46 pm
by EasyMoney
crazyhorse1 wrote:The post should have been a massive pass except that the added absudity of the paragraph about passing causes a huge credibily cap. First, it ignores other valid drives achieved by passing and then, second, it throws out the two scoring drives. Any passing attack would get a failing mark if you ignored its lesser successes, threw out major ones, and graded what was left. For the love of Mike, the passing game produced 340 yards and two touchdowns and gave up one interception. Campbell got a qb rating of 97.6. If posts were sane on this board, the passing attack would get an A-- and we wouldn't get so much made up stuff and inventive interpretations to make Campbell look bad. Enough is enough. Campbell this year has been a legit NFL quarterback doing his job. Period. The problem is that other players on the team have not been able to do their jobs. End of story.
I know I'm coming across as a Campbell can't do anything hater. I really don't hate the guy and if he was an above average QB he'd be perfect for this team and city. I want nothing more for the Redskins to have everything they need already on the roster. Ditching Campbell means rebuilding time. I honestly can't believe I'm typing that before week 4 but I've seen enough.
I really can't understand what you're seeing beyond that 97.6 QB rating. Please help me understand. Your statement about picking out the bad parts instead of the looking at the entire body of work is exactly whats wrong with looking at the numbers from the box score. It doesn't tell the whole story. I broke down his numbers by quarter to make my point. A point you haven't responded to.
Inventive interpretations? The only agenda I have is to help everyone understand where I'm coming from. I'm not going to have any say in decisions regarding the Redskins. I'm simply explaining my frustrations with fellow Redskins fans. Did you look at the stats I posted in the postgame discussion? He didn't convert a 3rd down until the 4th quarter! He was 2 of 10 for the entire game. Simms basically said that QB's are responsible for points and 3rd downs. Something we all know he's struggled with his entire career. We're getting crushed in t.o.p. and thats a direct result of failed 3rd down conversions. Good QB's get it done, and he's not getting it done.
Re: Key Matchup Problems
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:25 pm
by El Mexican
crazyhorse1 wrote:brad7686 wrote:Hall and Landry were focused on CJ, it was up to Rogers and Horton to cover Bryant friggin Johnson. Massive fail.
Andre Carter was against one of the worst pass blockers in the league, Jeff Backus. They did max protect a lot, but still, massive fail.
The offensive line was against a bunch of no names and couldn't push, and the d-line was against a bunch of no names and got pushed, massive fail.
The passing game also gets a massive fail for the time between the two TD's being scored. Two routes short of the first down on third down, and a pick by Campbell.
Zorn gets the biggest fail for bad playcalling and bad game management. The team proved last week that they need to kick field goals. Don't decline 3rd down penalties, make the guy kick a 50 yarder, If he drills it, fine, it SHOULD only be 3-3 at that point. I realize you want a big play, but Malcolm Kelly isn't Greg Jennings. Get him loose over the middle and get his receptions up. Use his hands and size to his advantage.
The post should have been a massive pass that the added absudity of the paragraph about passing causes a huge credibily cap. First, it ignores other valid drives achieved by passing and then, second, it throws out the two scoring drives. Any passing attack would get a failing mark if you ignored its successes, threw out others, and graded what was left. For the love of Mike, the passing game produced 340 yards and two touchdowns and gave up one interception. Campbell got a qb rating of 97.6. If posts were sane on this board, the passing attack would get an A-- and we wouldn't get so much made up stuff and inventive interpretations to make Campbell look bad. Enough is enough. Campbell this year has been a legit NFL quarterback doing his job. Period. The problem is that other players on the team have not been able to do their jobs. End of story.
Exactly what season are you watching, Crazy? Are you serious?
Campbell has compiled decent stats when defenses are in prevent mode (Lions, Rams) or the game is in garbage time (Giants).
He has had a lot of trouble with third downs, throwing 5 yard dump offs when you need 12, 15, 17 yards or just overthrowing his receivers.
Also, when it has been crunch time, he simply folds. He has not led the team at all when the score is not totally out of reach. Good QBs take the team on their shoulders and at least try to make something big happen. Campbell has not done this, and when you add that up with a shaky Oline and dubious calls from the coach, you get the mess we've stuck ourselves into.
Re: The Fundamental Problems of the Washington Redskins
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:53 pm
by Countertrey
RayNAustin wrote:
Example: Joe Gibbs didn't want Joe Theisman, or John Riggins, or Darrel Green. These were players Beathard insisted on despite Gibbs protestation.
Sorry, Ray... can't let this stand.
Joe Theisman was brought to the skins by George Allen. Beathard had nothing to do with it.
John Riggins was brought to the Redskins for the 1976 season from the Jets, as the heir apparent to the incomparable Larry Brown. He held out the entire 1980 season in a contract dispute. Joe Gibbs was hired in 1981. Among the first things he did was PERSONALLY go to Riggo's house in the woods, to talk him into returning to the game in Washington. The rest is history.
Regarding DG, I have never read nor heard anything of Gibbs not wanting him.
News to me.
There was certainly a power struggle between Gibbs and Beathard at the end... but these three players are not an example of that.
Re: Key Matchup Problems
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:11 pm
by crazyhorse1
EasyMoney wrote:crazyhorse1 wrote:The post should have been a massive pass except that the added absudity of the paragraph about passing causes a huge credibily cap. First, it ignores other valid drives achieved by passing and then, second, it throws out the two scoring drives. Any passing attack would get a failing mark if you ignored its lesser successes, threw out major ones, and graded what was left. For the love of Mike, the passing game produced 340 yards and two touchdowns and gave up one interception. Campbell got a qb rating of 97.6. If posts were sane on this board, the passing attack would get an A-- and we wouldn't get so much made up stuff and inventive interpretations to make Campbell look bad. Enough is enough. Campbell this year has been a legit NFL quarterback doing his job. Period. The problem is that other players on the team have not been able to do their jobs. End of story.
I know I'm coming across as a Campbell can't do anything hater. I really don't hate the guy and if he was an above average QB he'd be perfect for this team and city. I want nothing more for the Redskins to have everything they need already on the roster. Ditching Campbell means rebuilding time. I honestly can't believe I'm typing that before week 4 but I've seen enough.
I really can't understand what you're seeing beyond that 97.6 QB rating. Please help me understand. Your statement about picking out the bad parts instead of the looking at the entire body of work is exactly whats wrong with looking at the numbers from the box score. It doesn't tell the whole story. I broke down his numbers by quarter to make my point. A point you haven't responded to.
Inventive interpretations? The only agenda I have is to help everyone understand where I'm coming from. I'm not going to have any say in decisions regarding the Redskins. I'm simply explaining my frustrations with fellow Redskins fans. Did you look at the stats I posted in the postgame discussion? He didn't convert a 3rd down until the 4th quarter! He was 2 of 10 for the entire game. Simms basically said that QB's are responsible for points and 3rd downs. Something we all know he's struggled with his entire career. We're getting crushed in t.o.p. and thats a direct result of failed 3rd down conversions. Good QB's get it done, and he's not getting it done.
It doesn't matter that Simms said it. The platitude is simply stupid. The quarterback isn't alone out there on the field. Third downs are extremely difficult for a team that simply can't run the football. Most of our failures to get a first down came because too many running failures caused third and long or Portis got stuffed, or because receivers turned around for a pass one step too short (at least twice), or some moron committed a penalty. And, by the way, third downs should be avoided. Campbell passed for a great number of first downs. I don't care what down the first downs came on. I prefer the first or second.
Also, Campbell was not 2 for 10 on third downs. The Skins were. If you can't understand that simple fact about football, just keep on believing macho platitudes from a guy who doesn't remember he used to be derailed by receivers, blocking, run support, etc., like every other players who ever played the game.
Can you imagine a quarterback saying this to himself. Darn it, I shouldn't have put that ball right in Seller's hands. My fault. Sounds silly, doesn't it. But it's no sillier than listening to Simms with his macho up.
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:51 pm
by Countertrey
chiefhog44 wrote:So if we got rid of Vinny this week, who would you replace him with?
Holmgren? Shannahan?
Kindly explain why you feel firing Vinnie will somehow magically cause Zorn to become a master play caller, or our receivers to ensure that they are past the marker on that 3rd down pass? How will it result in our Corners suddenly covering the #2 receiver like a blanket? How will if cause our G-T Combos to start blasting 6 land highways for Portis to run through?
Please.
Plain fact is, it just doesn't matter when Vinnie goes... HE does not effect the outcome of next week's game one little bit.
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 10:43 pm
by Champsturf
PulpExposure wrote:DEHog wrote:BarrelORum wrote:Countertrey wrote:Secondly, you never get rid of a shut down corner that you draft. They are not found every day.
Non-starter. Gibbs had 2 choices here. Find someone willing to trade a pick or player of value to the skins, OR lose Bailey in 2 months to FA, with NO compensation. It was not a question of "getting rid" of a shut down corner. Bailey was not returning to the Skins one way or another. HE had made that very clear.
Huh? What about the Franchise Tag? All we'd have to do is ensure him that he is the top paid player at his position. Still don't like the move.
Yep that what I was going to say.
Franchise tag doesn't make a player
play for you. They just hold out instead.
Really? You honestly think that being paid that much (avg top 5 CB money, right?) that he wouldn't play one more season to try and get a monster deal (even bigger than the monster deal he just got for one year) somewhere far away from DC?
Re: Key Matchup Problems
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 10:45 pm
by EasyMoney
crazyhorse1 wrote:It doesn't matter that Simms said it. The platitude is simply stupid. The quarterback isn't alone out there on the field. Third downs are extremely difficult for a team that simply can't run the football. Most of our failures to get a first down came because too many running failures caused third and long or Portis got stuffed, or because receivers turned around for a pass one step too short (at least twice), or some moron committed a penalty. And, by the way, third downs should be avoided. Campbell passed for a great number of first downs. I don't care what down the first downs came on. I prefer the first or second.
Also, Campbell was not 2 for 10 on third downs. The Skins were. If you can't understand that simple fact about football, just keep on believing macho platitudes from a guy who doesn't remember he used to be derailed by receivers, blocking, run support, etc., like every other players who ever played the game.
Can you imagine a quarterback saying this to himself. Darn it, I shouldn't have put that ball right in Seller's hands. My fault. Sounds silly, doesn't it. But it's no sillier than listening to Simms with his macho up.
Fair enough, we'll disqualify Simms and Harrison. I'll also give you that the Skins (not Campbell by himself) went 2 for 10 on third down. 8 drives and 2 of them resulted in a TD. One of those TD's was a gift. Right now, we're 18th in the league on 3rd down percentage. I think we're hovering around 37%. 29th in the league in scoring average at 13.3. I'll be the first to admit the entire team from top to bottom is playing very poor.
Campbell, with a struggling Portis/running game in general, in a contract year trying to prove he's a franchise QB, isn't putting the team on his shoulders. He'd get a lot more respect from me and probably his teammates if he shouldered the blame. The rest of the QB's in the league do that, why can't he?
Half of his pass attempts came in the last 10 minutes of the game. I guess you can't really blame him for that unless he had more control at the l.o.s. But this is a team that gave up 6 td's to Brees. I guess it was foolish to think he could muster half of that.
I don't care if he puts up a 158.3 rating every game the rest of the season if the team doesn't win it doesn't matter. If the offense can only muster 13 ppg and 14 against the worst defense in the league how much does his QB rating and stats really matter? He has yet to put us ahead in the 2 minute drill, a requirement for every big time QB. He's had plenty of opportunities to get it done (this game was one of them) and he comes up short.
Honestly, all I'd really like to see is Campbell hit one of his receivers in stride. This is a fundamental part of playing QB and I rarely see him do it. He also needs to quit with the checkdowns, my calf muscles can't take much more jumping up and down in front of the TV.
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 11:05 pm
by EasyMoney
Oh and it was Boomer, not Simms. My mistake...
Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 9:27 am
by RedskinsFreak
Countertrey wrote:Kindly explain why you feel firing Vinnie will somehow magically cause Zorn to become a master play caller, or our receivers to ensure that they are past the marker on that 3rd down pass? How will it result in our Corners suddenly covering the #2 receiver like a blanket? How will if cause our G-T Combos to start blasting 6 land highways for Portis to run through?
Please.
Plain fact is, it just doesn't matter when Vinnie goes... HE does not effect the outcome of next week's game one little bit.
Firing Vinny now wouldn't change much in terms of how the rest of this season plays out. But it DOES right one half of the greatest wrong that exists in this franchise.
One half is having a good football guy in the lead spot when it comes to player evaluation and acquisition.
The other half is for said "good football guy" to have 100% autonomy of operations. The owner goes to "Be Like Bob Kraft" school and stays away from Ashburn as much as possible.
Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 9:52 am
by DEHog
RedskinsFreak wrote:Countertrey wrote:Kindly explain why you feel firing Vinnie will somehow magically cause Zorn to become a master play caller, or our receivers to ensure that they are past the marker on that 3rd down pass? How will it result in our Corners suddenly covering the #2 receiver like a blanket? How will if cause our G-T Combos to start blasting 6 land highways for Portis to run through?
Please.
Plain fact is, it just doesn't matter when Vinnie goes... HE does not effect the outcome of next week's game one little bit.
Firing Vinny now wouldn't change much in terms of how the rest of this season plays out. But it DOES right one half of the greatest wrong that exists in this franchise.
One half is having a good football guy in the lead spot when it comes to player evaluation and acquisition.
The other half is for said "good football guy" to have 100% autonomy of operations. The owner goes to "Be Like Bob Kraft" school and stays away from Ashburn as much as possible.
Well firing Vinny would stop the level of talent or lack there of coming here. Zorn hinted to talent in his presser being part of the problem...and we saw how he had no confidence to call certain plays in the red zone...so better player = different calls in the red zone.
But to the point...Vinny should not be allow to have any input in future personnel decisions for this team!