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

welch wrote:I want Russ Grimm to coach the Redskins.

I was one of those that wanted Gruden as a head coach. Right now, I m not sure that was a correct choice. It isn't that he does not try, it is just that he is not good enough in almost any aspect of the skills necessary for a head coach. The offense is terrible, play calling is predictable and at times seems like what someone would dial up on Madden. Monday was a fine example of that. If I can sit and predict most of the play calls, you had better believe that anyone with football knowledge can do much better. Someone said Shanahan was qualified. Shanahan was fired in Denver because he became a liability to the team and was not producing as a head coach. IMO, Snyder became blinded by a Super Bowl winning head coach that was no longer had the skill necessary to do the job. Classic Snyder hiring for headlines rather than production. Scott M has been responsible for the improvements in the Redskins and if there is a new head coach next year, I hope Scott is given the freedom to make that choice. I am not exactly clamoring for Grudens dismissal but do not believe he can take this team any farther.

aswas71788 wrote: Someone said Shanahan was qualified. Shanahan was fired in Denver because he became a liability to the team and was not producing as a head coach.

Mike the GM was the reason he was canned in Denver. Chip Kelly, is headed down the same path.

aswas71788 wrote:Scott M has been responsible for the improvements in the Redskins and if there is a new head coach next year, I hope Scott is given the freedom to make that choice. I am not exactly clamoring for Grudens dismissal but do not believe he can take this team any farther.

Thats why I phrased the subject in the manner that I did. It's an open invitation for his supporters to chime in... 2 pages in, nobody can give any reason for keeping him other than for the sake of having continuity. Keeping him around is not going to somehow fix anything. The desire of some to have continuity is solely in response to Snyders past transgressions. You're sabotaging the current team in trying to remove the sins of teams past.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

aswas71788 wrote: Someone said Shanahan was qualified. Shanahan was fired in Denver because he became a liability to the team and was not producing as a head coach.

Mike the GM was the reason he was canned in Denver. Chip Kelly, is headed down the same path.

aswas71788 wrote:Scott M has been responsible for the improvements in the Redskins and if there is a new head coach next year, I hope Scott is given the freedom to make that choice. I am not exactly clamoring for Grudens dismissal but do not believe he can take this team any farther.

Thats why I phrased the subject in the manner that I did. It's an open invitation for his supporters to chime in... 2 pages in, nobody can give any reason for keeping him other than for the sake of having continuity. Keeping him around is not going to somehow fix anything. The desire of some to have continuity is solely in response to Snyders past transgressions. You're sabotaging the current team in trying to remove the sins of teams past.

So Chris how long do you give a coach to show some sort of improvements...32 games?

When the opposing DC can dial up the same double line stunt 9 plays in a row, and be successful doing it... you have an offensive coach who is either asleep, or stupid.

call it.

DEHog - I see where you're going and it's a valid point except that Scot did not hire Jay Gruden and he's the one that's (hopefully) making the decision - Scot is not looking at Jay Gruden and what he's done, he's making a decision based on what he feels is better for the future

baseball is all about stats and what you've done - the NFL is all about what you're going to do

Gruden was hired by Dan Snyder and Bruce Allen and one of the most important parts of that hire was to help RG3 - I doubt that he went to Snyder and Allen after a few weeks and said that's not happening - then we had the QB mess because Cousins did not do well ....

Gruden has a few weeks left to make his case and to CLL's point - is a desire for continuity going to win out over a guy that Scot thinks can come in here and do a better job as HC?

I would add SM is on record as saying that the team wasn't going to be very good this year...Is Gruden to blame for that? Look, far be it from me to defend Gruden, I'm on reord as saying that firing him after two years would be an easy sell to the fan base because SM is in place and he could say it was his decision and not Snyder's.

DEHog wrote:So Chris how long do you give a coach to show some sort of improvements...32 games?

We've watched the DC work with backups and his defense has stepped up to the plate.

We've watched a 2nd year HC regress with the addition of talent. We're better at RT and RG. We're better at QB. Our defense is top 5 in forced fumbles, they've given the ball back to the offense 22 times I beleive. Yet the offense has only scored 7 points off of 22 takeways...

How much more time does Gruden need? The team is better personal wise. The team is more resilient this year. They're fighting harder this year. Does he need another 16 games to try to win a road game?

DEHog wrote:I would add SM is on record as saying that the team wasn't going to be very good this year...Is Gruden to blame for that? Look, far be it from me to defend Gruden, I'm on reord as saying that firing him after two years would be an easy sell to the fan base because SM is in place and he could say it was his decision and not Snyder's.

no worries - you're right, Gruden is not to blame and the same is true if we win the NFC East - it's not because we're a good team, its more likely because this division sucks and we won the games that mattered - Initially I was disappointed in Gruden for not having a much better offense here but I now understand the reasons for that

I think that 'accountability' has helped here and we could very well see a coaching change but I doubt there is one unless Scot has someone in mind - we are still a number of players away and just like the fact that there are no easy choices on what to do at QB because of a lack of quality QBs, I don't think Scot makes a change unless he sees a future great HC in somebody

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

DEHog wrote:So Chris how long do you give a coach to show some sort of improvements...32 games?

We've watched the DC work with backups and his defense has stepped up to the plate.

We've watched a 2nd year HC regress with the addition of talent. We're better at RT and RG. We're better at QB. Our defense is top 5 in forced fumbles, they've given the ball back to the offense 22 times I beleive. Yet the offense has only scored 7 points off of 22 takeways...

How much more time does Gruden need? The team is better personal wise. The team is more resilient this year. They're fighting harder this year. Does he need another 16 games to try to win a road game?

Don't look now but you just answered your own question...I see a lot of people giving credit to SM and other for the improvement that they have shown, but are quick to blame Gruden for the negative. If the HC gets the blame when things go bad shouldn’t he be given some credit when they go right??

We can still finish the season with a winning record, in which case Gruden is going nowhere.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:We can still finish the season with a winning record, in which case Gruden is going nowhere.

Easy now...that would require them to double the amount of road wins they've had under Gruden!

It would be nice to have more wins than losses......but unless we find a way to win road games, that isn't going to happen. I give Scott M more credit for the improvement in the team because the improvements have come from player selection which is Scott M's territory. I fully expect Gruden to be here another year but would not be surprised is he was replaced. I don't have any special like or dislike for him. I am somewhat displeased with the coaching from him so far. I just see an offense that I can predict and I am a terrible defensive play caller. Gruden gets hit no matter what her does. In previous games, the "experts" said stick to the run game. He did last Monday and now they say he should pass more. He isn't going to win either way except by winning games. I do think the Redskins are a better team this year and am looking forward to next year.

DEHog wrote:

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:We can still finish the season with a winning record, in which case Gruden is going nowhere.

Easy now...that would require them to double the amount of road wins they've had under Gruden!

Not to dig up the past but we've already improved this season over last so despite any logical evidence to the contrary the team can justify keeping Gruden another season.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:

DEHog wrote:

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:We can still finish the season with a winning record, in which case Gruden is going nowhere.

Easy now...that would require them to double the amount of road wins they've had under Gruden!

Not to dig up the past but we've already improved this season over last so despite any logical evidence to the contrary the team can justify keeping Gruden another season.

If you've read my comments on this thread...Your not going to get a argument from me.

DEHog wrote:If you've read my comments on this thread...Your not going to get a argument from me.

You expect me to actually read a thread before I reply?

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

DEHog wrote:We've watched the DC work with backups and his defense has stepped up to the plate.

We've watched a 2nd year HC regress with the addition of talent. We're better at RT and RG. We're better at QB. Our defense is top 5 in forced fumbles, they've given the ball back to the offense 22 times I beleive. Yet the offense has only scored 7 points off of 22 takeways...

How much more time does Gruden need? The team is better personal wise. The team is more resilient this year. They're fighting harder this year.

lol. You write all of these positive things about the team but Gruden gets NO credit for any of them? They're more resilient and fighting harder (both true), but that has nothing to do with the freaking head coach???

You guys are ridiculous.

If Scot McCloughan decides we need to move on from Gruden at the end of the year, that is fine with me. Otherwise, he and the team have my full support.

Back to work!

Chris Luva Luva wrote:Thats why I phrased the subject in the manner that I did. It's an open invitation for his supporters to chime in... 2 pages in, nobody can give any reason for keeping him other than for the sake of having continuity. Keeping him around is not going to somehow fix anything. The desire of some to have continuity is solely in response to Snyders past transgressions. You're sabotaging the current team in trying to remove the sins of teams past.

I don't think you are going to find anyone on this board or others that are going to be a 100% Gruden believer. I sure am not. I think he is the worst playcaller I have seen in a very long time.

That being said, the reason other than continuity is progression. In 2013 we were 3-13 and a total joke. Gruden inherited a horrible team. Since the 2013 season, only 3 OFF and 2 DEF starters remain. The 2014 season was a hot mess, being a struggle centered around Danny boy's desire to force RGIII as starter. Then, Scot came in as GM, creating new issues and authority.

At the beginning of this year, most pundits had us in the bottom 5 (some dead last) of the entire NFL. This season, we are 5-7, and appear to be vastly better than we were in 2013 and significantly better than 2014. Most in the anti-Gruden camp will say it was all Scot (and I may agree to a large extent), but in all actuality, whether or not that is 100% true is too difficult to determine or pinpoint with complete certainty. So, since this team continues to improve, it wouldn't be a horrible idea to continue the momentum until it stops, while improving the glaring items/pieces --- one of which is playcalling. Instead of killing the improvement and butchering up the entire coaching staff (a typical Danny boy move), why not instead hire a new OC that can call plays. Then see how they do in 2016. If there isn't continual improvement, we move on.

I don't see how this is unreasonable.

It's simple really - Gruden has not done anything really bad and he's not done anything really good
IMO he's 'benefitted' this season because the other NFC East franchises have really sucked - so 'improved' is a relative expression

there's accountability here now and that's helped our play on the field somewhat - a credit to Gruden for sure

nothing really matters though if Scot has someone in mind to be the HC - Gruden hasn't exactly made a strong case for himself

SkinsJock wrote:It's simple really - Gruden has not done anything really bad and he's not done anything really good

He's done both. Are you sure you're watching the games?

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:It's simple really - Gruden has not done anything really bad and he's not done anything really good

He's done both. Are you sure you're watching the games?

a really silly question - I watch a lot of NFL games
my impression of Jay Gruden is that he's an OK HC - IMO he can win the NFC East & still lose his job if Scot has someone he really wants as HC

If Jay Gruden had done a really good job as HC, especially with the offensive play calling, I'd say it's a no-brainer ... but that's not the case

I could care less - most importantly we need to give Scot more time - having Jay Gruden stay as HC doesn't make the franchise better or worse

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

DEHog wrote:I feel your frustrations, but changing coaches every 2-3 years just isn’t a good recipe for success. I agree that Scot has had an impact but it’s still Gruden in the locker room and for whatever reasons, (maybe the benching of RG) this team has rallied around him. I just think it’s more of a personnel issue, we need to get better at picking and developing our own players and I’ve seen some of that this year.

I don't want to switch coaches. And at the same time, I don't want to waste time going down a dead end street. If he's just gonna get fired in a year anyway, why wait? lol The only reason to wait, is if the coach you want won't be available for another year.

This is right. Gruden does not have the talent to be a HC in this league. He simple cannot make adjustments. He is not smart enough. No one wants a coach fired, but if he is not going to cut it, better sooner than later. His teams have been inconsistent and embarrassing.

I really doubt that Scot brings in a new HC just because Jay Gruden has not lived up to expectations - that's what Snyder would do

I'm sure that Scot and this FO will continue to make better decisions regarding players and coaches

SkinsJock wrote:I really doubt that Scot brings in a new HC just because Jay Gruden has not lived up to expectations - that's what Snyder would do

I'm sure that Scot and this FO will continue to make better decisions regarding players and coaches

That's exactly when a head coach is replaced. When he's not living up to expectations. The issue here is that Scot McCloughan's expectations are the one's that count, not fan expectations.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

DEHog wrote:I feel your frustrations, but changing coaches every 2-3 years just isn’t a good recipe for success. I agree that Scot has had an impact but it’s still Gruden in the locker room and for whatever reasons, (maybe the benching of RG) this team has rallied around him. I just think it’s more of a personnel issue, we need to get better at picking and developing our own players and I’ve seen some of that this year.

I don't want to switch coaches. And at the same time, I don't want to waste time going down a dead end street. If he's just gonna get fired in a year anyway, why wait? lol The only reason to wait, is if the coach you want won't be available for another year.

You have to give a coach at least three seasons, especially a rookie coach. We don't know that he is going to get fired next year. Let Scot have another draft and see what Gruden can do with an improved roster. I feel your frustration, and I agree that Gruden hasn't shown much to this point, but I can't condone starting over again this quickly. Of course, if that's what Scot wants to do, then who am I to say no?