Mike Shanahan...

[RayNAustin]

You guys know what really sux tailpipe?... When we've won, Mcnugget being "unfit" to run a 2minute drill and being to stupid to grasp a playbook from April was never a friggin issue to the Shananiganhans.. dat really boils my leftovers!!!

GOSH!

Still though... 12-4.. I have blind faith, you my friends should just do the same no matter what!!!

Joe, baby ... step away from the kool-aide ... very ... very slowly ... step away.

[SkinsJock]

LPJ is making a lot more sense than a lot of others here

[Deadskins]

In the Detroit game, there were many questionable decisions. When McNabb was pulled, it was 31-25 .... we had already tried two 2 point conversions and failed ... and I thought it was a mistake each time. Had we Kicked extra points on both, Detroit would never have gone for their two pointer on what ended up being the go ahead TD and successful 2 point conversion, and the score would have been 27-27 (not 28-25) with over 3 minutes left. With a tie ball game, the Redskins would never have gone for it on 4th down and 10 from their own 28, virtually handing the Lions 3 points ... which was also a mistake in my opinion, and set up by previous poor decisions to go for 2 twice. Even then, down by 3 with 2:22 left ... you punt, force a 3 and out, and try and drive for the tie ... you don't give them 3 ... it was 4th and 10 ... not 4th and 2.

I totally agree with your points about not going for 2 so early and going for it on 4th down from our own 28 with what amounts to 3 TOs left, but your math is faulty. We missed out on two points on the unsuccessful PATs, but the Lions broke even, missing one two point attempt and then making the next. The score would not have been tied 27-27 had both teams simply kicked; they would have been ahead 28-27.

You don't need a calculator for this ... it's not your math that is faulty, it's your assumption that the Lions would have gone for 2 rather than kick 1 to tie the score ... at the 4:40 mark, we had a 25-20 lead, having missed on two 2 point conversions. 25 + 2 = 27, which would have made the score, 27-20. After the INT (when we shouldn't have been throwing anyway), the Lions scored a TD ... which would have made the score 27-26 (not 25-26). I suggest that the Lions would never have gone for a 2 point conversion in that situation (27-26) ... they would have taken the higher percentage 1 point kick to tie the score at 27. They went for 2 points in that situation BECAUSE that TD gave them a lead 26-25 ... so whether they make it or not, they still had the lead. Those missed two points changed the entire situation at that stage. Do you think the Lions would have risked going for 2, down by 1 ? I DON'T THINK SO. They would have kicked the 1 pointer to tie, unless of course, Shanahan was their coach. Unfortunately, in this game, he was making our decisions, and not theirs.

Apparently you do need a calculator, Ray. Before the score was 25-20, it was 13-14. We scored a TD which made it 19-14 and went for 2 to make it 21-14, but we missed leaving the score 19-14. Then the Lions scored a TD to make the score 19-20 and they went for 2 trying to make the score 19-22, but they missed (Orakpo intercepted) leaving the score 19-20. Brandon Banks returned the ensuing kickoff for a TD making the score 25-20, and we tried for 2 again, but missed again. That's where the score was when we threw the INT. The Lions scored: 25-26. They went for 2 again and were successful: 25-28. We went for it on 4th down and the Lions kicked a FG 25-31. Grossman was sacked and fumbled 25-38.

Had we not gone for 2 the first time, but kicked instead, the score would have been 20-14, and when the Lions scored they also would have kicked to give themselves a 1 point lead again. They only went for two because we went for two first. Both teams missed their first attempt, so the score differential was a wash.

[SkinsJock]

You guys know what really sux tailpipe?...

you had me at "sux"

GO SKINS

[KazooSkinsFan]

These guys are trying to make things work here

I agree brother. I already moved on and I am supporting MY WHOLE TEAM 100%

We disagree on a lot of things, but that's the common bond. Ray hates the Redskins, of course he's trashing them. He's not looking for anything out of this other then it's another chance to rip them.

I don't see that at all.

+1

Ray is just being Ray and Ray definitely doesn't hate the Redskins.
Some of the Redskins... that's a different story

I don't see it. I'd say crazyhorse is probably the other most negative of regular posters, but even with crazyhorse I occasionally see something he admires about the Skins. All I ever see Ray do is bash them. And crazyhorse laments how badly we suck. When Ray thinks he's right he revels in it. And it takes so little to prove him right to himself we suck. Imagination is sufficient. Crazyhorse may overreact but he wallows in misery, he doesn't enjoy being right that we suck. It makes Ray's day.

[dlc]

These guys are trying to make things work here

I agree brother. I already moved on and I am supporting MY WHOLE TEAM 100%

We disagree on a lot of things, but that's the common bond. Ray hates the Redskins, of course he's trashing them. He's not looking for anything out of this other then it's another chance to rip them.

I don't see that at all.

+1

Ray is just being Ray and Ray definitely doesn't hate the Redskins.
Some of the Redskins... that's a different story

I don't see it. I'd say crazyhorse is probably the other most negative of regular posters, but even with crazyhorse I occasionally see something he admires about the Skins. All I ever see Ray do is bash them. And crazyhorse laments how badly we suck. When Ray thinks he's right he revels in it. And it takes so little to prove him right to himself we suck. Imagination is sufficient. Crazyhorse may overreact but he wallows in misery, he doesn't enjoy being right that we suck. It makes Ray's day.

I get his point, we all have bought into this hope that Shanahan knows what he's doing, and he'll right the ship. So far, it seems the only part of the team that has made ANY adjustments is Haslett's defense (as I was very critical of it until he started mixing it up, coverage vs. blitzing, pure 3-4 vs. mixing 4-3 sets). Besides that, we have seen no adjustments between weeks let alone halves. We've consistently seen Kyle call the same game, with similar strategies vs. different defenses. We see Mike consistently put worse talent on the field for seemingly personal reasons. We see the confidence in the new regime dwindle in just 8 weeks after the benching of a the respected team leader.

On top of all this, lying for lying's sake. No credibility whatsoever. The one everyone misses, the run just wasn't there. Dress two runnings backs for the game means that you really don't intend to run. The press might buy it, but it's obvious the every defensive coordinator has you pegged.

System over people. Belief over results. Game plan over adjustments.

With the first half year in, the next 5 years look pretty dismal if this continues. I hope it won't, but the press conferences don't lead me to believe that the Shanahans think any of this is their fault. Maybe we're all wrong, but this doesn't feel like winning environment. So Ray is like any other fan who isn't deluding themselves. Unless Shanahan shapes up, the misery will continue. Let's not forget that John Elway and the Broncos were Super Bowl contenders many times before Shanahan. He still needs to prove that he can build a franchise.

[CanesSkins26]

We see the confidence in the new regime dwindle in just 8 weeks after the benching of a the respected team leader.

Just curious, but who exactly is losing confidence in the new regime? Sure some fans are moaning and groaning about it, but I haven't seen anything that indicates that the team has lost confidence in the coaches. And that's really all that matters.

[1niksder]

I think what troubles me most moving forward is two things ... 1) Shanahan's unwillingness to simply say ... "it was a bad decision,

This is the closest we will probably get

And as I shared with the team, sometimes you don't always make the right decisions, but you make a decision based on your gut feeling during the week, watching somebody practice, how the game's going, and you go with it."

Link

[Deadskins]

sometimes you don't always make the right decisions

Boy, could it get any more wishy-washy than that?

[KazooSkinsFan]

Ray is like any other fan who isn't deluding themselves

On that we disagree. Many people have this misguided notion that being overly negative is somehow "realistic." It's not. Realistic is seeing it for what it is, not ignoring positives and obsessing on negatives. How is ripping to shreds a 4-4 team "realistic?" 4-4 says there's good and bad. So does paying attention to the Skins, there's good and bad.

[KazooSkinsFan]

We see the confidence in the new regime dwindle in just 8 weeks after the benching of a the respected team leader.

Just curious, but who exactly is losing confidence in the new regime? Sure some fans are moaning and groaning about it, but I haven't seen anything that indicates that the team has lost confidence in the coaches. And that's really all that matters.

+1

[Skinsfan55]

I don't think there's any denying that the McNabb benching was bad for the team on multiple levels. Mike Shanahan has a Napoleon complex. I like the guy, think he's a fine coach and I believe the team will get past this, but it's true. Shanahan is always showing his control over the team just for the sake of it. It worked out okay with the Haynesworth situation, but it was ill advised with McNabb.

Shanahan panicked against Detroit and he ran out his backup to run the two minute offense during a winnable game. It was a horrible, awful and ill-advised decision for multiple reasons. Benching McNabb:

-Cost us a chance at winning the game.

-Alienated our "franchise" quarterback who we acquired only 6 months ago at great expense.

-Confused a locker room full of McNabb's teammates who look upon him as a leader.

and

-Caused an enormous media firestorm where it was leaked that McNabb is in poor shape, was not comfortable with the two minute offense and had to have the offense scaled down 50% because he could not grasp it after a full training camp and 8 games.

Maybe the culture of the NFL prevents it, but even if Shanahan is unhappy with McNabb as his hand selected signal caller wouldn't it have been better for him to come to the podium after the Lions game and said: "I accept responsibility for this loss. Rex is a fine quarterback, but I panicked at the end and put him in the game cold to run the two minute offense. McNabb is our starter and we hope to keep him in DC for the foreseeable future where he will hopefully lead us to scores on many last minute drives."

That would have diffused this situation and I think people would have gained respect for Shanahan. I know I would.

[SkinsJock]

Ray is like any other fan who isn't deluding themselves

On that we disagree. Many people have this misguided notion that being overly negative is somehow "realistic." It's not. Realistic is seeing it for what it is, not ignoring positives and obsessing on negatives. How is ripping to shreds a 4-4 team "realistic?" 4-4 says there's good and bad. So does paying attention to the Skins, there's good and bad.

thanks Kaz - this is a good post - we are not as bad as some are making us out to be and we certainly have some good things going for us

I'm probably optimistic but I'm just tired of what we've seen here - I think that these guys, warts and all, beat what we've seen here for the last 10 years, THAT'S EASY

[SkinsJock]

I don't think there's any denying that the McNabb benching was bad for the team on multiple levels. Mike Shanahan has a Napoleon complex. I like the guy, think he's a fine coach and I believe the team will get past this, but it's true. Shanahan is always showing his control over the team just for the sake of it. It worked out okay with the Haynesworth situation, but it was ill advised with McNabb.

Shanahan panicked against Detroit and he ran out his backup to run the two minute offense during a winnable game. It was a horrible, awful and ill-advised decision for multiple reasons. Benching McNabb:

-Cost us a chance at winning the game.

-Alienated our "franchise" quarterback who we acquired only 6 months ago at great expense.

-Confused a locker room full of McNabb's teammates who look upon him as a leader.

and

-Caused an enormous media firestorm where it was leaked that McNabb is in poor shape, was not comfortable with the two minute offense and had to have the offense scaled down 50% because he could not grasp it after a full training camp and 8 games.

Maybe the culture of the NFL prevents it, but even if Shanahan is unhappy with McNabb as his hand selected signal caller wouldn't it have been better for him to come to the podium after the Lions game and said: "I accept responsibility for this loss. Rex is a fine quarterback, but I panicked at the end and put him in the game cold to run the two minute offense. McNabb is our starter and we hope to keep him in DC for the foreseeable future where he will hopefully lead us to scores on many last minute drives."

That would have diffused this situation and I think people would have gained respect for Shanahan. I know I would.

sorry - totally disagree

isn't it great to have a place like this where we can prognosticate and then at the end of the season look back and say "man was I wrong about that" AND of course point out to certain posters how really mistaken they were in their predictions
- we'll be checking on this for you, for sure



I love this site

[dlc]

Ray is like any other fan who isn't deluding themselves

On that we disagree. Many people have this misguided notion that being overly negative is somehow "realistic." It's not. Realistic is seeing it for what it is, not ignoring positives and obsessing on negatives. How is ripping to shreds a 4-4 team "realistic?" 4-4 says there's good and bad. So does paying attention to the Skins, there's good and bad.

Odds makers, sportswriters, former players, and my own view say that it is realistic (without the quotes) that this team has performed worse than its record. Boy do I want them to win, but I don't think its sustainable to win the way we have. Can they turn it around? Yes. Does it look like they are going in the right direction? (Is it realistic of me to say no?)

I do see the positives (the defense, the turnovers), and I see the negatives, personnel decisions, poor offense, lack of adjustments. The reasons why Shanahan were brought in have all been failing. There are other substantive things besides our record that make us below average. We gave up a 2nd round draft pick for someone who is probably leaving after a year. The offense seems confused, and it seems no one is accountable. Interviews after last weeks game of players seem that confidence in the coaching staff has diminished.

All it takes for me is to see changes, and we all know that winning fixes everything, but a couple more losses can also put us in a spiral.

Why? Shanahan has brought more drama to this club, through his own actions, nationally. He will blamed by everyone if things don't even seem like they are getting better, and don't think that doesn't effect team performance. If this forum doesn't make it obvious, he's not a very likable guy. And from what I saw in Denver, despite two Super Bowls, they chased him out of town.

Is it realistic that it could happen again?

More of the same isn't going to cut it. If we do see things improve, we're going to see us run the ball when we should, mix in the 4-3 along with the 3-4 (as we have recently), use better players that Shanahan doesn't like personally, start making sensible halftime adjustments, include a short passing game, and keep McNabb happy and at the helm.

Let's not forget that Zorn started off 6-2. This is the first serious test of adversity for this regime, because they have gotten a pass because of the surprising wins. If they don't continue to win, every mistake that will make will resonate 100 times worse. People are already calling him Zornahan, and as you say, they are 4-4.