Is this team really better than last year?

[Redskins_Fanatic]

......The fact that the Redskins changed the defensive scheme from a 43 to a 34 was obviously going to impact Haynesworth if he was to be relegated to the nose tackle position, yet I see no evidence that the staff expended any real effort to alleviate his legitimate concerns ... they chose to take the hardline stand that he was being paid, and he was to do as he is told. And that's a legitimate bottom line position ... but not what one would call a diplomatic starting point. This was the genesis of the battle of wills that continued right up to his suspension .... along the way, Shanahan, in my view, went out of his way to punish Haynesworth for his perceived insubordination, rather than offer any path for Albert to save face.....

I don't believe that anywhere in Albert Haynesworth's contract there was a clause (at least I haven't heard of one) that GUARANTEED the Redskins would continue using a 43 defense. Players, like employees of any company have TWO options.... Do what the BOSS tells you to do, or expect to be disciplined and/or terminated. Personally, I think that Shanahan was too SOFT on both Haynesworth and DMac.

Haynesworth should have been told to go the heck home in February (when he and Shanny had the first run in) and only come back when he was ready to play the defense that the team was running.

DMac should never have been acquired in the first place, but should have been benched about a month before he was simply for gross incompetence and ineffectiveness.

Personally, I truly HOPE that Shanahan sits down with the entire team at the end of the year and tells them flat out.... "Anyone who isn't in this to do it MY WAY, let me know and we'll do our best to trade you or cut you if possible. Otherwise I expect to see you here for OTA's and voluntary workouts." Then he needs to sit down with Haslet and demand to know when he's actually going to start running the defense the right way.... AGGRESIVELY and in an ATTACKING manner.

[TCIYM]

Now hearing Jeremy Jarmon and Adam Carriker were at each other in the weight room ... apparently verbal only, nothing physical before they were separated by teammates. Nice culture change.

[KazooSkinsFan]

Now hearing Jeremy Jarmon and Adam Carriker were at each other in the weight room ... apparently verbal only, nothing physical before they were separated by teammates. Nice culture change.

Wow, you "heard" that two players went "at each other" in the weight room verbally but were "separated" by teammates.

And from that you sarcastically conclude there has been no real culture change....




I only repeated it to amuse myself. What a stupid post...

[KazooSkinsFan]

Personally, I truly HOPE that Shanahan sits down with the entire team at the end of the year and tells them flat out.... "Anyone who isn't in this to do it MY WAY, let me know and we'll do our best to trade you or cut you if possible. Otherwise I expect to see you here for OTA's and voluntary workouts." Then he needs to sit down with Haslet and demand to know when he's actually going to start running the defense the right way.... AGGRESIVELY and in an ATTACKING manner.

I hope he doesn't do that because it's no way to manage. I'm with you in the sentiment, just not the delivery

[TCIYM]

Now hearing Jeremy Jarmon and Adam Carriker were at each other in the weight room ... apparently verbal only, nothing physical before they were separated by teammates. Nice culture change.

Wow, you "heard" that two players went "at each other" in the weight room verbally but were "separated" by teammates.

And from that you sarcastically conclude there has been no real culture change....




I only repeated it to amuse myself. What a stupid post...

Carriker is a Shanahan guy. If he doesn't care about checking himself it says that the Hitler routine Shanahan is pulling has no effect on the players, especially the ones he brings in. Glad you're amused because I am anything but ... this is embarrassing.

[Red_One43]

Shanahan says McNabb would be welcomed back next season ..... as a backup. Again, stick foot in mouth, and slam the door shut with your hand still in the jamb?

Rex had a good game against the Cowboys .... probably one of his best performances of his entire career. But this was, afterall, a Cowboys defense that let almost EVERYONE score 30 points. Will the old Rex Grossman show up for the final two games? You know ... Mr. "Fumble twice, and throw three horrendous picks" Grossman ? If so, what then? Beck? A Rookie draft pick?

This guy just doesn't quit. Why further insult McNabb unless 1 game convinced him that Grossman is the undisputed starter next year? This makes no sense whatsoever. Wouldn't it be wise to see what happens over the next two games ... and where the Redskins wind up in the draft ... and who is likely to be available at that spot?

And, for the crowd who have spent the last 4 years claiming that QBs need at least 2-3 years in the same offense before judging them .... McNabb got 13 games ... but was apparently on the bubble after 8? Does that make sense?

Wouldn't it have been wise just to stick to the story ... "We need to evaluate the other two QBs" for offseason evaluation, and next year's roster will be determined in the offseason, not now, with two games to left to play" ?

If nothing else ... this further diminishes McNabb's value or any potential that we might work a deal for him? Obviously, we aren't going to exercise the contract option at the current figure for a backup.

I swear ... this staff is just one idiotic move after another. I wonder what JJ is paying this guy on the side to blow up the Redskins?

Ok, Ray, you have a point about Shanahan saying that McNabb would be welcomed back as a back up. No matter what McNabb did to make him want tosay that it does devalue him. At this point, he and Kyle should do everything to let teams know that in another system Donovan would do well.

As far as 13 games to judge Dononan - Do you really think that the problem was he couldn't learn the offense? The problem seem to be that Donovan would deviate from the plan and it happened more than a couple of times. If the coach doesn't want that, then he doesn't need one more game to determine that a guy is deviating from the plan.

Now, before the Dallas game, you wanted Grossman tro have a bad game so it would blow up in the faces of the Shanahan's. It didn't happen. As you said Grossman had a good game, but now you want to belittle that by saying that his good game was a result of Dallas' defense.
Let's look at how other QB's played against Dallas' defense since Garrett took over as HC.


N.Y. Giants W 33-20 E. Manning (NYG) - 373 YDS, 2 TD, 2 INT

DETROIT W 35-19 S. Hill (DET) - 289 YDS, 2 TD, 1 INT

New Orleans L 30-27 D. Brees (NO) - 352 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
Indianapolis W 38-35 P. Manning (IND) - 365 YDS, 2 TD, 4 INT

PHILADELPHIA L 30-27 M. Vick (PHI) - 270 YDS, 2 TD, 2 INT

Sun, Dec. 19 W 33-30 R. Grossman - 322 YDS, 4 TD, 2 INT

Peyton Manning who is ten times the QB as Grossman 4 Picks! Two for TD's
Vick is multiple times better than QB as Rex - 2 picks
Drew Brees multiple times better 1 pick
Eli Manning multiple times better - 2 picks, 1 Pick 6
OK Stanton on Grossman's level - Only 1 pick, ONLY 19 points Ray!

Will the old Rex Grossman show up for the final two games? You know ... Mr. "Fumble twice, and throw three horrendous picks" Grossman ? If so, what then? Beck? A Rookie draft pick?

What if he does good, Ray? What then? Ray, nobody is saying that Grossman is a starting QB in the NFL. We did find out that he is a capable back up. Is he a capbable interim QB for next year? We need to find out. I think you know like every one else that we still need to find a QB. Do you really think that Donovan, the guy Andy Reid dumped and the guy who has struggled all season is the answer? He has had a history of throwing the ball in the dirt. The Shanahan's didn't make him do that stuff. Why did the Shanahan's get him in the first place. You got me on that one Ray, but what does that have to do with an older Grossman in a different offense getting a chance now to show what he can do. I am pulling for him to do well and win the game even if it costs us a draft position. I want to end this season on a high note. Even when I wanted Zorn to be fired, I could not root against the Skins. It hurts to see my team lose.

[KazooSkinsFan]

Now hearing Jeremy Jarmon and Adam Carriker were at each other in the weight room ... apparently verbal only, nothing physical before they were separated by teammates. Nice culture change.

Wow, you "heard" that two players went "at each other" in the weight room verbally but were "separated" by teammates.

And from that you sarcastically conclude there has been no real culture change....




I only repeated it to amuse myself. What a stupid post...

Carriker is a Shanahan guy. If he doesn't care about checking himself it says that the Hitler routine Shanahan is pulling has no effect on the players, especially the ones he brings in. Glad you're amused because I am anything but ... this is embarrassing.

You're just flat out assuming the truth of what you heard without any specific knowledge or context and blowing up every description of what you heard to the most extreme interpretation and then blaming it on Shannahan. I found a quarter on the street today, OMG, the Fed is going to collapse and the world economy is going to crash! Run for the hills!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What you heard seriously is that meaningful to you without any specific knowledge or context at all? And BTW, have you ever been in a weight room? Please.

[TCIYM]

It's one more item to add to a growing list of unprofessional goings on at Redskins Park, at least in my mind. I'd like to see something that doesn't look like a step in the wrong direction, regardless of how slight. Suspending Haynesworth and benching McNabb aren't exactly what I have in mind. Nor are locker room fights, conflicting media reports, conflicting accounts of the same event between the parties to the event, etc.

If others feel differently that is their prerogative. If we all felt the same there would be little need for a discussion forum.

[Redskin in Canada]

Yes, we are better in SOME important ways.

No, we are not better in other ways. That 3-4 experiment MAY work in the future but it is not working now. The defense is the worst in ... recent history?

In the end, this is a discussion that can be very simply settled: If we have more wins this year, we are better. But just as in the total Wins and LOsses, not by much on BALANCE.

To me the ONLY reason I have hope is that Daniel Snyder does not appear to be in charge and Vinny is out. THAT is a definite and concrete improvement.

But i do HATE PASSIONATELY the soap-opera, drama-queen, ridiculous atmosphere that surrounds internal affairs and still today make us look like the laughingstock of the NFL.

[1niksder]

FWIW

Adam and Jeremy did not fight. The had a small argument which happens all the time. Talked to both of them and a teammate that was in the weight room and they all said it was nothing.

In other words...

Please keep moving

There is nothing to see here

[Red_One43]

Ahh ... you don't like Haynesworth. Got it. But what I don't get is how you surmised that my post had anything to do with Albert Haynesworth. The issue isn't about Haynesworth ... it's about the coaching staff. The Haynesworth saga is simply a symptom of a much larger problem which really took form in a perceived lack of respect on both sides, progressing to a full blown battle of wills ... which did nothing to help a team in transition or a struggling defense right it's ship. Two childlike EGOS battling each other, to the detriment of the team. And both are partially responsible for the never settled impasse.

And you may take note here ... I have not, nor am I defending Albert Haynesworth's behavior. He's a selfish, immature numbskull ... however, if the NFL were to ban such types from the league, or teams chose to deal with such players in the manner the Redskins did, it's likely that the NFL would have to reduce the franchise count by a team or two. In other words ... Haynesworth isn't unique in this regard ... and there are many similar examples ... including many worse.

With that said, the handling of this rather temperamental and self absorbed fellow by Shanahan compounded the problems ... in fact, one could argue that the manner in which Shanahan chose to deal with him from the very outset PRECLUDED any possibility of a positive outcome.

Now, if Haynesworth was the ONLY example ... then one might have a case for assigning 100% blame on Albert. But given the rather clumsy, arguably disrespectful manner in which McNabb has been treated, only reinforces the view that Haynesworth was also mishandled.

Now, if you are trying to imply that Haynesworth could not have helped the Redskin D this year, nor did he contribute much last year ... you're wrong. The Redskins D last year saw a dramatic improvement in sacks by the addition of Albert .... the best total since the 3rd ranked 2004 Redskin D. This year, if the current pace continues, we'll see a double digit decline in sacks, no doubt due to Albert's absence and diminished role, to one degree or another.

The fact that the Redskins changed the defensive scheme from a 43 to a 34 was obviously going to impact Haynesworth if he was to be relegated to the nose tackle position, yet I see no evidence that the staff expended any real effort to alleviate his legitimate concerns ... they chose to take the hardline stand that he was being paid, and he was to do as he is told. And that's a legitimate bottom line position ... but not what one would call a diplomatic starting point. This was the genesis of the battle of wills that continued right up to his suspension .... along the way, Shanahan, in my view, went out of his way to punish Haynesworth for his perceived insubordination, rather than offer any path for Albert to save face. No, to the contrary, Shanahan embarrassed him with the "Conditioning Test" fiasco ... deactivated him on occasions during the season when healthy and available to contribute ... among other actions contrary to any demonstration of a desire to mend fences.

One could certainly argue that Albert brought all of this upon himself, but I think such an argument would have to ignore all of the unnecessary private and PUBLIC eye poking that in fact took place.

The McNabb situation is a completely different scenario ... however, no one can legitimately claim that McNabb was handled properly, or with proper respect , regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the coaches dissatisfaction with his on field performance. Consequently, this reinforces the view that Shanahan's mentality is that of a tactless dictator ... who views the players as pawns on his personal chess board. This behavior also suggests that his ego and image is more important than the team.

The overall view that I present regarding Shanahan is one of multiple issues ... poor judgement in talent evaluations (many examples) ... poor judgement in matching scheme to personnel (last place defense, and a struggling offense) ... and an egocentric manner in which he has chosen to implement these "Changes", exemplified by the dismissive manner he chooses to employ in player dealings.

Overall, it looks more like he's concocting a "Milkshake of Madness" than building a cohesive structure that portends good things coming on the near horizon.

My personal opinion is that he's done less with more ... than just about anyone I can recall as a Redskin coach. I also believe that his son, Kyle, is way less of a genius than is advertised.

Ray, thanks for clarifying your position. I do understand your argument is with the coaching staff. If you knew what Jim Washburn went through with Haynesworth you would probably stop using him as an example. If you knew what Greg Blache went through with Haynesworth, you would probably stop using him as an example tomake your point against Shanahan. My point is I don't want self serving dudes like Haynesworth on the team I root for. I want my team to follow the model of long term success of the Colts, Steelers and Patriots. Sure, the coaching styles of those teams are different, BUT Ray we brought Shanahan in to win games not play around with malcontents - kick 'em to the curb. Shanahan did not win until his second season in Denver. Coughlin, another so called tyrant dictator did not win until his second season. Each of those coaches has at least one Super Bowl championship. One of them is employed by OUR team. He is the Coach Ray, he has a right to demand that malcontents get in line. Not every coach is going to handle things the way you like Ray. Let's see what he does the next season.

Back to Haynesworth, he made other players better Ray, but this is a team sport the D didn't get better. We were 4-12. It is about winning games! I don't care about stats. The question is how many games did we win. 4 games is not enough to brag about any defense.

McNabb, in the letter from his Agent says in so many words that McNabb had been "suggesting" that Kyle run some screen passes. Was it "suggesting" or was he flat out improvising on the field - going against the coaches? RAY, if you don't do what your boss tells you to do, you are going to get into trouble. You just might get disrepected. I don't have all the information as to who is telling the truth. I don't care. I do know that Shanahan is our coach. He was hired to win games and build us a winner for years to come. His track record says that you will see results next year - I am giving him that.

[Red_One43]

It's one more item to add to a growing list of unprofessional goings on at Redskins Park, at least in my mind. I'd like to see something that doesn't look like a step in the wrong direction, regardless of how slight. Suspending Haynesworth and benching McNabb aren't exactly what I have in mind. Nor are locker room fights, conflicting media reports, conflicting accounts of the same event between the parties to the event, etc.

If others feel differently that is their prerogative. If we all felt the same there would be little need for a discussion forum.

I agree with your last statement. I like your posts. I disagree with you most of the time, that is why I respond to a lot of your posts.

True, Shanahan does some things that make you wonder. True Shanahan has some tact issues. But look players that he supposedly dissed - Dock, Devin Thomas - But Dock was cut by the Bills. Devin still hasn't found the field as a receiver two teams later. Haynesworth - Haynesworth was a problem child in Tennessee that is documented - Jim WAshburn, D line coach, Tenn, some things I will miss about Haynesworth and some things I won't. McNabb - Dumped by his coach of 11 years, having a horrible season, free-lancing on called plays. - All of these guys did not do what they were supposed to do. Criticize Shanahan for how he handles his discipline - I understand that, but you sound as if you want the Redskins to fail. Let's be real, TCIYM check all the new coaches and how many have had winning seasons in their first years - here's a short recent list. Joe Gibbs II- 6-10 had two play-off years but had a losing record for his second tenure, did not leave a foundation for winning for years to come; Tom Coughlin (Shanahan type) 6-10 won the division in his second year and a Super Bowl in his 4th and the Giants are consistent winners, the foundation is laid.

You pointing out a locker room fight as evidence of bad things going on. Yes, there has to be tension in that locker room. Half of the guys won't be on the team next year and you can bet with our talent level some of those guys will be in the YUFL or out of football, but their are locker room fights and on the field fights quite often in the NFL.

OK, I do get that you would like to see a more cleaner process to get where we need to get and that I do understand what you are saying.

I believe in old school coaches. Military types! So, of course, I don't have a problem with Shanahan. When I look at Coughlin down in NY. He started 6-10 was ridiculed by Giant fans for his "tyrant" ways, but look what he brought home - a Lombardi trophy - now he is in danger of not making the play-offs they want him fired. Isn't this what happened to Shanny in Denver 7-9 first season , two super Bowls, WHYDFML? - You are fired. You are right - old school coaches better win now or the fans will call for their heads matter what their resume says. Post on, TCIYM! I will keep reading and responding.

[RayNAustin]

Shanahan says McNabb would be welcomed back next season ..... as a backup. Again, stick foot in mouth, and slam the door shut with your hand still in the jamb?

Rex had a good game against the Cowboys .... probably one of his best performances of his entire career. But this was, afterall, a Cowboys defense that let almost EVERYONE score 30 points. Will the old Rex Grossman show up for the final two games? You know ... Mr. "Fumble twice, and throw three horrendous picks" Grossman ? If so, what then? Beck? A Rookie draft pick?

This guy just doesn't quit. Why further insult McNabb unless 1 game convinced him that Grossman is the undisputed starter next year? This makes no sense whatsoever. Wouldn't it be wise to see what happens over the next two games ... and where the Redskins wind up in the draft ... and who is likely to be available at that spot?

And, for the crowd who have spent the last 4 years claiming that QBs need at least 2-3 years in the same offense before judging them .... McNabb got 13 games ... but was apparently on the bubble after 8? Does that make sense?

Wouldn't it have been wise just to stick to the story ... "We need to evaluate the other two QBs" for offseason evaluation, and next year's roster will be determined in the offseason, not now, with two games to left to play" ?

If nothing else ... this further diminishes McNabb's value or any potential that we might work a deal for him? Obviously, we aren't going to exercise the contract option at the current figure for a backup.

I swear ... this staff is just one idiotic move after another. I wonder what JJ is paying this guy on the side to blow up the Redskins?

Ok, Ray, you have a point about Shanahan saying that McNabb would be welcomed back as a back up. No matter what McNabb did to make him want tosay that it does devalue him. At this point, he and Kyle should do everything to let teams know that in another system Donovan would do well.

Too late ... you can't put toothpaste back into the tube ... the point is, it was another demonstration of POOR JUDGEMENT. Not an example, ANOTHER example ... just one of many.

Players play ... you need talent ... athletic ability ... some football smarts .. Coaches coach ... they need GOOD JUDGEMENT to be good coaches. Coaches with bad judgement cannot be good coaches, by definition

As far as 13 games to judge Dononan - Do you really think that the problem was he couldn't learn the offense? The problem seem to be that Donovan would deviate from the plan and it happened more than a couple of times. If the coach doesn't want that, then he doesn't need one more game to determine that a guy is deviating from the plan.

McNabb, or anyone else needs time to learn, and no, I don't believe he didn't understand the "terminology" ... I'd remind you that was what Mike Shanahan claimed. So if he is so all knowing ... wouldn't Mike know better about that then you or me? Or was Mikey just lying?

And, I'd also remind you that for a great deal of the season, McNabb was running for his life ... and for that entire time, the other 52 players were learning too ... so maybe some of that "deviation" was forced? Had it ever occurred to you that when someone is learning a new system, and under heavy pressure, forced to scramble .. that one tends to revert to instinct over something they are still learning to do? And, given that McNabb is an 11 year vet .... I'd say maybe it's a little much to ask him to learn new players ... learn a new system ... new coaches ... while also having his mechanics tweaked at the same time? Maybe it would have been better if they'd recognized that the guy has been one of the top 10 QBs in the league for a decade, and maybe wait on changing his mechanics next year in the offseason ... and not while under fire? Nah, that would make too much sense!

Now, before the Dallas game, you wanted Grossman tro have a bad game so it would blow up in the faces of the Shanahan's. It didn't happen. As you said Grossman had a good game, but now you want to belittle that by saying that his good game was a result of Dallas' defense.
Let's look at how other QB's played against Dallas' defense since Garrett took over as HC.


N.Y. Giants W 33-20 E. Manning (NYG) - 373 YDS, 2 TD, 2 INT

DETROIT W 35-19 S. Hill (DET) - 289 YDS, 2 TD, 1 INT

New Orleans L 30-27 D. Brees (NO) - 352 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
Indianapolis W 38-35 P. Manning (IND) - 365 YDS, 2 TD, 4 INT

PHILADELPHIA L 30-27 M. Vick (PHI) - 270 YDS, 2 TD, 2 INT

Sun, Dec. 19 W 33-30 R. Grossman - 322 YDS, 4 TD, 2 INT

Peyton Manning who is ten times the QB as Grossman 4 Picks! Two for TD's
Vick is multiple times better than QB as Rex - 2 picks
Drew Brees multiple times better 1 pick
Eli Manning multiple times better - 2 picks, 1 Pick 6
OK Stanton on Grossman's level - Only 1 pick, ONLY 19 points Ray!

I'm not sure what your point is here ... that everyone was scoring on Dallas? That WAS MY POINT.

What if he does good, Ray? What then? Ray, nobody is saying that Grossman is a starting QB in the NFL. We did find out that he is a capable back up. Is he a capbable interim QB for next year? We need to find out. I think you know like every one else that we still need to find a QB. Do you really think that Donovan, the guy Andy Reid dumped and the guy who has struggled all season is the answer? He has had a history of throwing the ball in the dirt. The Shanahan's didn't make him do that stuff. Why did the Shanahan's get him in the first place. You got me on that one Ray, but what does that have to do with an older Grossman in a different offense getting a chance now to show what he can do. I am pulling for him to do well and win the game even if it costs us a draft position. I want to end this season on a high note. Even when I wanted Zorn to be fired, I could not root against the Skins. It hurts to see my team lose.

Look, Red, knock off the patronizing BS, Red, really. And I didn't "get you on that one" .... there are a lot of those "ones".

And no ... after one game, against a Dallas Defense that allowed more opponents to score 30+ points than our 32nd defense this year PROVES NOTHING about Rex Grossman. Nothing at all.

I'll admit that I was ASTONISHED that he played as well as he did ... I would have lost major moolah on a bet ... had there been one person on earth that believed he'd throw 4 TD passes .... (I think for the first and only time in his career). I suppose that's what happens when three men, Rex, Kyle and Mike all pray for the same thing this close to Christmas .. miracles happen, I guess.

But let's also not lose sight of the fact that we still LOST THE GAME ... and Rex's miscues also led to 14 points for the Cowboys, and he was stymied for more than half of the game. So, in reality, how much of it was Rex and how much of it was Dallas resting on a big lead ... playing a little softer and less aggressive? Do you think that might have something to do with it?

And, I tell you .... I have nothing at all against Grossman ... I'd be HAPPY to be wrong and have Rex turn out to be the next John Elway ... but lets not start fitting him for the Bronze Bust just yet .... one game does not a career make, know what I mean? Let's see how he handles the NYG at home, with the Giants fighting for something .... not dallas fighting us for last place.

In all honesty ... the McNabb issue cannot be escaped, and you cannot dance around this in defense of the coaches. They picked him ... they had plenty of data on him (or should have had), and the guy has a long track record of success, while Kyle Shanahan doesn't have a fraction of what McNabb has as a resume'.

They didn't exactly surround him with great o-line protection ... and I'll LAUGH AT YOU if you suggest he's been given the vote of confidence and support one would expect from his coaches. They dissed him in Detroit ... bungled the explanation afterward, and after a buy week, and the rumors and talk of possibly benching McNabb, they instead give him a contract ... the Redskins come out and get embarrassed by the Eagles, his former team. Donovan obviously failed because he did't throw 10 touchdowns, because that's the amount we needed to win that game!

Anyone who really looks at this scenario closely would see that the team imploded after the Detroit game ... winning only once since then. And who knows what would have happened if Donovan hadn't been yanked with 2 minutes left ... if he drives down and scores and we win ... the Redskins would have been 5-3 (instead of 4-4) going into a buy week. That never happened and we'll never know ... nor will we know how much of an impact that had on the confidence and morale of the team ... all we do know is that we were 4-3 with McNabb ignoring Kyle's instructions and running the Philly offense instead Rex came in and in one play, gave up 7, and the game.

After the Detroit game .. Mike says McNabb was pulled because of their feeling that his cardio endurance wasn't up to the task of running the 2 minuet drill .... such an absurd thing to say given the fact that McNabb was running for his life the entire game.... all while Kyle did everything but REFUSE to run the ball and take some of the heat off .... do you realize that Kyle called exactly 6 running plays for the entire game? Hell McNabb had most of the yards running 4 times.

But it is McNabb that sucks. At that point he was the 2nd most sacked QB in the league ... with a team still learning a new system right along with him ... not a hint of a consistent running game ... and a defense that just plain couldn't stop anybody unless they got a strip or an int., and they were STILL 4-3.

And you know something .... maybe in the Shanahan family you just don't speak unless spoken to, but maybe Kyle should have been a little more open to suggestions from the guy out there on the field with several pro bowls, and 5 Championship game appearances and one Super Bowl ? Maybe, as McNabb was trying to get comfortable with a totally new offense, and being mauled by pass rushers .... maybe some alterations or twists like handing the ball off ... or running a FREAKING screen pass every now and then would have been a good idea? Of course that doesn't work with guys like Mike & Ike ... they're the bosses and you're just a grunt.

And so it is ... we have a multiple Pro Bowler QB who's been doing it for 11 years ... and a 30 year Offensive Coordinator that doesn't appreciate input from his QB ...(another bad sign)

You believe the coach when he says McNabb sucks ..... I believe the player's demonstrated 11 year career that says otherwise. Good coaches get the best ... not the worst out of their players ... and if there is a problem, the better money is that Kyle Shanahan is the problem.

[1niksder]

Too late ... you can't put toothpaste back into the tube ... the point is, it was another demonstration of POOR JUDGEMENT. Not an example, ANOTHER example ... just one of many.

Players play ... you need talent ... athletic ability ... some football smarts .. Coaches coach ... they need GOOD JUDGEMENT to be good coaches. Coaches with bad judgement cannot be good coaches, by definition

Donovan wasn't playing and the fallout appears to be over him trying to tell a assistant coach how to do his job. As head coach it showed good judgement to put that player in his place

As far as 13 games to judge Dononan - Do you really think that the problem was he couldn't learn the offense? The problem seem to be that Donovan would deviate from the plan and it happened more than a couple of times. If the coach doesn't want that, then he doesn't need one more game to determine that a guy is deviating from the plan.

McNabb, or anyone else needs time to learn, and no, I don't believe he didn't understand the "terminology" ... I'd remind you that was what Mike Shanahan claimed. So if he is so all knowing ... wouldn't Mike know better about that then you or me? Or was Mikey just lying?

Mike said that part of the reason McNabb in the Lions game was because Grossman had a better understanding of the terminology than McNabb before he changed the reasons why he was benched. Maybe he changed the reason so McNabb wouldn't look bad, because Grossman who is a much lesser QB had the team in and out of the huddle and moving at a pace DMc never moved them at. Nor did he move the Iggles in and out the huddle like Rex had his team moving last week.

And, I'd also remind you that for a great deal of the season, McNabb was running for his life ... and for that entire time, the other 52 players were learning too ... so maybe some of that "deviation" was forced? Had it ever occurred to you that when someone is learning a new system, and under heavy pressure, forced to scramble .. that one tends to revert to instinct over something they are still learning to do?

McNabb was rumored to be changing the plays in the huddle and at the line of scrimage. You can't be running for your life and scrambaling until after the ball is snapped. That's McNabb refusing to learn the system and thinking that he knew better, if the rumors are true.

And, given that McNabb is an 11 year vet .... I'd say maybe it's a little much to ask him to learn new players ... learn a new system ... new coaches ... while also having his mechanics tweaked at the same time? Maybe it would have been better if they'd recognized that the guy has been one of the top 10 QBs in the league for a decade, and maybe wait on changing his mechanics next year in the offseason ... and not while under fire? Nah, that would make too much sense!

I think anything was to much to ask of your 11 year vet when it was coming from a 30 year old was part of the problem

Now, before the Dallas game, you wanted Grossman tro have a bad game so it would blow up in the faces of the Shanahan's. It didn't happen. As you said Grossman had a good game, but now you want to belittle that by saying that his good game was a result of Dallas' defense.
Let's look at how other QB's played against Dallas' defense since Garrett took over as HC.


N.Y. Giants W 33-20 E. Manning (NYG) - 373 YDS, 2 TD, 2 INT

DETROIT W 35-19 S. Hill (DET) - 289 YDS, 2 TD, 1 INT

New Orleans L 30-27 D. Brees (NO) - 352 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
Indianapolis W 38-35 P. Manning (IND) - 365 YDS, 2 TD, 4 INT

PHILADELPHIA L 30-27 M. Vick (PHI) - 270 YDS, 2 TD, 2 INT

Sun, Dec. 19 W 33-30 R. Grossman - 322 YDS, 4 TD, 2 INT

Peyton Manning who is ten times the QB as Grossman 4 Picks! Two for TD's
Vick is multiple times better than QB as Rex - 2 picks
Drew Brees multiple times better 1 pick
Eli Manning multiple times better - 2 picks, 1 Pick 6
OK Stanton on Grossman's level - Only 1 pick, ONLY 19 points Ray!

I'm not sure what your point is here ... that everyone was scoring on Dallas? That WAS MY POINT.

The point was that defense wasn't as bad as you portray it to be since the coaching change, 4 of this years top QBs were picked off nine times. If Rex was as bad has you say he is he would have thrown at least 4 picks last week

I'll admit that I was ASTONISHED that he played as well as he did ... I would have lost major moolah on a bet ... had there been one person on earth that believed he'd throw 4 TD passes .... (I think for the first and only time in his career). I suppose that's what happens when three men, Rex, Kyle and Mike all pray for the same thing this close to Christmas .. miracles happen, I guess.

I think you're par for the course and wrong again, he did it the year he went to the Super Bowl. I guess that's two miracles, I'll let you explain why it happened in September last time

But let's also not lose sight of the fact that we still LOST THE GAME ... and Rex's miscues also led to 14 points for the Cowboys, and he was stymied for more than half of the game. So, in reality, how much of it was Rex and how much of it was Dallas resting on a big lead ... playing a little softer and less aggressive? Do you think that might have something to do with it?

They weren't resting on a big lead they were holding on with all there might and if Kyle hadn't abandoned the ground game the outcome may have been different

And, I tell you .... I have nothing at all against Grossman ... I'd be HAPPY to be wrong and have Rex turn out to be the next John Elway ... but lets not start fitting him for the Bronze Bust just yet .... one game does not a career make, know what I mean? Let's see how he handles the NYG at home, with the Giants fighting for something .... not dallas fighting us for last place.

He's not starting a career, he's closing one out. He isn't going to be the starter he trying to do the job McNabb was brought in to do. Help develop a young gun that will lead this team into the future is all he needs to be able to do.

In all honesty ... the McNabb issue cannot be escaped, and you cannot dance around this in defense of the coaches. They picked him ... they had plenty of data on him (or should have had), and the guy has a long track record of success, while Kyle Shanahan doesn't have a fraction of what McNabb has as a resume'.

Didn't someone say players play and coaches coach?

[Red_One43]

Too late ... you can't put toothpaste back into the tube ... the point is, it was another demonstration of POOR JUDGEMENT. Not an example, ANOTHER example ... just one of many.

Players play ... you need talent ... athletic ability ... some football smarts .. Coaches coach ... they need GOOD JUDGEMENT to be good coaches. Coaches with bad judgement cannot be good coaches, by definition

Donovan wasn't playing and the fallout appears to be over him trying to tell a assistant coach how to do his job. As head coach it showed good judgement to put that player in his place

As far as 13 games to judge Dononan - Do you really think that the problem was he couldn't learn the offense? The problem seem to be that Donovan would deviate from the plan and it happened more than a couple of times. If the coach doesn't want that, then he doesn't need one more game to determine that a guy is deviating from the plan.

McNabb, or anyone else needs time to learn, and no, I don't believe he didn't understand the "terminology" ... I'd remind you that was what Mike Shanahan claimed. So if he is so all knowing ... wouldn't Mike know better about that then you or me? Or was Mikey just lying?

Mike said that part of the reason McNabb in the Lions game was because Grossman had a better understanding of the terminology than McNabb before he changed the reasons why he was benched. Maybe he changed the reason so McNabb wouldn't look bad, because Grossman who is a much lesser QB had the team in and out of the huddle and moving at a pace DMc never moved them at. Nor did he move the Iggles in and out the huddle like Rex had his team moving last week.

And, I'd also remind you that for a great deal of the season, McNabb was running for his life ... and for that entire time, the other 52 players were learning too ... so maybe some of that "deviation" was forced? Had it ever occurred to you that when someone is learning a new system, and under heavy pressure, forced to scramble .. that one tends to revert to instinct over something they are still learning to do?

McNabb was rumored to be changing the plays in the huddle and at the line of scrimage. You can't be running for your life and scrambaling until after the ball is snapped. That's McNabb refusing to learn the system and thinking that he knew better, if the rumors are true.

And, given that McNabb is an 11 year vet .... I'd say maybe it's a little much to ask him to learn new players ... learn a new system ... new coaches ... while also having his mechanics tweaked at the same time? Maybe it would have been better if they'd recognized that the guy has been one of the top 10 QBs in the league for a decade, and maybe wait on changing his mechanics next year in the offseason ... and not while under fire? Nah, that would make too much sense!

I think anything was to much to ask of your 11 year vet when it was coming from a 30 year old was part of the problem

Now, before the Dallas game, you wanted Grossman tro have a bad game so it would blow up in the faces of the Shanahan's. It didn't happen. As you said Grossman had a good game, but now you want to belittle that by saying that his good game was a result of Dallas' defense.
Let's look at how other QB's played against Dallas' defense since Garrett took over as HC.


N.Y. Giants W 33-20 E. Manning (NYG) - 373 YDS, 2 TD, 2 INT

DETROIT W 35-19 S. Hill (DET) - 289 YDS, 2 TD, 1 INT

New Orleans L 30-27 D. Brees (NO) - 352 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT
Indianapolis W 38-35 P. Manning (IND) - 365 YDS, 2 TD, 4 INT

PHILADELPHIA L 30-27 M. Vick (PHI) - 270 YDS, 2 TD, 2 INT

Sun, Dec. 19 W 33-30 R. Grossman - 322 YDS, 4 TD, 2 INT

Peyton Manning who is ten times the QB as Grossman 4 Picks! Two for TD's
Vick is multiple times better than QB as Rex - 2 picks
Drew Brees multiple times better 1 pick
Eli Manning multiple times better - 2 picks, 1 Pick 6
OK Stanton on Grossman's level - Only 1 pick, ONLY 19 points Ray!

I'm not sure what your point is here ... that everyone was scoring on Dallas? That WAS MY POINT.

The point was that defense wasn't as bad as you portray it to be since the coaching change, 4 of this years top QBs were picked off nine times. If Rex was as bad has you say he is he would have thrown at least 4 picks last week

I'll admit that I was ASTONISHED that he played as well as he did ... I would have lost major moolah on a bet ... had there been one person on earth that believed he'd throw 4 TD passes .... (I think for the first and only time in his career). I suppose that's what happens when three men, Rex, Kyle and Mike all pray for the same thing this close to Christmas .. miracles happen, I guess.

I think you're par for the course and wrong again, he did it the year he went to the Super Bowl. I guess that's two miracles, I'll let you explain why it happened in September last time

But let's also not lose sight of the fact that we still LOST THE GAME ... and Rex's miscues also led to 14 points for the Cowboys, and he was stymied for more than half of the game. So, in reality, how much of it was Rex and how much of it was Dallas resting on a big lead ... playing a little softer and less aggressive? Do you think that might have something to do with it?

They weren't resting on a big lead they were holding on with all there might and if Kyle hadn't abandoned the ground game the outcome may have been different

And, I tell you .... I have nothing at all against Grossman ... I'd be HAPPY to be wrong and have Rex turn out to be the next John Elway ... but lets not start fitting him for the Bronze Bust just yet .... one game does not a career make, know what I mean? Let's see how he handles the NYG at home, with the Giants fighting for something .... not dallas fighting us for last place.

He's not starting a career, he's closing one out. He isn't going to be the starter he trying to do the job McNabb was brought in to do. Help develop a young gun that will lead this team into the future is all he needs to be able to do.

In all honesty ... the McNabb issue cannot be escaped, and you cannot dance around this in defense of the coaches. They picked him ... they had plenty of data on him (or should have had), and the guy has a long track record of success, while Kyle Shanahan doesn't have a fraction of what McNabb has as a resume'.

Didn't someone say players play and coaches coach?

Thanks 1niksder, I don't need to respond to Ray. You comments prove that I was clear as day what I was saying. You clarified everything I was saying.
Ray, what's your solution? Who are you going hire and fire after one year every year because you don't like the coaches style? Every coach deserves a second year Joe Gibbs II 6- 10 first year; Tom Coughlin 6-10; Both made improvements and one even is a dictator and won a Super Bowl lately. Even Zorn got two years. Next year, Ray!

[mastdark81]

You seem to be the one who's 'just not getting it'. Last year, we lost SEVEN games by 6 pts or less. Isn't that the closeness yo're talking about? This year we've lost FIVE games by games by that same margin with two to go. Granted we have two more games, but by your qaulification of closeness, gotten closer more last year than this year. With only one more win, I don't see much of a difference, b/c in the end, all that really matters in W-L.

Again, this year we stayed in games except two until late. Last year some that were out of hand got closer at the end when the D loosened up. But in the end, I watched every play of every game last year in HD on DVR, including KC which I'd accidentally seen the score for and I knew we were going to be upset. If you seriously can tell me you in no way see that our O was better this year then last year then I don't know what to tell you. Last year we were just over and over shut down on O and when we did move it got shut down inside the 20. This year, frustration on O? Yes. Like last year? No.

I watched everygame last year as well and we may be a slight improvement over last year due to the offensive line getting a lil bit better. For the lack experience of offensive coordinators, play callers, trash oline...I thought this year we would see a significant improvement this year but haven't. our qb play got worse but I think our running game slightly improved.

[HEROHAMO]

Yes we are a better team. We are certainly in a better position to improve. The holes which we all knew of were exposed even more. In the offseason we managed to draft a starter at LT and RT. We have decent Gs but we just need depth at Oline.

Oline, we have good starters at the Oline but we are thin. We need depth. Another quality T and G would not hurt. Not to mention injuries hurt the play of our Oline this year.

Another major reason our offense suffered was injuries to the RBs. Clinton Portis when healthy is solid. He was out mostly all year. Torrain is very good when healthy but he also was hit with injuries. After Portis and Torrain our offense suffered. No running game exposed our weaknesses at WR.

Yet another reason our offense was pitiful. We have no WR who can consistently get us the first down. Chris ey is a great TE but he was keyed on by the opposing defense most all year.

Add Defensive tackle and Nose tackle to the needs list as well. Truly we as Skins fan should all know we need some immovable objects on our defensive line. NT and DE for the 3-4 or even just some good defensive tackles from 4-3 defenses. A good defensive tackle will help either way.

Just a quick breakdown of holes to fill by priority in my mind.

NT, DE, just like Rak OLB, Big 6 foot 1 and above possession WR, a do it all olineman who can play G/T/C. A free safety, RB who can stay healthy and not necessarily last priority but certainly the most costly would be QB. I think we should hold back on QB unless we truly think we have the next Peyton Manning in the draft. I would have loved to hold on the Mcnabb and then build around him with a protoge under Mcnabbs wing. Now that plan is gone and Rexy is going to fill in for a few.

[KazooSkinsFan]

You seem to be the one who's 'just not getting it'. Last year, we lost SEVEN games by 6 pts or less. Isn't that the closeness yo're talking about? This year we've lost FIVE games by games by that same margin with two to go. Granted we have two more games, but by your qaulification of closeness, gotten closer more last year than this year. With only one more win, I don't see much of a difference, b/c in the end, all that really matters in W-L.

Again, this year we stayed in games except two until late. Last year some that were out of hand got closer at the end when the D loosened up. But in the end, I watched every play of every game last year in HD on DVR, including KC which I'd accidentally seen the score for and I knew we were going to be upset. If you seriously can tell me you in no way see that our O was better this year then last year then I don't know what to tell you. Last year we were just over and over shut down on O and when we did move it got shut down inside the 20. This year, frustration on O? Yes. Like last year? No.

I watched everygame last year as well and we may be a slight improvement over last year due to the offensive line getting a lil bit better. For the lack experience of offensive coordinators, play callers, trash oline...I thought this year we would see a significant improvement this year but haven't. our qb play got worse but I think our running game slightly improved.

I did not think we'd be much better. My hope in the off season was we'd go 8-8 at the best, but I'd be happy with less if we stayed in games. I'd say we met that only not being in two games. We cut cap losing some guys who while not being in our long term plans would have made us better this year. We lost our rock LT and changed D schemes. You have to invest in the future and we're doing that. We weren't good last year, you don't just sign a few guys and make everything OK in one year. A lot of people's expectations were flat out preposterous. The team has met and exceeded reasonable expectations. The comeback in D showing they're not quitting.

[TCIYM]

Scoring: Offense 19.1, up 2.5 PPG, (25th)
Scoring Defense: 24.5, down 3.5 PPG (23rd)
Record: 5Wins, up 1 (26th)

2010 Scoring Margin: -5.4 PPG
2009 Scoring Margin: -4.4 PPG


Better?

[SkinsJock]

Stats can be used in a lot of different ways to make whatever point you want - not interested and irrelevant

the product on the field is better - yes we have issues on defense and huge concerns about our O line but we are a lot better - last year we had a 4-3 defense that seemeed to play okay but did not help the bottom line at all - I like the potential for an aggressive 3-4 defense and think that this could be a good unit next year

although the season has not ended - at the end of last season we were looking back on an embarrassing season with little hope for improvement - as of right now I think our path to a much improved team is a lot clearer - that also means we're better


what else should we hypothesize about

[Red_One43]

Last year was the second year of another coach's program. The second year of a program is crucial. Clearly the Redskins were heading in the wrong direction.

This year is a new coach's first year of a new program. This is not a continuation of last year. Though it is a legitimate question to ask - are we better than last year, there are different perspectives in which to answer this question.

If we go by stats: rankings wins, clearly there isn't much distinction. If we go by drama, probably more day to day drama this year.

Since it is the first year of a new program, I look at these issues:

*Did we change the culture of overspending? YES - a major need
*Did we make good personnel moves? Clearly the McNabb trade is panning out to be a mistake, but on the surface it wasn't a stupid move. A second and third or fourth for a QB of McNAbb's caliber was a good move - no coach is perfect in personnel moves. The Brown trade for a 3rd or 4th is still open for debate since he missed all of last year; however, getting a O lineman of his caliber for a that price was a bargain worth a go. IMO, there were no stupid moves made on the surface like the TJ Ducket - 3rd rounder ( forward leaner and underchiever, plus Betts was healthy; Brandon Lloyd 3rd and 4th rounders (glaring character issues - not a number 1 receiver) moves of the past.
*The new program went with a new D (Yes, some of you think it was a stupid move, but it was a long range decision - the second year is the year to judge whether it is moving in the right direction)
*There is no question that Shanahan's main goal this year was to find out what players on this team will be around next year. That is why he using the last three games to evaluate players - some of you may think it is stupid to do that, but again, it shows you have a coach who is thinking for the long run - trying to lay a foundation for winning years to come.
*Is this team unified? It doesn't matter - half of these guys are gone next year.
*Are we in a position to get talent next year and not just talent -work ethic guys? Contracts have been restructured namely Hall and Haynesworth so they are not taking up caap space when the cap is reinstated. A lot of high salaried vets will be let go. We have our 1st and and round picks and late round picks and potential to pick up later round picks through trades.
*Are we better than last year? I say yes, because I see a plan, but the bottom line, one can't compare one season to the next because the goals are different - one to win now (2009) and one to evaluate and lay a foundation (2010). Some of you will say, I thought the name of the game was to win now - For you - 5 wins trump 4 so this year is better than last (Don't forget we have two games left). Case Closed. For everybody else - Shanahan didn't set out to only win 5 games, but when he says I put the best players on the field to win, he was not talking about just winning today, he means being a winning franchise for years to come i.e. we laughed when he started Kory at guard over Dock. Dock was clearly a better player then, but look at Kory now. Look at what the playing experience has done for him - against the Bucs almost 180 yrds team rushing. Will Montgomery was horrible last year, he is holding his own now. Shanahan knows that guys with lesser talent who will work hard will pay dividends in the long run. Guys like Dock and Hicks are bigger, but in the long run they give you the same -inconsistency you might win one now, but you don't become a winner with these guys. If it comes down to win today vs becoming a winning franchise in the future, Shanahan choses winning franchise. Compare second years with second years.

[crazyhorse1]

yes, we are better then last year

I'll agree - we can look at this team as having been lucky to win a few games but last year's team needs to be looked at too - the question is easy - YES

we were horrible last year and I'll agree we're not very good this year - but we are better

Exactly. The standard stated was better then last year. Frankly it's a no brainer even though you're right that it's a pretty low hurdle

Our offense was a little better this year. Our defense much worse. Last in the NFL. There's no way to say we were better this year. It's been a big disappointment.

[crazyhorse1]

yes, we are better then last year

I'll agree - we can look at this team as having been lucky to win a few games but last year's team needs to be looked at too - the question is easy - YES

we were horrible last year and I'll agree we're not very good this year - but we are better

Exactly. The standard stated was better then last year. Frankly it's a no brainer even though you're right that it's a pretty low hurdle

Our offense was a little better this year. Our defense much worse. Last in the NFL. There's no way to say we were better this year. It's been a big disappointment.

[KazooSkinsFan]

Scoring: Offense 19.1, up 2.5 PPG, (25th)
Scoring Defense: 24.5, down 3.5 PPG (23rd)
Record: 5Wins, up 1 (26th)

2010 Scoring Margin: -5.4 PPG
2009 Scoring Margin: -4.4 PPG


Better?

There are liars, dirty liars, and statisticians...

This doesn't address any point anyone's making on that we improved. It's just a completely and utterly irrelevant post.

[KazooSkinsFan]

yes, we are better then last year

I'll agree - we can look at this team as having been lucky to win a few games but last year's team needs to be looked at too - the question is easy - YES

we were horrible last year and I'll agree we're not very good this year - but we are better

Exactly. The standard stated was better then last year. Frankly it's a no brainer even though you're right that it's a pretty low hurdle

Our offense was a little better this year. Our defense much worse. Last in the NFL. There's no way to say we were better this year. It's been a big disappointment.

And yet we won one more game with two to play and all were against decent teams and we stayed in several more against really good teams until late. The term better on the D isn't that they were statistically better it's that we made progress to where we're heading. It takes more then one year to go to a 3-4. Though I have to concede on the D we don't really know if it'll get good in the 3-4 or not.