DarthMonk wrote:It's really quite simple - we haven't stopped. We are the Redskins and a long standing pattern hasn't stopped yet. Hence the list. There is a link - continuity if you will. Same franchise, same pattern. It hasn't stopped yet.
Saying it hasn't stopped over and over doesn't mean it hasn't stopped.
I see no link when the motives and rationale are different.
As you point out, correctly in my view, many things have gotten better. Good job pointing out many of them. Agreement here.
+1 for both of us
The current regime acted, at least a bit, like a regime that thought we weren't that far away from contending. Otherwise, we'd have kept all the picks and maybe even acquired extras. I feel like we tried to straddle the fence last year. We tried to get younger AND contend and kinda did neither very well. It's too bad. I'd love to see a full fledged commitment to youthfull hunger.
I will admit that trading away draft choices right from the get go is in line with the old regime, but one has to look at the motive. Shanny traded for McNabb because he wanted to have a vet QB in place for at least 3 years to buy time for someone to groom. He didn't bring McNabb in soley to win now. IF Shanny truly was in a win now mode, he wouldn't have changed defensive schemes. When it comes to the press, Shanny rarely ever tells the truth. Sure he said we were going to compete, but again, he wouldn't have changed to a 3-4. There are several other moves he made that say he was in a long term thinking mode. Throughout this thread and other threads, I have been mentioning them. You say Shanny traded away draft choices, but he also aquired draft choices (late rounders). You choose to look at swapping draft choices for Brown and trading draft choices for McNabb as evidence of wanting to win now, but I say getting a former pro bowler (even coming off an injury) is low risk when you swap a 4th for a 5th, so it was a steal. You have already heard my spill about McNabb. Had McNabb worked out, Mike would not be pressed to get a QB with a 1st day pick in this draft, so it made good football sense to get a player of McNabb's caliber for so cheap. Mike's MO is aquiring draft choices. His track record in Denver proves it, but he was never afraid to trade a draft choice to get his guy. In this case, it was McNabb and now that trade will go down as one of his flubs. Would you have rathered us be like the Bucs and go 3-13 and then go 10-6 this year? It looks good, but the question is are the Bucs just another team that goes up then down. Shanny is trying to build a foundation and upon that foundation build a winning franchise for years to come. Tearing down the house is not the way to do that. Shanny has studied the Steelers and Pats, he is trying to follow their model. He darn near pulled it off last year as far as being competive. A few more bounces and penalties our way and we have a 500 or above team. I really think Shanny came into this year wanting to be competitive - 500 season was not a long term goal - thus the switch to a 3-4 now rather than ease it in or switch later.
We will have stopped when we stop. Perhaps we have begun to. Time will tell.
I am still not following as to what stops - trading draft choices? Like I said, Mike's MO is aquiring not trading, but he does and will always trade a pick if he sees fit. This isn't the Redskins of old trading all our picks.
But, yes, since he did it right away, I do have to admit it can be reasonably looked at it like you do.
I'm actually with you for the most part but there is plenty of evidence. You could probably play devil's advocate and point it out better than most.
I would say that the only thing different between our views is I am being optimistic, but optimistic with evidence to back up my optimism. You are leaning toward optimisim, but you are choosing to look back at the past. I think the only thing that will free you from the past is Shanny producing a winner which is a big thing. The little things that I point out to you don't suffice for you as they do for me. You see what I see, but until it produces a winner - a blunderous trade looks like the regime of old. Am I getting this right?
I think we have our best FO/Coaching situation since Marty. Now that guy was awesome. I think he turned over half the roster, brought in 13 rookies, brought our cap # from 100 million to nearly 50 million, and after 0-5 went 8-3 with Tony Banks ... but that's another story.
Well, it is another story, but at least your memories of the past aren't all bad.
This is also a story we can both agree on. I like our current FO/Coaching but Shanny has some strange ways about doing business - this might be another reason you are skeptical - What in the .... is Mike doing? With Mike, you have to judge him by the small things because he keeps the big picture hidden. I don't like this style. His priorities do not fit the average fan. I really believe that Mike has no problem losing a game if he gets the thing he wants out of the game i.e. starting Grossman against Dallas and playing all the other back ups in those last three games. Mike wasn't playing to lose, but it was more important to evaluate than put his starters out there - lo and behold, the back ups showed what our team was missing - hunger - they even beat a play-off hungry team in their home. Played the g-men to the best game since 2007. Darn near came back and beat the Cowboys instead of rolling over and dying.
The trade did not make football sense to someone who thought we were far away and needed to get younger. I recognize the craftiness of the contract. Too bad we had to be so crafty with McNabb instead of having the picks and the season we gave up.
Good point here. Personally, I think that McNabb was an upgrade for Jason especially for leadership, but I am with you - Shanny could have accomplished what he wanted with Jason and still kept his draft choices. True, Jason didn't have "IT," but he was an average QB who proved that he could learn Offenses on the fly. Even though I feel this way, when I saw how the players responded to McNabb, I was happy for the trade. I saw McNabb hang in the pocket and make throws that Campbell never did.
Yes, too bad, it has come down to having to craft out a contract like that, but every team will make mistakes, it is good to know that Mike can clean it up a little - BUT since he is known for these types of mistakes, he has had plenty of practice.
I have supported my view of at least part of the current FO thinking with facts. The two most obvious are McNabb and Brown.
We may not see it the same way, but you did support your view. +1
I never said we made a bank-breaking blunder. I am saying an old pattern (star signing mentality) has clearly continued to persist for a year - at least a little.
Fair enough! BUT I did. It was a blunder. The only reason why I am not upset, is that stuff comes with Mike. One thing, I love about the guy, when he makes a mistake, he moves on instead of beating the dead horse. True, Mike must produce a winner, at least by the third season and that can't be just a winning record, it must be a solid team with a foundation OR people will get tired of his stuff just like the onwer in Denver did. I personally think tha Mike will produce that type of winner by year three because he has did a lot of homework, but Mike will never change his stripes.
I'm really not that frustrated. I've been around a while and pretty much saw 6-10 coming. I think I predicted 7-9 with an opening win over Dallas last year and got labeled as an optimist at work.
What got me, a lot of fans say that they saw 6-10, 7-9 or 8-8 but seemed to be frustrated that it turned out that way. I am sure that any frustration you may have had was not the record but the manner in which it happened. Had Shanny left the 4-3 alone. Adjusted his O to fit McNabb, a la Joe Gibbs adjusting to fit his personnel during his first season, we could have been a contenda' ( a little movie humor). I don't get frustrated that he didn't do that - he is no Joe Gibbs - I just sit back and say he's the coach - he better know what he is doing and I look at the small things to assure myself that he knows what he is doing, most of the time.
I trust his resume. For those who say, he had John Elway, I say, John never won SB without Mike.
Oh, and we need to score more points!
100 % with you.
I stand by my posts.
BAD CALL - and not only in how it worked out at both the QB and leadership deal but also in how he and Kyle handled the players and the offense