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

we're about to learn a lot about this HC - OR, should I say ... there's a lot of doubters that are about to learn that Mike Shanahan is a good HC

I'd agree that he gets another year and might leave then if he does not think he's doing a good enough job

I doubt Snyder gets involved here UNLESS Mike loses the players - I seriously doubt that happens - he's better than that


After this season, I'd love to get a new DC and new OC in here but I doubt that happens either

2009 Redskins: last place in NFC East
Jan 2010, Shanny is hired.
2010, NFC East cellar
2011, NFC East cellar
Week 9 2012: NFC East cellar. Shanny starts evaluating players for the 2013 season and planning for the 2015 draft....

Don't expect things to change, if you keep doing the same things. Einstein

HaiL,

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DaSkinz Baby wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DaSkinz Baby wrote:It's pretty sad when Jim Zorn and Steve Spurrier has a better winning percentage then this 2 time SB winning coach

What a stupid post. The comparison ignoring their their objectives of their first teams here and what they inherited is just complete fail.

No the stupidity is the inability to understand that Shanahan is and has been over-rated. If you look at records it would appear the team Shanahan inherited was better than the players he has brought in. 3 years in and the defense is worse then what it was when he came. The only thing we can show as progress is RG3 and Alfred Morris and with the bush league calls Kyle calls RG3 will have brain damage before this year is over and Alfred Morris will be also be ran into the ground like he did Terrell Davis.......

Then make the point with good arguments. Shannahan is trying to build a successful franchise. Comparing that after a couple years to the record of guys who were just trying to win games is a terrible argument.

He said "It's pretty sad ..." Is anyone disputing that?

DarthMonk

Yes, I'm disputing that. I want a coach to teach solid football to a team and instill a never say die attitude. He got a team that needed to be built. Comparing that to two guys who were not ready for prime time over the first two years of their administrations is what's sad. I am happy we have a good coach who's building an organization, there is nothing sad about that at all.

So 3 years into this rebuild and what do we have to show for it besides a QB and RB who at this rate we are going will be destroyed. Our defense is no better than what it was 3 years ago. We have brought in Shanahan type players and why are we still inept? Seems to me Mann and Green saying themselves that basics aren't being taught is a shame. Especially from a so called 2 time SB winning coach with supposed Hall of Fame credentials. Shanahan has not taught or instilled a never say die attitude. Shanahan and is son are arrogant fools one living off of past laurels and son who is living off his daddy's name. Period.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DaSkinz Baby wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DaSkinz Baby wrote:It's pretty sad when Jim Zorn and Steve Spurrier has a better winning percentage then this 2 time SB winning coach

What a stupid post. The comparison ignoring their their objectives of their first teams here and what they inherited is just complete fail.

No the stupidity is the inability to understand that Shanahan is and has been over-rated. If you look at records it would appear the team Shanahan inherited was better than the players he has brought in. 3 years in and the defense is worse then what it was when he came. The only thing we can show as progress is RG3 and Alfred Morris and with the bush league calls Kyle calls RG3 will have brain damage before this year is over and Alfred Morris will be also be ran into the ground like he did Terrell Davis.......

Then make the point with good arguments. Shannahan is trying to build a successful franchise. Comparing that after a couple years to the record of guys who were just trying to win games is a terrible argument.

He said "It's pretty sad ..." Is anyone disputing that?

DarthMonk

Yes, I'm disputing that. I want a coach to teach solid football to a team and instill a never say die attitude. He got a team that needed to be built. Comparing that to two guys who were not ready for prime time over the first two years of their administrations is what's sad. I am happy we have a good coach who's building an organization, there is nothing sad about that at all.

So 3 years into this rebuild and what do we have to show for it besides a QB and RB who at this rate we are going will be destroyed. Our defense is no better than what it was 3 years ago. We have brought in Shanahan type players and why are we still inept? Seems to me Mann and Green saying themselves that basics aren't being taught is a shame. Especially from a so called 2 time SB winning coach with supposed Hall of Fame credentials. Shanahan has not taught or instilled a never say die attitude. Shanahan and his son are arrogant fools one living off of past laurels and son who is living off his daddy's name. Period.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DaSkinz Baby wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DaSkinz Baby wrote:It's pretty sad when Jim Zorn and Steve Spurrier has a better winning percentage then this 2 time SB winning coach

What a stupid post. The comparison ignoring their their objectives of their first teams here and what they inherited is just complete fail.

No the stupidity is the inability to understand that Shanahan is and has been over-rated. If you look at records it would appear the team Shanahan inherited was better than the players he has brought in. 3 years in and the defense is worse then what it was when he came. The only thing we can show as progress is RG3 and Alfred Morris and with the bush league calls Kyle calls RG3 will have brain damage before this year is over and Alfred Morris will be also be ran into the ground like he did Terrell Davis.......

Then make the point with good arguments. Shannahan is trying to build a successful franchise. Comparing that after a couple years to the record of guys who were just trying to win games is a terrible argument.

He said "It's pretty sad ..." Is anyone disputing that?

DarthMonk

Yes, I'm disputing that. I want a coach to teach solid football to a team and instill a never say die attitude. He got a team that needed to be built. Comparing that to two guys who were not ready for prime time over the first two years of their administrations is what's sad. I am happy we have a good coach who's building an organization, there is nothing sad about that at all.

Well is the following isn't spot on and sad then I will have two of whatever you are drinking:

2009 Redskins: last place in NFC East SAD
Jan 2010, Shanny is hired.
2010, NFC East cellar SAD
2011, NFC East cellar SAD
Week 9 2012: NFC East cellar. Shanny starts evaluating players for the 2013 season and planning for the 2015 draft.... TERRIBLY SAD

Amazing other teams like the Saints can be jokes for years, they get the right coach and bam. Crap look at Indy everyone said the Redskins were a better team and they are 5-3 we are 3-6 SAD SAD and MORE SAD......

Based on your point of logic you must either A) be related to the Shanahan's or B no nothing of what it takes the other 31 teams that for some reason the Redskins just can't do...............

riggofan wrote:Yes! What we REALLY need is another coaching change. That has really worked well for us in the past.

I had a girl once ... and found out she was bad ... real bad ... she lied and cheated and stole all my money ... treated my momma badly and hated my dog. Wrecked my car, slept with the neighbor's wife, but since I had already changed girlfriends a few times before, and that didn't seem to work out ... I thought about keeping her. And then 5 seconds later, I threw her rear end out!

This is just a story I made up ... but you should get what I'm saying ... right?

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:I think having one person as the coach and de facto GM is a terrible idea.

Not sure how old you are, but a lot of people don't really remember the reality of the Gibbs/Beathard days. Beathard did the work, but every time they disagreed, JKC sided with Gibbs. It actually isn't that different than it is now. Allen's doing the work, but Shannahan's making the final calls.

That was a looong time ago. In today's NFL it's not a recipe for success. Holmgren struggled when he became coach and GM and Shanahan began having problems when he took on that roll in Denver. Sure we have Allen, but he handles more of the business side and Shanahan is responsible for personnel moves. If you look back at what Shanahan's problems were in Denver, it wasn't his coaching. It was the personnel moves that were made on the defensive side of the ball.

No highly successful organization works without one person making the final decision. Decision by committee is decision of mediocrity

And that person should be the general manager, not the head coach. There's a reason why the vast majority of NFL franchises separate the GM and head coaching functions. No team, as far as I'm aware, has won a Super Bowl having the head coach also take on the roll as general manager. What got Shanahan in trouble in Denver was thinking he could succeed with a bunch of reclamation projects on defense. Having someone in place to take these decisions away from the coach and the coach's ego is important.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DaSkinz Baby wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DaSkinz Baby wrote:It's pretty sad when Jim Zorn and Steve Spurrier has a better winning percentage then this 2 time SB winning coach

What a stupid post. The comparison ignoring their their objectives of their first teams here and what they inherited is just complete fail.

No the stupidity is the inability to understand that Shanahan is and has been over-rated. If you look at records it would appear the team Shanahan inherited was better than the players he has brought in. 3 years in and the defense is worse then what it was when he came. The only thing we can show as progress is RG3 and Alfred Morris and with the bush league calls Kyle calls RG3 will have brain damage before this year is over and Alfred Morris will be also be ran into the ground like he did Terrell Davis.......

Then make the point with good arguments. Shannahan is trying to build a successful franchise. Comparing that after a couple years to the record of guys who were just trying to win games is a terrible argument.

He said "It's pretty sad ..." Is anyone disputing that?

DarthMonk

Yes, I'm disputing that. I want a coach to teach solid football to a team and instill a never say die attitude. He got a team that needed to be built. Comparing that to two guys who were not ready for prime time over the first two years of their administrations is what's sad. I am happy we have a good coach who's building an organization, there is nothing sad about that at all.

Listen to this......http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/85961 ... iving-2012 This is EXACTLY WHAT SNYDER SHOULD DO!!!!

DaSkinz Baby wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DaSkinz Baby wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DaSkinz Baby wrote:It's pretty sad when Jim Zorn and Steve Spurrier has a better winning percentage then this 2 time SB winning coach

What a stupid post. The comparison ignoring their their objectives of their first teams here and what they inherited is just complete fail.

No the stupidity is the inability to understand that Shanahan is and has been over-rated. If you look at records it would appear the team Shanahan inherited was better than the players he has brought in. 3 years in and the defense is worse then what it was when he came. The only thing we can show as progress is RG3 and Alfred Morris and with the bush league calls Kyle calls RG3 will have brain damage before this year is over and Alfred Morris will be also be ran into the ground like he did Terrell Davis.......

Then make the point with good arguments. Shannahan is trying to build a successful franchise. Comparing that after a couple years to the record of guys who were just trying to win games is a terrible argument.

He said "It's pretty sad ..." Is anyone disputing that?

DarthMonk

Yes, I'm disputing that. I want a coach to teach solid football to a team and instill a never say die attitude. He got a team that needed to be built. Comparing that to two guys who were not ready for prime time over the first two years of their administrations is what's sad. I am happy we have a good coach who's building an organization, there is nothing sad about that at all.

Listen to this......http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/85961 ... iving-2012 This is EXACTLY WHAT SNYDER SHOULD DO!!!!

This guy is a baffoon.

I am a little bit on the fence. Some of the decisions by the Shanaclan have been spotty. I am not 100% sure that they are as great as they have been made out to be. There is a lot of evidence both ways. I am tired of Danny Boy blowing things up all the time. But..... If he did, who would be surprised if he went after a very hot coaching commodity who just had saw his new contract voided by the league and is set to be a free agent coach after this season? Yes. I am talking about Saints head coach, Sean Payton, who is rumored to be on the radar of Jerry Jones if the Pukes continue to struggle. Who would win the bidding war? Would RG3 be enough to entice Sean to come to Washington (along with maybe 10 mil or so per year that Danny would throw at him?) Look like Loomis may be available too. Just a thought....

chiefhog44 wrote: Just had a bad couple games. Every team has them

Yea, just sucks that we've had a bad couple of games, every couple of weeks for a couple of decades.

I think we let Rat face finish the season, and depending whether we fight and finish hot or at least improving, or if the team quits will be the indicator if we break out the Cheddar, load up the trap and Rid ourselves of the rat. Seriously dude has a rodent face... jusy sayin.

langleyparkjoe wrote:*side note*..

I like da avatar Mursilis.. congrats!

+1. Too bad you didn't get it seven or eight weeks ago, it might have gone far.

RayNAustin wrote:I had a girl once ... slept with the neighbor's wife, but since I had already changed girlfriends a few times before, and that didn't seem to work out ... I thought about keeping her. And then 5 seconds later, I threw her rear end out!

This is just a story I made up ... but you should get what I'm saying ... right?

You don't like lesbians?

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:I think having one person as the coach and de facto GM is a terrible idea.

Not sure how old you are, but a lot of people don't really remember the reality of the Gibbs/Beathard days. Beathard did the work, but every time they disagreed, JKC sided with Gibbs. It actually isn't that different than it is now. Allen's doing the work, but Shannahan's making the final calls.

Actually, that's not exactly how it all went down. Beathard came to the Redskins in 1978, and began building the team then. And it was he that convinced Cooke to hire this unknown Offensive Coordinator named Joe Gibbs as Head Coach. Cooke was dead set against the idea, as he wanted an experienced head coach, but Cooke had enough respect and trust for Beathard that he agreed. And that was the start of the Beathard-Gibbs team that we all remember as the glory years. And Beathard was in total charge of who was and who wasn't brought in to be Redskins ... and that was true until some point near after the 3rd Super Bowl in 1987.

Prior to that time, when Beathard and Gibbs would be at odds on certain personnel, Cooke had always sided with Beathard ... though that began to shift, and for the last couple of years between 1987-1989, Gibbs was winning those arguments with the support of Cooke. Cooke apparently began believing that Gibbs was the primary genius behind the Redskins success ... and so Beathard eventually had enough, and left the team in 1989. The Redskins made it back to the Super Bowl in 1991, with a substantial number of players that were Beathard's acquisitions, but after that, things went down hill quickly. Gibbs retired in 1993 at the start of the NFL free agency period, and never again would the Redskins dominate.

In 1992, the Redskins traded QB Stan Humphries (a Beathard 6th round draft choice for the Redskins in 1988) to Bobby Beathard's San Diego Chargers where he went on to compile a 49-27 record as the Chargers starting QB, leading them to their only Super Bowl appearance in 1994.

Many already understood that Beathard was the architect of the Redskins team that dominated the 1980's ... but Beathard's follow on success with San Diego, with the Redskin QB he had drafted, then traded for, pretty much confirmed the truth of that.

And as Paul Harvey used to say ... "And now you know the rest of the story".

Deadskins wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:I had a girl once ... slept with the neighbor's wife, but since I had already changed girlfriends a few times before, and that didn't seem to work out ... I thought about keeping her. And then 5 seconds later, I threw her rear end out!

This is just a story I made up ... but you should get what I'm saying ... right?

You don't like lesbians?

Only the lipstick wearing types that enjoy man sandwiches

RayNAustin wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:I think having one person as the coach and de facto GM is a terrible idea.

Not sure how old you are, but a lot of people don't really remember the reality of the Gibbs/Beathard days. Beathard did the work, but every time they disagreed, JKC sided with Gibbs. It actually isn't that different than it is now. Allen's doing the work, but Shannahan's making the final calls.

Actually, that's not exactly how it all went down. Beathard came to the Redskins in 1978, and began building the team then. And it was he that convinced Cooke to hire this unknown Offensive Coordinator named Joe Gibbs as Head Coach. Cooke was dead set against the idea, as he wanted an experienced head coach, but Cooke had enough respect and trust for Beathard that he agreed. And that was the start of the Beathard-Gibbs team that we all remember as the glory years. And Beathard was in total charge of who was and who wasn't brought in to be Redskins ... and that was true until some point near after the 3rd Super Bowl in 1987.

Prior to that time, when Beathard and Gibbs would be at odds on certain personnel, Cooke had always sided with Beathard ... though that began to shift, and for the last couple of years between 1987-1989, Gibbs was winning those arguments with the support of Cooke. Cooke apparently began believing that Gibbs was the primary genius behind the Redskins success ... and so Beathard eventually had enough, and left the team in 1989. The Redskins made it back to the Super Bowl in 1991, with a substantial number of players that were Beathard's acquisitions, but after that, things went down hill quickly. Gibbs retired in 1993 at the start of the NFL free agency period, and never again would the Redskins dominate.

In 1992, the Redskins traded QB Stan Humphries (a Beathard 6th round draft choice for the Redskins in 1988) to Bobby Beathard's San Diego Chargers where he went on to compile a 49-27 record as the Chargers starting QB, leading them to their only Super Bowl appearance in 1994.

Many already understood that Beathard was the architect of the Redskins team that dominated the 1980's ... but Beathard's follow on success with San Diego, with the Redskin QB he had drafted, then traded for, pretty much confirmed the truth of that.

And as Paul Harvey used to say ... "And now you know the rest of the story".

Ray is correct on this, and I might add, that Humphries was a bone of contention between the two and part of the reason Beathard said goodbye.

RayNAustin wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:I think having one person as the coach and de facto GM is a terrible idea.

Not sure how old you are, but a lot of people don't really remember the reality of the Gibbs/Beathard days. Beathard did the work, but every time they disagreed, JKC sided with Gibbs. It actually isn't that different than it is now. Allen's doing the work, but Shannahan's making the final calls.

Actually, that's not exactly how it all went down. Beathard came to the Redskins in 1978, and began building the team then. And it was he that convinced Cooke to hire this unknown Offensive Coordinator named Joe Gibbs as Head Coach. Cooke was dead set against the idea, as he wanted an experienced head coach, but Cooke had enough respect and trust for Beathard that he agreed. And that was the start of the Beathard-Gibbs team that we all remember as the glory years. And Beathard was in total charge of who was and who wasn't brought in to be Redskins ... and that was true until some point near after the 3rd Super Bowl in 1987.

Prior to that time, when Beathard and Gibbs would be at odds on certain personnel, Cooke had always sided with Beathard ... though that began to shift, and for the last couple of years between 1987-1989, Gibbs was winning those arguments with the support of Cooke. Cooke apparently began believing that Gibbs was the primary genius behind the Redskins success ... and so Beathard eventually had enough, and left the team in 1989. The Redskins made it back to the Super Bowl in 1991, with a substantial number of players that were Beathard's acquisitions, but after that, things went down hill quickly. Gibbs retired in 1993 at the start of the NFL free agency period, and never again would the Redskins dominate.

In 1992, the Redskins traded QB Stan Humphries (a Beathard 6th round draft choice for the Redskins in 1988) to Bobby Beathard's San Diego Chargers where he went on to compile a 49-27 record as the Chargers starting QB, leading them to their only Super Bowl appearance in 1994.

Many already understood that Beathard was the architect of the Redskins team that dominated the 1980's ... but Beathard's follow on success with San Diego, with the Redskin QB he had drafted, then traded for, pretty much confirmed the truth of that.

And as Paul Harvey used to say ... "And now you know the rest of the story".

So I was wrong, but you didn't contradict me. I agree with what you said.

Deadskins wrote:Ray is correct on this, and I might add, that Humphries was a bone of contention between the two and part of the reason Beathard said goodbye.

Humphries may have been the proximate cause, but he wasn't the reason.

I agree Bethard wasn't happy Gibbs was getting final say, which I said, but was wrong about, but it was apparently correct. But you guys are forgetting he was also in his mid fifties and had family in San Diego and wanted to go there. I'm not saying it was one or the other, I'm saying it was the combination.

Irn-Bru wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:If the locker room spirals out of control from here, I think you have to consider a change this offseason, if only to cut our losses. But I don't think we'll see things get that chaotic.

So far, the team never quits. They believe they can win any game until it's over. It's hard to even be contemplating it as a possibility.

I'm talking about the fallout from Shanahan's statements, which some players already expressed discontent over (on the condition of anonymity). Plus, have they had the best attitude if Sunday's performance against the Panthers was their comeback from a tough Steeler's loss?

I'm not saying there is a problem, and you know I'm not one to stir the pot of negativity just for kicks. But it's not unthinkable to me, and I've watched Redskins teams that have given up on coaches before. I'm getting a similar feeling about the way things are right now.

A good coach can clamp down on it and right the ship, and I think Shanahan is a good coach. So I don't think a meltdown is likely.

That makes sense. Though I think Shannahan's statements were overblown and stirred up by a controversy seeking/creating media. Obviously Shannahan didn't mean we were going rookie time. I think it was pretty obvious he wants to get everyone he can some playing time and find out who he wants, rookies and veterans. The media took a quote which often connotes rookie time, reported it in the way they did. I'd argue when they did it, they knew that isn't what he meant.

And yes, I totally know you're not a stirrer of negativity.

Back to the now - it's the Allen and Shanahan show

they have begun the process - unless Mike makes a complete mess of the rest of this season, they will be here next season

both players and coaches will get the opportunity to show that they should be a part of the RG3 era going forward


after this season, a number of contracts will not be renewed, we will have some players coming back that can help, the FO will use the draft and free agents to continue improving the franchise

the beat goes on

Deadskins wrote:

langleyparkjoe wrote:*side note*..

I like da avatar Mursilis.. congrats!

+1. Too bad you didn't get it seven or eight weeks ago, it might have gone far.

Oh dag was it that long ago? You gotta remember bro that I don't come in the public area too much. I'm usually cruisin in smack while gettin --->

And my stance on the Shanahans.. even though our talent pool isn't that deep (i'm talkin my baby can stand in it), I feel the whole dag gone coaching staff can go.

Shanahahahahahananananans can GO!

Take the whole staff wit ya'll, see ya! Peace out!

Do it now while RG3 is still young in the NFL and get him some coaches with some dag gone common sense.

That is all, Joe out.

langleyparkjoe wrote:And my stance on the Shanahans.. even though our talent pool isn't that deep (i'm talkin my baby can stand in it), I feel the whole dag gone coaching staff can go.

Shanahahahahahananananans can GO!

Take the whole staff wit ya'll, see ya! Peace out!

Do it now while RG3 is still young in the NFL and get him some coaches with some dag gone common sense.

That is all, Joe out.

My dispute with your point isn't so much that it has to be Mikey, it's that you're adopting the gnat attention span approach to rebuilding that is the biggest reason we can't stop sucking.

Contrary to the belief of armchair fans like Ray, 2 1/2 year is not long enough to overhaul a roster and build a winning organization when we were as bad as we were. I expect to see progress this year, and I did. I expect to see more progress next year. If at the end of year four we're still 6-10 or so, then yeah, you're getting my attention. But advocating starting over now is just crazy.

I don't necessarily predict Mike will win a SB here, I see him more as a Perdue. A solid coach who builds a winning attitude. I just hope there's a Gibbs out there to finish the job. Though unlike Perdue, Shannahan did win it twice and now he has a great QB, I'm not conceding he won't.

Contrary to the belief of armchair fans like Ray, 2 1/2 year is not long enough to overhaul a roster and build a winning organization when we were as bad as we were. I expect to see progress this year, and I did. I expect to see more progress next year. If at the end of year four we're still 6-10 or so, then yeah, you're getting my attention. But advocating starting over now is just crazy.

If 2.5 years isnt enough, how do you explain the Colts' turnaround? Do you really think that they have more talent than the Redskins? A 2-14 team is now 5-3, and they are in year 1 of a switch to a 3-4 and playing better than our D in year 3. And all of this with their head coach away from the team fighting cancer.

Honestly do you really want to rid RG3 of the coaching staff and scheme that he fits into???
With Shanny gone who knows what type of coach will come in not to mention who in their right mind would come in.
I'm sorry but I don't see a lot of out of work coaches worth a *sh$t*, lining up to take the Washington Redskins coaching job
I mean Jason Garrett may be out of a job next year, do we go after him... come on...

Stick with Shanny