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

another constructive, knee jerk reaction

plain and simple - why? what difference does it make?

SkinsJock wrote:another constructive, knee jerk reaction

plain and simple - why? what difference does it make?

Surely you jest.

3-13.

Smithian wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/mike-shanahan-hasnt-solved-washington-redskins-problems-during-uneven-tenure/2013/12/28/7df92930-6fd5-11e3-a523-fe73f0ff6b8d_story.html?hpid=z2

Fire Shanahan before he makes it to the postgame lockerroom.

Not even Dan Snyder who is an idiot would stoop that low - that is a classless thing to do and will not happen

we shall see who has a better understanding of these things

SkinsJock wrote:

Smithian wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/mike-shanahan-hasnt-solved-washington-redskins-problems-during-uneven-tenure/2013/12/28/7df92930-6fd5-11e3-a523-fe73f0ff6b8d_story.html?hpid=z2

Fire Shanahan before he makes it to the postgame lockerroom.

Not even Dan Snyder who is an idiot would stoop that low - that is a classless thing to do and will not happen

we shall see who has a better understanding of these things

If I was a betting man I would put big money on Shanahan being gone tomorrow.

Smithian wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:

Smithian wrote:Fire Shanahan before he makes it to the post game locker room.

Not even Dan Snyder would stoop that low - that is a classless thing to do and will not happen

we shall see who has a better understanding of these things

If I was a betting man I would put big money on Shanahan being gone tomorrow.

Oh No! - you already insisted he should be fired before then ... WRONG! you can't have it both ways

Mike is most likely fired soon ... but not today!

I'm kind of glad that we might be done with Mike ...

my only concern is who will be responsible for bringing in the next HC ...

IF Mike is gone we need a real GM ...

SkinsJock wrote:I'm kind of glad that we might be done with Mike ...

my only concern is who will be responsible for bringing in the next HC ...

IF Mike is gone we need a real GM ...

Is Bruce Allen reported to be on the out as well?

SkinsJock wrote:I'm kind of glad that we might be done with Mike ...

my only concern is who will be responsible for bringing in the next HC ...

IF Mike is gone we need a real GM ...

Brian Mitchel was talking about that on the Post Game Live. Hopefully Snyder watches it and takes note.

Like many of us have been saying, Mitchel thinks Bruce Allen should be VP of football operations (handling the financial matters). Then a football-minded GM who knows how to find talent in players and coaches to condition those players.

Literally praying it goes this way.

I don't think Allen is in the hot seat at all. We need a real GM.

EA7649 wrote:Is Bruce Allen reported to be out as well?

No - Bruce should be kept because he's done well for the franchise with the financial side ...

Mike & Bruce were not great as personnel guys - they did put together a good FO including a much improved scouting dept.

However, we don't have a strong GM who would be better at leading a search for a new HC plus other personnel (coaches and players)

Mike has 'controlled' things here - he has helped in many ways but certainly not as far as success on the field is concerned ...

IMO - letting Mike go is good thing - hopefully the restructuring is handled by NFL guys and not by Dan Snyder

I know many of you do not like Sally Jenkins but ...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/re ... story.html

Excerpts:

The problem, and it has been the same problem all along, what’s chronically wrong with the organization, is that the owner would rather be a central figure on a losing team than a marginal figure on a winning one. He simply can’t live with being a mute observer. This means tension instead of efficiency. It means fractiousness instead of cohesion. And it means drama instead of success, year after year.

-snip-

The guess here is that Shanahan was finished as Redskins coach long ago — a dead man walking maybe as early as last spring, when radioactively over-empowered rookie quarterback Robert Griffin III began to openly campaign against the coach to the owner, and the owner didn’t stop it. The result was that nobody knew who they were playing for.

-snip-

Schottenheimer vividly described it once in a radio interview, talking about Snyder’s habit of whispering with then-aide Vinny Cerrato. “Wait until I get up in the owner’s box during the regular season,” Cerrato told him, “and then we’ll see who Dan listens to.”

The names have changed, but the dynamic hasn’t. In 2013, we had the Shanahan-Snyder-Griffin triangle, with the player and owner whispering in each other’s ears. Shanahan made no secret of his unhappiness with it, and presumably, his view of this season’s disaster is that it exploded his locker room. And the result is that the Redskins are starting from scratch — again.

more great 'reporting' from S Jenkins and the Washington Post ...

some things never change - this rag and this hag have nothing to offer that is not anti Redskins and fabricated

I NEVER read anything from the Post sports reporters and especially not from S Jenkins

I suggest you read Jason Reid articles. I'm convinced that he's Griffin's cousin. He wrote an article saying the number 1 priority this offseason was to make Griffin happy and to find someone who could make football fun for him again.

StorminMormon86 wrote:I suggest you read Jason Reid articles. I'm convinced that he's Griffin's cousin.
He wrote an article saying the number 1 priority this offseason was to make Griffin happy and to find someone who could make football fun for him again.

- I mean, you just can't make up stuff like this

StorminMormon86 wrote:I suggest you read Jason Reid articles. I'm convinced that he's Griffin's cousin. He wrote an article saying the number 1 priority this offseason was to make Griffin happy and to find someone who could make football fun for him again.

Reid's just butt hurt because Allen wouldn't play his blame game...

SkinsJock wrote:more great 'reporting' from S Jenkins and the Washington Post ...

some things never change - this rag and this hag have nothing to offer that is not anti Redskins and fabricated

I NEVER read anything from the Post sports reporters and especially not from S Jenkins

Yet the first excerpt I posted from Sally could've been written by you or any number of posters you've agreed with.

#shrug

DarthMonk wrote:

SkinsJock wrote: ... some things never change - this rag and this hag have nothing to offer that is not anti Redskins and fabricated

I NEVER read anything from the Post and especially not from S Jenkins

Yet the first excerpt I posted from Sally could've been written by you or any number of posters you've agreed with.

I have no idea what you're referring to as I do not read trash .... and that includes many posts here as well

btw - thanks for all the contributions from you too

Dan Snyder=BAD
Lance Armstrong=GOOD

I'll never read a word that woman writes, I'm sorry.

UK Skins Fan wrote:Dan Snyder=BAD
Lance Armstrong=GOOD

I'll never read a word that woman writes, I'm sorry.

This is beautiful!!! I think I'm misting up!

Countertrey wrote:

UK Skins Fan wrote:Dan Snyder=BAD
Lance Armstrong=GOOD

I'll never read a word that woman writes, I'm sorry.

This is beautiful!!! I think I'm misting up!

Hah! Seriously, I don't regard the Post writers with much respect. But I regard Ms. Sally with none.

SkinsJock wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:

SkinsJock wrote: ... some things never change - this rag and this hag have nothing to offer that is not anti Redskins and fabricated

I NEVER read anything from the Post and especially not from S Jenkins

Yet the first excerpt I posted from Sally could've been written by you or any number of posters you've agreed with.

I have no idea what you're referring to as I do not read trash .... and that includes many posts here as well

btw - thanks for all the contributions from you too

There you have it ... denial.

SkinsJock wrote:

SKINS#1 wrote:SkinsJock - My point was to try and understand the sequence of events to date based on a couple facts.
1. MS drafted KC after RG3, many on the board wondered why.
2. MS was/is trying to make RG3 a pocket QB.
Who knows the real story but I was making a rational summary based on what is known.

I agree that nobody knows for sure but we were told by Mike at the time when there were MANY questioning why Mike would take another QB he said "we could not believe he was there - we were not planning on taking him but we could not pass him up - it was too good a player to pass on"

So there were no ulterior motives as far as we know

and then a short time later we all thought that maybe we could get a draft pick for him …

now, I think we keep him - getting a first round pick is not worth it IMHO

why risk taking a first round player when you have a good back up QB - I think we keep him

We would not get a first rounder for KC after his last 3 games. No question.

StorminMormon86 wrote:I suggest you read Jason Reid articles. I'm convinced that he's Griffin's cousin. He wrote an article saying the number 1 priority this offseason was to make Griffin happy and to find someone who could make football fun for him again.

If that's true, he's a huge idiot.

And everyone knows that football is ONLY fun when you win, so there is no logic in the "making football fun" statement. It's a serious business with serious consequences for underperformance. It's like me telling my boss that he needs to change things up and make law fun again for me..... Total nonsense.

we have seen that most of the BS reports about what went down and why were just that ...

Mike got what he wanted and in some ways he helped the franchise but he made a number of bad decisions that cost him his job

we will continue to be managed by NFL guys as has been the case since Mike came in and Dan will stay away from hurting this franchise as he has since Mike came in

SkinsJock wrote:Dan will stay away from hurting this franchise as he has since Mike came in

I'm curious why you think this is so.

Just asking.