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

http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbc ... /RSS_SPORT

Great article!

Maybe it just came out wrong.

Maybe Snyder meant to say, "If I ain't broke, don't fix it."

I'll go with this!

great article! my question is this. If Gibbs was making the decisions, who in the world is gonna make the decisions now? I think Gregg Williams would be a good choice for head coach, but i don't think i want him making personnel decisions as well. The thought of Dan Snyder and Vinny Cerrato sitting on the floor of madison square garden pulling the punches on draft day makes me sick. okay, im gonna go puke......

It's always interesting that when someone wants to make a point they only use the "evidence" to support that - we all agree that Snyder should hire a GM but to imply that Snyder is not doing what is best for the team is just typical hype in my opinion.

Snyder has done a lot of things right recently and yet these guys still try to paint the picture that suits their point of view - there was a part towards the end where Thom points out what all the "critics" are saying but does not bother to list all the supporters by name and what they are saying - When it comes to opinions about Snyder I think if we knew the identities of the critics and the identities of the supporters we would place a lot more credence with the supporters than his detractors or critics.



no worries though - I think we are lucky to have Snyder as owner of the Washington Redskins and there are always going to be more critics of this guy because he's so successful and these media guys know what sells more papers.

SkinsJock wrote:It's always interesting that when someone wants to make a point they only use the "evidence" to support that - we all agree that Snyder should hire a GM but to imply that Snyder is not doing what is best for the team is just typical hype in my opinion.

Snyder has done a lot of things right recently and yet these guys still try to paint the picture that suits their point of view - there was a part towards the end where Thom points out what all the "critics" are saying but does not bother to list all the supporters by name and what they are saying - When it comes to opinions about Snyder I think if we knew the identities of the critics and the identities of the supporters we would place a lot more credence with the supporters than his detractors or critics.



no worries though - I think we are lucky to have Snyder as owner of the Washington Redskins and there are always going to be more critics of this guy because he's so successful and these media guys know what sells more papers.

What makes you think Snyder has done things right??

I'll believe that when he does them without Gibbs!

I just think that we have seen a change in the way this team is managed and credit for that goes back to Snyder - I don't think Snyder wanted Gibbs to leave but I do think Snyder will keep this team headed in the right direction.

we shall see the effects and soon - I predict there are going to be a lot of people saying they have been wrong about this guy soon - he's a lot brighter than most give him credit for and he will take us to the next level. Gibbs has given him the base and he will expand on that.

This team was in bad shape and still has some work to do because of some of those mistakes but fortunately in this age of parity we are not far off the pace and we seem to be playing pretty well despite some really unforseen things happening to us this year.


I just think there are more positive things about Snyder that we don't hear about and he is such an easy target to hit if you need a story - that's all

First we get a page and a half explaining that the system is broken.

Then we get one paragraph that says this:

In a rarity, the Redskins still own most of their picks in the upcoming draft. Perhaps the success of young, homegrown players like LaRon Landry, Reed Doughty, Rocky McIntosh and free agent rookie Stephon Heyer has convinced Snyder that free agency should serve only as a complementary element in building a team, not as the foundation for it.
What Snyder does this offseason will go a long way toward determining whether he quietly came to the conclusion that his system was broken and began being fixed this past season.

But then right back to the it is broken attitude.

With this at the end.

It won't fix what is broken inside the Washington Redskins organization.

I thought he said we will have to wait and see this offseason.

Where as IMO we will have to wait and see if he's learned anything. That's my feelings and that is what is stated in this article but then why does he go back to say it is broken again at the end? Like he already knows he hasn't changed.

SkinsJock wrote:It's always interesting that when someone wants to make a point they only use the "evidence" to support that - we all agree that Snyder should hire a GM but to imply that Snyder is not doing what is best for the team is just typical hype in my opinion.

Snyder has done a lot of things right recently and yet these guys still try to paint the picture that suits their point of view - there was a part towards the end where Thom points out what all the "critics" are saying but does not bother to list all the supporters by name and what they are saying - When it comes to opinions about Snyder I think if we knew the identities of the critics and the identities of the supporters we would place a lot more credence with the supporters than his detractors or critics.



no worries though - I think we are lucky to have Snyder as owner of the Washington Redskins and there are always going to be more critics of this guy because he's so successful and these media guys know what sells more papers.

Eh, why would you put out facts that don't support your point? To research and be prepared to argue against the facts (or put them a difference way that aren't so detrimental to your case) is the ONLY way to support yourself successfully. Would you go to a job interview and only point out your shortcomings? I think not, you stress your strengths and downplay your weaknesses.

VetSkinsFan wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:It's always interesting that when someone wants to make a point they only use the "evidence" to support that - we all agree that Snyder should hire a GM but to imply that Snyder is not doing what is best for the team is just typical hype in my opinion.

Snyder has done a lot of things right recently and yet these guys still try to paint the picture that suits their point of view - there was a part towards the end where Thom points out what all the "critics" are saying but does not bother to list all the supporters by name and what they are saying - When it comes to opinions about Snyder I think if we knew the identities of the critics and the identities of the supporters we would place a lot more credence with the supporters than his detractors or critics.



no worries though - I think we are lucky to have Snyder as owner of the Washington Redskins and there are always going to be more critics of this guy because he's so successful and these media guys know what sells more papers.

Eh, why would you put out facts that don't support your point? To research and be prepared to argue against the facts (or put them a difference way that aren't so detrimental to your case) is the ONLY way to support yourself successfully. Would you go to a job interview and only point out your shortcomings? I think not, you stress your strengths and downplay your weaknesses.

At all my interviews I tell them up front i'm an idiot. It works for me, People like honesty.

Think of esurance.com they let you compair other insurance rates to theirs all on one site.

BnGhog wrote:First we get a page and a half explaining that the system is broken.

Then we get one paragraph that says this:

In a rarity, the Redskins still own most of their picks in the upcoming draft. Perhaps the success of young, homegrown players like LaRon Landry, Reed Doughty, Rocky McIntosh and free agent rookie Stephon Heyer has convinced Snyder that free agency should serve only as a complementary element in building a team, not as the foundation for it.
What Snyder does this offseason will go a long way toward determining whether he quietly came to the conclusion that his system was broken and began being fixed this past season.

But then right back to the it is broken attitude.

With this at the end.

It won't fix what is broken inside the Washington Redskins organization.

I thought he said we will have to wait and see this offseason.

Where as IMO we will have to wait and see if he's learned anything. That's my feelings and that is what is stated in this article but then why does he go back to say it is broken again at the end? Like he already knows he hasn't changed.

Us keeping our draft picks is an excellent sign. Where a GM would be helpful is in maximizing those picks. We have done well with some of our higher draft picks, but our drafting in the later rounds has been very poor and that is where team's build depth.

CanesSkins26 wrote:Us keeping our draft picks is an excellent sign. Where a GM would be helpful is in maximizing those picks.

1. Its January.
2. F/A has not started.

I realize I'm playing Pop-psychologist (or at least I play one on TV), but it appeared that Dann-o has been humbled and been taught a few things from Gibbs.

This is my primary reason for being extremely excited when Gibbs first came back, it was that JG would bring a sense of order, professionalism and maturity to a highly disfunctional franchise.

When he first bought the team, Dann-o, et al, appeared to be recent college graduates being asked to run a fortune 500 company w/out any formal experience... "on the job training."

This why Gibbs was either given the management job or he asked to be given the job as a condition of his hire, because he wanted to make sure that he provided the full breath of his experince.

I mean you can clearly see in the interviews that he does, he was really hurting seeing the Redskins become the laughing stock of the NFL before he got there. So he did what any concerned fan would do if he could put himself in a position to have maximum influence on Dann-o... and I believe he did.

Dann-o is no dummy (obviously by the bank he accumulated) and I'm certian he's going to take a more judcious approach to his handleing of the draft, free agents, and salaries.

CanesSkins26 wrote: We have done well with some of our higher draft picks, but our drafting in the later rounds has been very poor and that is where team's build depth.

Montgomery, Golston, Doughty, Blades, and even Stephon Heyer (not technically a pick) would disagree with you.

jazzskins wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote: We have done well with some of our higher draft picks, but our drafting in the later rounds has been very poor and that is where team's build depth.

Montgomery, Golston, Doughty, Blades, and even Stephon Heyer (not technically a pick) would disagree with you.

2004 Onward:

Dallas Sartz
Tyler Ecker
Jordan Palmer
Kevin Simon
Keli Lefotu
Jared Newberry
McCune
Nemiah Broughton
Manuel White Jr.
Mark Wilson
Jim Molinaro
Gibran Hamdan

Nobody is going to deny that we have hit on a few late rounders. But between trading away draft picks and using picks on guys like Palmer, our overall record drafting in the later round (4th onward) is piss poor.


If I had more motivation I would dig up an article that lists all of the players that we lost out on by trading away as many picks as we have. The list, including guys like Bob Sanders, would truly blow your mind.

You'll get no argument here regarding our misuse of draft picks by trading them away. But, I will disagree that they haven't done well with the picks that they actually used. Sure there are guys that didn't make the team, but if you look at 4th-7th rounders for any team and look at how many are now starters on thier team I'm sure that you will find that we are middle of the pack....even with our reduced number of picks.

jazzskins wrote:You'll get no argument here regarding our misuse of draft picks by trading them away. But, I will disagree that they haven't done well with the picks that they actually used. Sure there are guys that didn't make the team, but if you look at 4th-7th rounders for any team and look at how many are now starters on thier team I'm sure that you will find that we are middle of the pack....even with our reduced number of picks.

Since when does the middle of the pack win championships?

Take a look at the draft position of the great Redskin teams of the 80's. You'll see a tremendous amount of late round picks who became not just starters, but stars.

That's how the Pats have built their team. Brady was a 6th round pick.

jazzskins wrote:You'll get no argument here regarding our misuse of draft picks by trading them away. But, I will disagree that they haven't done well with the picks that they actually used. Sure there are guys that didn't make the team, but if you look at 4th-7th rounders for any team and look at how many are now starters on thier team I'm sure that you will find that we are middle of the pack....even with our reduced number of picks.

Here's a look at the Colts picks. I chose them because they have a very good GM (hall of famer)...and by the way, his son will be better.

Pollian came to the team in 1997. this list shows all of his 4th round or lower picks since that time. You make your own conclutions. 14 of these guys are on the roster today, and Cato June is playing in Tampa. 5 of them are starters for the Colts.

2007
4.32 DB Brannon Condren Troy State
4.37 LB Clint Session Pittsburgh compensatory pick
5.32 WR Roy Hall Ohio State
5.36 CB Michael Coe Alabama State compensatory pick
7.32 DE Keyunta Dawson Texas Tech
2006
5.29 OT Michael Toudouze Texas Christian
6.30 OT Charlie Johnson Oklahoma State
6.38 SS Antoine Bethea Howard
2005
4.28 OC Dylan Gandy Texas Tech
4.34 FS Matt Giordano California
5.12 DE Jonathan Welsh Wisconsin
5.29 OC Robert Hunt North Dakota State
5.37 OLB Tyjuan Hagler Cincinnati
6.28 K Dave Rayner Michigan State
7.29 RB Anthony Davis Wisconsin
2004
4.11 LB Kendyll Pope Florida State
4.29 CB Jason David Washington State
5.09 OG Jake Scott Idaho
6.08 CB Von Hutchins Mississippi
6.28 QB Jim Sorgi Wisconsin
7.28 K David Kimball Penn State
2003
4.25 OG Steve Sciullo Marshall
5.03 DE Robert Mathis Alabama A&M
5.27 MLB Keyon Whiteside Tennessee
6.25 OLB Cato June Michigan
6.35 OG Makoa Freitas Arizona
2002
4.08 OLB David Thornton North Carolina
6.10 DT David Pugh Virginia Tech
6.11 S James Lewis Miami
6.32 RB Brian Allen Stanford
7.09 DE Josh Mallard Georgia
2001
4.23 OT Ryan Diem Northern Illinois
5.21 CB Raymond Walls Southern Mississippi
6.30 S Jason Doering Wisconsin
7.20 OG Rick DeMulling Idaho
2000
4.28 DT Josh Williams Michigan
5.09 OG Matt Johnson Brigham Young
7.29 DL Rob Renes Michigan
7.32 CB Rodregis Brooks Ala.-Birmingham
1999
4.01 CB Paul Miranda Central Florida
5.05 DE Brad Scioli Penn State
1997
4.21 DB Delmonico Montgomery
5.26 DE Carl Powell Louisville

RayNAustin wrote:

jazzskins wrote:You'll get no argument here regarding our misuse of draft picks by trading them away. But, I will disagree that they haven't done well with the picks that they actually used. Sure there are guys that didn't make the team, but if you look at 4th-7th rounders for any team and look at how many are now starters on thier team I'm sure that you will find that we are middle of the pack....even with our reduced number of picks.

Since when does the middle of the pack win championships?

Take a look at the draft position of the great Redskin teams of the 80's. You'll see a tremendous amount of late round picks who became not just starters, but stars.

That's how the Pats have built their team. Brady was a 6th round pick.

Is that right? What do you define as building their team? They only have 3 starters on the team from rounds 4-7. Two of those players are studs with Asante Samuel and Brady, so if you think those two make up for all the misses, then yes, they've built their team in the late draft.

chiefhog44 wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:

jazzskins wrote:You'll get no argument here regarding our misuse of draft picks by trading them away. But, I will disagree that they haven't done well with the picks that they actually used. Sure there are guys that didn't make the team, but if you look at 4th-7th rounders for any team and look at how many are now starters on thier team I'm sure that you will find that we are middle of the pack....even with our reduced number of picks.

Since when does the middle of the pack win championships?

Take a look at the draft position of the great Redskin teams of the 80's. You'll see a tremendous amount of late round picks who became not just starters, but stars.

That's how the Pats have built their team. Brady was a 6th round pick.

Is that right? What do you define as building their team? They only have 3 starters on the team from rounds 4-7. Two of those players are studs with Asante Samuel and Brady, so if you think those two make up for all the misses, then yes, they've built their team in the late draft.

Yeah, they build with first round picks (all their d-line starters are 1st rounders), and free agents. Now they've gotten some decent free agents who fit their system that don't cost much, and that helps.

But seriously...look at their starting offense:

QB: Brady (6th round)
RB: Maroney (1st round)
TE: Watson (1st round)
WR: Moss (FA, 1st round, Vikings)
WR2: Welker (FA, undrafted Chargers)
WR3: Stallworth (FA, 1st round, Saints)
OT: Matt Light (2nd round)
OT: Nick Kaczur (3rd round)
OG: Stephan Neal (undrafted)
OG: Logan Makins (1st round)
C: Dan Koppen (5th round)

So...it looks like they have 3 guys out of the 11 starters who were 4th round draft picks or later. 3 Free Agents. The other 5 were drafted in the first day.

PulpExposure wrote:WR: Moss (FA, 1st round, Vikings)

To be picky, that was a trade. They gave up a 4th-round pick to get him.

Probably makes your argument even stronger.

RedskinsFreak wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:WR: Moss (FA, 1st round, Vikings)

To be picky, that was a trade. They gave up a 4th-round pick to get him.

Probably makes your argument even stronger.

Yeah so was Welker, 2 and 7th round picks. Just used FA as shorthand to show that it wasn't drafted talent.

We are not great at drafting late, but we aren't really terrible either. For every Sartz there is a blades and for every palmer/ecker there is a montgomery/golston, The problem is that we give away 3rd and fourth rounders for stopgaps that make little to no difference longterm. 3rd and 4th rounders is where you can really get some of that meat where people who were injured, played in a small school, or had slight discipline problems drop to that are still potential gamechangers. The fact that they give those away for peanuts is why they are in the shape they are in.

brad7686 wrote:We are not great at drafting late, but we aren't really terrible either. For every Sartz there is a blades and for every palmer/ecker there is a montgomery/golston, The problem is that we give away 3rd and fourth rounders for stopgaps that make little to no difference longterm. 3rd and 4th rounders is where you can really get some of that meat where people who were injured, played in a small school, or had slight discipline problems drop to that are still potential gamechangers. The fact that they give those away for peanuts is why they are in the shape they are in.

Excellent point. Chris ey was a third round draft pick and is one of our most important players.

brad7686 wrote:We are not great at drafting late, but we aren't really terrible either. For every Sartz there is a blades and for every palmer/ecker there is a montgomery/golston, The problem is that we give away 3rd and fourth rounders for stopgaps that make little to no difference longterm. 3rd and 4th rounders is where you can really get some of that meat where people who were injured, played in a small school, or had slight discipline problems drop to that are still potential gamechangers. The fact that they give those away for peanuts is why they are in the shape they are in.

You're saying that for every failure there's a win involved? The way you're putting it, it's like we have a 50/50 shot in late rounds, and this just isn't true.

I'm only judging second day draft picks (3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th round picks) so here's what we have for the last 5 years:

2007:

5. Dallas Sartz- Gone
5. HB Blades- Uncertain future with the team, possible backup
6. Jordan Palmer- Gone
7. Tyler Ecker- IR, possible backup next season?

So we have maybe two players with a chance of being backups for the Redskins...

2006:

5. Anthony Montgomery- Starting defensive tackle, very good player.
6. Reed Doughty- Decent FS, probably a career backup.
6. Kedric Golston- Decent DT, looks like a career backup.
7. Kili Lefotu- Gone
7. Kevin Simon- Gone

3 guys still with the team, only one is a starter, but the other two give good depth.

2005:

4. Manuel White- Gone
5. Robert McCune- Gone
6. Jared Newberry- Gone
7. Nehemiah Broughton- Gone

Drafts like this kill a team, not a single second day pick turned out to be a decent football player.

2004:
3. Chris ey- Star TE.
5. Mark Wilson- Gone
6. Jim Molinaro- Gone

Both guys were backups for a while and are gone.

2003:
3. Derrick Dockery- Good guard, with Buff. now.
7. Gibran Hamdan- Gone

Ol' Gibby was not a good football player, enough said.

So even if I was going to be extremely generous and give checks to every player still on the Redskins' roster (and Dockery who did turn out to be good) then we'd have 7 second day picks from the last 5 years and 11 busts.

So really it's not as if for every Sartz we have a Blades, or for every Palmer/Ecker we have some stars, we have a lot less than 50% even when you're generous (I gave Ecker and Golston as positives even when they haven't done anything!)

For reference the Cowboys have second day guys in their lineup like Bradie James, Jason Whitten, Patrick Crayton, Marion Barber, Chris Canty, Jay Ratliff... and that's just the guys I know of offhand. These guys are all significant contributors, and most of them are starters or platoon guys.