Scouting process just beginning

Redskin in Canada · Post by **Redskin in Canada** » Tue Jun 15, 2004 11:12 am

Scouting process just beginning
By Gil Brandt

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/7337841

[/quote]
Also, five teams -- the Ravens, Colts, Patriots, Raiders and Redskins -- aren't a part of either group. They choose to scout by themselves, keeping things "in house."
[quote][/quote]

JDC · Post by **JDC** » Tue Jun 15, 2004 1:15 pm

Because we got the duckets to do whatever we want.

hailskins666 · Post by **hailskins666** » Tue Jun 15, 2004 1:40 pm

gibbs wants no leaks. he'd probably make a great CIA director.

gambit187 · Post by **gambit187** » Tue Jun 15, 2004 1:47 pm

hailskins666 wrote:gibbs wants no leaks. he'd probably make a great CIA director.

No Hailskins666 look for Gibbs to change that. That may explain why you guys have been giving up so many draft pics for players.

Redskin in Canada · Post by **Redskin in Canada** » Tue Jun 15, 2004 2:02 pm

No Hailskins666 look for Gibbs to change that. That may explain why you guys have been giving up so many draft pics for players.

Joe Gibbs and his staff will take a player through the draft if they feel that he can contribute, for example, Chris Cool

ey. But they will also trade picks for tested and true players such as Clinton Portis or some of our Hogs from the past. There is more than one way to build a team and results, not the draft order, are what count.

I will not speculate what the record of the Skins will be this year. I will let the record speak for itself.

The record will determine the true value of our trade and recruiting choices. Hindsight will prove Joe Gibbs right.

wandkwitham · Post by **wandkwitham** » Tue Jun 15, 2004 3:07 pm

I might be missing something so please help me out. We want to cut down on leaks so we don't subscribe to a service. But say if we are interested in a player, we don't go to one of these combines, that means we work with the player individually - doesn't that INCREASE the chance for leaks? "Dude, the Redskins were just talking to XXXXXXX". If you go to one of these cmps you can look at all these players and not tip your hand. Again, might have missed something.

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Tue Jun 15, 2004 5:44 pm

wandkwitham wrote:I might be missing something so please help me out. We want to cut down on leaks so we don't subscribe to a service. But say if we are interested in a player, we don't go to one of these combines, that means we work with the player individually - doesn't that INCREASE the chance for leaks? "Dude, the Redskins were just talking to XXXXXXX". If you go to one of these cmps you can look at all these players and not tip your hand. Again, might have missed something.

I don't know what you're "missing", specifically. Here's what I think.
The Redskins send their own staff to these combines, as opposed to many other teams who send their staff AND these professional Scouts, who aren't on the payroll of the team but are compensated for their services per diem.
Here's the difference between the two. Anyone could see a Redskin employee talking to a player or a players rep, but the line of questioning and the specifics would be kept between the employee and the team. (The player and his rep wouldn't likely go blabbing unless there was a serious contract on the line.) With a pool scout, you run the risk of that scout turning in his report to his agency, who then could make it available through channels or at cost. The risk is greater, because the pool scout has no specific responsibility to the team.
This is just a scenario. I have no working knowledge of how this really goes. I used to coach at the High School level, though. The kids used to scan the bleachers looking for somebody who was looking for them.
Sadly, only one guy from our program ever made it to the bigs (before my time).
Guess where he went ?
Yep. The Cowboys.

hailskins666 · Post by **hailskins666** » Tue Jun 15, 2004 6:52 pm

tc, this is what i gathered. if gibbs will close camp dates to fans, he certainly doesn't want a "groupie" scout telling him what to do, or better yet, telling others what he's doing.

ii7-V7 · Post by **ii7-V7** » Wed Jun 16, 2004 7:25 am

gambit187 wrote:look for Gibbs to change that. That may explain why you guys have been giving up so many draft pics for players.

It is certainly true that our scouting that last five years has been pretty miserable. Beyond the first round picks we haven't had many players contribute. Now I know that someone is going to come on and say what about player X taken in the third round? But remember this. Its been six seasons (approx.) since Charlie Casserly left. In those six years we have had seven first round picks (we had two one year), and approx. 36 non-first round picks. Thats 44 selections total. Almost our entire regular season roster. Of the 36 non-first round selections can you name ten players that we drafted who are starters on the team now? I can only think of five who are still on the team and only two who are starters. So, the bottom line is that we just don't scout well. I think that Gibbs knows this. Thats why he had no problem giving away picks. Its also why he hired three new scouts from clubs that have proven that they can build through the draft. What I'm saying is....What we have been doing in the Snyder era hasn't worked. So why not try something else.