As A Redskins Fan, I Must Say
-
holmgren is the president. they generally do not handle personnel....but holmgren does have heckerts ear. heckert is the GM tho, and thus has final say. holmgren wasw always a bad judge of talent sans the QB position, so its pretty easy to see who runs our personnel department.
holmgren is the president. they generally do not handle personnel....but holmgren does have heckerts ear. heckert is the GM tho, and thus has final say. holmgren wasw always a bad judge of talent sans the QB position, so its pretty easy to see who runs our personnel department.
Fair enough. I was basing everything off of all the posts on how it's who Holmgren wants, implying he's the personnel guy. You can understand the confusion. Either way, I wouldn't exactly be bragging up Heckert. Yeah, he might have put the team together that kept beating the Skins, but he could never put together a Super Bowl winning team.
I can bring up Shanahan though, because he and Allen have equal say in the Skins personnel (if anything, Shanny has more power than Allen). Shanny has experience building Super Bowl winning teams. Elway was already in place, but Shanahan brought in Terrell Davis and the others who put Denver over the top.
-
That's really all that needs to be said.
-
That's really all that needs to be said.
That's really all that needs to be said.
Because your record is better?
-
That's really all that needs to be said.
Because your record is better?
Because your record is better?
I'm not comparing teams.
I'm saying if Shanahan is such a Super Bowl winning genie, he's failed to show it thus far in Washington. Blow the guy's cock all you want, he's proven nothing for you.
But he USED to win Super Bowls, that's what really matters...right?
I'm awesome, and I fuck dolphins. Ghoolie 12/2/2012: I have absolutely no skills, training or pride -
holmgren is the president. they generally do not handle personnel....but holmgren does have heckerts ear. heckert is the GM tho, and thus has final say. holmgren wasw always a bad judge of talent sans the QB position, so its pretty easy to see who runs our personnel department.
Fair enough. I was basing everything off of all the posts on how it's who Holmgren wants, implying he's the personnel guy. You can understand the confusion. Either way, I wouldn't exactly be bragging up Heckert. Yeah, he might have put the team together that kept beating the Skins, but he could never put together a Super Bowl winning team.
I can bring up Shanahan though, because he and Allen have equal say in the Skins personnel (if anything, Shanny has more power than Allen). Shanny has experience building Super Bowl winning teams. Elway was already in place, but Shanahan brought in Terrell Davis and the others who put Denver over the top.
Fair enough. I was basing everything off of all the posts on how it's who Holmgren wants,
i wont deny that most of our fans dont know how the team operates, in the same way everyone assumes that snyder is still pulling the trigger for you.
walrus pulled trump and took colt.....he's 0 for 1. if he gets his way again, griffin is yours. he track record says he'll forego the big prospect for the diamond in the rough. he gets more credit that way.
im hoping, for our sake, heckert locks holmgren in his office in berea during the draft.
-
Because your record is better?
I'm not comparing teams.
I'm saying if Shanahan is such a Super Bowl winning genie, he's failed to show it thus far in Washington. Blow the guy's cock all you want, he's proven nothing for you.
But he USED to win Super Bowls, that's what really matters...right?
I'm not comparing teams.
I'm saying if Shanahan is such a Super Bowl winning genie, he's failed to show it thus far in Washington. Blow the guy's cock all you want, he's proven nothing for you.
Because if he hasn't won a Super Bowl in his first two years (with a team that was in ruins thanks to Vinny Cerrato not knowing how to handle personnel, trades, the draft, or contracts), with stunted offseasons, he's definitely not going to win one.
All of his personnel moves were the right ones at the time. No one figured McNabb was going to bitch out on the Skins. Everyone figured he was going to be a professional about it. His two drafts have been damn near outstanding. Trent Williams and Perry Riley in his first one, and 11 of 12 picks got significant playing time from his second one.
His free agent acquisitions have been spot on, too. Cofield, Bowen, Atogwe, Gaffney, the OL. His only real whiff was John Beck. Grossman might not have been the stud pick, but he did a better job than McNabb did in the offense.
The only real thing you can criticize Shanny about is John Beck.
Rebuilding takes time, something that both our franchises know too well. No one expected Shanny to win much his first two years here. That's why he signed the 5 year contract and ensured Snyder won't get rid of him until that 5 years is up.
-
Fair enough. I was basing everything off of all the posts on how it's who Holmgren wants,
i wont deny that most of our fans dont know how the team operates, in the same way everyone assumes that snyder is still pulling the trigger for you.
walrus pulled trump and took colt.....he's 0 for 1. if he gets his way again, griffin is yours. he track record says he'll forego the big prospect for the diamond in the rough. he gets more credit that way.
im hoping, for our sake, heckert locks holmgren in his office in berea during the draft.
i wont deny that most of our fans dont know how the team operates, in the same way everyone assumes that snyder is still pulling the trigger for you.
walrus pulled trump and took colt.....he's 0 for 1. if he gets his way again, griffin is yours. he track record says he'll forego the big prospect for the diamond in the rough. he gets more credit that way.
im hoping, for our sake, heckert locks holmgren in his office in berea during the draft.
Completely serious, you don't think McCoy could be successful (on a Romo/Schaub level) with the right supporting cast? If the Browns grab two or three offensive playmakers, that could really aid McCoy out. He's shown flashes from the few Browns games I've seen, he just needs a lot of help.
-
colts got physical limitations, and has been wildly inconsistent. i have no doubt he could be better, but the question is how much. the talent around him doesn't affect many of his issues tho:
pre-snap defensive reads
blitz recognition
protection audilbles
post-snap pressure recognition
velocity
accuracy
anticipation
confidence
happy feet
no long ball
having the talent around him would certainly help the bottom line, but these above factors (which are issues of different degrees) contribute as much to our struggling offense as the lack of adequate playmakers. he's a great kid, but the NFL is still fast for him after 21 starts. i dont see it getting significantly better tho, as in enough to not consider an upgrade whenever the opportunity arises.
-
colts got physical limitations, and has been wildly inconsistent. i have no doubt he could be better, but the question is how much. the talent around him doesn't affect many of his issues tho:
pre-snap defensive reads
blitz recognition
protection audilbles
post-snap pressure recognition
velocity
accuracy
anticipation
confidence
happy feet
no long ball
having the talent around him would certainly help the bottom line, but these above factors (which are issues of different degrees) contribute as much to our struggling offense as the lack of adequate playmakers. he's a great kid, but the NFL is still fast for him after 21 starts. i dont see it getting significantly better tho, as in enough to not consider an upgrade whenever the opportunity arises.
having the talent around him would certainly help the bottom line, but these above factors (which are issues of different degrees) contribute as much to our struggling offense as the lack of adequate playmakers. he's a great kid, but the NFL is still fast for him after 21 starts. i dont see it getting significantly better tho, as in enough to not consider an upgrade whenever the opportunity arises.
Fair enough. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.
Not that I'm advocating him starting, but what's your take on Wallace?
-
selfish malcontent comes to mind. even with his leg up on the system, he still couldn't beat out delhomme or mccoy. makes a good backup, and can spot start, but after as many years as he'sd been in the league (8 i think), he still can't look left when going thru his progressions.
mccoy could still possibly grow, wallace is who he is.
-
Granted, RG3 is a rare talent. However, do you think that the Browns would be better off going all in for him and getting players to support him in the later rounds or rolling with McCoy and possibly Flynn (personally, I would recommend McCoy. I think Flynn is a flash in the pan. This year's Kevin Kolb or Matt Cassel, but with a smaller sample size) or a mid round QB (Weeden or Cousins) this year with better receivers and running backs. If they succeed, then you're golden. If not, then go for Barkley next year.
Both strategies have their advantages. Not taking RG3 is less of a risk, with a possibly high reward IMO (thinking if McCoy, Flynn, or another drafted QB pans out). If he's taken, there will be some breaking in time. He could absolutely dominate for you, but he'll definitely need some help.
-
Zombo said:
You can bring in whoever you want. You aren't going to a Super Bowl JUST because you brought in ex-Super Bowl winners. Doesn't work that way. If we win a Super Bowl, great, but it will because we finally drafted right and put it all together not because Holmgren brought some Green Bay magic with him.
If you think your chances of going to the SB are enhanced because Mike Shanahan coached a team there 15 years ago you are awful gullible.
Neither Holmgren or Shanahan is worth another Super Bowl, it depends on the talent the teams can amass.
Zombo
--You don't have to respond to every post ... you can just be wrong you know.
I never said that Shanahan brought "magic" with him. I've said that Shanny knows how to build a winner and that it takes time. Basically I'm saying the same things you are, only you want me to say that the Browns are in a better position because of your front office.
You want to act all high and mighty about the Browns because Holmgren took the Packers and Seahawks to the Super Bowl and Heckert "built teams that constantly beat the Skins." But when I use the same argument about Shanahan and the Skins I'm being "gullible" and whatever else you've said about me.
That's a mighty high double standard you've set.
-
i guess it all depended on what they did with the extra picks.
mangini made some trades and got back some picks our own vinny cerrato (phil savage) gave away like candy. he followed it up by drafting a bunch of guys that either never made the team or severely disappointed.
if we pass on griffen, im not one to think it's the end all be all. i could live with colt/flynn/tannehill, but if those picks bust then we're no better off. its gonna take me literally weeks to iron all this out, cause i (like you said) see other possibilities that could succeed as well. i absolutely hate trading away picks, but if griffin is really as good as advertised, then i cant argue with taking the chance.
i like the flynn route only because the investment is purely monetary. if he busts, we're out some cash, and still need a QB (if this is the case, we're drafting high again and can pursue barkley). all those picks saved would bolster the team, perhaps giving flynn (or colt) some talent to work with.
if griffin busted at a cost of 3 high picks and 2 mid rounders, thats a year or 2 recovery on top of being in the same position we're in right now. tough call, no doubt.
-
Zombo said:
I am just amusing myself with your justifications on why the Redskins are so much better off than they were in Snyder meddling days.
Stability in the front office? Check.
A front office who doesn't treat the team like their personal fantasy football team? Check.
Not trading away draft picks for over-the-hill vets for one year rentals (Jason Taylor, TJ Duckett, etc)? Check.
Spending wisely in free agency, bringing in the right people at the right price? Check
Just because the record doesn't show it doesn't mean we're not better off.
A couple years of status quo sucking(Shanahan's first two years) for multiple years of consistency and stability? I'll take it.
Would you say the Browns are better off with Holmgren, Heckert, and Shurmur than with Keenan, Kokinis, and Crennel (or however your FO looked with Romeo as your head coach)? I'm saying the same thing about the Skins with Allen and Shanahan. Same argument, different names.
-
@king-ghoolie-lives said:
His release and thinking are too slow for the pros. Trust me, the guy will fizzle.
So the fact that he could run his offense like Manning ran the Colts means nothing to you? His release is one notch below Manning's.
There may be criticism of Luck, but those aren't two of them.
-
Zombo said:
Dropping from 6-10 to 5-11, check.
Zombo
Because the record is the only way to show a team is improving...
Using that logic, the Browns are worse off with their FO too. It's not like the Browns record has been getting better...
-
Zombo said:
Actually I think both teams will be better in 2012 regardless of who gets Griffin. Is ther much talk about Shanahan et al going after Manning? It'd be fun to see Peyton and Eli in the same division.
Zombo
There is talk, but most of it is smokescreens.
Honestly (and I'm one of the few who think this way), I don't want Manning here. Not because his skills have diminished, but it would throw off the long-term success of the team.
Yeah, we'd be competitive for the next three or four years, but what about after that? We're going to need to draft a QB soon. Based on the rookie contract scale, the guy we draft would be going into the last year of his contract when Manning hangs up his cleats. That would only give us one year of game evals to judge whether we want to give him an extension.
If not Griffin, I wouldn't be upset with trading down from 6 and taking Tannehill mid to late 1st. Sign a 2nd tier QB (Orton or someone like him) and roll like that. I have faith in Shanahan's ability to groom young QBs into "the" guy.
Best case scenario for both our teams (IMO):
Colts keep Manning and trade out of the pick to get players to fit their new defense (they have the Ratbirds old DC, he'll want to run a 3-4). They can get Barkley then next year. Redskins trade up and take Luck with the 1. Browns then either trade up or let RG3 fall to them. We both get elite QBs.
-
Zombo said:
Actually I think both teams will be better in 2012 regardless of who gets Griffin. Is ther much talk about Shanahan et al going after Manning? It'd be fun to see Peyton and Eli in the same division.
Zombo
There is talk, but most of it is smokescreens.
Honestly (and I'm one of the few who think this way), I don't want Manning here. Not because his skills have diminished, but it would throw off the long-term success of the team.
Yeah, we'd be competitive for the next three or four years, but what about after that? We're going to need to draft a QB soon. Based on the rookie contract scale, the guy we draft would be going into the last year of his contract when Manning hangs up his cleats. That would only give us one year of game evals to judge whether we want to give him an extension.
If not Griffin, I wouldn't be upset with trading down from 6 and taking Tannehill mid to late 1st. Sign a 2nd tier QB (Orton or someone like him) and roll like that. I have faith in Shanahan's ability to groom young QBs into "the" guy.
Best case scenario for both our teams (IMO):
Colts keep Manning and trade out of the pick to get players to fit their new defense (they have the Ratbirds old DC, he'll want to run a 3-4). They can get Barkley then next year. Redskins trade up and take Luck with the 1. Browns then either trade up or let RG3 fall to them. We both get elite QBs.
There is talk, but most of it is smokescreens.
Honestly (and I'm one of the few who think this way), I don't want Manning here. Not because his skills have diminished, but it would throw off the long-term success of the team.
Yeah, we'd be competitive for the next three or four years, but what about after that? We're going to need to draft a QB soon. Based on the rookie contract scale, the guy we draft would be going into the last year of his contract when Manning hangs up his cleats. That would only give us one year of game evals to judge whether we want to give him an extension.
If not Griffin, I wouldn't be upset with trading down from 6 and taking Tannehill mid to late 1st. Sign a 2nd tier QB (Orton or someone like him) and roll like that. I have faith in Shanahan's ability to groom young QBs into "the" guy.
Best case scenario for both our teams (IMO):
Colts keep Manning and trade out of the pick to get players to fit their new defense (they have the Ratbirds old DC, he'll want to run a 3-4). They can get Barkley then next year. Redskins trade up and take Luck with the 1. Browns then either trade up or let RG3 fall to them. We both get elite QBs.
I think the Skins would make a play for Manning if they thought it would make them legit SB contenders in the short term, they would worry about the long term later as would I if I felt we would be SB contenders with Manning. I think thats a discussion the Skins need to have internally. If they don't think he would they will try to acquire the best one they can in the draft.
-
There is talk, but most of it is smokescreens.
Honestly (and I'm one of the few who think this way), I don't want Manning here. Not because his skills have diminished, but it would throw off the long-term success of the team.
Yeah, we'd be competitive for the next three or four years, but what about after that? We're going to need to draft a QB soon. Based on the rookie contract scale, the guy we draft would be going into the last year of his contract when Manning hangs up his cleats. That would only give us one year of game evals to judge whether we want to give him an extension.
If not Griffin, I wouldn't be upset with trading down from 6 and taking Tannehill mid to late 1st. Sign a 2nd tier QB (Orton or someone like him) and roll like that. I have faith in Shanahan's ability to groom young QBs into "the" guy.
Best case scenario for both our teams (IMO):
Colts keep Manning and trade out of the pick to get players to fit their new defense (they have the Ratbirds old DC, he'll want to run a 3-4). They can get Barkley then next year. Redskins trade up and take Luck with the 1. Browns then either trade up or let RG3 fall to them. We both get elite QBs.
I think the Skins would make a play for Manning if they thought it would make them legit SB contenders in the short term, they would worry about the long term later as would I if I felt we would be SB contenders with Manning. I think thats a discussion the Skins need to have internally. If they don't think he would they will try to acquire the best one they can in the draft.
I think the Skins would make a play for Manning if they thought it would make them legit SB contenders in the short term, they would worry about the long term later as would I if I felt we would be SB contenders with Manning. I think thats a discussion the Skins need to have internally. If they don't think he would they will try to acquire the best one they can in the draft.
Unless it's a guaranteed Lombardi, I still don't want him. I'd rather have the long-term solution here for the next ten to fifteen years than try to find him once Manning leaves.
Shanahan had five years to turn the Skins around (three left on his contract). If he doesn't turn us into contenders on a long-term consistent basis, he's gone after 5. Manning doesn't do that.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login