Akh's Thoughts: Week 16 [Archive] - hailRedskins.com Fan Board

shally

12-26-2010, 05:59 PM

Good write up

Some additional thoughts

Macho Harris terrible. We can see why Philly gave up on him so quickly.

on the other hand, Barnes has a nice feel for the free safety position and soft hands. he needs about 10 pounds of muscle in the weight room this offseason, perhaps 20.

Westbrook deserves to stay. he really wants to tackle on defense.

Rogers can play corner. 50/50 on him returning if he is reasonable

Buchanon can cover. he just doesnt like to tackle too ften, although he had a great Tackle fr Loss inthe backfield

Jackson hasnt got Orakpo's burst to the QB, but he can hold the edge better and can get push. a keeper for next year.

Nice to see young bodies out there inthe front 7. if you cant get dominant individual guys, you can do extrememly well with a solid rotation. the Giants proved that in their SB performance using plays by Alford, Robbins, Cofield etc.. Keeping Jarmon to go with Carricker (easily his best game as a Redskin) and Bryant (ditto) is a nice nucleus when adding Alexander. Joseph got some reps too.

Not sure wether we even need Golston. Not sure we want Rocky.
Really torn over Carter who gives great effort and is a leader. He is very smart in pursuing the QB and doesnt overreact..Would try and find a spot for him

On offense Grossman did enough for me to jutify keeping him on as a reserve, or caretaker until we draft the real deal.

Shanahan has said we wont see Beck this year unless Rex gets hurt.

We have seen McNabb take his last snap as Redskin QB

Torrain has power but is still misreading his lanes. Williams doesnt do that.
Despite converting, Sellers should never see the bll inhis hands on a running play

Cooley had 4 drops. We still need to use Davis more.

Heyer was so weak it was pathetic. What happened to J Brown, who was saying how healthy he was on Friday ???

Williams was up and down. Rabach, Lichtensteiger and Montgomery were meh

Armstrong failed to convert a third down. so did R Williams. But Austin converted his one chance.. Moss with a drop, but a nice game overall..

Grossman really only made 2 bad throws. his grounding changed a 2nd and 1 to a 3rd and 13.. inexcusable.. also, that INT in the redzone on first down was a bad throw and poor judgement.. but without those 5 drops and better effort from Armstrong and Williams he has a far better game.. still, he did enough to warrant being kept on as at least a number 2

Haslett had a superb game taking away the Jags running game and forcing Garrard to beat us via the pass..

jtovb2005

12-26-2010, 06:06 PM

Torain might not be the answer but he seems he runs hard. With a better line does he run better? I don't think he is our super star RB that it would be nice to have but maybe he is a good fill while they concentrate on other positions?

The pressure we got today shows how that can help a subpar back field. No pressure those guys back there get shredded. Granted the Jags QB is no great QB but we sure have been burnt by all kinds of so so QB's that get time to throw.

I would be surprised if we get a new Defensive coach next year. He can claim he needs some time. We sure were not ready to go to the 3-4. Someone else said it but we seem to have a crap load of DE's that are "learning" to be OLB's. Some ain't doing so well lol. Plus with Rocky not playing well that seems to be a hard spot. One of the excuses early was these guys were learning the system. I think some of those guys "learning" are not going to learn and belong back at DE. Could have waited for next year to get some real 3-4 guys and i don't suspect the learning curve would be so painful.

I miss Ken Beatrice. Those guys writing back then seemed to be Redskin fans writing good and bad about their team. Maybe it was being here with competing winning teams. These guys writing these days seem to be mercenaries. I don't much like some of them. They sure don't like Danny and Vinnie and I think that affects their writing.

shally

12-26-2010, 06:11 PM

Jammal Brown had the flu.. that is a relief. look forward to seeing him against the Giants

jtovb2005

12-26-2010, 06:12 PM

akhhorus

12-26-2010, 06:16 PM

I can see him coming back if he takes a pay cut. $8.3 million is too much to pay a guy who's spent over half the past 32 games on the bench.

I don't think that money will be an issue re: Portis.

On offense Grossman did enough for me to jutify keeping him on as a reserve, or caretaker until we draft the real deal.

Grossman really only made 2 bad throws. his grounding changed a 2nd and 1 to a 3rd and 13.. inexcusable.. also, that INT in the redzone on first down was a bad throw and poor judgement

I honestly don't know which game you were watching if you think he only made 2 bad throws lol. He panic threw a ball into a Defensive tackle(who was shocked to see it coming towards him lol), he made at least 2 groundings that were dangerous throws, he made 4-6 really bad throws that he didn't have to rush, he made a bad one when the DE zone blitzed and was waiting for the outlet to Cooley, he got lucky that the Lb dropped a tipped ball that he shouldn't have thrown and I don't know if he made a single throw planting his leg properly.

He frankly has no business playing in the NFL. After that game, I'm amazed anyone thinks he's even a backup.

Haslett had a superb game taking away the Jags running game and forcing Garrard to beat us via the pass..

That was Bryant, not Haslett imo.

Torain might not be the answer but he seems he runs hard. With a better line does he run better? I don't think he is our super star RB that it would be nice to have but maybe he is a good fill while they concentrate on other positions?

He can run hard, but he still makes far too many gaffs by stopping in the hole. I don't trust him to be a feature back.

I would be surprised if we get a new Defensive coach next year. He can claim he needs some time. We sure were not ready to go to the 3-4. Someone else said it but we seem to have a crap load of DE's that are "learning" to be OLB's. Some ain't doing so well lol. Plus with Rocky not playing well that seems to be a hard spot. One of the excuses early was these guys were learning the system. I think some of those guys "learning" are not going to learn and belong back at DE. Could have waited for next year to get some real 3-4 guys and i don't suspect the learning curve would be so painful.

He has the front 7 for a 3-4, and has basically for the entire season. He just refused to play them. The problem with the defense has nothing to do with the scheme: the DB are horrible.

shally

12-26-2010, 06:27 PM

I don't think that money will be an issue re: Portis.

I honestly don't know which game you were watching if you think he only made 2 bad throws lol. He panic threw a ball into a Defensive tackle(who was shocked to see it coming towards him lol), he made at least 2 groundings that were dangerous throws, he made 4-6 really bad throws that he didn't have to rush, he made a bad one when the DE zone blitzed and was waiting for the outlet to Cooley, he got lucky that the Lb dropped a tipped ball that he shouldn't have thrown and I don't know if he made a single throw planting his leg properly.

He frankly has no business playing in the NFL. After that game, I'm amazed anyone thinks he's even a backup.

That was Bryant, not Haslett imo.

He can run hard, but he still makes far too many gaffs by stopping in the hole. I don't trust him to be a feature back.

He has the front 7 for a 3-4, and has basically for the entire season. He just refused to play them. The problem with the defense has nothing to do with the scheme: the DB are horrible.

i didnt expect you to have anything nice to say about Grossman, so i am not surprised.. he had his rough moments, but he had at least 5 drops and 2 receivers who failed to convert a play when they had the chance.. that is the kind of thing you would have given McNabb a pass over.. i get that you dont think that Grossman belongs in the NFL, but you are wrong about him not being worth keeping as a back up. yes, he got away with a couple of dropped passes by defenders, but so did McNabb ll season.

frankly, the team loses NOTHING by playing Grossman over McNabb. both are flawed. difference is that McNabb will cost 15 million + next year. what would Grossman cost ? Grossman is 1-1 at starter with the same supporting cast as McNabb, who was 5-7.. what is the difference ??

Haslett didnt have Bryant for most of the year because of a concussion..
and he had to deal with Haynesworth and his disruptions

also, we will likely be picking somewhere in the 10-13 range now (assuming we dont beat the Giants).. we can forget about drafting a QB in the first round because both Luck and Mallet will be long gone and Newton, as well.. Locker isnt worth anything before the second round, so unless we trade down, i can see a defensive front 7 player, or wideout, or o lineman.

this win changed some post season strategy i think, and may have saved Haslett's job.

Gravy

12-26-2010, 06:32 PM

I have seen all I want of Grossman. Granted there was some awful drops by the recievers (as always) but his decison making really scares me. What are the odds of Kubiak bailing out Shanahan?

Toadslayer

12-26-2010, 06:37 PM

shally

12-26-2010, 06:39 PM

I have seen all I want of Grossman. Granted there was some awful drops by the recievers (as always) but his decison making really scares me. What are the odds of Kubiak bailing out Shanahan?

Kubiak will get canned, and might end up on the Redskins as a QB coach, but do you think for a second that Mike is going to remove his son ?? not gonna happen

Grossman had at least 5 drops.. that isnt going to help your percentages.. plus, the wind was really bad.. he made some poor decisions for certain, but i expect he will be brought back to compete for the starters position next year.. at the worst, i expect he returns as backup

jtovb2005

12-26-2010, 06:41 PM

He has the front 7 for a 3-4, and has basically for the entire season. He just refused to play them. The problem with the defense has nothing to do with the scheme: the DB are horrible.

I sure am not a fan of Haslet and his befudled looks as we get burned by one big play after another. I am just saying I would be surprised he is gone after 1 year. Who would you say where the front 7 we should have played? The guys today?

tribeinca

12-26-2010, 06:41 PM

also, we will likely be picking somewhere in the 10-13 range now (assuming we dont beat the Giants).. we can forget about drafting a QB in the first round because both Luck and Mallet will be long gone and Newton, as well.. Locker isnt worth anything before the second round, so unless we trade down, i can see a defensive front 7 player, or wideout, or o lineman.

I think this is the most frustrating part about this win. I still hope that we can sneak in the top 10 at 6-10. Newton may be available, but don't want him. I think this win really put a dent in our future and with an unsettled future qb position, it is hard for this team to have any meaningful run at the Superbowl. I would say if we don't trade up, we should trade down.

firehawk157

12-26-2010, 06:41 PM

I don't think that money will be an issue re: Portis.

He's a vet min guy at this point and I'm not even sure he's worth a roster spot. Not enough production and too injury prone at this point.

I honestly don't know which game you were watching if you think he only made 2 bad throws lol. He panic threw a ball into a Defensive tackle(who was shocked to see it coming towards him lol), he made at least 2 groundings that were dangerous throws, he made 4-6 really bad throws that he didn't have to rush, he made a bad one when the DE zone blitzed and was waiting for the outlet to Cooley, he got lucky that the Lb dropped a tipped ball that he shouldn't have thrown and I don't know if he made a single throw planting his leg properly.

He frankly has no business playing in the NFL. After that game, I'm amazed anyone thinks he's even a backup.

I think a lot of those criticisms could have been leveled at McNabb though too. I think we came into the season with a broke QB position and Grossman is playing about as well as any other QB not considered a "franchise" player (Rodgers, Manning, Brady, Rivers, etc) could play. Drops by receivers, poor protection and an inexplicable desire to roll a slow, right-handed QB continuously to the left made him look worse than he really is. He's still bad though and QB is probably the first position that needs to be fixed. It won't matter unless we, at a minimum, pick up a legit #1 WR and swap out Rabach and get some better play from RG.

That was Bryant, not Haslett imo.

I think Haslett did have a good game though. He crowded the line with 8-9 players and made Garrard beat him in the intermediate range under pressure. It worked in spurts, but ended up being a successful strategy. Guys like Manning, Rivers, Brady, Romo, etc... would have eaten us alive but Garrard isn't that good.

He can run hard, but he still makes far too many gaffs by stopping in the hole. I don't trust him to be a feature back.

I don't think we need a feature back. I would be happy with a back with speed, Torain for short yardage/rotation and keeping Keiland as a 3rd down specialist. Keiland can really block and he's passable on swing passes. In defense of Torain, he's averaging close to 5 YPC this season behind one of the worst OLs in the NFL.

He has the front 7 for a 3-4, and has basically for the entire season. He just refused to play them. The problem with the defense has nothing to do with the scheme: the DB are horrible.

I can't believe that Haslett didn't know what he had in Bryant. NT makes the entire scheme go. Bryant has made the entire front 7 better. He's stout at the POA, has a motor that just won't stop and is surprisingly agile. He ran down a swing pass to a RB on a third down, forcing a punt. Further emphasizing Bryant's upside, it's no coincidence that just about everybody who lined up beside him looked good (Jarmon, Carriker, Rob Jackson, Chris Wilson).

shally

12-26-2010, 06:42 PM

If Gabbert comes out he could easily be our QB pick. Big kid, Big Arm.

Stanzi or Ponder just seem more like a Shanahan pick.. but if i were betting on asingle player, i think Shanahan looks at Locker and sees another Cutler.. a guy who played on a losing team but has played in a major conference and is mobile with a solid (but not overwhelming ) arm.
if he is there at the end of the first round, i can see Mike trading up for a shot at him

akhhorus

12-26-2010, 06:44 PM

i didnt expect you to have anything nice to say about Grossman, so i am not surprised.. he had his rough moments, but he had at least 5 drops and 2 receivers who failed to convert a play when they had the chance.. that is the kind of thing you would have given McNabb a pass over..

I wouldn't have given McNabb ANY pass for that performance. Cooley had a few drops(a couple of them were at least partially Grossman's fault), but I seem to recall you always minimizing the drops argument whenever I pointed this out over the last couple years. I don't think you have any right to turn around and try to change the discussion about Grossman's performance into "Well, he was killed by drops." How many times has Moss dropped the ball for Campbell and McNabb? And yet i don't recall you ever giving them much credence as a reason for their problems. And drops weren't Grossman's problem. His stupid decisions were. He had 20 incompletions. You want to point out 5 drops(at least). He made far more than 5 bad decisions that weren't just dropped(including the INT that was dropped lol).

i get that you dont think that Grossman belongs in the NFL, but you are wrong about him not being worth keeping as a back up. yes, he got away with a couple of dropped passes by defenders, but so did McNabb ll season.

McNabb never had throws as insanely bad as Grossman did today. Not even close. Grossman fricking panic threw the ball right into a defensive tackle. Nevermind his first INT last week against Dallas where he panicked from a mild rush and threw it up high and slowly blindly into the flat. If McNabb did any of that(or Campbell before him), you would have started 6 threads about each! lol.

frankly, the team loses NOTHING by playing Grossman over McNabb. both are flawed. difference is that McNabb will cost 15 million + next year. what would Grossman cost ? Grossman is 1-1 at starter with the same supporting cast as McNabb, who was 5-7.. what is the difference ??

That doesn't make much sense. So, since Grossman is cheaper than McNabb and since he's 1-1 so far, he represents a better option for the Skins moving forward? First off, I've been clear that McNabb is done here in DC(and isn't the answer since his OC has no interest in putting him in anything close to a position to succeed). Secondly, cheap sh*t is still sh*t. And Grossman's "win" came thanks to the opposing QB throwing the ball up blindly in OT deep in his own territory. I honestly don't understand how you can try and spin Grossman's performance into anything other than what it was: terrible. Neither McNabb nor Grossman deserve the Redskins' starter or backup jobs next year. McNabb: because I don't want to pay him that much money if he can't just coexist with his coordinator, Grossman: because he sucks flaming donkey balls and should only start for Dallas or Philly!

shally

12-26-2010, 06:44 PM

I think this is the most frustrating part about this win. I still hope that we can sneak in the top 10 at 6-10. Newton may be available, but don't want him. I think this win really put a dent in our future and with an unsettled future qb position, it is hard for this team to have any meaningful run at the Superbowl. I would say if we don't trade up, we should trade down.

both are unlikely.. trading up takes a full draft.. trading down requires somene who really wants your pick..

it might actually force us to take a lineman to our benefit..lol

justinskins

12-26-2010, 06:45 PM

akhhorus

12-26-2010, 06:48 PM

He's a vet min guy at this point and I'm not even sure he's worth a roster spot. Not enough production and too injury prone at this point.

Perhaps, but they aren't going to dump him until they have a bird in hand.

I think a lot of those criticisms could have been leveled at McNabb though too. I think we came into the season with a broke QB position and Grossman is playing about as well as any other QB not considered a "franchise" player (Rodgers, Manning, Brady, Rivers, etc) could play. Drops by receivers, poor protection and an inexplicable desire to roll a slow, right-handed QB continuously to the left made him look worse than he really is. He's still bad though and QB is probably the first position that needs to be fixed. It won't matter unless we, at a minimum, pick up a legit #1 WR and swap out Rabach and get some better play from RG.

The difference being that McNabb's downside isn't anywhere close to Grossman's. McNabb did skip a lot of makeable passes and make mistakes, but Grossman's decisions when rushed are just painful to watch. This is the same Grossman that got benched in Chicago and couldn't find a starter's gig after they let him walk. He might be a clipboard holder, but he's a walking disaster waiting to happen if you ask him to take any snaps.

I can't believe that Haslett didn't know what he had in Bryant. NT makes the entire scheme go. Bryant has made the entire front 7 better. He's stout at the POA, has a motor that just won't stop and is surprisingly agile. He ran down a swing pass to a RB on a third down, forcing a punt. Further emphasizing Bryant's upside, it's no coincidence that just about everybody who lined up beside him looked good (Jarmon, Carriker, Rob Jackson, Chris Wilson).

He's had Jarmon, Jackson, Barnes, etc etc rotting on the bench, I don't think its too implausible that he just didn't know what he had in them.

I sure am not a fan of Haslet and his befudled looks as we get burned by one big play after another. I am just saying I would be surprised he is gone after 1 year. Who would you say where the front 7 we should have played? The guys today?

If you can get Wade Phillips, you make the move. As for the front they should be playing:
DE: Carriker
NT: Bryant
DE: Jarmon/Holliday
OLB: Orakpo/Jarmon/Jackson/Wilson/Carter
ILB: Fletcher
ILB: Alexander/Riley/Jackson
OLB: Orakpo/Jarmon/Jackson/Wilson/Carter

McNabb's YPA: 7.15 for the season
Grossman's YPA: 6.15 for the season, 4.67 today

McNabb makes big plays in the passing game, Grossman less often.

And Grossman turns the ball over at a higher rate. There's just no comparison to McNabb and Grossman. None.

Toadslayer

12-26-2010, 06:50 PM

Stanzi or Ponder just seem more like a Shanahan pick.. but if i were betting on asingle player, i think Shanahan looks at Locker and sees another Cutler.. a guy who played on a losing team but has played in a major conference and is mobile with a solid (but not overwhelming ) arm.
if he is there at the end of the first round, i can see Mike trading up for a shot at him

Shanahan has me confused now on what is a "Shanahan pick" Locker is a "coach killer" IMO. I say we throw the bank at the highest QB in the draft we can. We piss away draft picks anyway, might as well be for a first round QB.

akhhorus

12-26-2010, 06:53 PM

Shanahan has me confused now on what is a "Shanahan pick" Locker is a "coach killer" IMO. I say we throw the bank at the highest QB in the draft we can. We piss away draft picks anyway, might as well be for a first round QB.

Shanny likes gunslingers who'll throw it up. Cutler, Plummer, Grossman(who's a gunslinger wielding a pop gun lol), Elway. If he holds to that model and drafts a QB high, I would say Luck and Mallet would be on top of his list. Stanzi would be a great fit(so would Kellen Moore), but Shanny more likely to go for the high upside project outside the first round. Taylor Potts might be on the table late.

tribeinca

12-26-2010, 06:53 PM

I honestly don't know which game you were watching if you think he only made 2 bad throws lol. He panic threw a ball into a Defensive tackle(who was shocked to see it coming towards him lol), he made at least 2 groundings that were dangerous throws, he made 4-6 really bad throws that he didn't have to rush, he made a bad one when the DE zone blitzed and was waiting for the outlet to Cooley, he got lucky that the Lb dropped a tipped ball that he shouldn't have thrown and I don't know if he made a single throw planting his leg properly.

He frankly has no business playing in the NFL. After that game, I'm amazed anyone thinks he's even a backup.

I have to say you really have a double standard. I can easily point out the same things McNabb did in multiple games that you have mentioned. Now, can you remind us what grade you gave McNabb in the Chicago game when he played horrible and Chicago handed us a win which is almost exactly the same scenario as this game? I am sure you didn't yank McNabb out of the league at that time.

firehawk157

12-26-2010, 06:53 PM

frankly, the team loses NOTHING by playing Grossman over McNabb. both are flawed. difference is that McNabb will cost 15 million + next year. what would Grossman cost ? Grossman is 1-1 at starter with the same supporting cast as McNabb, who was 5-7.. what is the difference ??

Production to this point has been about equal. That's good for a back-up but bad news for a starter.

Haslett didnt have Bryant for most of the year because of a concussion..

Didn't know this.

also, we will likely be picking somewhere in the 10-13 range now (assuming we dont beat the Giants).. we can forget about drafting a QB in the first round because both Luck and Mallet will be long gone and Newton, as well.. Locker isnt worth anything before the second round, so unless we trade down, i can see a defensive front 7 player, or wideout, or o lineman.

QBs, other than the top pick, have seemed to really have dropped. Nobody thought Clausen was going to get picked in the 2nd (or behind Tebow for that fact).

this win changed some post season strategy i think, and may have saved Haslett's job.[/QUOTE]

I think this is the most frustrating part about this win. I still hope that we can sneak in the top 10 at 6-10. Newton may be available, but don't want him. I think this win really put a dent in our future and with an unsettled future qb position, it is hard for this team to have any meaningful run at the Superbowl. I would say if we don't trade up, we should trade down.

If we really think Mallet is the answer and we're really concerned he'll get picked before us, we can get into the top-10. The question is whether or not he's the answer. I wouldn't jump at him before we go through the combine and get the full scouting report on him. He could drop or rise at this point.

GenMgr

12-26-2010, 06:54 PM

From Twitter:

Current NFL Draft Order: 1. CAR 2. DEN 3. BUF 4. CIN 5. ARI 6. SF 7. DAL 8. HOU 9. DET 10. CLE 11. MIN 12. SEA/STL 13. TEN 14. WAS 15. OAK

Keino

12-26-2010, 06:55 PM

akhhorus

12-26-2010, 06:56 PM

I have to say you really have a double standard. I can easily point out the same things McNabb did in multiple games that you have mentioned. Now, can you remind us what grade you gave McNabb in the Chicago game when he played horrible and Chicago handed us a win which is almost exactly the same scenario as this game? I am sure you didn't yank McNabb out of the league at that time.

I gave him a 6. Thats not a good grade. Especially when I added the comment: "Was hit/pressured all game long and didn’t do well with it."

You probably should stop trying to hit me with some "gotcha" moment until you have something where I was blatantly applying a double standard. One of McNabb's INTs that week was went he was trying to dump it being rushed and it got popped in the air, so there's no double standard.

If we really think Mallet is the answer and we're really concerned he'll get picked before us, we can get into the top-10. The question is whether or not he's the answer. I wouldn't jump at him before we go through the combine and get the full scouting report on him. He could drop or rise at this point.

JMO, but I want nothing to do with Ryan Mallet.

tribeinca

12-26-2010, 06:58 PM

justinskins

12-26-2010, 07:08 PM

He has the front 7 for a 3-4, and has basically for the entire season. He just refused to play them. The problem with the defense has nothing to do with the scheme: the DB are horrible.

Way, way to early to make this claim. We were playing against a running team without it's star back. I just don't buy that we have the personnel to field a legit 3-4 defense, certainly not based on one game against a highly inconsistent team.

akhhorus

12-26-2010, 07:12 PM

Way, way to early to make this claim. We were playing against a running team without it's star back. I just don't buy that we have the personnel to field a legit 3-4 defense, certainly not based on one game against a highly inconsistent team.

Thats fair, but the Skins' rush defense(and I use that term lightly) came into today letting up 130 YPG and 4.8 YPC. The Jags, even missing MoJo(thanks for that btw, I was playing for the title and needed him), only got 78 rushing yards for 3.4 YPC. Thats a significant dropoff.

Toadslayer

12-26-2010, 07:18 PM

I agree. Luck is as close to a sure thing as anyone in years. I would just ask the Panthers what they want from us.

Just like Bradford was last year. JMO in hindsight, i wish we could have threw our 2nd and 4th and Haynesworth last year to move up and take Bradford. But that's if my damn time machine and hypothetical Skins FO "total say over personnel" job weren't just a pipe dream. lol

firehawk157

12-26-2010, 07:18 PM

I wouldn't have given McNabb ANY pass for that performance. Cooley had a few drops(a couple of them were at least partially Grossman's fault), but I seem to recall you always minimizing the drops argument whenever I pointed this out over the last couple years. I don't think you have any right to turn around and try to change the discussion about Grossman's performance into "Well, he was killed by drops." How many times has Moss dropped the ball for Campbell and McNabb? And yet i don't recall you ever giving them much credence as a reason for their problems. And drops weren't Grossman's problem. His stupid decisions were. He had 20 incompletions. You want to point out 5 drops(at least). He made far more than 5 bad decisions that weren't just dropped(including the INT that was dropped lol).

First off, defenders drop the ball ALL the time. Watching the Giants/Packers game, there were a couple of dropped INTs. Either way, McNabb made a BUNCH of dumb decisions on his own accord, just like Grossman. The fact that they even are meriting comparisons just shows you how bad McNabb was playing.

McNabb never had throws as insanely bad as Grossman did today. Not even close. Grossman fricking panic threw the ball right into a defensive tackle. Nevermind his first INT last week against Dallas where he panicked from a mild rush and threw it up high and slowly blindly into the flat. If McNabb did any of that(or Campbell before him), you would have started 6 threads about each! lol.

McNabb had his share of WTF moments. Throws into double and triple coverage, holding onto the ball too long and losing the ball on a slide were all pretty jacked up plays. The difference is, we traded for McNabb with the idea that we were getting a franchise QB and what we got was back-up material. Grossman we brought on to be back-up material and that's what he is, back-up material.

That doesn't make much sense. So, since Grossman is cheaper than McNabb and since he's 1-1 so far, he represents a better option for the Skins moving forward? First off, I've been clear that McNabb is done here in DC(and isn't the answer since his OC has no interest in putting him in anything close to a position to succeed). Secondly, cheap sh*t is still sh*t. And Grossman's "win" came thanks to the opposing QB throwing the ball up blindly in OT deep in his own territory. I honestly don't understand how you can try and spin Grossman's performance into anything other than what it was: terrible. Neither McNabb nor Grossman deserve the Redskins' starter or backup jobs next year. McNabb: because I don't want to pay him that much money if he can't just coexist with his coordinator, Grossman: because he sucks flaming donkey balls and should only start for Dallas or Philly!

Grossman represents a better option because we can yank him with little to no explanation. We yanked McNabb and we're headlining ESPN and NFL Network for a whole week. We spend half of the broadcast focusing on McNabb huddling in his jacket. He's a distraction just like any other formerly good player while Grossman isn't.

both are unlikely.. trading up takes a full draft.. trading down requires somene who really wants your pick..

it might actually force us to take a lineman to our benefit..lol

I wouldn't mind taking a DE or OLB, but we need interior OL and the value isn't there at where we pick in the first. At 10-12, you expect a franchise player.

McNabb's YPA: 7.15 for the season
Grossman's YPA: 6.15 for the season, 4.67 today

McNabb makes big plays in the passing game, Grossman less often.

Grossman's body of work is too small for a solid statistical analysis. With as few attempts as Grossman has, drops play too big a factor.

Perhaps, but they aren't going to dump him until they have a bird in hand.

That's a good idea but if we can't land another decent back, that's our fault.

And Grossman turns the ball over at a higher rate. There's just no comparison to McNabb and Grossman. None.

I just disagree. We're averaging more points/game offensively than we did under McNabb.

justinskins

12-26-2010, 07:27 PM

Thats fair, but the Skins' rush defense(and I use that term lightly) came into today letting up 130 YPG and 4.8 YPC. The Jags, even missing MoJo(thanks for that btw, I was playing for the title and needed him), only got 78 rushing yards for 3.4 YPC. Thats a significant dropoff.

Sure, I was impressed. We shut down the run and forced the Jags to be one-dimensional. Successful game-plan and execution, although I do wonder if it depended on the absence of MJD as a dual threat. I'm just not willing to extrapolate from that performance. Is Bryant really the answer at NT? Too early to tell. And apart from that, I really don't believe in our LB corps, not with Fletcher getting older (can he really play at a high level for even another 2 years?), Rocky at the other ILB spot, and total uncertainty at the OLB spot opposite Orakpo.

Let's see how our front 7 plays against the Giants offensive line & backs before we call them much improved. If they do a good job, I'll concede the point.

Grossman represents a better option because we can yank him with little to no explanation. We yanked McNabb and we're headlining ESPN and NFL Network for a whole week. We spend half of the broadcast focusing on McNabb huddling in his jacket. He's a distraction just like any other formerly good player while Grossman isn't.

I really don't get this logic at all. If nobody cares when you bench your QB, it means that everyone thinks you have a crappy QB. It's more of an indictment of Grossman that a defense.

akhhorus

12-26-2010, 07:27 PM

First off, defenders drop the ball ALL the time. Watching the Giants/Packers game, there were a couple of dropped INTs. Either way, McNabb made a BUNCH of dumb decisions on his own accord, just like Grossman. The fact that they even are meriting comparisons just shows you how bad McNabb was playing.

I'm not defending McNabb's performance, it was subpar, but you just can't compare the two. Grossman is a disaster. McNabb is merely meh lol. And your "the fact that they even are meriting comparisons" is a fallacy imo. I can compare Tom Brady to Rex Grossman without implying that Brady isn't as good as he appears to be. There is no comparison between Grossman and McNabb-statistically or play on the field-where they look close.

McNabb had his share of WTF moments. Throws into double and triple coverage, holding onto the ball too long and losing the ball on a slide were all pretty jacked up plays. The difference is, we traded for McNabb with the idea that we were getting a franchise QB and what we got was back-up material. Grossman we brought on to be back-up material and that's what he is, back-up material.

I disagree that Grossman is even a "backup." I don't want a backup who'll come in and dig the hole deeper. As for McNabb's problems: he had his share, but nothing like Grossman has had in 2 starts+1 relief performance.

Grossman represents a better option because we can yank him with little to no explanation. We yanked McNabb and we're headlining ESPN and NFL Network for a whole week. We spend half of the broadcast focusing on McNabb huddling in his jacket. He's a distraction just like any other formerly good player while Grossman isn't.

If thats the latest rational, you need to work on it lol. And I disagree with your premise: if Shanny announced that Grossman was out and Beck was in, it would be a major story. Nevermind that the "impact" in the headlines should have absolutely nothing to do with the decisions on the field. Its bad enough letting the players help decide who plays and who doesn't. But using the standard of how many blog hits or youtube views is even more mystifying.

I just disagree. We're averaging more points/game offensively than we did under McNabb.

You can't say: "Grossman's body of work is too small for a solid statistical analysis" and then try to bring up a statistical analysis lmao.

firehawk157

12-26-2010, 07:28 PM

This in its entirety. Somehow I knew that the standards of acceptability would change.

I hope there is a decent vet placeholder available next year.

I think it's pretty self-evident WHY the standards change. The price we paid for McNabb indicated we should have expected elite, or at least good, play. It's like springing for a Corvette then finding out it ran laps like your commuter car. I never expected my commuter to post good laps around the Nurburgring, I expected my Corvette to run with the top pack though.

I gave him a 6. Thats not a good grade. Especially when I added the comment: "Was hit/pressured all game long and didn’t do well with it."

You probably should stop trying to hit me with some "gotcha" moment until you have something where I was blatantly applying a double standard. One of McNabb's INTs that week was went he was trying to dump it being rushed and it got popped in the air, so there's no double standard.

I don't know dude, Grossman didn't REALLY throw an INT (replay should have overturned it) and Moss did quit on the route. McNabb threw more than one in Chicago.

JMO, but I want nothing to do with Ryan Mallet.

I honestly haven't looked at Mallet very closely yet, so I don't have an opinion on him. A lot of people think he's the 2nd best so I was just running with that example.

akhhorus

12-26-2010, 07:32 PM

I think it's pretty self-evident WHY the standards change. The price we paid for McNabb indicated we should have expected elite, or at least good, play. It's like springing for a Corvette then finding out it ran laps like your commuter car. I never expected my commuter to post good laps around the Nurburgring, I expected my Corvette to run with the top pack though.

So, when the cheaper car's engine blows up in the middle of the night 100 miles from anywhere you'll be happy since you didn't waste much money on it?

I don't know dude, Grossman didn't REALLY throw an INT (replay should have overturned it) and Moss did quit on the route. McNabb threw more than one in Chicago.

Moss was right there, so I don't think you can spin it as "moss quit on it" especially since he so close to the play that he was able to take the ball out of his hands after he was immediately out of bounds. And the replay was clear if he had his first foot down when he caught it.

As for McNabb in Chicago and Grossman in Jacksonville, McNabb did have 2 ints against a great defense. I gave him a 6.0. Grossman looked much worse as a player in Jacksonville and I gave him a 4.3. Not much of a contradiction, especially when I said that Mcnabb struggled.

firehawk157

12-26-2010, 07:41 PM

I'm not defending McNabb's performance, it was subpar, but you just can't compare the two. Grossman is a disaster. McNabb is merely meh lol. And your "the fact that they even are meriting comparisons" is fallacy imo. I can compare Tom Brady to Rex Grossman without implying that Brady isn't as good as he appears to be. There is no comparison between Grossman and McNabb-statistically or play on the field-where they look close.

McNabb threw more INTs than TDs. His completion percentage was below 60. He didn't seem to have any pocket presence. He made mystifying decisions at least once a game. I'm not saying Grossman is better than McNabb at this point, I'm just pointing out that Grossman does not represent a large enough dropoff in performance to warrant springing for the extra cap hit that bringing McNabb back would entail. If we brought in Pennington or any other caretaker QB, I'd be all for a QB competition.

I disagree that Grossman is even a "backup." I don't want a backup who'll come in and dig the hole deeper. As for McNabb's problems: he had his share, but nothing like Grossman has had in 2 starts+1 relief performance.

I don't really get this. Grossman posted 4 TDs and generally looked decent in the Dallas game. He looked worse this game but not like he was a 4 INT mess or anything. Having said that, I don't expect much for the Giants game.

If thats the latest rational, you need to work on it lol. And I disagree with your premise: if Shanny announced that Grossman was out and Beck was in, it would be a major story. Nevermind that the "impact" in the headlines should have absolutely nothing to do with the decisions on the field. Its bad enough letting the players help decide who plays and who doesn't. But using the standard of how many blog hits or youtube views is even more mystifying.

I think you underestimate what a distraction benching a franchise QB would cause over a guy like Grossman. Having reporters ask continuously, the locker room second guessing and the possibility of losing the locker room are all major distractions. McNabb has the ability to tear the locker room in half, Grossman doesn't. Whether or not McNabb can (ie, has the ability to parlay that influence he has into something legitimately distracting) or will is another question. Grossman doesn't have enough credibility to.

You can't say: "Grossman's body of work is too small for a solid statistical analysis" and then try to bring up a statistical analysis lmao.

That's probably pretty true. Notable instances, but not definitive. I think the Giants game will tell us more but I think you need at least 4-6 games to get a real feel for a player.

akhhorus

12-26-2010, 07:49 PM

McNabb threw more INTs than TDs. His completion percentage was below 60. He didn't seem to have any pocket presence. He made mystifying decisions at least once a game. I'm not saying Grossman is better than McNabb at this point, I'm just pointing out that Grossman does not represent a large enough dropoff in performance to warrant springing for the extra cap hit that bringing McNabb back would entail. If we brought in Pennington or any other caretaker QB, I'd be all for a QB competition.

Please show where anyone said that they should bring back McNabb next year. If thats what your premise is based on, then you're not reading what people are writing. In fact I thought I was rather clear when I said this earlier in the thread:
"Neither McNabb nor Grossman deserve the Redskins' starter or backup jobs next year. McNabb: because I don't want to pay him that much money if he can't just coexist with his coordinator, Grossman: because he sucks flaming donkey balls and should only start for Dallas or Philly!"

I'd also add that even if Papa Shanny came to his senses and canned his son tomorrow, I'd still support dealing McNabb because it would send a wrong signal to the team(players and coaches) if they kept him but dumped his nemesis.

I don't really get this. Grossman posted 4 TDs and generally looked decent in the Dallas game. He looked worse this game but not like he was a 4 INT mess or anything. Having said that, I don't expect much for the Giants game.

3 turnovers(5 for him on the season) vs 5 TDs(but to be fair, one of those was because Jacksonville had 2 extraordinary mistakes on 3rd downs inside the red zone in the 1st quarter today). Imo, a backup quality QB should be a player who can come in and staunch the bleeding, either by the performance of the starter or after the starter gets knocked out of a game. Grossman is incapable of that since he makes far too many bad decisions and exposes the ball to far too many turnovers.

I think you underestimate what a distraction benching a franchise QB would cause over a guy like Grossman. Having reporters ask continuously, the locker room second guessing and the possibility of losing the locker room are all major distractions. McNabb has the ability to tear the locker room in half, Grossman doesn't. Whether or not McNabb can (ie, has the ability to parlay that influence he has into something legitimately distracting) or will is another question. Grossman doesn't have enough credibility to.

That assumes that the reporters haven't been crawling all over the players asking about their feeling re: McNabb/Grossman in regards to every single permutation of the theme. The distraction is there and won't go away until the offseason(if even then). If you bench Grossman for anyone, it'll be a major story with all the smaller stories about benching McNabb considered.

firehawk157

12-26-2010, 07:51 PM

So, when the cheaper car's engine blows up in the middle of the night 100 miles from anywhere you'll be happy since you didn't waste much money on it?

I'd be more angry when the Vette's engine blew up. I scimped on the commuter car, picked it up for a grand and a half, I never had huge expectations for it. If I thought I could go somewhere in it, I should have springed for a better one.

Moss was right there, so I don't think you can spin it as "moss quit on it" especially since he so close to the play that he was able to take the ball out of his hands after he was immediately out of bounds. And the replay was clear if he had his first foot down when he caught it.

I doubt that. The announcers were pretty clear on it being a non-catch for a while. They changed their tunes after it wasn't overturned. If it was ruled a non-catch, I don't think they would have overturned it.

As for McNabb in Chicago and Grossman in Jacksonville, McNabb did have 2 ints against a great defense. I gave him a 6.0. Grossman looked much worse as a player in Jacksonville and I gave him a 4.3. Not much of a contradiction, especially when I said that Mcnabb struggled.

I'm not saying that McNabb was worse but you graded him better. I just think that it's an indictment of McNabb that Grossman has, overall, played at about the same level. I don't want Grossman to take a bunch of snaps in 2011 for the Skins but I think McNabb is almost as bad of an option.

tribeinca

12-26-2010, 07:51 PM

So, when the cheaper car's engine blows up in the middle of the night 100 miles from anywhere you'll be happy since you didn't waste much money on it?

No question. I yelled "Thank the Lord", it's not the Ferrari!

Moss was right there, so I don't think you can spin it as "moss quit on it" especially since he so close to the play that he was able to take the ball out of his hands after he was immediately out of bounds. And the replay was clear if he had his first foot down when he caught it.

Like the commentator said, it was a bang-bang play. You can argue that the defender made a great play rather than Grossman made a bad throw.

As for McNabb in Chicago and Grossman in Jacksonville, McNabb did have 2 ints against a great defense. I gave him a 6.0. Grossman looked much worse as a player in Jacksonville and I gave him a 4.3. Not much of a contradiction, especially when I said that Mcnabb struggled.

McNabb had a qb rating of 56 and he got a 6 from you. Grossman had a rating of 60 and he got a 4.3 and should be out of the league. I don't know how you come up with these grades.

akhhorus

12-26-2010, 07:54 PM

I'd be more angry when the Vette's engine blew up. I scimped on the commuter car, picked it up for a grand and a half, I never had huge expectations for it. If I thought I could go somewhere in it, I should have springed for a better one.

You should just have had a better car or your mechanics should have done what they could to make the Vette run better in the first place.

I doubt that. The announcers were pretty clear on it being a non-catch for a while. They changed their tunes after it wasn't overturned. If it was ruled a non-catch, I don't think they would have overturned it.

I'll trust the replay officials who "confirmed" the call over Tim "major gaping head injury" Ryan lol. Who made a number of dumb statements throughout the game.

I'm not saying that McNabb was worse but you graded him better. I just think that it's an indictment of McNabb that Grossman has, overall, played at about the same level. I don't want Grossman to take a bunch of snaps in 2011 for the Skins but I think McNabb is almost as bad of an option.

1.7 points better. That isn't much. Talk to me if I gave McNabb something north of 7.5 for a remotely similar performance.

Again: I don't where anyone was saying that McNabb should or could be an option for 2011.

McNabb had a qb rating of 56 and he got a 6 from you. Grossman had a rating of 60 and he got a 4.3 and should be out of the league. I don't know how you come up with these grades.

Qb rating isn't the only stat I use(although it appears to be the only one you care about). I'm sorry if you disagree with my grading of both McNabb in Chicago and Grossman in Jacksonville, but Grossman was a disaster today while McNabb merely struggled. Again: maybe you should wait for gotcha moments where I'm actually using a clear double standard.

firehawk157

12-26-2010, 07:56 PM

Please show where anyone said that they should bring back McNabb next year. If thats what your premise is based on, then you're not reading what people are writing. In fact I thought I was rather clear when I said this earlier in the thread:
"Neither McNabb nor Grossman deserve the Redskins' starter or backup jobs next year. McNabb: because I don't want to pay him that much money if he can't just coexist with his coordinator, Grossman: because he sucks flaming donkey balls and should only start for Dallas or Philly!"

I'd also add that even if Papa Shanny came to his senses and canned his son tomorrow, I'd still support dealing McNabb because it would send a wrong signal to the team(players and coaches) if they kept him but dumped his nemesis.

3 turnovers(5 for him on the season) vs 5 TDs(but to be fair, one of those was because Jacksonville had 2 extraordinary mistakes on 3rd downs inside the red zone in the 1st quarter today). Imo, a backup quality QB should be a player who can come in and staunch the bleeding, either by the performance of the starter or after the starter gets knocked out of a game. Grossman is incapable of that since he makes far too many bad decisions and exposes the ball to far too many turnovers.

That assumes that the reporters haven't been crawling all over the players asking about their feeling re: McNabb/Grossman in regards to every single permutation of the theme. The distraction is there and won't go away until the offseason(if even then). If you bench Grossman for anyone, it'll be a major story with all the smaller stories about benching McNabb considered.

I think we're missing each other's points here. I am not saying Grossman is better or that I think he's a good QB or anything like that. I think he's okay as a #2 and I'm slightly resigned to the possibility that he may be back as a starter in 2011 but I'm not happy about it. If we released him, I would probably be happy about it. What I am saying is that it is a indictment of how horribly McNabb has played that when you put in Grossman, the offense didn't seem to really regress at all. I'd expect when you put in a QB that sucked flaming donkey balls in for a guy you traded a 2nd and a 4th for, you'd see the entire offense go from competent to sputtering. The offense went from streaky to streaky. Nothing really changed.

Toadslayer

12-26-2010, 07:57 PM

McNabb had a qb rating of 56 and he got a 6 from you. Grossman had a rating of 60 and he got a 4.3 and should be out of the league. I don't know how you come up with these grades.

I think Mcnabb gets an automatic 1.5 pt boost for his ability to evade the rush. I think he may have made our O-line look better than it really was sometimes. Grossman would have killed us with sack fumbles all year. guaranteed.

firehawk157

12-26-2010, 07:59 PM

McNabb had a qb rating of 56 and he got a 6 from you. Grossman had a rating of 60 and he got a 4.3 and should be out of the league. I don't know how you come up with these grades.

QB rating is one of the worst statistical measures of a QB. It rewards safe play and WR YAC ability far too much. A screen that is taken 50 yards by a great receiver is graded the same as a QB who threw the ball to a mediocre receiver the entire way. You can get a good QB rating by just dumping it off for 5-7 yards a play.

akhhorus

12-26-2010, 08:00 PM

I think we're missing each other's points here. I am not saying Grossman is better or that I think he's a good QB or anything like that. I think he's okay as a #2 and I'm slightly resigned to the possibility that he may be back as a starter in 2011 but I'm not happy about it. If we released him, I would probably be happy about it.

He's a unrestricted free agent.

What I am saying is that it is a indictment of how horribly McNabb has played that when you put in Grossman, the offense didn't seem to really regress at all. I'd expect when you put in a QB that sucked flaming donkey balls in for a guy you traded a 2nd and a 4th for, you'd see the entire offense go from competent to sputtering. The offense went from streaky to streaky. Nothing really changed.

But how much of that was that K-Sh*tty changing his playbook to try and slow down opposing blitzes(which is what McNabb asked of him)? And outside of one stretch when Dallas was up 20-7 and went into a loose cover-2 cloud, how much "better" or "remotely similar" has Grossman's play been? The skins failed on their first 8 3rd down conversations today, 4 for 15 for the game. The 3rd downs haven't been good under McNabb, but I don't think that they've been that bad lol.

BIGREDSKINSFAN1963

12-26-2010, 08:01 PM

if the skins want to have a shot at winning sunday,they are gonna have to run that rollout play a lot,and give cooley and davis help on pass plays!

tribeinca

12-26-2010, 08:03 PM

Qb rating isn't the only stat I use(although it appears to be the only one you care about). I'm sorry if you disagree with my grading of both McNabb in Chicago and Grossman in Jacksonville, but Grossman was a disaster today while McNabb merely struggled. Again: maybe you should wait for gotcha moments where I'm actually using a clear double standard.

If you don't use qb rating to grade a qb, then what do you use? Is there a formula? I guess it would help me and others to better understand your grading system. And if you think Grossman should not be playing in the league, how did he score a 4.3? These are not "Gotcha" moements.

Toadslayer

12-26-2010, 08:07 PM

QB rating is one of the worst statistical measures of a QB. It rewards safe play and WR YAC ability far too much. A screen that is taken 50 yards by a great receiver is graded the same as a QB who threw the ball to a mediocre receiver the entire way. You can get a good QB rating by just dumping it off for 5-7 yards a play.

Adding to that, our WR are probably the worst in the NFL at YAC. Mcnabb racked up alot of yrds without much YAC padding his stats. Grossman comes in with his buddy Pyle, finally breaking out the dink and dunk and screens, and he benefits with higher YAC and rating. Truth is Pyle never wanted Mcnabb to succeed from the get go. JMO

akhhorus

12-26-2010, 08:07 PM

If you don't use qb rating to grade a qb, then what do you use? Is there a formula? I guess it would help me and others to better understand your grading system. And if you think Grossman should not be playing in the league, how did he score a 4.3?

1st: a 4 isn't a good grade at all. Anything under 5.0 is a failing grade(which should say a lot about McNabb's 6).

2nd: I don't use any formula or any hard statistical method. A Qb could have a 300 yard game and get a 3 if he didn't have a good game. Its more about his play rather than his stats(unless its some statistical game that's a record, like Hall's 4 int game and McNabb's Houston game, then the stats matter to some extent).

3rd: I define the scoring legend every week. I can't make it any clearer for you.

These are not "Gotcha" moements.

Right....

tribeinca

12-26-2010, 08:09 PM

QB rating is one of the worst statistical measures of a QB. It rewards safe play and WR YAC ability far too much. A screen that is taken 50 yards by a great receiver is graded the same as a QB who threw the ball to a mediocre receiver the entire way. You can get a good QB rating by just dumping it off for 5-7 yards a play.

These things even out in the long run. The fact is no qb can complete 50 yards pass every game. Scoring TD, high completion rate, no interceptions are always key to winning games.

Keino

12-26-2010, 09:01 PM

I think it's pretty self-evident WHY the standards change. The price we paid for McNabb indicated we should have expected elite, or at least good, play. It's like springing for a Corvette then finding out it ran laps like your commuter car. I never expected my commuter to post good laps around the Nurburgring, I expected my Corvette to run with the top pack though.

The issue for me is that the entire offense is bad, and that the play of the QB while a contributing factor is not the primary culprit. I argued this for Campbell last year and McNabb this year. When the change was made to Grossman, these problems still persist, but certain posters, who would not accept those facts when the discussion was McNabb and Campbell turned around and made the EXACT same arguments for Rex. When the change was made, I let it be known that I would expect that these posters hold Rex to the same standards as they did McNabb and 2 games in those standards changed.

It's not about expectations (which is your point), it is about performance and results. Even though I think Rex sucks donkey sack, I recognize that he was constantly undermined by the play of his O line, his OC's playcalling and in a surprising turn of events, his TE (pass catchers). No matter the QB, these 3 things have been a constant all frickin season (just the pass catchers unable to hang on the ball were different depending on the game).

Keino

12-26-2010, 09:05 PM

Like the commentator said, it was a bang-bang play. You can argue that the defender made a great play rather than Grossman made a bad throw.

Um, no you can't. At least not to anyone who watched the throw in question. The only person who had a play on the ball at its highest point was the defender. That is the very definition of bad throw.

FunBunch5

12-26-2010, 09:13 PM

Keino

12-26-2010, 09:21 PM

We haven't had a dependable starter for years we need to focuc on QB and OL in this years draft. It is no coincidence that teams with stud QBs are always in contention.

It is also no coincidence that the teams who are always in contention keep their QBs uniforms clean and their pass catchers make plays.

I thought this was an interesting snip:

Grossman finished the game 19-of-39 passing for 182 yards. With one touchdown and one interception, he had a quarterback rating of only 60.0. Donovan McNabb, who started the first 13 games before he was benched in favor of Grossman, had only one game this season with a worse passer rating.

Link (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/rex-grossman/rex-grossman-less-impressive-i.html?wprss=redskinsinsider)

What's interesting is that the two worst QB rating performances came in wins. Sorta puts the whole passer rating thing in perspective if you ask me.

If this front office is serious about putting a contender on the field, it will focus all of its efforts on the offensive line in the draft and will get a stop-gap at QB until the line is solidified.

FunBunch5

12-26-2010, 09:27 PM

It is also no coincidence that the teams who are always in contention keep their QBs uniforms clean and their pass catchers make plays.

I thought this was an interesting snip:

Link (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/rex-grossman/rex-grossman-less-impressive-i.html?wprss=redskinsinsider)

What's interesting is that the two worst QB rating performances came in wins. Sorta puts the whole passer rating thing in perspective if you ask me.

If this front office is serious about putting a contender on the field, it will focus all of its efforts on the offensive line in the draft and will get a stop-gap at QB until the line is solidified.

Yep, I think Trent Williams is a nice start and if we get a good young center I believe we will have an adequate OL. Combine that with a good young QB prospect and the foundation is started.

Dolla Bill

12-26-2010, 10:40 PM

If this front office is serious about putting a contender on the field, it will focus all of its efforts on the offensive line in the draft and will get a stop-gap at QB until the line is solidified.

The million dollar question is; do we think that a true "franchise" QB is in the upcoming draft, or in the following draft? I agree that OL play is a big reason for winning/losing, but do we pull the trigger on someone like Luck or Mallet? I've seen a couple of games with Luck, and i'm not exactly blown away. I would of preferred Bradford than Luck.

We need a vet to be a placeholder, and to take a beating, while the line does get remodeled.

SkinsfaninNJ

12-26-2010, 11:08 PM

Nice write up. A few thoughts. Haslett called a very different game today. It was a pleasant surprise.

Shanny's play calling improved in the second half, but it was still inconsistent at most times. He seems to fall in love too often in the pass, and then in the run instead of mixing it up. For example, the drive where the Skins took over around the 40 and started with a 9 yard pass to Davis up to midfield. Second and 1 incomplete pass, third and 1 incomplete pass. That's awful play calling. Likewise, the Skins got a long run from Torrain (12 yards or so), then then run on the next first down for 4 yards. The Jags were set up for play action here. Instead short run by Torrain and then incomplete pass on obvious passing down.

I really haven't seen anyone else talk about this, but am I crazy to say I thought the line played decently today? Right tackle had its struggles. Williams had one or two break downs, but generally, Grossman had a decent pocket to throw from.

shally

12-27-2010, 01:20 AM

shally

12-27-2010, 01:32 AM

This in its entirety. Somehow I knew that the standards of acceptability would change.

I hope there is a decent vet placeholder available next year.

and then do what about the long term answer at starter ?

a placeholder is exactly that. i have no problem moving on from Grossman to another vet this off season, but it does nothing to establish a long term answer at QB. that is the central issue, whether we address it in this years draft or some other draft in the future. the vast majority of good teams have this issue settled. we dont and that will hurt us until we do. by all means fix the line and receiver corps, but we need a young starter at qb at the same time

there is no difference in the standards of acceptability WHILE we were ALIVE in the playoff race. now that we are eliminated, i want to see what else he have on the roster. i have no problem starting Beck next week, but i would have a problem starting McNabb next week because i have seen enough while it really mattered. if you think it is a different standard, fine, so be it..

shally

12-27-2010, 01:34 AM

It is also no coincidence that the teams who are always in contention keep their QBs uniforms clean and their pass catchers make plays.

I thought this was an interesting snip:

Link (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/rex-grossman/rex-grossman-less-impressive-i.html?wprss=redskinsinsider)

What's interesting is that the two worst QB rating performances came in wins. Sorta puts the whole passer rating thing in perspective if you ask me.

If this front office is serious about putting a contender on the field, it will focus all of its efforts on the offensive line in the draft and will get a stop-gap at QB until the line is solidified.

half right.. both Rodgers and Big Ben have taken a terrific pounding the last couple of years.. their receivers make plays for sure..

akhhorus

12-27-2010, 06:48 AM

Here we are debating the sucktitude of our QB situation again. I thought this was over when JC left and McNabb came in. I was doing back flips, then McNabb was like JC and got benched for a guy that sucks just as bad as JC. (Fat Bastard Voice) "I eat because I am fat, I am fat because I eat, it's just a visious circle."

We haven't had a dependable starter for years we need to focuc on QB and OL in this years draft. It is no coincidence that teams with stud QBs are always in contention.

Its not just the Line. They need a real flanker who's taller than me. And they need a playcaller who will adjust his scheme around the best lineup he can throw out there talentwise along with setting up opposing defenses in-game.

Nice write up. A few thoughts. Haslett called a very different game today. It was a pleasant surprise.

Shanny's play calling improved in the second half, but it was still inconsistent at most times. He seems to fall in love too often in the pass, and then in the run instead of mixing it up. For example, the drive where the Skins took over around the 40 and started with a 9 yard pass to Davis up to midfield. Second and 1 incomplete pass, third and 1 incomplete pass. That's awful play calling. Likewise, the Skins got a long run from Torrain (12 yards or so), then then run on the next first down for 4 yards. The Jags were set up for play action here. Instead short run by Torrain and then incomplete pass on obvious passing down.

This is why I have problems with K-Sh*tty even outside of the whole McNabb/Grossman dynamic. I really hope that we hire Kubiak as a "assistant head coach" or "consultant" for next season.

I really haven't seen anyone else talk about this, but am I crazy to say I thought the line played decently today? Right tackle had its struggles. Williams had one or two break downs, but generally, Grossman had a decent pocket to throw from.

I wonder how much of that was moving him around the pocket more. The Jags stopped bringing much of a blitz after they did that early.

firehawk157

12-27-2010, 06:50 AM

half right.. both Rodgers and Big Ben have taken a terrific pounding the last couple of years.. their receivers make plays for sure..

Big Ben gets bailed out a lot by a great defense and a mostly good running game. Put him on the Skins and we're probably not looking at a great improvement honestly.

firehawk157

12-27-2010, 06:53 AM

Its not just the Line. They need a real flanker who's taller than me. And they need a playcaller who will adjust his scheme around the best lineup he can throw out there talentwise along with setting up opposing defenses in-game.

This is why I have problems with K-Sh*tty even outside of the whole McNabb/Grossman dynamic. I really hope that we hire Kubiak as a "assistant head coach" or "consultant" for next season.

Not going to happen. First, we don't WANT a power struggle in the offensive coaching ranks and KS isn't going to get demoted.

I wonder how much of that was moving him around the pocket more. The Jags stopped bringing much of a blitz after they did that early.

Grossman's scrambling looks awkward.

akhhorus

12-27-2010, 08:05 AM

Not going to happen. First, we don't WANT a power struggle in the offensive coaching ranks and KS isn't going to get demoted.

I'll hazard coaching power struggles to get someone competent in charge.

Grossman's scrambling looks awkward.

No, it looks fine...as compared to an octopus trying to get off an iceberg during a 70 mph wind storm

GenMgr

12-27-2010, 08:17 AM

I see Kyle Orton as possibly the vet that Shanahan wants.

akhhorus

12-27-2010, 08:23 AM

I see Kyle Orton as possibly the vet that Shanahan wants.

I could buy that. Orton might be cheap also. And the irony of Orton replacing Grossman yet again isn't lost on me.

Keino

12-27-2010, 08:34 AM

and then do what about the long term answer at starter ?

a placeholder is exactly that. i have no problem moving on from Grossman to another vet this off season, but it does nothing to establish a long term answer at QB. that is the central issue, whether we address it in this years draft or some other draft in the future. the vast majority of good teams have this issue settled. we dont and that will hurt us until we do. by all means fix the line and receiver corps, but we need a young starter at qb at the same time

there is no difference in the standards of acceptability WHILE we were ALIVE in the playoff race. now that we are eliminated, i want to see what else he have on the roster. i have no problem starting Beck next week, but i would have a problem starting McNabb next week because i have seen enough while it really mattered. if you think it is a different standard, fine, so be it..

When you offer the same reasons for Grossman's shoddy performance that you refused to accept to explain McNabb's shoddy performances you are most certainly applying multiple sets of standards to the results. You aren't the only one which is why I said "certain posters".

There is no point in searching for the long-term answer at the position in my opinion if it means that said long-term answer is going to be ruined by inept line-play, inept pass catchers and inept playcalling. All 3 of these things need to be fixed before bringing in a youngster lest he be ruined ala Ken O'Brien.

SkinKing

12-27-2010, 10:36 AM

McNabb never had throws as insanely bad as Grossman did today. Not even close. Grossman fricking panic threw the ball right into a defensive tackle. Nevermind his first INT last week against Dallas where he panicked from a mild rush and threw it up high and slowly blindly into the flat. If McNabb did any of that(or Campbell before him), you would have started 6 threads about each! lol.
!

Really?? McNabb never had throws as bad as Grossmans today? Wow, did you not watch the end of the Detroit game? Did you not watch the Chicago game where he threw it right to the Bears defender that was called back due to false start? Grossman is more accurate, period! Did he have a good game? NO! however, as much pressure that was in his face all day, no QB would put up great numbers. (Maybe Vick with his legs).

The worse play I have ever seen a veteren QB make was from McNabb. Runs the ball to the first down marker and tries to get out of bounds. He realizes he won't make it so he slides 2 ft before being out of bounds and fumbles the ball..lol worse play I've ever seen.

akhhorus

12-27-2010, 10:43 AM

There is no point in searching for the long-term answer at the position in my opinion if it means that said long-term answer is going to be ruined by inept line-play, inept pass catchers and inept playcalling. All 3 of these things need to be fixed before bringing in a youngster lest he be ruined ala Ken O'Brien.

This is the truth. No matter who the 2011 Qb(s) are, if they have the same WRs, Oline, playcalling: nothing is going to change.

BurgundyNGold

12-27-2010, 11:32 AM

When you offer the same reasons for Grossman's shoddy performance that you refused to accept to explain McNabb's shoddy performances you are most certainly applying multiple sets of standards to the results. You aren't the only one which is why I said "certain posters".

There is no point in searching for the long-term answer at the position in my opinion if it means that said long-term answer is going to be ruined by inept line-play, inept pass catchers and inept playcalling. All 3 of these things need to be fixed before bringing in a youngster lest he be ruined ala Ken O'Brien.
Which was the same argument I made against blaming Campbell completely for the mess and when we traded for McNabb. It doesn't matter if you have Kyle Busch driving your car if that car is dilapidated, missing key components and has a terrible pit crew.

Keino

12-27-2010, 11:38 AM

Which was the same argument I made against blaming Campbell completely for the mess and when we traded for McNabb. It doesn't matter if you have Kyle Busch driving your car if that car is dilapidated, missing key components and has a terrible pit crew.

I won't lie to you, I thought that McNabb would be such an upgrade that it was well worth it. Turns out, that you were entirely correct and that our draft picks would have been better served picking players for our team rather than the Eagles.

BurgundyNGold

12-27-2010, 11:41 AM

Really?? McNabb never had throws as bad as Grossmans today? Wow, did you not watch the end of the Detroit game? Did you not watch the Chicago game where he threw it right to the Bears defender that was called back due to false start? Grossman is more accurate, period! Did he have a good game? NO! however, as much pressure that was in his face all day, no QB would put up great numbers. (Maybe Vick with his legs).
Grossman is probably more accurate than McNab but that's not really saying much. In fact, Grossman isn't in the top half of accurate passers in the league, IMO. Saying that Grossman is more accurate than McNabb is like rationalizing which of two turds smells better lol.

The worse play I have ever seen a veteren QB make was from McNabb. Runs the ball to the first down marker and tries to get out of bounds. He realizes he won't make it so he slides 2 ft before being out of bounds and fumbles the ball..lol worse play I've ever seen.
I can think of a worse play in a bigger game (http://www.videosurf.com/video/superbowl-41-kelvin-hayden%27s-4th-qtr-interception-breaks-bears-back-dumbassmovies-com-12120765?t=35).

BurgundyNGold

12-27-2010, 11:47 AM

I won't lie to you, I thought that McNabb would be such an upgrade that it was well worth it. Turns out, that you were entirely correct and that our draft picks would have been better served picking players for our team rather than the Eagles.
I think McNabb was an upgrade over Campbell. I thought he would be at the time too -- just not enough to warrant the deal. You get a guy like McNabb as the last piece, not the first piece. It was delusional for the FO to think that we were any better than an 8-8 team, even with an All-Pro QB.

McNabb has terrible short accuracy. Always has. His mechanics are for crap (he rarely follows through on his passes) and his footwork is even worse (he throws off of his back foot or doesn't shift his weight properly about half of the time). I can still see Brian Westbrook in my minds eye right now, slowing to a jog, arms flailing and a "WTF?" look in his eyes as McNabb once again misses him in the flat on a 4 yard pass. In that way, he's a lot like Campbell. The difference is that McNabb ismore mobile, is probably at least a marginally better leader and can throw a better deep ball than Campbell. I would certainly take Mcnabb over Campbell. But given where we were and what we had to give up? I couldn't justify it.

shally

12-27-2010, 12:12 PM

When you offer the same reasons for Grossman's shoddy performance that you refused to accept to explain McNabb's shoddy performances you are most certainly applying multiple sets of standards to the results. You aren't the only one which is why I said "certain posters".

There is no point in searching for the long-term answer at the position in my opinion if it means that said long-term answer is going to be ruined by inept line-play, inept pass catchers and inept playcalling. All 3 of these things need to be fixed before bringing in a youngster lest he be ruined ala Ken O'Brien.

you can feel free to think whatever you want, but dont let your animus towards Grossman cloud the fact that the offense has looked at least somewhat better under him than under McNabb, despite all the same other issues still being present. i dont think i am the only one who has seen this.. there is a reference to an SI quote in another thread...

there is no reason what advancement of the QB position cannot go on in parallel with advancement of the line, receivers, etc..

shally

12-27-2010, 12:13 PM

This is the truth. No matter who the 2011 Qb(s) are, if they have the same WRs, Oline, playcalling: nothing is going to change.

all are going to change in the next year...

Keino

12-27-2010, 12:20 PM

you can feel free to think whatever you want, but dont let your animus towards Grossman cloud the fact that the offense has looked at least somewhat better under him than under McNabb, despite all the same other issues still being present. i dont think i am the only one who has seen this.. there is a reference to an SI quote in another thread...

there is no reason what advancement of the QB position cannot go on in parallel with advancement of the line, receivers, etc..

I will always think what I want, but my thinking will always be based on real observations. It has very little to do with animus towards Grossman than it does with scapegoating whomever is playing QB. Our Offense flat out Stunk yesterday save for one drive, the one drive where they effectively took the ball out of the QBs hands, and we would have scored 7 points were it not for the defense and special teams giving us incredible field position for the other 13. But I would hate to let actual facts get in the way of your false belief that the offense is actually performing better when in fact it is not.

Keino

12-27-2010, 12:21 PM

all are going to change in the next year...

How can you be sure? There is no indication that this crappy OC that we have is going anywhere. Hooray Nepotism!

justinskins

12-27-2010, 12:25 PM

you can feel free to think whatever you want, but dont let your animus towards Grossman cloud the fact that the offense has looked at least somewhat better under him than under McNabb, despite all the same other issues still being present.

How was the offense any better yesterday than it was under McNabb? Grossman had a terrible passer rating and could not move the ball effectively. He couldn't make big plays, which is one of McNabb's strengths. I was all about giving Grossman his propers after the Dallas game, but at best he played no better than McNabb yesterday, and I think worse. The offensive production as a whole was similar in many ways to the Tampa game, except that McNabb played much better in that game than Grossman played in this one.

*EDIT* Also, let's not forget that special teams cost us 7 points in that game on what should have been routine kicks.

tribeinca

12-27-2010, 12:31 PM

Really?? McNabb never had throws as bad as Grossmans today? Wow, did you not watch the end of the Detroit game? Did you not watch the Chicago game where he threw it right to the Bears defender that was called back due to false start? Grossman is more accurate, period! Did he have a good game? NO! however, as much pressure that was in his face all day, no QB would put up great numbers. (Maybe Vick with his legs).

The worse play I have ever seen a veteren QB make was from McNabb. Runs the ball to the first down marker and tries to get out of bounds. He realizes he won't make it so he slides 2 ft before being out of bounds and fumbles the ball..lol worse play I've ever seen.

Are you saying Akh is biased in favor of McNabb and have a double standard? I guess I am not the only one then.

No one is saying Grossman is the answer, but to say he is way worse than McNabb?

BurgundyNGold

12-27-2010, 01:09 PM

you can feel free to think whatever you want, but dont let your animus towards Grossman cloud the fact that the offense has looked at least somewhat better under him than under McNabb, despite all the same other issues still being present. i dont think i am the only one who has seen this.. there is a reference to an SI quote in another thread...
I think you can make an argument that the offense looked somewhat better than the McNabb norm under Grossman for the final 30 minutes against Dallass, but not for the first 30 minutes. But I don't think you can really say that the offense looked better at all against Jacksonville (251 net yards, 182 passing yards, a 60.0 passer rating, 26% efficiency on 3rd down, only 1 drive of 10 plays or more and a turnover in the red zone).

At present, this is a team without a QB. Moreover, that isn't the biggest definciency on offense. Personnel at every position and offensive play calling are bigger problems than McNabb or Grossman.

there is no reason what advancement of the QB position cannot go on in parallel with advancement of the line, receivers, etc..
That can happen, but usually it doesn't. It happened for Peyton Manning, but it didn't for most other star QBs (Brady, Brees, Rivers, etc). Usually, you build your team with a caretaker while you bring a young guy along. In our case, all we have are subpar caretakers, the price of one of whom actually retarded the development of the rest of the team around him.

shally

12-27-2010, 02:45 PM

I think you can make an argument that the offense looked somewhat better than the McNabb norm under Grossman for the final 30 minutes against Dallass, but not for the first 30 minutes. But I don't think you can really say that the offense looked better at all against Jacksonville (251 net yards, 182 passing yards, a 60.0 passer rating, 26% efficiency on 3rd down, only 1 drive of 10 plays or more and a turnover in the red zone).

At present, this is a team without a QB. Moreover, that isn't the biggest definciency on offense. Personnel at every position and offensive play calling are bigger problems than McNabb or Grossman.

That can happen, but usually it doesn't. It happened for Peyton Manning, but it didn't for most other star QBs (Brady, Brees, Rivers, etc). Usually, you build your team with a caretaker while you bring a young guy along. In our case, all we have are subpar caretakers, the price of one of whom actually retarded the development of the rest of the team around him.

we had about 30 % turnover last off season. based upon the numerous players going on IR to get a look at younger players, i would expect a similar rate of turnover this off season.. i cant prove it, but i believe it

having nothing but caretaker QB's is a recipe for disaster. between Elway and Plummer that is what Shanahan had (Brister/Gus/Griese) ..why would anyone think he would go away from his norm of a long term starter ?

i totally agree with you that changing from McNabb to Grossman has not solved anything- except perhaps showing what Grossman could do as a reserve/spot starter. but it has NOT been the abject disaster that several posters here have said it has been.

let's face it, when the 3 highest paid players on the team (Haynesworth/Portis/McNabb) have not been among the most productive players on the team (and that is putting it mildly) you have a major problem to address in the off season.. right now, at least 2 out of the 3 will be gone next year, and Portis will return only if he accepts a major cut in his contract and can get healthy.

we are a team in transition and that leads to spotty play most of the time.
but, as some posters have suggested, to fire the entire coaching staff and start anew is simply beyond ludicrous

we have a lot of work to do this off season

FunBunch5

12-27-2010, 02:58 PM

I think McNabb was an upgrade over Campbell. I thought he would be at the time too -- just not enough to warrant the deal. You get a guy like McNabb as the last piece, not the first piece. It was delusional for the FO to think that we were any better than an 8-8 team, even with an All-Pro QB.

McNabb has terrible short accuracy. Always has. His mechanics are for crap (he rarely follows through on his passes) and his footwork is even worse (he throws off of his back foot or doesn't shift his weight properly about half of the time). I can still see Brian Westbrook in my minds eye right now, slowing to a jog, arms flailing and a "WTF?" look in his eyes as McNabb once again misses him in the flat on a 4 yard pass. In that way, he's a lot like Campbell. The difference is that McNabb ismore mobile, is probably at least a marginally better leader and can throw a better deep ball than Campbell. I would certainly take Mcnabb over Campbell. But given where we were and what we had to give up? I couldn't justify it.

I have to give you and the few other posters that were saying this your props. I too thought McNabb was going to be a huge upgrade, but I remember posters like you showing stats that were equivalent. My mind said that makes sense, but my heart kept saying this is Donovan he is better.

nicefellow31

12-27-2010, 03:05 PM

having nothing but caretaker QB's is a recipe for disaster. between Elway and Plummer that is what Shanahan had (Brister/Gus/Griese) ..why would anyone think he would go away from his norm of a long term starter ?

we have a lot of work to do this off season

I sure hope that a "Plummer" like QB isn't what Shanny is looking for. Is he the measuring stick for a successful QB?

FunBunch5

12-27-2010, 03:06 PM

I sure hope that a "Plummer" like QB isn't what Shanny is looking for. Is he the measuring stick for a successful QB?

We already have Plummer like in Grossman, so I hope you are right and Plummer isn't the standard.

Keino

12-27-2010, 03:06 PM

I sure hope that a "Plummer" like QB isn't what Shanny is looking for. Is he the measuring stick for a successful QB?

And yet a caretaker would be a disaster? There is a reason I didn't bother responding....

lorimike

12-27-2010, 03:19 PM

We should resign Grossman and draft a project . Pat Devlin of Delaware or Ricky Stanzi of Iowa come to mind. Trade Cooley for a 2nd or 3.round pick. McNabb for a 5th rounder and Haynesworth for a 4th.

Round 1-C Mike Pouncey of Florida
Round 2- G/C Stefan Wisniewski of Penn State
Round 2( for Cooley)- Ricky Stanzi of Iowa
Round3- Best 3-4 OLB available
Round 4- Wideout or running back
Round 5- NT

justinskins

12-27-2010, 03:28 PM

We should resign Grossman

Or maybe it is Grossman who should resign. ;)

Arkangiest

12-27-2010, 03:32 PM

we had about 30 % turnover last off season. based upon the numerous players going on IR to get a look at younger players, i would expect a similar rate of turnover this off season.. i cant prove it, but i believe it

having nothing but caretaker QB's is a recipe for disaster. between Elway and Plummer that is what Shanahan had (Brister/Gus/Griese) ..why would anyone think he would go away from his norm of a long term starter ?

i totally agree with you that changing from McNabb to Grossman has not solved anything- except perhaps showing what Grossman could do as a reserve/spot starter. but it has NOT been the abject disaster that several posters here have said it has been.

let's face it, when the 3 highest paid players on the team (Haynesworth/Portis/McNabb) have not been among the most productive players on the team (and that is putting it mildly) you have a major problem to address in the off season.. right now, at least 2 out of the 3 will be gone next year, and Portis will return only if he accepts a major cut in his contract and can get healthy.

we are a team in transition and that leads to spotty play most of the time.
but, as some posters have suggested, to fire the entire coaching staff and start anew is simply beyond ludicrous

we have a lot of work to do this off season

This may be a bit of a dramatic post, but this is how I feel. I am passionate fan and I have to get this out of my system.

The Redskins have a lot of work to do this off season and the next 2 to 3 off seasons to even remotely have a chance at contending. I will never root for the Redskins to lose a game in favor of getting the better draft pick, but man...

This was as numb of a victory as the home opener last season over the Rams. Numb through the futility of The Washington Redskins coaching staff and terrible attrition of talent aquired from the draft.

The slew of wasted second round picks has clearly set this team back. I can't count how many 2nd rounders have been a waste or non-productive. Throw in Campbell and Rogers and you have 2 firsts.

I can't let myself fall into a pessimistic mindset like most of my friends. Some are actually giving up and quitting on the Redskins, its horrible.

We are so bad its sickening, and Snyder makes wrong decision after wrong decision. Its unbelievable! Watching REX FREAKING GROSSMAN lead our team literally makes me nauseated. I want to seriously vomit when I watch him drop back. Seeing Hasletts stupid face, and watching Kyle's complete garbage playcalling. I've heard it from Denver fans before and now I'm convinced that Mike's only high level success was because of a legend in John Elway.

Get a clue Snyder, give this team a super ex-lax and flush the crap down the toilet. Start with a real rebuilding draft class and NEW COACHING.

Yes it is ludicrous but after 1 season of rebuilding with Shanny I've already seen enough. Get a competent coaching staff. Not a clueless Zorn.

For the love of a higher being, let this f*cking team REBUILD!!!!!!!! GHAA!! REBUILD #$@ DAMNIT!

akhhorus

12-27-2010, 03:46 PM

we had about 30 % turnover last off season. based upon the numerous players going on IR to get a look at younger players, i would expect a similar rate of turnover this off season.. i cant prove it, but i believe it

having nothing but caretaker QB's is a recipe for disaster. between Elway and Plummer that is what Shanahan had (Brister/Gus/Griese) ..why would anyone think he would go away from his norm of a long term starter ?

i totally agree with you that changing from McNabb to Grossman has not solved anything- except perhaps showing what Grossman could do as a reserve/spot starter. but it has NOT been the abject disaster that several posters here have said it has been.

I'm still amazed that some people think that Grossman hasn't been a disaster for the skins. If McNabb had the performances that Grossman has, people would be pillorying him. For all the talk of "double standards" in this thread, people need to focus on the people who really have a changing standard for players.

let's face it, when the 3 highest paid players on the team (Haynesworth/Portis/McNabb) have not been among the most productive players on the team (and that is putting it mildly) you have a major problem to address in the off season.. right now, at least 2 out of the 3 will be gone next year, and Portis will return only if he accepts a major cut in his contract and can get healthy.

That really doesn't matter in an uncapped year, no?

This may be a bit of a dramatic post, but this is how I feel. I am passionate fan and I have to get this out of my system.

The Redskins have a lot of work to do this off season and the next 2 to 3 off seasons to even remotely have a chance at contending. I will never root for the Redskins to lose a game in favor of getting the better draft pick, but man...

This was as numb of a victory as the home opener last season over the Rams. Numb through the futility of The Washington Redskins coaching staff and terrible attrition of talent aquired from the draft.

The slew of wasted second round picks has clearly set this team back. I can't count how many 2nd rounders have been a waste or non-productive. Throw in Campbell and Rogers and you have 2 firsts.

I can't let myself fall into a pessimistic mindset like most of my friends. Some are actually giving up and quitting on the Redskins, its horrible.

We are so bad its sickening, and Snyder makes wrong decision after wrong decision. Its unbelievable! Watching REX FREAKING GROSSMAN lead our team literally makes me nauseated. I want to seriously vomit when I watch him drop back. Seeing Hasletts stupid face, and watching Kyle's complete garbage playcalling. I've heard it from Denver fans before and now I'm convinced that Mike's only high level success was because of a legend in John Elway.

Get a clue Snyder, give this team a super ex-lax and flush the crap down the toilet. Start with a real rebuilding draft class and NEW COACHING.

Yes it is ludicrous but after 1 season of rebuilding with Shanny I've already seen enough. Get a competent coaching staff. Not a clueless Zorn.

For the love of a higher being, let this f*cking team REBUILD!!!!!!!! GHAA!! REBUILD #$@ DAMNIT!

Great post Ark, but how dare you attack Grossman!! Don't you know that he's been fantastic for the skins! Or that he's been as good as McNabb! Or considering his salary, he's been a cost-effective option for the team! Or that we're just looking at backups for 2011 and Grossman has shown that he's the best backup in the NFL! /sarcasm.

BurgundyNGold

12-27-2010, 04:38 PM

we had about 30 % turnover last off season. based upon the numerous players going on IR to get a look at younger players, i would expect a similar rate of turnover this off season.. i cant prove it, but i believe it
I expect it too. Not so much because Shanny is all about turnover as much as 30% of this team probably shouldn't be on the roster of anyone who hopes to be a contender.

having nothing but caretaker QB's is a recipe for disaster. between Elway and Plummer that is what Shanahan had (Brister/Gus/Griese) ..why would anyone think he would go away from his norm of a long term starter ?
That's something that I think that Shanny has learned. He tried to do it with the retreads and realized that he could have some success, but that he likely wouldn't win the big game. Then he drafts Cutler, which shows that he can go both routes as a coach.

i totally agree with you that changing from McNabb to Grossman has not solved anything- except perhaps showing what Grossman could do as a reserve/spot starter. but it has NOT been the abject disaster that several posters here have said it has been.
I think the confusion on both sides of the issue stem around two important facts. First, the Redskins were a disaster before Grosman even took a snap. So the concept of disaster is relative. The second is that Redskins fans have learned to live with some pretty crappy play over the years to the point where merely adequate play is considered exceptional and subpar play can be rationalized as good. Given a long enough timeline, the playability of any QB approaches zero. The problem with Grossman is that the timeline is a lot shorter than average. The more data points we get, the more likely that you are not going to be on the favorable side of the results.

let's face it, when the 3 highest paid players on the team (Haynesworth/Portis/McNabb) have not been among the most productive players on the team (and that is putting it mildly) you have a major problem to address in the off season.. right now, at least 2 out of the 3 will be gone next year, and Portis will return only if he accepts a major cut in his contract and can get healthy.
As it should be. NFL stands for "Not For Long" when you don't produce.

we are a team in transition and that leads to spotty play most of the time. but, as some posters have suggested, to fire the entire coaching staff and start anew is simply beyond ludicrous
The problem is that we have been a team in transition for nearly 20 years now. 20 years. That's a freaking generation. I think you have people at wits end, and I can't blame them.

Personally, I think Haslett needs to go because he shouldn't have been hired. He's a C student, also-ran as a coach and always has been. Great guy? Sure, but that doesn't cut it.

As for K-Shanny, I'd give him one more year. Not so much to show that his system will work but to show me that he can learn from his mistakes. He clearly has aptitude, but his playcalling is so myopic that I'm begging for Odysseus to run onto the field and put us all out of his misery. He needs to learn balance and to properly engineer an offense and game plan that maximizes the talent he does have. In Houston, he could chuck it up to Andre Johnson 1/3 of the time. In DC, the receivers are nowhere near that caliber and are likely to drop the pass 1/3 of the time.

The mark of a true prodigy is genius. The mark of a true genius is the ability to think in abstract terms. Bullheadedness is the complete opposite of the abstract. Which is why I think that if K-Shanny doesn't adapt his offense to his personnel and spend a lot more time with the quality control coaches, ultimately, he'll be looking for a job in 2012. The question then becomes whether his dad will have given him his walking papers or is alongside him in the unemployment line.

we have a lot of work to do this off season
SOS lol

shally

12-27-2010, 04:43 PM

akhhorus

12-27-2010, 04:47 PM

actually it does matter in an uncapped year. players see who is getting paid and how they practice and perform.. it has a negative impact when you see what AH has done. i dont think that either CP or DM have had the same kind of negative impact, but you expect your highest paid players to be your most productive

Yes, but Haynesworth and McNabb were benched by the coaches and Portis popped a groin muscle. If they just sucked so much that they never got on the field, okay how much they're making is very relevant. Shanny had plenty of opportunities to ship Fat Albert out up until the trade deadline, then made a decision to just suspend him when Albert gave him the opening to do so. He ate the cash he's paying Haynesworth and it didn't penalize the team.

If there's a hard cap, then cost-benefit makes a lot of sense. Now I don't see how especially considering the situations.

shally

12-27-2010, 04:50 PM

I expect it too. Not so much because Shanny is all about turnover as much as 30% of this team probably shouldn't be on the roster of anyone who hopes to be a contender.

That's something that I think that Shanny has learned. He tried to do it with the retreads and realized that he could have some success, but that he likely wouldn't win the big game. Then he drafts Cutler, which shows that he can go both routes as a coach.

I think the confusion on both sides of the issue stem around two important facts. First, the Redskins were a disaster before Grosman even took a snap. So the concept of disaster is relative. The second is that Redskins fans have learned to live with some pretty crappy play over the years to the point where merely adequate play is considered exceptional and subpar play can be rationalized as good. Given a long enough timeline, the playability of any QB approaches zero. The problem with Grossman is that the timeline is a lot shorter than average. The more data points we get, the more likely that you are not going to be on the favorable side of the results.

As it should be. NFL stands for "Not For Long" when you don't produce.

The problem is that we have been a team in transition for nearly 20 years now. 20 years. That's a freaking generation. I think you have people at wits end, and I can't blame them.

Personally, I think Haslett needs to go because he shouldn't have been hired. He's a C student, also-ran as a coach and always has been. Great guy? Sure, but that doesn't cut it.

As for K-Shanny, I'd give him one more year. Not so much to show that his system will work but to show me that he can learn from his mistakes. He clearly has aptitude, but his playcalling is so myopic that I'm begging for Odysseus to run onto the field and put us all out of his misery. He needs to learn balance and to properly engineer an offense and game plan that maximizes the talent he does have. In Houston, he could chuck it up to Andre Johnson 1/3 of the time. In DC, the receivers are nowhere near that caliber and are likely to drop the pass 1/3 of the time.

The mark of a true prodigy is genius. The mark of a true genius is the ability to think in abstract terms. Bullheadedness is the complete opposite of the abstract. Which is why I think that if K-Shanny doesn't adapt his offense to his personnel and spend a lot more time with the quality control coaches, ultimately, he'll be looking for a job in 2012. The question then becomes whether his dad will have given him his walking papers or is alongside him in the unemployment line.

SOS lol
agree. agree. agree. agree..

i understand that we have been in transition for 20 years. that is Snyder's fault, and not Shanahan's. that is the reason that i think Shanahan deserves at least another full year to implement his system.
Kyle gets another year, as well. if Kyle produces the same erratic Offense next year, especially if there are upgrades to the line and receiver corps, then Mike may well be in the position of either removing his son or placing his entire regime in jeopardy.. but that is for another day, and another possible discussion. to say it has to happen after this year is a gross over reaction IMHO..
and to the likely profound disappointment of some posters here, it simply aint going to happen this year...

shally

12-27-2010, 04:54 PM

Yes, but Haynesworth and McNabb were benched by the coaches and Portis popped a groin muscle. If they just sucked so much that they never got on the field, okay how much they're making is very relevant. Shanny had plenty of opportunities to ship Fat Albert out up until the trade deadline, then made a decision to just suspend him when Albert gave him the opening to do so. He ate the cash he's paying Haynesworth and it didn't penalize the team.

If there's a hard cap, then cost-benefit makes a lot of sense. Now I don't see how especially considering the situations.

the damage that AH did is over and done, except to Snyder's wallet

CP's loss was due to losing his production and leadership and could not be helped

DM, i am not going to go into because i dont want to start another round of posts when we obviously see things differently, but i will say that DM has been classy and above reproach from a character point of view throughout the whole year. the ONLY issue i have with him is performance.

akhhorus

12-27-2010, 04:55 PM

agree. agree. agree. agree..

i understand that we have been in transition for 20 years. that is Snyder's fault, and not Shanahan's. that is the reason that i think Shanahan deserves at least another full year to implement his system.
Kyle gets another year, as well. if Kyle produces the same erratic Offense next year, especially if there are upgrades to the line and receiver corps, then Mike may well be in the position of either removing his son or placing his entire regime in jeopardy.. but that is for another day, and another possible discussion. to say it has to happen after this year is a gross over reaction IMHO..
and to the likely profound disappointment of some posters here, it simply aint going to happen this year...

If Shanny won't consider dumping K-Sh*tty for his performance this season, he isn't going to after next year or the year after that no matter how the offense performs. If he doesn't bring in Kubiak, even in some nebulous role, he's gone all in with his son and will hang with him at all costs.

the damage that AH did is over and done, except to Snyder's wallet

CP's loss was due to losing his production and leadership and could not be helped

DM, i am not going to go into because i dont want to start another round of posts when we obviously see things differently, but i will say that DM has been classy and above reproach from a character point of view throughout the whole year. the ONLY issue i have with him is performance.

I don't know what this has to do with the point at hand.

shally

12-27-2010, 04:59 PM

If Shanny won't consider dumping K-Sh*tty for his performance this season, he isn't going to after next year or the year after that no matter how the offense performs. If he doesn't bring in Kubiak, even in some nebulous role, he's gone all in with his son and will hang with him at all costs.

2 issues here

Mike wont do anything about Kyle's position this year. i would bet my house, but not my life on it

As to Kubiak, it will come down to whether he is available, what GK is looking to do next, how he can be fit into the coaching staff..I would LOVE to have him as another offensive mind, and honestly, i would have no problem replacing Kyle with Kubiak.. but again, i dont see 1% chance of that actually happening

shally

12-27-2010, 05:01 PM

If Shanny won't consider dumping K-Sh*tty for his performance this season, he isn't going to after next year or the year after that no matter how the offense performs. If he doesn't bring in Kubiak, even in some nebulous role, he's gone all in with his son and will hang with him at all costs.

I don't know what this has to do with the point at hand.

??????

if your 3 highest paid players arent productive, it hurts your team.. in this case it has been for 3 different reasons, but it STILL has hurt the team

what is so opaque about that ?

akhhorus

12-27-2010, 05:01 PM

2 issues here

Mike wont do anything about Kyle's position this year. i would bet my house, but not my life on it

As to Kubiak, it will come down to whether he is available, what GK is looking to do next, how he can be fit into the coaching staff..I would LOVE to have him as another offensive mind, and honestly, i would have no problem replacing Kyle with Kubiak.. but again, i dont see 1% chance of that actually happening

We'll know by what they do to fix the offense in the offseason. If they do little to change things, then Mike is all in with his son. He won't fire him except for sex tape, animal fighting ring or asking that the players call him Kandy Shanahan lol.

??????

if your 3 highest paid players arent productive, it hurts your team.. in this case it has been for 3 different reasons, but it STILL has hurt the team

what is so opaque about that ?

Nothing you said was a response to anything I said. If you take issue or agree with what I said about how Shanny made haynesworth a monetary sink hole(or POrtis/McNabb), then say so. I didn't see what your last response had to do with the issue at hand.

shally

12-27-2010, 05:03 PM

We'll know by what they do to fix the offense in the offseason. If they do little to change things, then Mike is all in with his son. He won't fire him except for sex tape, animal fighting ring or asking that the players call him Kandy Shanahan lol.

and on that, i fully agree with you...

skinsfan36

12-27-2010, 07:27 PM

This is the truth. No matter who the 2011 Qb(s) are, if they have the same WRs, Oline, playcalling: nothing is going to change.

this is a great point. center,a stud wr,a guard all need to be fixed.

and to others points.
when grossman scrambles
-its barealy going out of bounds
-hes getting sacked and may possibly fumble
-or its going to be an INT

FunBunch5

12-27-2010, 10:10 PM

This may be a bit of a dramatic post, but this is how I feel. I am passionate fan and I have to get this out of my system.

The Redskins have a lot of work to do this off season and the next 2 to 3 off seasons to even remotely have a chance at contending. I will never root for the Redskins to lose a game in favor of getting the better draft pick, but man...

This was as numb of a victory as the home opener last season over the Rams. Numb through the futility of The Washington Redskins coaching staff and terrible attrition of talent aquired from the draft.

The slew of wasted second round picks has clearly set this team back. I can't count how many 2nd rounders have been a waste or non-productive. Throw in Campbell and Rogers and you have 2 firsts.

I can't let myself fall into a pessimistic mindset like most of my friends. Some are actually giving up and quitting on the Redskins, its horrible.

We are so bad its sickening, and Snyder makes wrong decision after wrong decision. Its unbelievable! Watching REX FREAKING GROSSMAN lead our team literally makes me nauseated. I want to seriously vomit when I watch him drop back. Seeing Hasletts stupid face, and watching Kyle's complete garbage playcalling. I've heard it from Denver fans before and now I'm convinced that Mike's only high level success was because of a legend in John Elway.

Get a clue Snyder, give this team a super ex-lax and flush the crap down the toilet. Start with a real rebuilding draft class and NEW COACHING.

Yes it is ludicrous but after 1 season of rebuilding with Shanny I've already seen enough. Get a competent coaching staff. Not a clueless Zorn.

For the love of a higher being, let this f*cking team REBUILD!!!!!!!! GHAA!! REBUILD #$@ DAMNIT!

I am so tired of hearing what is in bold I want to puke. Tell me what did Elway ever win prior to Shanny? Before Shanny came along Elway was a media darling that was a loser. Shanny and Elway needed each other to win. Most of all they needed a running game that Shanny committed to building.

CNYSkinFan

12-27-2010, 10:21 PM

Yes, but Haynesworth and McNabb were benched by the coaches and Portis popped a groin muscle. If they just sucked so much that they never got on the field, okay how much they're making is very relevant. Shanny had plenty of opportunities to ship Fat Albert out up until the trade deadline, then made a decision to just suspend him when Albert gave him the opening to do so. He ate the cash he's paying Haynesworth and it didn't penalize the team.

If there's a hard cap, then cost-benefit makes a lot of sense. Now I don't see how especially considering the situations.
the whole cost benefit thing is such a false option when we are talking about this year. It is not like we dont have to pay mcnabb to hold a clipboard. He is still getting paid for this year.

Now if you want to argue that the Redskins can use their money better next season and Grossman is the starting qb you want, then the cost benefit analysis means something, right now it doesn't.

CNYSkinFan

12-27-2010, 10:23 PM

I am so tired of hearing what is in bold I want to puke. Tell me what did Elway ever win prior to Shanny? Before Shanny came along Elway was a media darling that was a loser. Shanny and Elway needed each other to win. Most of all they needed a running game that Shanny committed to building.
elway willed his teams to the superbowl before shanny came along only to fall to superior teams. Shanahan never sniffed the superbowl again after elway and davis left. I think it is an apt question to ask. Espescially since so many want to put so much trust in him based on his past successses, well we should really wonder what that record actually is.

FunBunch5

12-27-2010, 10:24 PM

elway willed his teams to the superbowl before shanny came along only to fall to superior teams. Shanahan never sniffed the superbowl again after elway and davis left. I think it is an apt question to ask. Espescially since so many want to put so much trust in him based on his past successses, well we should really wonder what that record actually is.

Did Mr Career QB rating of 79 win or did he not win a SB prior to Shanny?

CNYSkinFan

12-27-2010, 10:28 PM

Did Mr Career QB rating of 79 win or did he not win a SB prior to Shanny?
he won several afc titles. If all you want to talk about is superbowls you will have alot of people looking bad. Shanny not only did not win a superbopwl after elway, he never won an afc title either

FunBunch5

12-27-2010, 10:33 PM

he won several afc titles. If all you want to talk about is superbowls you will have alot of people looking bad. Shanny not only did not win a superbopwl after elway, he never won an afc title either

You still didn't answer my question. I have been hearing alot of Shanny wouldn't have won if it wasn't for Elway and I can say for a fact Elway never won before Shanny. In fact the Broncos never won before Shanny. There first SB victory Elway peformed mediocre, it was Terrell Davis who took the team on his shoulders. You know the RB that Shanny drafted and the RB that ran behind Shanny's zone blocking scheme. You may not like Shanny but it is disegenous to not give the guy credit. How many bad coaches win back to back SB?

BurgundyNGold

12-27-2010, 10:35 PM

Are you saying Akh is biased in favor of McNabb and have a double standard? I guess I am not the only one then.

No one is saying Grossman is The Answer, but to say he is way worse than McNabb?
LMAO. I think we just found Grossman's new nickname lol.

Arkangiest

12-28-2010, 02:12 AM

BurgundyandGold I must say post #92 is true blue goodness, the Odysseus reference was great. One of the finest posts I've read on here, you hit the nail on the head. Bullheadedness through and through, it's such a interesting dynamic to watch unfold as the pressure mounts. A polarity that affects so much in football and life in general.

I won't dare go on a Snyder bitching and moaning tangent here, as it is simply a waste of energy at this point. However it strikes me that the continuously awful decisions Snyder makes cyclically influences everything on this team in a bad way. I wonder if Snyder has placed a carton of vanilla ice cream in Kyles office yet...

Rex Grossman is truly "The Answer" and he isn't giving it back to Allen Iverson any time soon. He's the Answer of why I have been drinking late at night, wasting away.

Superstars don't come around very often Akh, we should appreciate the trust that K-Shan has bestowed upon "this" super bowl quarterback.

Speaking of appreciation I enjoy reading your weekly updates, as well as Shally. You guys are both awesome.

Things can only go up from here... I hope.

This has been my mantra every off-season for far too long. At this juncture all I can do is pray that Snyder cuts/trades the loose weight and figures out how to finally hire a genius.

Hr fan

12-28-2010, 07:10 AM

Thanks again Akh.

Just a question - since both Rex and Donovan will be on the 2011 FA market which one will command the most suitors/compensation?

akhhorus

12-28-2010, 08:22 AM

Thanks again Akh.

Just a question - since both Rex and Donovan will be on the 2011 FA market which one will command the most suitors/compensation?

McNabb. Rex was a UFA after last season and couldn't get any attention. Despite the wishful thinking about him here, I doubt that his market value has changed.

BurgundyNGold

12-28-2010, 08:46 AM

McNabb. Rex was a UFA after last season and couldn't get any attention. Despite the wishful thinking about him here, I doubt that his market value has changed.
Ironically, Jason Campbell having a better-than-expected season in Oakland will probably credibility to the notion that McNabb will do better wherever he goes than he's doing for the Redskins.

akhhorus

12-28-2010, 08:51 AM

Ironically, Jason Campbell having a better-than-expected season in Oakland will probably credibility to the notion that McNabb will do better wherever he goes than he's doing for the Redskins.

It certainly makes Fletcher Smith and Papa Shanny's jobs easier to find him a new team. I still think that packaging him with Haynesworth to a team that needs a 4-3 DT and a starting caliber QB(Minnesota, Seattle[Whitehurst was who we thought he was lol], Tennessee and Cincy could fall into that category) would be the best way to get maximize value.

CNYSkinFan

12-28-2010, 09:04 AM

You still didn't answer my question. I have been hearing alot of Shanny wouldn't have won if it wasn't for Elway and I can say for a fact Elway never won before Shanny. In fact the Broncos never won before Shanny. There first SB victory Elway peformed mediocre, it was Terrell Davis who took the team on his shoulders. You know the RB that Shanny drafted and the RB that ran behind Shanny's zone blocking scheme. You may not like Shanny but it is disegenous to not give the guy credit. How many bad coaches win back to back SB?
I am not saying he was a bad coach whebn he won the superbowls, I am saying he is bad now. The shanny supporters are the wone who bring up his record...so it is right to question it.

I believe what has happened to Shanny is the same thing that happens to alot of SB wqinning coaches not named belicheck or Gibbs. they win it all and get stuck in their ways believing they dont have to adapt their system or way of doing things for anyone. Several commentators have said Shanahan has been lookingfor the next elway since the last elway and is never satisfied wiht his qb, I htink the same can be said about RB as he is always looking for the next terrell davis. If you dont adapt in the nfl, you fail.

I think right now what is going on in DC is a perfect example of that

shally

12-28-2010, 09:26 AM

It certainly makes Fletcher Smith and Papa Shanny's jobs easier to find him a new team. I still think that packaging him with Haynesworth to a team that needs a 4-3 DT and a starting caliber QB(Minnesota, Seattle[Whitehurst was who we thought he was lol], Tennessee and Cincy could fall into that category) would be the best way to get maximize value.

there is simply NO way that both AH and DM go to the same team.. together, they would command an enormous amount of salary with considerable risk based upon their past histories.. talk about rolling the dice !
i dont see that happening

based upon the sentiment in Seattle, i can tell you there is no way and older qb is going to be brought in. Hasselbeck has become brittle and injury prone. they wont go after another gimpy qb. Carroll will either draft a qb
or might go after Leinhart or Carson Palmer

nicefellow31

12-28-2010, 09:32 AM

there is simply NO way that both AH and DM go to the same team.. together, they would command an enormous amount of salary with considerable risk based upon their past histories.. talk about rolling the dice !
i dont see that happening

based upon the sentiment in Seattle, i can tell you there is no way and older qb is going to be brought in. Hasselbeck has become brittle and injury prone. they wont go after another gimpy qb. Carroll will either draft a qb
or might go after Leinhart or Carson Palmer

While he might not be gimpy, Carson Palmer's arm is damaged. I wonder if he regrets not having Tommy John surgery that was recommended two seasons ago. Now back to our Redskins discussion.

shally

12-28-2010, 09:34 AM

While he might not be gimpy, Carson Palmer's arm is damaged. I wonder if he regrets not having Tommy John surgery that was recommended two seasons ago. Now back to our Redskins discussion.

i have wondered the same thing.. i am not sure if it is arm, or his Mojo that was damaged.. he has not looked the same since his knee injury against Pittsburgh

BurgundyNGold

12-28-2010, 09:53 AM

there is simply NO way that both AH and DM go to the same team.. together, they would command an enormous amount of salary with considerable risk based upon their past histories.. talk about rolling the dice !
i dont see that happening

based upon the sentiment in Seattle, i can tell you there is no way and older qb is going to be brought in. Hasselbeck has become brittle and injury prone. they wont go after another gimpy qb. Carroll will either draft a qb
or might go after Leinhart or Carson Palmer
I'm not so sure about Carroll wanting Leinart. Didn't he have a chance to go after this offseason him once Leinart got cut by Arizona?

akhhorus

12-28-2010, 10:17 AM

there is simply NO way that both AH and DM go to the same team.. together, they would command an enormous amount of salary with considerable risk based upon their past histories.. talk about rolling the dice !
i dont see that happening

Haynesworth is essentially owed 21 mil over 3 years if he's dealt. You have McNabb on a relatively cheap deal also. Certainly cheaper than a top 4 rookie contract, what Mike Vick will command on the open market or a more talented QB than McNabb will demand if they dealt for him. If I'm looking for help at either position that sounds pretty cheap. Minny would be saving about 5-6 million if they let Pat Williams walk and Favre get back to his t-mobile contract for Fat Albert and McNabb lol.

based upon the sentiment in Seattle, i can tell you there is no way and older qb is going to be brought in. Hasselbeck has become brittle and injury prone. they wont go after another gimpy qb. Carroll will either draft a qb or might go after Leinhart or Carson Palmer

I doubt they draft someone with Charlie "Pete Carroll should have looked at the tapes of him at Clemson" Whitehurst on the roster. They passed on Leinart when he was cut last offseason. McNabb(or the McNabb/Fat Albert package) would make a lot of sense for them.

FunBunch5

12-28-2010, 11:22 AM

I am not saying he was a bad coach whebn he won the superbowls, I am saying he is bad now. The shanny supporters are the wone who bring up his record...so it is right to question it.

I believe what has happened to Shanny is the same thing that happens to alot of SB wqinning coaches not named belicheck or Gibbs. they win it all and get stuck in their ways believing they dont have to adapt their system or way of doing things for anyone. Several commentators have said Shanahan has been lookingfor the next elway since the last elway and is never satisfied wiht his qb, I htink the same can be said about RB as he is always looking for the next terrell davis. If you dont adapt in the nfl, you fail.

I think right now what is going on in DC is a perfect example of that

I don't think he is necessarily bad now as much as he took over a bad situation. I also don't think he is stuck in his ways, that is why he worked with the Steeler organization and decided it was better to move to a 3-4. He definitely has gotten off to a bad start, so I understand why you want him gone. I will know if he is truly as stubborn as you think, if he decides we can win the Grossman and he is our next years starter. If that happens I will be where you are regarding moving on (unless of course Grossman finds his inner Rich Gannon and turns it around).

CNYSkinFan

12-28-2010, 11:25 AM

I don't think he is necessarily bad now as much as he took over a bad situation. I also don't think he is stuck in his ways, that is why he worked with the Steeler organization and decided it was better to move to a 3-4. He definitely has gotten off to a bad start, so I understand why you want him gone. I will know if he is truly as stubborn as you think, if he decides we can win the Grossman and he is our next years starter. If that happens I will be where you are regarding moving on (unless of course Grossman finds his inner Rich Gannon and turns it around).
I really hope he is not so delusional as think that Grossman is the answer. MY fear is that we trade the farm to get a rookie qb and keep grossman and Kyle does the same tank job to the rookie as he did to McNabb.

akhhorus

12-28-2010, 11:32 AM

I really hope he is not so delusional as think that Grossman is the answer. MY fear is that we trade the farm to get a rookie qb and keep grossman and Kyle does the same tank job to the rookie as he did to McNabb.

This is why I keep saying that McNabb/Grossman doesn't matter. If the reports are true about Kyle's role in all this, the Skins have bigger problems than McNabb or Grossman. We have Gregg Williams under Gibbs 2.0.

shally

12-28-2010, 11:46 AM

This is why I keep saying that McNabb/Grossman doesn't matter. If the reports are true about Kyle's role in all this, the Skins have bigger problems than McNabb or Grossman. We have Gregg Williams under Gibbs 2.0.

not to hi jack the thread, but i thought that Williams did a superb job last night against the Falcon offense.. great game. came away with a lot of respect for both teams.. but especially for the Saints

FunBunch5

12-28-2010, 11:46 AM

This is why I keep saying that McNabb/Grossman doesn't matter. If the reports are true about Kyle's role in all this, the Skins have bigger problems than McNabb or Grossman. We have Gregg Williams under Gibbs 2.0.

Unfortunately even if Kubiak becomes available, Shanny will not get rid of his son. By the time MS is ready to get rid of Kyle the ship will already be to far sunk to recover.

justinskins

12-28-2010, 11:47 AM

akhhorus

12-28-2010, 11:52 AM

not to hi jack the thread, but i thought that Williams did a superb job last night against the Falcon offense.. great game. came away with a lot of respect for both teams.. but especially for the Saints

Williams when he doesn't have the Blache brainslug on him is a certified genius of a coach. The problem was that he had the Blache brainslug on his head and Gibbs let him make personnel decisions like signing Arch deluxe even when his agent is telling Williams that he would be a disaster in his defense.

Unfortunately even if Kubiak becomes available, Shanny will not get rid of his son. By the time MS is ready to get rid of Kyle the ship will already be to far sunk to recover.

We'll know this offseason. If they don't do much to help this offense, then we'll know that Mike is rising or falling with his son. If they go out and get Kubiak as a "consultant" or as a random assistant head coach, or they go out and make major changes to the offense personnel-wise, K-sh*tty is on thin ice.

shally

12-28-2010, 11:55 AM

Williams when he doesn't have the Blache brainslug on him is a certified genius of a coach. The problem was that he had the Blache brainslug on his head and Gibbs let him make personnel decisions like signing Arch deluxe even when his agent is telling Williams that he would be a disaster in his defense.

We'll know this offseason. If they don't do much to help this offense, then we'll know that Mike is rising or falling with his son. If they go out and get Kubiak as a "consultant" or as a random assistant head coach, or they go out and make major changes to the offense personnel-wise, K-sh*tty is on thin ice.

i think the will make changes t the offensive personnel this off season and Kyle will benefit form those changes, rather than resist them happening

regardless of who is playing QB, we need to upgrade our offensive personnel- except at tight end...

Patrick

12-28-2010, 11:58 AM

i think the will make changes t the offensive personnel this off season and Kyle will benefit form those changes, rather than resist them happening

regardless of who is playing QB, we need to upgrade our offensive personnel- except at tight end... Would not exempt TE either

akhhorus

12-28-2010, 12:01 PM

i think the will make changes t the offensive personnel this off season and Kyle will benefit form those changes, rather than resist them happening

Making major changes is admitting that things were failing this year either with McNabb or Grossman. Unfortunately I think that the Shanahans are stubborn enough to refuse to admit problems just to save face.

regardless of who is playing QB, we need to upgrade our offensive personnel- except at tight end...

I agree, but I have a dread feeling that we'll roll into 2011 with very little changed from the offense personnel which took the field on sunday.

justinskins

12-28-2010, 12:08 PM

i think the will make changes t the offensive personnel this off season and Kyle will benefit form those changes, rather than resist them happening.

At this point I don't think making offensive personnel changes is enough. It's time to blow up the team; trade anyone and everyone who can be traded, stock up on draft picks, and rebuild over the next 2-3 years.

akhhorus

12-28-2010, 12:15 PM

At this point I don't think making offensive personnel changes is enough. It's time to blow up the team; trade anyone and everyone who can be traded, stock up on draft picks, and rebuild over the next 2-3 years.

Agreed. I would keep Armstrong, Trent Williams, Davis or Cooley and Jamaal Brown on the offense: everyone else can go.

BurgundyNGold

12-28-2010, 12:30 PM

+1. How many Super Bowls have the Skins won since Williams left?
Really?

justinskins

12-28-2010, 12:32 PM

Really?

I'm just not buying heavy criticism of a guy whose defense picked off Peyton Manning in the Super Bowl, and took it to the house to seal the win.

BurgundyNGold

12-28-2010, 12:36 PM

Williams when he doesn't have the Blache brainslug on him is a certified genius of a coach. The problem was that he had the Blache brainslug on his head and Gibbs let him make personnel decisions like signing Arch deluxe even when his agent is telling Williams that he would be a disaster in his defense.
The problem is Williams has never been his intellect, it's been his ego. Given enough time, he will decimate the talent on the Saints to suit his own brand of play. Not to mention that he rarely game plans to take away the other team's best player nor does he make adjustments. He enjoys maknig those decisions mano-a-mano on a play-by-play basis. His game plan gonikf into any given game is essentially the same every week. Because he believes that he canot be outmatched during the game. To me, that kind of hubris is what has (and will invariably once again) do him in.

Still, if you have to give one thing to Williams it's that he preaches physcial cornerback play. We have the antithesis of that here in Haslett. Notice the difference.

BurgundyNGold

12-28-2010, 12:38 PM

I'm just not buying heavy criticism of a guy whose defense picked off Peyton Manning in the Super Bowl, and took it to the house to seal the win.
One play? Really?

justinskins

12-28-2010, 12:39 PM

Given enough time, he will decimate the talent on the Saints to suit his own brand of play.

That's assuming his GM & HC will let him do that. He's a good DC, not necessarily a good personnel guy. Maybe he just needed a shorter leash here. Which goes back to the dysfunctional character of the organization as a whole...

One play? Really?

One play is enough if you win the Super Bowl. But that defense had been a turnover machine all year. And as Shally pointed out, they certainly did a gritty job vs. the Falcons last night.

CNYSkinFan

12-28-2010, 12:39 PM

I'm just not buying heavy criticism of a guy whose defense picked off Peyton Manning in the Super Bowl, and took it to the house to seal the win.
the problem is here he was definitely given too much power. The Ass hc title made him think he was heir apparent. I also theink Gregg learned from his mistakes here and you dont see the drama he had with players like Lavar and Pierce in NO. He learned his system is not greater then the players and he can not just pick a guy up and fit him into his system (he learned that with Arch). Don't forget I think ST's death transformed alot of the coaches on the roster and made GW a better coach because he could not rely on ST over the top making up for bad calls, schemes, players

akhhorus

12-28-2010, 12:39 PM

The problem is Williams has never been his intellect, it's been his ego. Given enough time, he will decimate the talent on the Saints to suit his own brand of play. Not to mention that he rarely game plans to take away the other team's best player nor does he make adjustments. He enjoys maknig those decisions mano-a-mano on a play-by-play basis. His game plan gonikf into any given game is essentially the same every week. Because he believes that he canot be outmatched during the game. To me, that kind of hubris is what has (and will invariably once again) do him in.

Absolutely, but his major problem in DC was that he started trying to coach a system he didn't know-the cover-2-while trying to work in his cover-1 blitz packages and what was in retrospect a weak pass rushing defensive line. If you give him a 46 defense and tell him to kick the QB in the nuts(which is basically what Peyton is asking him to do), his ego will cause issues, but he'll get the job done(for the most part).

Still, if you have to give one thing to Williams it's that he preaches physcial cornerback play. We have the antithesis of that here in Haslett. Notice the difference.

I'd love to have seen what Williams could have done with Haynesworth, Orakpo, Jarmon, Carter, Jackson, Chris Wilson, Hall and Landry at SS.

BurgundyNGold

12-28-2010, 12:46 PM

That's assuming his GM & HC will let him do that. He's a good DC, not necessarily a good personnel guy. Maybe he just needed a shorter leash here. Which goes back to the dysfunctional character of the organization as a whole...
In the end, every DC decides who comes in, who stays and who goes from the talent that is provided. Granted, if talent is provided, it's a whole lot harder to screw those calls up. The length of the leash might have been part of the problem here, but the depth and general arsenic levels of the talent well probably had a good deal to do with it too.

One play is enough if you win the Super Bowl. But that defense had been a turnover machine all year. And as Shally pointed out, they certainly did a gritty job vs. the Falcons last night.
That's the only thing that kept them in a whole lot of games, honestly. That defense last year ranked near the bottom of the league in both YPG and PPG. Make no mistake, it was the Saints offense that got them to the Superbowl and that had them ahead even before the INT.

BurgundyNGold

12-28-2010, 12:49 PM

Absolutely, but his major problem in DC was that he started trying to coach a system he didn't know-the cover-2-while trying to work in his cover-1 blitz packages and what was in retrospect a weak pass rushing defensive line. If you give him a 46 defense and tell him to kick the QB in the nuts(which is basically what Peyton is asking him to do), his ego will cause issues, but he'll get the job done(for the most part).
I put that squarely on the shoulders of Williams. He's the one who decided to implement and then almost exclusively play a crappy scheme. If he didn't play the 46 sets -- which he was hired for and that we all were begging and screaming for -- that's his own bad decision.

I'd love to have seen what Williams could have done with Haynesworth, Orakpo, Jarmon, Carter, Jackson, Chris Wilson, Hall and Landry at SS.
With the Redskins? Play a Tampa 2 base set lol.

nicefellow31

12-28-2010, 12:51 PM

+1. How many Super Bowls have the Skins won since Williams left?

Heck man, how many Super Bowls have the Skins won since Petitbone, Ron Lynn, Mike Nolan, Marvin Lewis, George Edwards, & Greg Blache left?

justinskins

12-28-2010, 12:53 PM

Heck man, how many Super Bowls have the Skins won since Petitbone, Ron Lynn, Mike Nolan, Marvin Lewis, George Edwards, & Greg Blache left?

What I was trying to get at is that Williams ended up with a ring, we didn't.

akhhorus

12-28-2010, 12:55 PM

I put that squarely on the shoulders of Williams. He's the one who decided to implement and then almost exclusively play a crappy scheme. If he didn't play the 46 sets -- which he was hired for and that we all were begging and screaming for -- that's his own bad decision.

I'm not absolving him. He made the decision to listen to Blacha Wormtongue in the first place.

With the Redskins? Play a Tampa 2 base set lol.

With a 46.

nicefellow31

12-28-2010, 12:58 PM

What I was trying to get at is that Williams ended up with a ring, we didn't.

So did Mark Brunell, Pierson Prioleau, Leigh Torrence, & Chase Daniel. LOL

shally

12-28-2010, 01:07 PM

So did Mark Brunell, Pierson Prioleau, Leigh Torrence, & Chase Daniel. LOL

did you see how much shorter Daniel is than Brees last night ? standing next to each other there are at least a couple inches difference in height.. if Brees is just about 6' Daniel is about 5' 10".. he really is short

BurgundyNGold

12-28-2010, 03:59 PM

I'm not absolving him. He made the decision to listen to Blacha Wormtongue in the first place.

With a 46.
I can't get too much behind that line of thinking. It was Williams who recruited Archuleta. It was Williams who let Pierce and Clark go. It was Williams who continued the neglect along the DL for 4 years (which makes me think that we never would have gone after AH, Orakpo or Jarmon if he were still here). It was also Williams who set up this Cover 2 base set that we still use far too much for my tastes. Much of what we are now is still resultant from Williams' ego trip.

shally

12-28-2010, 04:16 PM

I can't get too much behind that line of thinking. It was Williams who recruited Archuleta. It was Williams who let Pierce and Clark go. It was Williams who continued the neglect along the DL for 4 years (which makes me think that we never would have gone after AH, Orakpo or Jarmon if he were still here). It was also Williams who set up this Cover 2 base set that we still use far too much for my tastes. Much of what we are now is still resultant from Williams' ego trip.

Honest questions:

is Williams a better DC now ? has he changed his thinking ? is is just that he has better players with the Saints ?

nicefellow31

12-28-2010, 05:07 PM

Honest questions:

is Williams a better DC now ? has he changed his thinking ? is is just that he has better players with the Saints ?

I don't know if he is a better DC now but he definitely has a better offense that capitalizes on opponents turnovers and puts points on the board. Makes the defense look a little bit better.

BurgundyNGold

12-28-2010, 06:17 PM

Honest questions:

is Williams a better DC now ? has he changed his thinking ? is is just that he has better players with the Saints ?
I think he's learned some lessons fromhis time here, but as near as I can tell, he's very much the same. He still doesn't seem to prepare week to week for each opponent, but that seems to be a dying art. From what I've seen still plays more of that Cover 2 crap than he should. It's a liability for him because it's the polar opposite of his 46 stuff, which has always been his best stuff.

BurgundyNGold

12-28-2010, 06:20 PM

I don't know if he is a better DC now but he definitely has a better offense that capitalizes on opponents turnovers and puts points on the board. Makes the defense look a little bit better.
Absolutely true.

skinsfan36

12-28-2010, 09:43 PM

[QUOTE=akhhorus;1364811With a 46.[/QUOTE]

wow that could of been a super bowl d

SkinKing

12-29-2010, 01:25 PM

I'm still amazed that some people think that Grossman hasn't been a disaster for the skins. If McNabb had the performances that Grossman has, people would be pillorying him. For all the talk of "double standards" in this thread, people need to focus on the people who really have a changing standard for players.

You make a great point AKH. Personally, I think it's not fair to grade their performances the same. The expectations for McNabb were far greater than for Grossman. We all knew what we had in Grossman, good sometimes, bad the other times. But for McNabb, we gave up a lot hoping he would perform like a 6 time pro bowler. I think what people are seeing in Grossman is about the same level as McNabb which surprises some people.

I agree with some people that Grossman can be a servicable backup. He is 1-1 as a starter and could easily be 2-0 or 0-2. The McNabb experiment is clearly over and rightfully so. The man just didn't produce like he has in the past. Comparing the stats of both QB's is like apples to oranges. We didn't give up anything for Grossman but gave up future picks for McNabb. And for both to perform the same, well thats just a knock on McNabb.

shally

12-29-2010, 01:29 PM

You make a great point AKH. Personally, I think it's not fair to grade their performances the same. The expectations for McNabb were far greater than for Grossman. We all knew what we had in Grossman, good sometimes, bad the other times. But for McNabb, we gave up a lot hoping he would perform like a 6 time pro bowler. I think what people are seeing in Grossman is about the same level as McNabb which surprises some people.

I agree with some people that Grossman can be a servicable backup. He is 1-1 as a starter and could easily be 2-0 or 0-2. The McNabb experiment is clearly over and rightfully so. The man just didn't produce like he has in the past. Comparing the stats of both QB's is like apples to oranges. We didn't give up anything for Grossman but gave up future picks for McNabb. And for both to perform the same, well thats just a knock on McNabb.

Some rumors reported at the WaPo that negotiations to re sign Grossman are either starting or will start..

despite the controversy, he is likely to be the back up next year, along with Beck who has another year left onhis deal.

we will be drafting a QB, if that is the case, because it makes little sense to sign Grossman and another vet (such as Bulger or trade for Orton) and keep Beck without having the young QB on the bench learning next year..

SkinKing

12-29-2010, 01:31 PM

Lacquer Head

12-29-2010, 01:32 PM

I always loved G. Williams schemes, he was so fun to watch in D.C.

SkinsfaninNJ

12-29-2010, 01:36 PM

I was thinking About G. Williams a few weeks ago while watching the Saints play. What if the directive to play a more conservative, bend but don't break Tampa 2 after 2004 came from Gibbs? I have no idea, but Gibbs was much more conservative in Gibbs II. Williams changed back to an aggressive coach awfully quick.

akhhorus

12-29-2010, 01:38 PM

Some rumors reported at the WaPo that negotiations to re sign Grossman are either starting or will start..

despite the controversy, he is likely to be the back up next year, along with Beck who has another year left onhis deal.

we will be drafting a QB, if that is the case, because it makes little sense to sign Grossman and another vet (such as Bulger or trade for Orton) and keep Beck without having the young QB on the bench learning next year..

Orton won't be a placeholder for a rookie imo. If I'm Grossman, I wait and hit the open market.

I was thinking About G. Williams a few weeks ago while watching the Saints play. What if the directive to play a more conservative, bend but don't break Tampa 2 after 2004 came from Gibbs? I have no idea, but Gibbs was much more conservative in Gibbs II. Williams changed back to an aggressive coach awfully quick.

I don't think it was Gibbs. They ran the same defense(with some of the old players like Daniels, Walt Harris and Holdman) that Blache ran in Chicago: a cover-2 without a pass rushing line.

SkinsfaninNJ

12-29-2010, 02:17 PM

Orton won't be a placeholder for a rookie imo. If I'm Grossman, I wait and hit the open market.

I don't think it was Gibbs. They ran the same defense(with some of the old players like Daniels, Walt Harris and Holdman) that Blache ran in Chicago: a cover-2 without a pass rushing line.

I have no doubt Blache had a hand in it, and probably was the guy at the white board doing the X's and O's in the offseason (you know Blache is too old school for video). While I am no expert on Williams' career, I would bet that if you look at his Tenn. days, his Buffalo days, his Wash days and his Saints days, 2006 and 2007 stick out like a sore thumb when looking at stats like blitz percentage, two deep safety coverages, etc. I have a hard time believing the decision to change from everything he was and has ever been as a play caller was made by someone other than a supervisor.

akhhorus

12-29-2010, 06:58 PM

I have no doubt Blache had a hand in it, and probably was the guy at the white board doing the X's and O's in the offseason (you know Blache is too old school for video). While I am no expert on Williams' career, I would bet that if you look at his Tenn. days, his Buffalo days, his Wash days and his Saints days, 2006 and 2007 stick out like a sore thumb when looking at stats like blitz percentage, two deep safety coverages, etc. I have a hard time believing the decision to change from everything he was and has ever been as a play caller was made by someone other than a supervisor.

Considering how much leeway Gibbs gave him on personnel, I don't know if I could buy Gibbs encouraging him to play a certain defense. Especially after the defense played extremely well in the cover-1 in 2004 and 2005.