WP: Portis and Mitchell put the Redskins on blast

[crabbypatty]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dc-sports-bog/wp/2016/12/20/clinton-portis-redskins-have-too-many-nice-guys-not-enough-jerks/?utm_term=.7915cd1d6264

 

WOW. These guys are pissed, and I can't say I blame them for speaking their minds. I've posted on here several times how we need some firebreathers on this team, and was basically told I was an idiot, there was nothing wrong with the players, everything was just fine and I was stupid for wanting some angry playmakers, because that's not "today's NFL"

here's some snippets from the article:

 

“We don’t have those guys,” he said. “We don’t have any of these players. The players we have, when you look at Preston Smith, he’s a nice guy. So humble, so relaxed. He don’t have the spark. He’s not an angry guy. When you look at Kerrigan, he’s not an angry guy. Murphy. They’re all friendly guys. If I need a man to be in my wedding, those are the guys I want to walk down the aisle with. C’mon. They’re friendly. I love ’em. But you need tough guys. You need more dogs. You need more jerks. You need more troublemakers. You need that.

 

 

“There are guys that you watch them week in and week out, and it doesn’t seem like they give a damn, and it doesn’t seem like their coaches give a damn,” Mitchell said. “I’m watching guys on the football field that are playing horrible, and the coaches don’t shake up anything.”

“Hold on, hold on, so I can help the listeners,” Portis interrupted. “You just said there’s guys on the field that’s playing like they don’t give a damn. But you said that as a general statement. I’m going to include the names of those guys: Shawn Lauvao, Spencer Long, Donte Whitner, Vernon Davis when it comes to blocking, Ziggy Hood when it comes to [garbled].”

“I totally agree with all those names,” Mitchell said.

 

Spencer Long is a surprise name I didn't expect to see on a list of slackers..

 

Discuss.

[Koolblue13]

So you can't play good tough football, without being an asshole?

 

That's absurd.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

9 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

So you can't play good tough football, without being an asshole?

 

That's absurd.

I'm not sure that's true, but it would have been nice to have some assholes on the field on Monday night, rather than the befuddled, oh shucks looks we were getting from the guys we do have.

[Koolblue13]

9 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I'm not sure that's true, but it would have been nice to have some assholes on the field on Monday night, rather than the befuddled, oh shucks looks we were getting from the guys we do have.

I don't think that has anything to do with guys being assholes. Trent's an asshole and we've seen him slack off. Whitner is a well known asshole and here he is.

[Wildbunny]

20 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

So you can't play good tough football, without being an asshole?

 

That's absurd.

I believe you have To be nasty and tough on the field and you can be Nice off the field. This isn't exclusive To me.

[DM72]

I saw this yesterday and I agreed with every word. I might have to agree when Stephen A says, "you need a few rough riders." Particularly on defense. 

 

Portis and BMitch saw the exact same thing we saw. A team that got PUNKED!!!

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Defense is channeled, disciplined aggression. That doesn't require being an asshole. Will Compton isn't gonna suddenly start tackling better or taking better angles because he became a big ol' meannie.

 

What's needed are defensive players who are smarter, more talented and faster...

[superozman]

I heard Portis on the way out of the stadium.  And I think here is the issue:

 

D. Hall was a captain for a reason.  He brought that and players recognized that.  Compton, while having his limitations, brought that.  Norman Brings that.  I'd say Swaggy as well.  The other 7?  Not so much.  You need a mix.  With DHall out, Compton Out, Norman having nothing thrown his way, and Swaggy's job to eat up blocks a lot of times - that leaves the aforementioned players left.

 

On offense, Kirk is a nice guy with his moments.  Our RB's aren't vocal to demand the ball, our lineman seem to like pass blocking more than run blocking.  Garcon plays nasty, JReed plays nasty.  

 

I think in general - you need some people who will pull the best out of others.  Who will pull the best out of the team.  Who arne't shy in taking people under their wings.  I love Kirk, but i know with Kirk, there needs to be another vocal leader on offense which we lack.

[skinzplay]

Team came out on Monday night completely flat, both in terms of attitude/performance and gameplan. That's on the coaches. Every last one of them.

 

As far as the comments by Portis and BMitch, I agree to an extent. Would I rather have Reverend Thrash or a guy like Dez as my wideout. Easy answer. But players don't have to be thugs to be effective. Good coaching can bring out the nasty when the nasty needs to rear its head.

 

Love what Portis said about Kerrigan (and Kerrigan is one of my favorite Redskins). But damn, really......how many times is he going to be sucked into that play time and time again?

[Koolblue13]

46 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

I believe you have To be nasty and tough on the field and you can be Nice off the field. This isn't exclusive To me.

I agree with that.

[tshile]

Mitchell can say whatever he wants.

 

Portis and Cooley?

 

Portis worked to get his friends on the team, pouted when he didn't get special treatment, and in general abused having a personal relationship with the owner. Portis brought it every sunday, and I loved watching him hit people. Portis on the field on Sunday I loved. Portis in the locker room during the week? Not so much.

 

Cooley has admitted he didn't put much/enough effort into football for much of his career. His biggest reflection on his career, since starting his radio show, seems to have been that he didn't start to appreciate, understand, and put in the required work until very late in his career, and then it was gone.

 

While those two were majority of the good players for early 2000's redskins, neither were on any redskins teams that were anything more than overrated fools gold.

 

I like both of them in their current roles and I liked both as players but I don't need them to tell me what a football team is supposed to be, because neither were on a team that acted or was built the way it was supposed to be. And one of them actively worked to make it that way.

[kleese]

This is the same BS that BMitch always spews. Doc says similar things. Many ex players do. They trot out the they aren't tough enough/fiery enough stuff whenever things go south. They need "fire breathers" or "junkyard dogs."

 

Well, when BMitch was playing was he one of those guys? 

 

If so why didn't he breathe more fire when we went 4-12 in 1993 or 3-13 in 1994. Maybe he should have screamed louder when we went 6-10 in 1995 or when we choked down the stretch in 1996 and 1997. Or maybe he could have thrown some chairs when we started 0-7 in 1998? 

 

This is a tired take. 

 

 

[tshile]

1 minute ago, kleese said:

Well, when BMitch was playing was he one of those guys?

 

 

Yes... you didn't know that?

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

I don't think they actually meant we need guys with police records or that step on guys throats.  I think the point is that you just don't see any rah-rah type of emotion out of anyone on either side of the ball.  I would like to think guys who have played professional football before know better than us as to whether this is a needed element.  Honestly, when is the last time you saw a big hit?  Other than the hit on Sproles that wasn't intentional.  I seem to recall Whitner laying the wood back in the day but he can't seem to get close enough to pop someone anymore.  When was the last time you saw someone kirking out on the sideline trying to get the guys jacked up? 

[MassSkinsFan]

My personal experience was that being nasty on the field helped me be nice off it. 

 

As far as the coaches go, I'm not sure what to say, as I have limited personal experience. I had 5 HCse. Two were kind of average, not super-emotional, but also not too quiet. Those two teams could and did get riled up, but not for every game. I had one who had a slow-burning simmer going all the time, with occasional outbursts. His intensity was something to behold, and he could get us fired up without showing much emotion or making too much of a scene. He got the team going for every game. Of all the coaches, he was the one the team played hardest for, the one you'd sacrifice whatever you had for, since he was best at making us feel and think like one team. Another was a heart-on-your-sleeve coach who gave the best locker room speeches of all of them. He would scream, cry, run around, get people chanting, whatever it took to get the team into a semi-trance/heightened adrenaline state going out of the locker room. That was the only team I was on that went undefeated, but we arguably had the most talent of all of them. Lastly, there was the HC who was a limp fish. No emotion, never angry, never excited, never anything. When we took the field it felt like going to work - punch the clock and catch up with the guys by the water cooler. That was the worst team I was on and the worst football experience. In that instance it was definitely on the coach - even if it made him uncomfortable, he needed to find a way to get the team up for the games, and he didn't. 

 

I wonder what Gruden's locker room and practice field style is. Does anyone have insight/firsthand experience?

[kleese]

Just now, tshile said:

 

Yes... you didn't know that?

That's my point. He was obviously horrible at it then. BMitch was a team leader during an absolutely miserable stretch of seasons for the Redskjns-- ten times worse than what we see now. 

[tshile]

Just now, kleese said:

That's my point. He was obviously horrible at it then. BMitch was a team leader during an absolutely miserable stretch of seasons for the Redskjns-- ten times worse than what we see now. 

 

You want to compare a time of coaching carosells and a very old roster, with an owner that was in poor health, eventually died, and team sat in limbo for years waiting for it to be sold, and then completely gutted by the current owner... to now?

 

OK.

 

[goskins10]

46 minutes ago, skinzplay said:

Team came out on Monday night completely flat, both in terms of attitude/performance and gameplan. That's on the coaches. Every last one of them.

 

As far as the comments by Portis and BMitch, I agree to an extent. Would I rather have Reverend Thrash or a guy like Dez as my wideout. Easy answer. But players don't have to be thugs to be effective. Good coaching can bring out the nasty when the nasty needs to rear its head.

 

Love what Portis said about Kerrigan (and Kerrigan is one of my favorite Redskins). But damn, really......how many times is he going to be sucked into that play time and time again?

 

Sorry but at this level if a player can't get up for a game like this, then it's on them not the coaches! The coaches do not tackle (or miss them), they do not throw or catch balls, they don't knock passes down. It's a cop out to blame the coaches. You put yourself in a position to control your own destiny. You are at home after 3 straight road games. The opponent is wounded and down.

 

Instead of taking the game to the panthers, the players got punched in the mouth and just stood there. The coaches may own some of it - mostly in terms of who is on the field, but to say it's all on them is a cop out. The players have to hold themselves accountable. If you need to be psyched up for this game then you need to take up pottery. Football is just not for you.

 

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

9 minutes ago, tshile said:

 

You want to compare a time of coaching carosells...

 

 

Coaching carousels?...

[kleese]

3 minutes ago, tshile said:

 

You want to compare a time of coaching carosells and a very old roster, with an owner that was in poor health, eventually died, and team sat in limbo for years waiting for it to be sold, and then completely gutted by the current owner... to now?

 

OK.

 

What I'm saying is that the notion that you just need a bunch of guys to yell and scream and be "fiery" is nonsense. BMitch was a Redskins during a SIX season stretch of football where we missed the playoffs every year and averaged  a 6-10 record over that span. If it is just so simple as getting people's faces and being a junkyard dog, then why didn't he do it then? 

 

This is something ex players and fans always talk about-- they aren't tough enough, they aren't mean enough, they aren't as nasty as the old Redskins used to be etc...

 

So was BMitch tough and nasty in 90-92 and not in 93-98?

 

This is the same ole rhetoric from him that we've been hearing for years. He provides no real analysis and summarizes everything more or less with needing more guys that will "punch you in the mouth." 

[mistertim]

Yeah I don't think they were necessarily saying you need guys who are just personally jerks or assholes or whatever. More like guys who are just nasty on the field and play mean and go out there wanting to absolutely destroy everyone they see with a different jersey. That's how Trent is. He doesn't seem like a bad dude off the field but on the field he is just MEAN and is out to kill you. You can tell those guys, no matter the position. I really don't see us having many of those guys. That sort of nastiness and emotional involvement translates to effort. Yes you obviously still have to have guys who have their technique and are smart and know football. But the two aren't mutually exclusive.

[tshile]

2 minutes ago, kleese said:

So was BMitch tough and nasty in 90-92 and not in 93-98?

 

You're right.

 

There was nothing else different about 90-92 and 93-98.

 

Clearly.

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

6 minutes ago, kleese said:

This is the same ole rhetoric from him that we've been hearing for years. He provides no real analysis and summarizes everything more or less with needing more guys that will "punch you in the mouth." 

 

[tshile]

By the way, wasn't GMSM's opening presser about bringing in big nasty dudes?

 

"football players" is what I think he called them.

 

He was loved for saying it, if I recall correctly.

[kleese]

Just now, mistertim said:

Yeah I don't think they were necessarily saying you need guys who are just personally jerks or assholes or whatever. More like guys who are just nasty on the field and play mean and go out there wanting to absolutely destroy everyone they see with a different jersey. That's how Trent is. He doesn't seem like a bad dude off the field but on the field he is just MEAN and is out to kill you. You can tell those guys, no matter the position. I really don't see us having many of those guys. That sort of nastiness and emotional involvement translates to effort. Yes you obviously still have to have guys who have their technique and are smart and know football. But the two aren't mutually exclusive.

Funny though how we associate the "nasty" guy with someone who is also possibly the best player at his position in the league...

 

I get the impression that Will Compton plays very hard and is a tough competitor-- yet he just isn't very good and probably needs to be replaced. Donte Whittner had always had the rep as one of the "tougher" guys in the league-- he probably still is- but he just isn't good. Maybe other guys we complain about are also "tough" and trying their hardest and willing to scrap, but just aren't very good?