Taco Bell

timberwolves keeping this game close at GS... 89-90 warriors with 8:43 left

The first song I ever loved... 4 years old Wow that video is bad... no wonder the the main guy in ministry disowned this period.

These next two are essentially the same song - I think Vandross song was written first, but because he was collaborating with Bowie on Young Americans and not sure the details but Bowie and Vandross reworked the song and it showed up with Bowie first... I prefer the instrumental/arrangement of Fascination more, but Funky Music clearly has the more direct and what I would consider meaningful lyrics. ------------ oh and paco de lucia

(possibly NSFW - it's motorhead lol) (I edited this link out once because it didn't work all of the sudden - now it seems to be working for me again.) korean link - I don't know korean so enter at own risk ? - best Clapton layla live solo I've found on the internets thus far - http://tvpot.daum.net/v/aPqiIOFlV70$

Well there is a difference between hearing it's occurred at all vs. not once. I had literally never - heard jon say something that seemed nice in a brotherly way (proud, excited, etc.) about his brother lol. Just the - "they got some nice pieces there, they got to get that secondary figured out man, they've had some special teams troubles" football related stuff. Even hearing it from you is enough because my burden of proof was low, and yea, it would really have been the Philly thing that took this to a real level. It was more in that the base sense, in hindsight, I wouldn't have been as surprised only because it felt like an anomaly that him and Jay were never effusive (for NFL lifer standards) in public. ----------- But yea, that was the point anyway, that perhaps that's just their brotherly coaching keep the distractions to a minimum type stuff at work, but that if he really went to the eagles that would just be nuts from the competition standpoint, given that both A. Jon could choose his job unless some lower level candidates and B. they basically vie for who gets to keep their millions of dollars contracts against eachother every year. I've always assumed that Jay having Jon as a brother could only help as a HC, because it would help with his immediate respect by players, Jay feeling more like he belongs in that base sense of living the life on an NFL and trying to make it, and the benefits of talking football and talking tape. Talking tape... if I were Jon, I would just send Jay my notes every day and give Jay the best weekly scouting reports in the world. That's the type of thing I'm hoping Jon does that we don't hear about. lol

I know there's plenty of misinformation out about this right now, but I would be terribly disappointed in Jon Gruden if he went to the Eagles (or Giants). As like a overall "fan" of his. My grandfather was a Bucs fan so I always rooted for them as far as the pecking order goes for people watching teams other than ours play. I've always felt like Jon seems to keep an emotional distance to Jay when he gets brought up, not a dislike necessarily, but just no extra effusiveness about his brother himself. I know it's very possible that as an analyst he probably might think it's a conflict of interest, and/or, he doesn't want to draw extra attention to Jay, but it's weird that I've never heard him say ever like "I'm happy with the way his team played last week" or anything - I mean there's nothing. Not even small brotherly praise. It just always felt weird. Point is, if he's genuinely interested in the Eagles job, either they are the most competitive family of all time, or maybe their relationship isn't as great as other brothers. And I know there are only 32 HC jobs in the NFL bla bla bla - but not only is Jon a coveted name so doesn't need to beg for a position anywhere, but there are always multiple job openings in a given year. Something just feels odd about it. ---- Now - if Jon were to join the Eagles - I think we are the ones that gain from that. Jay already had his territory in the NFC east and I think the players would dig in their heels and never let the Eagles get the best of Jay. And the Eagles would ultimately look dysfunctional again.

Wow can't believe lovie got fired, I feel the same way about his as I did theoretically Jay this year if he were to have gotten fired with anything 6-10 or better - as in, hasty and too quick to overall judgement with such a terrible roster starting off with. During our year of hiring a coach, lovie was always the top of the "retread" list for me because his Bears regime felt very similar to Coughlins Jags or Fox's Panthers. Long tenures of overall consistency which ended once a short streak of missing playoffs started happening. They will supposedly give some details as to why tomorrow, but I have a feeling it will just be business speak. They lost 4 in a row down the stretch which maybe played into it, but that division was decided long before that so not sure what they were expecting. Although, the 3 opponents prior to the Panthers probably all felt like winnable games in NO, STL, and CHI. If W/L was part of their decision (and I hope it was something legitimate), I think our win against them was probably a loss they had circled as a factor, that would have been a huge letdown to lose like that.

Yea, that puts a little stain on Mara's mystique of being such a great person. Clearly the coach that is on his way out doesn't buy in to the BS the giants have been selling. I watched that live and I wasn't sure if I just missed the handshake but it sounds like it definitely didn't happen lol.

UFC must be happy about this after Rousey getting destroyed.. Mcgregors pointless post match speech is about 100x longer than the fight

yea, that was incredibly fast and hilarious

Strangely, the only way I actually like the gold pants is with the white jersey. It seems to be a good counterpoint to the burgundy helmet and helps balance out the color scheme. The burgundy shirt, and helmet, looks awkward with that particular type of gold pant. A very bold gold color for sure. ------------ If we could make the smallest change in the world today I would say Brucie could keep his gold pants with the white shirt, but at least go back to white pants for the burgundy shirt. Not that I don't like the burgundy pants with white jersey, but I think Bruce likes his gold pants too much so he needs a fair trade.

Sorry haha, I forgot that I dropped a hot take in here without realizing that there has probably been more long running nuanced discussion about these players along the way. But, to be honest however, I definitely stand by my remarks about Lebron. I mean, obviously when I use the term "underachiever" it's relative and specific to his talent, history, and expectation, so, taking the word on it's own like it's sacrilege is fine but there aren't better descriptors to use for what I am saying. Just replace it with "He could have accomplished so much more" if you'd like, I'm not sticking by underachiever like it's some sort of label. Like more a Peyton Manning type underachiever where regular season success and pedigree are at an odds with championships attained yet there is still no doubt how great of a player he is. I think so people can get a better sense of my overall stance, I also root for him when push comes to shove over everyone else since he's still the player currently in the NBA with the potential to have the greatest legacy based on where he's at both past and future... so criticism of him is more in the constructive sense. I know he's getting up there in years now, but he still has plenty of time to re-write his history, and yes, he is indeed a top 10 or better player of all time, but that's the thing about him - he "should" be a top 1-2-3 player of all time unequivocally given his skillset. Here's another reason as to why, for me at least, it's easy to root for lebron. It's that unlike other players, lebron "feels" more human quite literally because he's shown he could cave under pressure in huge moments. That first finals appearance against the mavs with the heat revealed a player, even as good as he is, actually try to stay away from the ball when the pressure rose. There were so many possessions where Lebron wasn't even on the t.v. screen he was so far away from the action. And look, this type of behavior has always coincided with the long running narrative about Lebron passing the ball away in crunch time. He can say it as many times as he wants, we get it, if he thinks he has a "matchup" he likes, he justifies passing the ball away due to something like that. But the problem is, everyone in the arena knows that "should" be Lebrons shot. Including the players that pretty much get the pressure passed on to them that aren't necessarily ready for moments like that. Sure, there are times when the paint might get collapsed to the degree it makes sense to kick the ball out, but I'd say far more than 75% of the time Lebron should have been taking the last shot instead of kicking the ball out. Second, Lebron doing his 1 on 1 shot stuff instead of driving the ball to the basket for last shots is the same boat. Again, sometimes, it makes sense to do a jumper instead of drive, but there are so many times where he took a bad shot when he could have done a better one, and that again deals with overall apprehensiveness. And again, this isn't only about last shots, it's about key moments in general. After the back to backs in miami, I really hoped that he would have had the capability of putting his team on his back against the 2014 spurs. But again, there's always some sort of narrative going on, like cramps for that one. Sure, the Spurs were a nice team, and the heat were injured, but he doesn't always play like the force of nature he can be on each and every possession. The heat were straight up outclassed in that series and with the best player in the world on your team the fight should be tougher. And then again with this 1st Cavs one, it's that he's "fatigued" down the stretch. I know some people thought he absolved himself with his performance against GS "putting the team on his back," but to me he got off easy due to the "volume" of stats he provided. Again, contextually within the games, there were way too many specific possessions where he again, does the whole "basketball genius" thing and gets too cute instead of just being aggressive. And then he would talk about how he's not used to the volume vs. efficiency he was putting up, but, there were tons of missed opportunities there. And then further, I also get it, maybe he really was at his 100% physical output limits where each and every possession he settled for a bad shot or less than favorable pass was because he had no other resort, but given Lebron's history, apprehensiveness more than likely played a part. There were winnable games to be had in that series, even without Kyrie and Love. As great as his stats looked in certain games, that was the point, he could have dropped 50+ some of those games. Remember, and I'll reiterate again, I root for Lebron first and foremost being a casual NBA fan so let's just all agree that even if you disagree with my thoughts, that we can agree that it's more of a tough love thing on my end whether I am being too hard on him or not. I'm still the dork sitting here hoping he gets 6 rings. So, I guess you can see why I get annoyed with each and every finals loss.

I don't really have a basketball team, so I've always just rooted for legacies and "greatness" etc etc... so this year, as usual, I will be hoping for lebron to take some magic playoff "leap" and actually pull through in the playoffs, and then I'd also like to see golden state continue on this magic run of theirs. Honestly, I think Steph is a better player than Lebron since he's amazing in the clutch, and it's cool how when you look at him you see the greatest shooter (male shooter at least) in the world, there's no random dude hidden in the world that's better, you are looking at the greatest shooter in the world when you see him. I guess Lebron still has being the greatest athletic freak in the world, but that is nearing the end as he continues on in his 30s. Third highest priority would then be the Spurs, since Duncan getting a 6th ring would be cool as well although at this point even tying Jordan doesn't really mean the same thing. So, until it's really too late I have to be on the Lebron train for at least 2-3 more years until his underachieving is complete in his prime, and then second is GS and Steph Curry dominance. Distant third are Spurs... after that, just random teams winning it would be cool like the grizz or the knicks (lol).

I'm not a big MMA person or anything but I was watching it so whatever That was incredible in how outclassed Rousey looked, I mean I get it it's a quick fight and it's very easy for things to go wrong when you're dealing with people trying to kill eachother, but Rousey trying to beat Holm at her own game started derailing within the first few hits in the first round. I'm sure the whole thing could have been different if Rousey could have carried out whatever move she was trying to pull when they were on the ground, but she ran out of gas and punches she could handle really fast. That dodge holly did was awesome, and of course, seeing her clean precise knockout was nice too. Obviously this could go very differently in a rematch. I know nothing about it but I was just happy I actually watched it usually I'm not very into MMA type stuff. I'm more of a sumo wrestling type of guy.... lol

I 100% agree that the helmets look better without the stripes given this current crop of unis. The helmets look legit without the stripes. And, obviously I'm not going to get into it, but I think removing all other "stuff" and leaving the logo on it's own makes the logo look more proper than it being combined with other "decoration" per se. I love the 80s style unis and are my overall favorite, but having those today is almost impossible to replicate for a variety of reasons like the shirts fitting differently and moving away from the double stripe pants so taking away the triple helmet stripes would be fine to me tomorrow. The striping on the new nike jerseys barely show up on the shirts thanks to poor design and the sleeves being tighter so the whole need for echoing them on the helmets sort of gets lost anyway. There are only like 2 players that wear the loose sleeves on our team at this point and those are really the only ones where the yellow and white stripes are visible and benefit from the helmet stripes. But again, our double stripe pants are gone so triple stripe helmet, non-visible uni stripes, and 9 stripe socks don't benefit from the helmet stripes at this point. I also actually like the slightly mismatched burgundy colors despite the fact it's only done because of the rules issues. I know many won't like it in here, but much like the cowboys white shirt jerseys, their "seafoam green" pants lol not matching with their helmets ever since I read that is one of my favorite details in NFL jerseys currently. What I realized was, if those cowboys pants matched their helmets, they'd look just like the lions or the colts, and I dunno what it is, but the lions uniform is one of the most boring in all of the NFL, so I think the cowboys look more interesting with that detail. So, the mismatched burgundies actually looks good to me.

I agree, you can already see how something like that makes a humongous difference

Ok, so I think I figured out the reason why, my personal favorite uni, the 80s style jerseys from the 80s and early 90s, don't look right today, and it's perhaps a contributor, in addition to Bruce Allen being back, of adding the 70s bottom half (9 stripe socks and gold pants) to our current uni. I wondered why that change would have ever been made, of the Burg shirt White pants and White shirt Burg Pants, but then all I need to do is go to the early 2000s and it gets explained pretty quickly. In addition to the team being terrible, something just looks off from our uniforms of that era. If you just google 2001 season, 2004 season, etc you can see that our 80s unis don't look quite right. They actually do look sort of bad and makes me look at our current uni a bit differently, even if our current one has it's own set of problems. But I figured out why they don't look quite right in today's modern time. It's going to sound stupid but it's the trickle down effect that causes all the problems. We are the only team that has "classic" uniforms that still have our jersey numbers on the sides of the sleeves instead of the top of the shoulders. Not counting the Raiders, who never had details on the sides of their sleeves so the cramping of space isn't as big of an issue. That causes so many problems on our current uniforms that are predominantly form fitting around the shoulders. Our 80s unis need the double thick stripes on the shirt to match the pants for them to work. Ideally, they also need even extra shirt length after the double thick stripes on the sleeves to add either the final white stripe (for the white shirt) or burgundy stripe (for burg) to echo the pants and socks. Since, for the pants there is always a "third color" surrounding the stripes, and then the socks there is always white above it making them "triple stripe" too (on the white socks). Looking at our jerseys from the late 90s onward until we went to the gold pants adjustment makes more sense as to why they look wrong. For us since those darn numbers are still on the sleeves and it's almost a permanent fixture to have the elastic sleeves except for certain QBs, kickers, punters, and Darrell Green (makes me love him even more), makes having the space to echo the distinctive double thick striped pants and socks impossible. Also, even the sleeved jerseys nowadays are never as long as they were back in the 90s and before, so the issues remain there too even if not as bad. But Kirk's jersey always does seem to look the best (and it has nothing to do with the QB drama surrounding our team right this second) since he's one of the few players that still wears longer sleeves on our team. So, our 2015 jerseys now have this weird curved stripe thing where the gold accent color wraps around the opening and then a small crescent of white curves over the highest point of the gold. This probably makes these gold pants with the "generic" triple stripes make more sense with our current shirt since the consistency aspect no longer matters. But on it's own looks very poor to me regardless. You can see that it's a very easy switch that could have probably made our 80s unis look solid in today's current era of unis, as long as you would be willing to move the jersey numbers (unless there is something I am missing, I have no problem with it). If you look at the 49ers jerseys from the 80s, their numbers are on the sleeves and above detail (stripes for them). On their current jerseys, they moved the numbers to the top so now their stripes fit on the shoulders with plenty of spacing and look very nice while keeping their overall classic look. We could do the same thing with the 80s style shirts and pants combinations, but right now during this gold pant era I guess it doesn't really matter. I should probably mess around with this in photoshop and try things out. Because I never noticed it before but now I'd like to see.

With those the single gold stripe would be real nice

That's why I would only do it if I had the courage. I'd have to go full out with mockups and make myself look like an idiot in the process before doing so. But, I think literally asking him straight up "why are the bottom half of the jerseys from 71 and the top half from 92 being slapped together" would probably force him to at least say something non-computer like since it's very direct and not necessarily choosing sides. "thanks taco bell for your interest in the washington redskins, I am happy for your comments and appreciate your support! Hail to the Redskins!" lol

If I were to gain the courage one day, perhaps I'd do my shot at sending a letter to either Brucie or Danny I'd start it with "the imperial magistrate has reached a verdict..." lol.. (that movie is legitimately one of my favorite movies of all time) But anyways.. that pic that was just quoted is actually the look I like the best if I had to pick one. Again, I'm an 80's kid so I might have an innate bias towards those, but I also think they are balanced very nicely. I can see how some people wouldn't like the thickness of the stripes, but maybe because it feels like "ours" I do happen to like the boldness of those stripes. Also, we can see from that picture in particular how when a player is in motion things are all parallel with eachother from a sequencing standpoint. The striping of the shirt's burgundy and gold are the same when parallel with the pants on either side, and then the striping on the shirts reflect the helmet's colors like a mirror, where the shirt's gold stripes form a larger triangle with the helmet stripe encapsulating the smaller burgundy triangle of the helmet itself as the top center point. And then the socks match too. I really like that uni, looks nice still and in motion. But again, I actually like the darker gold that matches the 70s unis and my personal favorite part are the solid numbers to go along with the detailed stripes.

I spent some time looking at photos of the redskins browns game just to make sure I still agreed with what I was thinking and ultimately I still do. The main thing is actually what trickles down to the rest, which is ultimately that we are using half the jurgensen (edit - spelled sonny's name wrong here but right everyone (everywhere!! 2nd edit) else thankfully) era look, half our current (~80s onward) look. Both from a visual perspective and from a symbolic perspective. I think obviously the visuals of it just look a little out of whack. I'm not saying it's terrible, but it's just not cohesive and there's a "reason" why this doesn't happen very often. From the basic visual perspective, which I'm not being unique about, is just the randomness of the striping consistency. It goes from top to bottom - 3 on the helmet, 2 on the shirts (although unless you are wearing the loose sleeve version like Kirk Cousins they aren't very noticeable on these Nike jerseys so it could be argued 0 from the visual side of things), 3 on the pants, and then the 9 striped socks (yellow, red, white, red, yellow, red, white, red, yellow). The matching stripes on the jersey are what make the socks work on the "jurgensen" jerseys. Otherwise, those socks are just out of place. And then the gold pants. I was born in 86 so I admit there might be a bit of a bias in that on the current unis I prefer the "80s" half of it more, but I genuinely like most of the iterations of our uniform from a pure visual perspective during it's history. But again, the Gold pants, and the 3 stripes on the pants, conflict with what I consider our "true identity of our current uniforms" which still errs more on the side of the 80s onward look given additional identity elements found in things beyond our jersey. We also never as a franchise made a "big thing" out of reverting back to our old style look on our current unis in recent time either, so it just feels like the Jurgensen bottom half is either temporary or a test or whatever, which is also what I mean about the 80s onward look still feeling like our current identity. So, the fact that these two halves were not truly fused together properly, they are quite literally half the old jerseys half the new jerseys put together, makes it "feel" patchwork and incomplete. But further, on the pants in particular, the striping was sort of "modernized" (which I would ultimately consider "generalized") compared to the Jurgensen era where they were slightly thinner and have that retro feel today, to what I consider the most standard of standard football pants, the 3 equally thick stripes. So, any uniqueness of the pants themselves have sort of been stripped away by using the same exact pattern that many NFL teams still use or have used. The packers, the 9ers, the colts, the cowboys to name a few currently today. This is something for example I've said in this thread before, but one thing I do genuinely think of as "ours" are the thick double stripes. I think most NFL fans would agree that when they see thick double stripes, they probably associate them with our team over any other at first glance. So, we kind of give our visual identity away by using these "generic" triple striped pants. Also, I am in the camp that don't prefer the gold pants, but it's a lot of the symbolism as to why as opposed to just the color. I think one thing, about our specific colors, is that, they are colors that I always associate with royalty in various forms since burgundy is often a color you see used as velvet or whatever in uses for kings/monarchies/etc. So gold always felt to me for us like the special color that would be used sparingly as a form of ornamentation. And for me, that was the ultimate combo of colors when I was growing up to have that royal burgundy color with gold to be our ornamental color. I think when we use gold so liberally on the uniforms it makes the special nature of gold as a color go away, as it takes away the implications of value or scarcity. Also, it's one of the things that made the 49ers gold less special on the unis since their use of gold is to imply a large quantity of gold (the gold rush). Now, it's almost like we are copying them symbolically by going back to it. And then other teams, like the packers or steelers, have more of an identity with gold pants that we are all of the sudden rejoining. I know our franchise has been around forever so we aren't "really" copying anyone else, but it feels that way, and the look of it is just a little off too. I think that ultimately the reason why we went to this current look is because, in our typical Snyder era mishandling of things, it is an attempt in driving home the point that our colors are "Burgundy and Gold" combined with "tradition" by keeping both halves of our uniforms *mostly* intact. It feels very thudding and obvious their "intentions" there. Finally, because of the "look" of our jerseys currently, I have to wonder if kids at a young impressionable age would really like our uniforms and become fans outside of being born into redskins families because they just aren't very sharp right this second. (edit - I meant to add that I realize liking a uniform as a kid leading to fandom is just one path to becoming a redskins fan outside of being nurtured into one, but it is a relevant one) I had no real reason to become a redskins fan in eagles country other than they had recently won a SB - which my cowboys fan dad told me since I was only 3-4 when it happened, and I also loved the uniforms/colors the most. The very first SB I actually remember watching was the first Cowboys SB, go figure. None of this is too egregious and I know a simple update could fix a lot of things, but there are better ways to incorporate tradition to our uniforms than putting together a uniform from two separate eras.

Going through the sportslogos.net website, you are obviously right that their 2003-2011 white pants are purely the green and black, but it looks like their current ones have some sort of middle grey stripe in between, so I didn't open the thumbnail for the rest, playing the odds. Also, it looks like the actuality of their disgusting uniforms that those black stripes are thicker than the green component, making their nasty colored green uniforms look even worse.

I don't hate the yellow pants, although my personal favorite part of any redskin uniform are the double thick stripes on the sides of the pants, something that the yellows never have. Having a run through on all franchises unis throughout history, it looks like that we are the only team to ever have that, and it's probably the reason why it feels unique (and looks the best) to me. Even if that design ultimately causes problems on any consistent helmet stripe layout, since we aren't going to ever go 2 stripes with half yellow half white on the other, maybe keeping the stripes off like last week helps that.

I agree with bits and pieces of most of these posts since it seems like pretty much all of you know what you are talking about... While, out of all the realistic candidates Gruden was my favorite choice anyway, I think as time goes on we can see how hiring Gruden, on a basic level, did not contribute to any sort of "culture change" that a lot of teams with quick turnarounds seem to have. That doesn't mean he's a failure, it just means we are missing a "positive sign" that a common thread of recent "good hires," such as Chip, Jim Harbaugh, Chuck Pagano, Mike McCoy, or Bruce Arians all seemed to instill with an instant culture change based on the previous regime. Culture change encapsulates a bunch of things, including wins, so not all these situations are the same, but all of these happened early in their tenure. As of week 4, Gruden has the worst record of these hires at their week 4 juncture, as well as staring 1-5 in the face. I'm not here to discuss those guys in particular, and also, there are examples in recent history, of a team building slowly, with their current coach. Ron Rivera is one of those examples of having 2 bad seasons before a good one. Despite being a little older, John Harbaugh started "slow" in that he was 2-3 through his first 5, but they went on to go 11-5 that year. They also had the dolphins, raiders, browns, and texans after that start. This is really just about Bruce Allen, and Dan Snyder as well, and how it ties to a lack of a true culture change based on the overlying feeling that it's just business as usual in washington. While Bruce is far and away more competent than Cerrato ever was, I think Bruce still gets the benefit of nepotism both in actual blood as well as being what I assume to be a "pro redskins guy" for life. This isn't about going into the name change debate, but I guarantee that Snyder would rather have a guy at the head of the organization who is with him about football in every aspect and is willing to say whatever Snyder wants/needs him to, than otherwise. Snyder seems like the type of guy who would rather have someone who's "with him" on things as opposed to getting the 100% best option if the "with him" option is a 95% best option. I mean, look at Vinny, he was like a 60%. I don't think that Bruce Allen is the 100% best option as the "president of a team" for the redskins. Like many of these good "suit" jokes, he fits quite the perfect mold as the head of this team, lol. He did fit in to our organization perfectly of course by being a competent GM as well as his father being one of our former great coaches. But, this will probably lead to Snyder riding out Bruce until either our team has another trainwreck season or worse as a result. It's going to be real tough to fire the son of a former redskins great when it happens. This feeling of nepotism at the top then has trickled down into every other hire on our team it seems, since like many said, whether some of these hires were legitimate or not, almost all of them have some sort of questionable aspect to them, where they all seem to be more about benefiting at least 1 or more of the people above them to a certain extent. And remember, like everything in the NFL, I'm not questioning these guys' X and O capabilities, but in the NFL you are dealing with 95% vs 98% vs 100% abilities, so it's all small margins of error (I know you all know this, except for Vinny), I know these people aren't garbage, but they have signs of nepotism within. McVay obviously helps Gruden, since Gruden gets more comfort in calling the offense how he wants without too much backlash, since a OC in his late 20s is not going to cause a stir since he's got a cushy job already. I sometimes wonder if Grudes just likes to put a lipper in and call some plays. Lol... Haslett survives because Gruden is unwilling to fire him based on the reciprocation of a past "debt" he owes. We all know Haz stated his case about being handcuffed prior, so this one of course reeks in all sorts of ways anyway. Gruden is the brother of Jon, who obviously had ties to both the raiders and the bucs. So, I think it's tough no matter how you slice it... So many connections and conveniences in there. So, all this is really getting to is the chicken or the egg discussion. I feel like most of these previous coaches actually had an answer for this riddle, because I feel like most of these coaches probably instilled a new feeling from day 1 in the spring which led to quick turnarounds with actual results to back them up (good records early)... Gruden, I dunno, not that he is Zorn from a skills standpoint because I think Gruden is actually more on the forefront of X and O design in the current NFL fraternity than Shanny or Zorn was at their times of hiring, but I don't think he has that same "voice" that you seem to hear from other current successful coaches. Keeping Haslett was the biggest mistake of all the coaching changes or lack thereof, and I think its one of the primary factors that leads our team to not have that feeling of a regime change, since there is way too much continuity from the previous regime, having a terrible pass and overall big play defense, so there's not really any magical feeling going on. All we had this season so far was a QB controversy which got our tick meters to rise a bit, but other than that, this just seems like a rough season going forward. Obviously, our ST, while not legendarily bad, has already contributed poorly in our games, except for the punter, I guess. What it leaves us is to just hope that the Offense somehow outdoes the Shanny era offense, and we are having major problems in that area too, early. I know there are circumstances as to "why," but all I'm saying is, I don't feel a bit of "culture change" in this current regime yet. And while it's not necessary, it seems to be a side effect of all good recent coaching hires, so I feel like it's a bad indicator. But, my point is, ultimately, just in overall agreement with many of you that Bruce doesn't seem to be the right fit for this team anymore. People don't actually get tricked into seeing a "descendant of a franchise great" in 2014 and actually think it means something if the results aren't there. It's too easy to read through that stuff now because in any form of media there will be people that can comment on it and you can learn from, bla bla bla. Our organizational flaws run deeper than other teams so the best thing we can hope for is a superstar GM that can handle the tightrope of uplifting a franchise as well as appeasing the owner, but in the right way. I think we've seen enough of bruce to know that he's not "the guy" at this point, based on record, drafts, etc.