SPare Posted January 13, 2002 Share Posted January 13, 2002 The lack of consistency. Snyder is mixing things up worse than a cheap management consultant. Is this wrong? ... yes. Will it bring us to better pastures in the future? Probably. Marty, while successful, seems to be self limiting in his philosophy and methods. Still, it's gut wrenching. Oh yeah, I almost forgot the TWO draft picks that it cost the skins to get Schottenheimer in the first place. By comparison with this, Beathard's deals look safe investments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGDC Posted January 13, 2002 Share Posted January 13, 2002 agreed, it would be great to get some consistancy. ------------------ -------------------------------------------- "It's gonna be a long, long day, baby...Don't bring that weak s--- on this side of the line again, your hear? ... Get up, Brother, so you can go back down again". "Fred Smoot" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted January 13, 2002 Share Posted January 13, 2002 well, to be fair to Snyder, who thought that Schottenheimer would come into town as the big, pompous windbag that he did? sure, the guy was self-confident in Cleveland and KC and seemed to be stubborn at times. but he also related to veteran players on both teams. here he seemed to go out of his way to put a bulls-eye on his back by taking on the very veteran players he would need down the stretch to lead the team from its early funk. Heck, like Snyder, I thought Marty would come in, get rid of a few troublemakers and laggards, as he did, and then go on to form a solid relationship with the rest of the team. Most of all because of his well-know communication skills the last thing you would think was that he and team leaders would go almost 2 months not addressing the issues that separated them and that would mushroom into the worst start in 40 years. So, I don't believe we ever got to see the well-organized, well-oiled veteran coach who knew the psychology of getting a team to achieve that we were paying for. The 8-3 finish was nice from a numeric perspective, but the fact remains with a better decision at the quarterback position to suit his own offensive style and some decent communication in the preseason this could have been a 10 or 11 win team. And most of those players were already on this team when Marty arrived. The best players on offense? Davis, Jansen, Samuels. All were already here. Defense? Arrington, Bailey, Green, Wilkinson. All here. Of the players Marty brought in I would say that Smoot and Ben Coleman were the two that had the greatest impact on this club. Others such as Szott and Rasby were contributors as well. Overall, I would say it was 50/50. For every Szott or Rasby, there was the Donnell Bennett, Donovan Greer, Kevin Lockett and Matt Campbell that were largely empty jerseys in 2001. The funny thing in retrospect about Marty is that you could argue he didn't want to eat the cap dollars by cutting Jeff George in 2001 but he ended up doing it after only 2 games anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted January 13, 2002 Share Posted January 13, 2002 Consistency for the sake of consistency isn't always a real solid idea. Certainly you can make a solid argument that we would have been better off next year under Marty than we may end up under Spurrier. I believe we may have lost a playoff berth by making this move as it will take time for Spurrier to get accustomed to the tempo of things in the NFL and to craft whatever genius he may be able to bring. But, with Marty, consistency for the sake of consistency isn't really a selling point for me. I think if Spurrier wasn't out there Marty would probably have been asked back even with a lack of willingness to yield in any small way. If the facts of this situation are that Snyder told Marty that the only change he really wanted to see was in the final approval of moves, and not the normal personnel stuff, just the decisions that there was a disagreement over, then perhaps Marty was angling to be released as he was and Snyder was making an earnest effort to bring his coach back. We certainly had consistency with Norv over the years and it didn't help us. I'm not sure consistency with Marty would have either, though, I believe Marty would have gotten this team into the playoffs with regularity. I think Snyder has blown his wad on this move and he'd be hard pressed to make another, so, at least those who want consistency may well see it here at this point. Of course, you never know what a guy with millions burning a hole in his pocket will do . ------------------ Doom is in the box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPare Posted January 14, 2002 Author Share Posted January 14, 2002 Art, your comments about consistency could be equally made about change. Change for the sake of change is equally, or more destructive than consistency. Balance is the key. Admittedly, John Kent Cooke gave the team consistency, and that wasn't good. I can easily concede that Spurrier and whoever the GM is going to be will be an improvement over Schottenheimer. Bulldog makes a good point when he states that Schottenheimer did not deliver the bill of goods that he presented when he was hired. A lot is made of the 8-3 finish. Well, that 8-3 is actually a 3-3 finish, with the three losses being key conference games, and two of the wins being against teams that had all but given up on the season. That's a pretty damning indictment of the coach's results. Maybe this is a good decision in the end, but dang, it's a bitter pill to swallow for the moment. Of course, the first day of the Marty hiring was an equally bitter day. Give me some time. Oh yeah, and I'm still not over the draft pick thing. ------------------ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted January 14, 2002 Share Posted January 14, 2002 SPare, I hear you and don't disagree in the slightest. It's certainly a very difficult situation to think about. I wish we had more direct information to let us know more about how this all happened, but, that will come over time. ------------------ Doom is in the box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Will Posted January 14, 2002 Share Posted January 14, 2002 I am p*ssed! I think the Skins have gone from a team on the verge of making the playoffs, to a rebuilding team...overnight! DAMNIT SNYDER!!! Nothing against Spurrier here, just the ridiculous buissness tactics of Snyder. I just hope he doesn't terminate Spurrier's contract when we miss the playoff fun next year. I JUST HOPE I'M WRONG... Someone please prove it to calm me down. (p#ssed)Will Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted January 14, 2002 Share Posted January 14, 2002 Will, I share your concerns that this team won't be as ready to compete next year as it would have been had we kept Marty, but, Kleese made a very valuable point to consider. The defense is going to be pretty much the same. We might lose Lang who was a contributor, but, the defense really shouldn't get drastically worse and could get even better with a bit more imagination in the blitz packages and more aggression. More importantly though, the moment Spurrier walks in as the coach the offense just got better. Just by being here the offense is an improved unit. Special teams may drop, who knows. The point is, you can make a strong point that this team has just improved today if you use this logic. I think while it's a strong point, it is a bit stretched because Spurrier's offense will take time to come together and the personnel may not be an ideal fit. Hell, if we put four receivers on the field on more than one or two plays in a game, the players themselves may pass out from shock and force us to waste time outs. And if we DARED put any of those receivers in motion, we'll certainly stumble and fall down from not having any experience with such diabolical ingenuity for an entire year. But, I hope I don't sound bitter or anything about last year's offense . ------------------ Doom is in the box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted January 14, 2002 Share Posted January 14, 2002 will.....we may have been rebuilding anyway. i'm not as confident as art that the problems on the defensive line are not reaching a crescendo this year - independent of who the coach is. coleman/smith are simply aging. we were not able to sustain a pass rush this year without an occasional blitz. we all know lang is not the long-term solution at DT as he doesn't want to play the position. finally, i still maintain that we need a killer safety ( a lot will argue this point). there is uncertainty at mlb. so......the defense is going to need a few key FA pick-ups and one or two drafts for the long term to solidify. both marty and spurrier (we need an acronym now for him) would/will face the same problem. ------------------ looking through a glass onion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted January 14, 2002 Share Posted January 14, 2002 This was a quasi rebuilding year. Consistency? Under Norv we underachieved Consitently. Marty's Consistency Cleveland 8-8 next year 11-5 KC 8-7-1 next year I believe 10-6 skins 8-8 next year oh well. I'd love to see 4 wide sets to spread out offenses on 2nd and short and 3rd and short and goal line situations. ------------------ This isn't love, it's an Obsession. Redskins football Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.