Thinker's Painful Realization of What Went Wrong

[Oldfan]

I agree that it would have been foolishg to rely on Betts as our featured back since he has yet to make it through a whole season or pre-season for that matter.

Your point is granted. However, it has been shown, by Denver and other teams, that the RB position can be filled through the draft at bargain prices. Betts plus a first day pick invested in another RB would have made more sense.

[fpickering]

Clinton is a good back, but honestly, I'd rather start Betts. You are definitely correct that we overpaid for Portis. And what's worse is that over the course of two years we went from having a young, very good/elite pair of cornerbacks to having a pair of good/mediocre cornerbacks.

As someone else stated... Betts is injury prone. You would want him as your #1 back? Then what? Risk having to start Cartwright? Come on this is just not a good strategy nor is it realistic.

[AlexRS]

Once that decision was made it has led us here. Here is that we have our supposedly awesome OLine (All five starters mostly healthy all year, 4 of 5 starters with BIG contracts) our awesome RB and we can't convert on third and three at the end of a game to run out the clock.

I completely agree with your post, except for one little thing. We do not run on 3rd downs. Maybe this is happening because Portis is not capable to do it, but I would still like to see us try that more often. We ran Portis three times in a row only once in SD game - and we did get a 1st down

Since the Seattle game (including Seattle, not counting 9ers) we have ran Portis on a 3rd down a total of 7 times.

2 of those were on 3rd and 10 or more.

Out of 10 3rd and 1's we had, we ran him 2 times and coverted once.

Out of 11 3rd and 2's we had, we ran him 3 times and converted once.

We have not run Portis on any of our:

Four 3rd and 3 to go.

Nine 3rd and 4 to go.

Nine 3rd and 5 to go.

So you do have a good point - maybe Portis is not Gibbs' back. I'd still like to see him run on 3rd down more.

[Oldfan]

As someone else stated... Betts is injury prone. You would want him as your #1 back? Then what? Risk having to start Cartwright? Come on this is just not a good strategy nor is it realistic.

Bear in mind, if he was your featured back, you wouldn't have him running back kickoffs. That way, he might prove to be more durable.

[wskin44]

What's done is done. Individual players have broken down at key times all season and that is why we are losing. Without the breakdowns Gibbs would be hailed as the second coming of . . . er . . . Joe Gibbs. Sometimes this team just doesn't play smart football. It's somewhat interesting to look at what could've been but the real question is how do we fix what we have?

[Oldfan]

What's done is done. Individual players have broken down at key times all season and that is why we are losing. Without the breakdowns Gibbs would be hailed as the second coming of . . . er . . . Joe Gibbs. Sometimes this team just doesn't play smart football. It's somewhat interesting to look at what could've been but the real question is how do we fix what we have?

There are plenty of threads offering criticism on what has gone wrong in the games. Indirectly, this thread is one of those grading Joe Gibbs in the role of GM, a position he has never held in the past.

[redphoenix]

portis is not a gibbs type back??????????isnt gibbs job to build the offense around portis's strengths ,shanahan utilised portis CORRECTLY and got over 1500 yards in the three years in denver,sorry clintons not the problem,its the coaching

[TheLongshot]

While I do agree that we overpaid for Portis, I'd hardly say that he's a disappointment. Hard to be disappointed in a guy who is 9th in the league in rushing and averages 4.2 yards a carry. (BTW, Stephen Jackson is 12th, LaMont Jordan is 15th.) Also, all the other things he does for this team add to his value, like his ability as a blocker, which was highlighted in one of the games this year.

I like Betts and I think he's a fine player, but at the same time, he hasn't proven he's durable. This is true before Gibbs took over, so it is understandable that bringing in a back would have been a priority.

While we could have used the pick, one player doesn't make that much of a difference in this team. The problem of speculating of what we could have gotten for Champ is, we don't really know. All we have are rumors of what was offered.

Jason

[FranklinNoble]

How quickly we forget Clint Didier. He was the other threat...Warren was more of the blocking TE

I don't believe Didier was on the '91 squad.

That's really the gold-standard for Redskins teams, in my opinion. The other two Super Bowls were won during strike seasons, and people always tend to detract from those (not that Gibbs didn't do a hell of a job there).

But there's no detracting from the '91 team - that club played in a tough division (defending SB champ Giants, Dallas on the way up, Philly still tough), and amassed one of the best regular season records for a Super Bowl winner since the league went to a 16 game schedule.

In my opinion, that was the greatest Redskins team ever (even though Thiesmann and Riggins were some of my favorite players).

[wskin44]

There are plenty of threads offering criticism on what has gone wrong in the games. Indirectly, this thread is one of those grading Joe Gibbs in the role of GM, a position he has never held in the past.

By and large I think that Gibbs has done a good job as GM. Letting Pierce get away was his biggest mistake, but Gibb's has admitted that it was a mistake, and watching our defense looking confused and abused on critical downs this year confirms how big of a mistake it was. Not to mention how the giants owned our offense.

But from a GM standpoint, what's done is done. What do we do now?

[TheLongshot]

By and large I think that Gibbs has done a good job as GM. Letting Pierce get away was his biggest mistake, but Gibb's has admitted that it was a mistake, and watching our defense looking confused and abused on critical downs this year confirms how big of a mistake it was. Not to mention how the giants owned our offense.

I don't think he thinks it was a mistake as much as he wishes he could have kept him, but the numbers didn't work out in the end. It is a tough thing when a player you didn't expect to blossom does, and you have a tight salary cap situation.

Jason

[zoony]

While I do agree that we overpaid for Portis, I'd hardly say that he's a disappointment. Hard to be disappointed in a guy who is 9th in the league in rushing and averages 4.2 yards a carry. (BTW, Stephen Jackson is 12th, LaMont Jordan is 15th.) Also, all the other things he does for this team add to his value, like his ability as a blocker, which was highlighted in one of the games this year.

I like Betts and I think he's a fine player, but at the same time, he hasn't proven he's durable. This is true before Gibbs took over, so it is understandable that bringing in a back would have been a priority.

While we could have used the pick, one player doesn't make that much of a difference in this team. The problem of speculating of what we could have gotten for Champ is, we don't really know. All we have are rumors of what was offered.

Jason

That about sums it up. Good post

[The Full Monty]

I think Thinker has made some outstanding points. But I'd like to see someone address this:

If Joe Gibbs had brought Alex Gibbs to coach the o-line and implement the pass blocking and running schemes INSTEAD of Joe Bugel, who has gotten crap out of a very well-paid and seemingly potential-heavey offensive line,

Portis would be annihilating everybody and our QB's would feed off that success. Anyone disagree?

[Hail_Skinz]

I agree with this post except the O Line seems to be the problem in my eyes. If they could somehow muster some better run blocking -- Portis would be a MONSTER!!!

[bbuzz1962]

Brunell was a huge mistake. Haven't we learned from the past, these veterans in their twilight years have not come through for us as expected. I don't think our record would have been any worse with Ramsey running the show, didn't he do well in the later part of the season last year?? Most of the wins were with Ramsey. Everyone was wondering what took Gibbs so long, and what if scenarios were running rampid. Gibbs gave him 2 quarters to prove himself. What was that about?? He has a thing for Brunell, I have no idea why, he has a losing record as a starter with this team.

We have basically forfeited the season, hoping Brunell would keep his act together after the first three games, but I didn't think it would hold up for long. He would be the best backup quarterback in the league, and would last a couple more years as a backup. So the money spent on him was a loss. Ramsey also has a lucrative contract, and has not been given a fair chance with Gibbs.

Say what you want fellas, this team has only won 5 games with Brunell this year, and that is not acceptable. I can't remeber how may he won last year, I believe it was 3. So he has a record of 8-11. Good quarterbacks continuously find ways to win in the most adverse situations, and he just can't do it. Age, injuries, whatever. He just can't get it done.

[Goaldeje]

I think Thinker has made some outstanding points. But I'd like to see someone address this:

If Joe Gibbs had brought Alex Gibbs to coach the o-line and implement the pass blocking and running schemes INSTEAD of Joe Bugel, who has gotten crap out of a very well-paid and seemingly potential-heavey offensive line,

Portis would be annihilating everybody and our QB's would feed off that success. Anyone disagree?

This is an interesting point, and one I have thought often about. Alex Gibbs has to be the gold standard for O-line coaches now. What he can do is amazing. I am continually struck by how antithetical the 2005 O-line is to the Hoggs. It doesn't make sense. I wonder if Bugel has lost his magic or what. But, looking back, if we could have gotten A. Gibbs, I wish we would have done it.

[betsy thurman]

the biggest mistake Gibbs made IMO when he came back was to make a lot of moves BEFORE he had a chance to see his existing players on the field.

yes, it would have meant taking your lumps in 2004 while you learned what you have and who you want to go to war with, but isn't that what happened at 6-10 anyway?

Ramsey would have played himself into or out of a job based on 16 games.

Ladell Betts would have had a fair chance to carry the load at running back and legitimize the investment of a high pick in him.

And as Thinker said we wouldn't have invested so much in money in Brunell, Portis and a few others that may not end up being part of the ultimate solution here.

I think the pressure to come back and win right away was enormous.

But the proper approach in retrospect would have been to say this was a 5-11 team Gibbs was inheriting and people would have to be patient as he built up a new team from the ground, laying the foundation one step at a time.

great logic -- could it be that Dan pushed too hard for this hurry up and win ?? Joe has never been a coach to make hasty decisions

[zoony]

great logic -- could it be that Dan pushed too hard for this hurry up and win ?? Joe has never been a coach to make hasty decisions

With all due respect to bulldog, a blindman could see why the Redskins have been steeped in mediocrity for so long. Joe saw it, and he was driving cars.

Our QB position has been a liability (save one playoff year) since he left. First thing Joe did when he came back was scan the league for a vet... someone he might win with right away.

Second thing Joe did was look to the draft to get a QB for the future. I suspect if Campbell is not progressing the way Joe wants in practice, etc... he'll go to the draft again. He'll continue to do so until he gets the guy.

As for Portis? I think Joe might have paid a bit too much, but Portis has been a great running back for us and team leader. He is a pleasure to have on this team, and good riddance for Bailey, who did not want to be a Redskin. At least we got something for him (bailey)

The rest is hindsight, and that doesn't take any talent.... always 20-20

........

[thinker]

With all due respect to bulldog, a blindman could see why the Redskins have been steeped in mediocrity for so long. Joe saw it, and he was driving cars.

Our QB position has been a liability (save one playoff year) since he left. First thing Joe did when he came back was scan the league for a vet... someone he might win with right away.

Second thing Joe did was look to the draft to get a QB for the future. I suspect if Campbell is not progressing the way Joe wants in practice, etc... he'll go to the draft again. He'll continue to do so until he gets the guy.

As for Portis? I think Joe might have paid a bit too much, but Portis has been a great running back for us and team leader. He is a pleasure to have on this team, and good riddance for Bailey, who did not want to be a Redskin. At least we got something for him (bailey)

The rest is hindsight, and that doesn't take any talent.... always 20-20

........

If hindsight doesn't take any talent, then why do you suppose there is so much disagreement about what went wrong? Quite honestly, I don't think that the problem has strictly been the qb. I'm not sure that Joe Montana would have won a lot more games for us last year with the oline, receivers, schemes, and playcalling we had.

Frankly Brunell hasn't played badly this year, in fact I think he's played pretty well. He's does his job when he's been given good plays to run and his team mates have done their part. He doesn't block, catch, run routes, or call the plays. Other people have to do that. More often than not when we have failed this year, it hasn't been because Brunell made the bad play.

And stop with the we are better off without Bailey stuff. No where anywhere in this thread is the notion that we shouldn't have gotten rid of Bailey. This is also not about what a nice guy, great player, or leader Portis is. He is those things. He just isn't the kind of back that the Gibbs system can use to his best effect. He just doesn't do what the Gibbs system needs him to do.

[panel]

Champ Bailey is no Chump, we would have been better with him.

already he has 6 picks and 2 TD this year, I know a lot of people will say to them selves he sucked, because they want to come off on top in the trade.

[s0crates]

I'm pretty tired of Coach Gibbs' personnel decisions being unfairly criticized around here. He has done a great job in that department.

-Sean Taylor was the right pick in the first round (not Winslow) - he is outstanding.

-Chris Cooley was a steal in the 3rd round (and probably the best tight end available in the draft that year - not Winslow).

-Mark Brunell is playing very well - he is ranked pretty high among QBs. We got (undefeated senior)

-Jason Campbell early to develop him so he can replace the old man down the road.

-Clinton Portis is doing well all around - he is a balanced back not a power runner (pass blocking, 4.5 YPA rushing, 2 straight 1000 yard seasons, receiving, making game saving tackles, hitting backwards laterals out of bounds, etc).

-Santana Moss is way better than Coles (Gibbs took a lot of heat for this one).

-Carlos Rogers is ready to start in the NFL (he clearly showed he is better than Walt Harris).

-Marcus Washington made the Pro Bowl and has continued to play well.

-Shawn Springs is a shut down corner - he has been all season.

-Cornelius Griffin is the best defensive linemen we have - the line looked great with him back.

We have also made good coaching decisions,

-Greg Williams is doing a fine job when he has his starters our there.

-Bill Musgrave and the shotgun have been a valuable addition to this offense.

-Buges has improved an o-line in shambles after the Spurrier disaster.

-Byner has all his backs looking good (Betts and Rock have played well too).

Looks to me like we've made some good personnell moves in Gibbs tenure. Hopefully, we're gonna keep this staff and these players aroung, develop some cohesiveness, and continue to improve. Just have a little patience. This team gets better every day Gibbs is here. Look at the big picture. :2cents:

I know its tacky to quote yourself, but hey, this point has to be reitereated.

[ummagumma]

I know its tacky to quote yourself, but hey, this point has to be reitereated.

Brunell was a questionable acquisition given the fact he was going to be cut outright, then he's overpaid. Cost cap space and a 3rd rounder.

That 3rd rounder should have been used to draft Cooley, but instead a future #2 had to be burned to get that #3 to draft Cooley.

If the Redskins want to win now, how can they afford to give up so much for a QB prospect (Campbell)? Are they trying to win now (Brunell over Ramsey - fine give Gibbs credit)? Then you should have spent the resources used on Campbell to acquire DL help. Playing for the future? Then why play Brunell over Ramsey and trash Ramsey's value. No one can deny that Gibbs trashed Ramsey's value. Not the mark of a good GM. So while it may have been a good coaching decision, a savy GM moves Patrick as soon as Brunell was acquired and we get at least a 2nd and possibly a 1st from Miami as was rumored.

Clinton Portis cost too much to acquire. Straight up for Champ, fine, but another wasted #2. It's not Portis' fault he's misused. It's not Portis' fault the O-line stinks. But not a savy acquisition.

I don't disagree with the defensive acquistions. But I'll hazard a guess Gibbs didn't choose those players per se. I will give him credit for allocation of resources to the defense, except, of course, to add a speedy DE to presurre the QB. But it seems no Redskin personnel manager wants to acquire that.

As far as the staff...With all the money invested in the O-line, how can you be happy with Bugel? I remember being lectured repeatedly in the offseason how much better that unit would be with Jansen back and the new center. Not impressed.

So there are some bad things...

[The extremist]

good points....

it has been a point of creeping anxiety myself...Sadly, Portis has been solidly good, but not great, and not quite the RB that used to absolutely RAPE those AFC West week in and week out....In retrospect, the trade seemed like the answer to all our hopes, but any number of backs can provide the output of Portis, and many can do it without a bloated number against the cap...When you see such a scary lack of depth at WR (behind Moss) TE, and DL especially, and when you know the skins are trading away draft picks, it makes you sit up and take notice...DL, TE, WR and OL must be addressed, and apart of finding hidden stars that are UFAs, I don't know how the team will fill all the gaps...

The million dollar question of course is: Will ES be having this same discussion in two years with the trade up to get Campbell?? I hope not, but as I have said elsewhere, the rookie needs to get his development playing time in NOW

[TheLongshot]

Champ Bailey is no Chump, we would have been better with him.

Maybe, if he actually wanted to be here, which really, he didn't.

What he signed for was more than what we signed Portis and Springs to. I think I'd rather have them.

Jason

[skinthemboys]

ummm. Nope, portis isnt that slashy dashy runner he was in denver. hes not piling up tons of yards and stats, but he plays his best game week in and week out. Hes a reciever...an O lineman....a running back and a helluva football player and Im glad we got him. Denver can keep champ. Shawn springs has easily filled his shoes. Who was the last back weve had that has played as well as portis?