A Solution in the war between the Newbies and the Toadies.

[Isifhan]

I wasn't here during the Spurrier era so I don't know the answer to this. But was Spurrier's word taken as Gospel on all issues by the moderators in the same way that Joe Gibbs' word is? The frustrating part is of posting here is that the moderators' date=' at times, force the party line to a degree that I find stifling. And I wonder if it's just because Joe Gibbs' word is seen as having Biblical authority.[/quote']

It was blatently obvious to most after Spurrier got here that he really wasn't out to put a good football team on the field, he wanted to prove his system worked on the NFL level. He didn't care about the team, he cared about proving that his system worked. The difference with Joe Gibbs and the reason why people defend him so fervently is that he truly loves and cares for the team, and is willing to do whatever it takes, even if it means taking himself out of the equation, to make the team better.

You shouldn't feel that you are being subjected to "the party line" because if you really step back and look at the situation the only "party line" is making the team better...and isn't that what this is about? I mean, why wouldn't you be happy about that?

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

It was blatently obvious to most after Spurrier got here that he really wasn't out to put a good football team on the field, he wanted to prove his system worked on the NFL level. He didn't care about the team, he cared about proving that his system worked. The difference with Joe Gibbs and the reason why people defend him so fervently is that he truly loves and cares for the team, and is willing to do whatever it takes, even if it means taking himself out of the equation, to make the team better.

You shouldn't feel that you are being subjected to "the party line" because if you really step back and look at the situation the only "party line" is making the team better...and isn't that what this is about? I mean, why wouldn't you be happy about that?

Because while I do think that Gibbs is trying to improve the team, I don't think all of his decisions are correct. The most frustrating thing during the Great Brunell-Ramsey Debate of 2005 was the constantly reappearing statement of "You don't see what the coaches see." The same argument appeared during The Where's Lavar Saga?

To me, if that's the case, why even have a message board?

[Art]

I wasn't here during the Spurrier era so I don't know the answer to this. But was Spurrier's word taken as Gospel on all issues by the moderators in the same way that Joe Gibbs' word is? The frustrating part is of posting here is that the moderators' date=' at times, force the party line to a degree that I find stifling. And I wonder if it's just because Joe Gibbs' word is seen as having Biblical authority.[/quote']

The frustrating part of posting here is people will so dumbly attempt to associate Steve Spurrier with Joe Gibbs as if the level of respect and understanding should be similar in nature. Spurrier was given a wide berth when he started here. As it became evident he wasn't willing to work hard enough to make things go, legitimate questions came of his abilities. Those grew into more legitimate questions of moves he might want to make.

As a coaching staff demonstrates their concepts don't work, and you see those negative results on the field, you generally grow to question them, and find a great deal of merit behind the questions. When a staff is proven and their methods achieve an increasing degree of performance that confirms their ideas, to maintain they should somehow be passed through the same filter Mike Nolan was or Steve Spurrier earned, is a pathetic attempt.

Gibbs came in and quickly recognized areas he needed to improve. He didn't stagnate. He added staff. Preached core and team. Found believers in the same. Developed character and fight. Started to win. Added more staff for more ideas. The clear concept is they have a clear idea what they are doing. They know where they've failed and probably already know what they need to do to improve there.

As long as you continue to wonder why Gibbs and Williams are granted a wider latitude than Spurrier and Edwards were, you will remain part of the problem.

[Art]

A little bit of knowledge can be dangerous. Sort of like some supposed CBA experts around here. Nothing wrong with an opinion, but c'mon, common sense tells you to give extra weight to what the experts say/do.

Who are experts?

I spend more time understanding my favorite team than any member of the media does in understanding the Redskins. I imagine MOST fans here do. We're far more expert with regard to our team than ANY member of the professional media.

[KingGibbs]

Actually, the main problem on this board is some refuse to believe the obvious regardless of how much data there is countering their position. No matter how clear things are, they refuse to yield even one iota on their stance. No number of facts, amount of inside info or valid, reasoned opinion can sway them.

The tone deafness is at an all time high here and almost exclusively on the side of people who simply refuse to start the conversation from the basis that they LIKE the Washington Redskins, that the current people running the team MUST have some plan in effect and that until we see clear signs the plan is just not acceptable or working, we should at least conclude they aren't whistling in the dark.

If we could just get people to THAT point, all would go so smoothly. Instead, we have people who actually REFUSE to believe the position coach of a favorite player may know what he's talking about, when it echos exactly what just about everyone who speaks on the same topic says. It's a bad time when NO amount of informed information can get a person to step back and say, "Wow, that means something to me."

Art. It's been two days since the news broke and I was one of those who were obviously upset. Well guess what? The sting is already gone. Time to move on. But, you have your opinion on the issue and I have mine. It doesn't make you right and it certainly doesn't make me wrong. I thought I gave you reasonable explainations on why I felt the way I did.

That being said, do you really think that when someone is disappointed that a player they can identify with and was truly a Redskin (drafted by us) is gone, that they don't understand the team concept? I doubt if there is a fan in this world that has agreed with every move that their team has made. So why should this situation be any different?

When it comes down to it, we all cheer for whomever is wearing the B&G on Sundays, well, the exception for me being Deion. :puke:

[DCsportsfan53]

Actually, the main problem on this board is some refuse to believe the obvious regardless of how much data there is countering their position. No matter how clear things are, they refuse to yield even one iota on their stance. No number of facts, amount of inside info or valid, reasoned opinion can sway them.

The tone deafness is at an all time high here and almost exclusively on the side of people who simply refuse to start the conversation from the basis that they LIKE the Washington Redskins, that the current people running the team MUST have some plan in effect and that until we see clear signs the plan is just not acceptable or working, we should at least conclude they aren't whistling in the dark.

If we could just get people to THAT point, all would go so smoothly. Instead, we have people who actually REFUSE to believe the position coach of a favorite player may know what he's talking about, when it echos exactly what just about everyone who speaks on the same topic says. It's a bad time when NO amount of informed information can get a person to step back and say, "Wow, that means something to me."

Great post, I agree completely. I know that for me, when Art or one of the other mods posts something about the skins, I listen. If people can't see that they have a ton of knowledge and are privy to a lot more inside information than most of us then they are just being naive or stubborn. Keep the good information coming guys, some of us are listening.

[Gallen5862]

The new forum idea is a bad one. The moderators keep a good balance on the board. They allow opposing viewpoints. This is the best message board. I agree with Art that at times posters do get stubborn when it comes to their opinions. I give Coach Gibbs the benefit of the doubt he was great the first time and he is still a great coach. He is building the entire organization to be great on and off the field. He knows how to get the most out of people.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

As long as you continue to wonder why Gibbs and Williams are granted a wider latitude than Spurrier and Edwards were, you will remain part of the problem.

So, if the team goes 7-9 next year, will I continue to be "part of the problem?"

[Art]

Because while I do think that Gibbs is trying to improve the team' date=' I don't think all of his decisions are correct. The most frustrating thing during the Great Brunell-Ramsey Debate of 2005 was the constantly reappearing statement of "You don't see what the coaches see." The same argument appeared during The Where's Lavar Saga?

To me, if that's the case, why even have a message board?[/quote']

And, this is a PRIME example of how perfectly right the coaching staff was. They made the call at QB and it worked out pretty much just as the staff thought it would, and directly opposite what most of us felt might happen. And, the same in the Lavar situation when he said no one is telling him why he wasn't playing and EVERY coach came out and said they communicate with him EVERY day. Yet, people still sided with Lavar instead of realizing it's unlikely 10 other people are lying when they all say the same thing.

A message board is a place to converse about the events of the day. Sometimes there are reasonable differences of view within that. Sometimes there aren't. Some people refuse to acknowledge sometimes things are exactly as they appear, no more, no less.

I have even been critical of Gibbs here since his return, hammering at the point the single biggest failure we had in 2004 was Joe Gibbs. He was the biggest problem we had. I've SAID this ON this very board. Yet, within that, I also felt supremely confident he knew how to get things going a different direction. And, he's proving that confidence well granted.

[KingGibbs]

Who are experts?

I spend more time understanding my favorite team than any member of the media does in understanding the Redskins. I imagine MOST fans here do. We're far more expert with regard to our team than ANY member of the professional media.

See Art, this is where I agree with you. Because of all of the media outlets we have access to now, I honestly believe that we have the ability to evaluate and scrutinize players. It's why we have every right to pound on the likes of Lenny and King for their ignorance.

[Art]

So' date=' if the team goes 7-9 next year, will I continue to be "part of the problem?"[/quote']

I think a lot depends on how the team gets to 7-9. Does a lack of a CBA extension cause limited depth this year, while injuries mount, sapping our ability to immediately compete, which wouldn't exactly be a problem of coaching as much as circumstance.

Will Gregg Williams blindly continue blitzing a team prepared for an all out attack, or, will he blindly stay back in a two-deep shell against a team spreading the field with five receivers, allowing games to be lost by an unwilligness to adjust the scheme and plan to fit the circumstances?

This was COMMON under Mike Nolan and Norv Turner who would develop a game plan and run it, period, with NO flexibility. We would play read and react even against teams doing exactly what we were allowing them to do and showing no effort to stop that and make them do something else. You know when coaching is causing you games just as you know when it's winning you games.

Remember the 1991 playoffs against the Lions? They were killing us all the first half with slants. I told my father, a Lions fan, they wouldn't get any of that in the second half. I knew that because I knew that staff. I knew the staff adjusted and took away things and forced teams to adjust to us. That's what we have again.

And as long as this staff continues to adjust to the situation presented instead of forcing round holes into square pegs as most of our previous coaches have done for so long, it will likely be a situation we're happy with for a long time.

[Isifhan]

So' date=' if the team goes 7-9 next year, will I continue to be "part of the problem?"[/quote']

It's not about the record...it's about how he approaches the job.

[KingGibbs]

Great post, I agree completely. I know that for me, when Art or one of the other mods posts something about the skins, I listen. If people can't see that they have a ton of knowledge and are privy to a lot more inside information than most of us then they are just being naive or stubborn. Keep the good information coming guys, some of us are listening.

I really appreciate Art's work as well and I really love his enthusiasm when it comes to the 'skins and I've seen him in action. But, I don't need to agree with everything he posts and some of you have the tendacy to do so, based on the fact that he is a mod. :2cents:

[Art]

I really appreciate Art's work as well and I really love his enthusiasm when it comes to the 'skins and I've seen him in action. But, I don't need to agree with everything he posts and some of you have the tendacy to do so, based on the fact that he is a mod. :2cents:

You don't have to agree with anything I say. But, you DOOOOOOOOOO have to agree with reality and fact. I do not know if you're one of the posters who refused to believe Lindsey was telling the truth -- despite everyone else saying the same thing the last couple of years whether on our team or elsewhere -- about Lavar. Those people couldn't understand the Lavar situation because they refused to believe the FIRST premise that he was doing something the coaching staff didn't like.

These people started their view that Lavar was doing everything right, and yet, somehow the staff was so dumb as to keep him off the field. He wasn't in on third downs which was bad of the staff, but, at no point could they conceive he wasn't on the field because he WASN'T GOOD ENOUGH TO BE. It's no secret to anyone who watches this team that Lavar is terrible on the line of scrimmage. Clemons is a far more dangerous player there. Lavar didn't play there because he got beat out by a guy who could do it better.

It's not hard to see for those who want to look.

If you can't get yourself around to acknowledging the obvious, then everything that flows from that improper foundation will be difficult to fix.

[DCsportsfan53]

I really appreciate Art's work as well and I really love his enthusiasm when it comes to the 'skins and I've seen him in action. But, I don't need to agree with everything he posts and some of you have the tendacy to do so, based on the fact that he is a mod. :2cents:

I still formulate my own opinion but I do share a lot of the mods' opinions with regard to the coaching staff and FO. I'm just one of those guys who thinks the team is more important than any indivual player, no matter who he is, no matter what the situation because I'm a fan of the Redskins first, fan of players second. Also, I tend to trust THIS coaching staff's opinions and decisions because I think they've more than earned the benefit of the doubt. Like Art said, there's a difference between conflicting opinions and ignoring the facts presented.

[KingGibbs]

You don't have to agree with anything I say. But, you DOOOOOOOOOO have to agree with reality and fact. I do not know if you're one of the posters who refused to believe Lindsey was telling the truth -- despite everyone else saying the same thing the last couple of years whether on our team or elsewhere -- about Lavar. Those people couldn't understand the Lavar situation because they refused to believe the FIRST premise that he was doing something the coaching staff didn't like.

These people started their view that Lavar was doing everything right, and yet, somehow the staff was so dumb as to keep him off the field. He wasn't in on third downs which was bad of the staff, but, at no point could they conceive he wasn't on the field because he WASN'T GOOD ENOUGH TO BE. It's no secret to anyone who watches this team that Lavar is terrible on the line of scrimmage. Clemons is a far more dangerous player there. Lavar didn't play there because he got beat out by a guy who could do it better.

It's not hard to see for those who want to look.

If you can't get yourself around to acknowledging the obvious, then everything that flows from that improper foundation will be difficult to fix.

Well, I can tell you this and that is, I'm not gullible enough to think that Lavar did no wrong. But, I'm certainly not someone who is going to allow an individual speak or think for me. Like I said, I'm over it and I voiced my displeasure.

[NavyDave]

There are some quality posts from the newbies however comma it does get old to see every Madden Fantasy football trade post that are obviously not thought out.

[sashae]

A lot of the older posters have disappeared/cut back their posting due to the influx of noobs... the old, measured tenor of the forum is totally and utterly gone, but that's the price that's paid by the additional exposure coming from the sale of the site to the team.

It's a different site. For some, that's a good thing, for others... not so much.

[KingGibbs]

I still formulate my own opinion but I do share a lot of the mods' opinions with regard to the coaching staff and FO. I'm just one of those guys who thinks the team is more important than any indivual player, no matter who he is, no matter what the situation because I'm a fan of the Redskins first, fan of players second. Also, I tend to trust THIS coaching staff's opinions and decisions because I think they've more than earned the benefit of the doubt. Like Art said, there's a difference between conflicting opinions and ignoring the facts presented.

Again, just because a fan cheers an individual on the TEAM that they follow, doesn't mean they are ignorant to the team concept. Maybe some of you would like to see my "Redskins" shrine and then you could ask where my loyalties lie.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I should actually point out that I have never criticized Gibbs' approach to game day coaching. At least not since about halfway through his first season back (at which point I was admittedly worried that the game had past him by). As a coach, he is still pretty remarkable, because - on paper - this was not a 10-6 team. That he got this particular team to 10 wins and won a playoff game is more impressive to me than any of his Super Bowl wins.

So...as a coach...I really can't complain. My complaint has always been with how the team's roster is structured because it makes no sense to me. It's always been that the Gibbs/Vinny/Snyder triumverate is really undercutting the Gibbs/Williams tandem.

Case in point: I love the fact that Mark Brunell was able to do what he was able to do for half of last season. To me, that says that Gibbs can still pull every last ounce of talent out of his players. However, I hate the fact that we are practically obligated to start Mark Brunell next year due to his contract status. I still call that a FO blunder.

[stevenaa]

I should actually point out that I have never criticized Gibbs' approach to game day coaching. At least not since about halfway through his first season back (at which point I was admittedly worried that the game had past him by). As a coach' date=' he is still pretty remarkable, because - on paper - this was not a 10-6 team. That he got this particular team to 10 wins and won a playoff game is more impressive to me than any of his Super Bowl wins.

So...as a coach...I really can't complain. My complaint has always been with how the team's roster is structured because it makes no sense to me. It's always been that the Gibbs/Vinny/Snyder triumverate is really undercutting the Gibbs/Williams tandem.

Case in point: I love the fact that Mark Brunell was able to do what he was able to do for half of last season. To me, that says that Gibbs can still pull every last ounce of talent out of his players. However, I hate the fact that we are practically obligated to start Mark Brunell next year due to his contract status. I still call that a FO blunder.[/quote']

Brunnell is here because Gibbs wanted him.

Man this has gotten off topic.

[feeshta]

No offense, but I really don't see how this is and issue of right and wrong opinion. It isn't in point of fact. It's an issue of board management. The arguments over whether the coaching staff knows what they are doing or not and all of the associated stuff is personal issue. The problem of exceptionally high amounts of similar posts, which the original poster was referring to before the thread was somewhat hijacked, is not an opinion issue so much as it is an issue about adapting the community to new challenges.

Stevenaa and several others have mentioned their opinion that this is the way the board has always worked and it should not be changed. I would have to disagree. I think the board could continue to "work" that way, but that's no reason to look into making it work better for all involved. Things are changing with all of the new members and it's only going to get worse. Things will never be like they used to be in the grand ond days. We need to look for ways to update the community and make it better for all involved.

[KingGibbs]

No offense, but I really don't see how this is and issue of right and wrong opinion. It isn't in point of fact. It's an issue of board management. The arguments over whether the coaching staff knows what they are doing or not and all of the associated stuff is personal issue. The problem of exceptionally high amounts of similar posts, which the original poster was referring to before the thread was somewhat hijacked, is not an opinion issue so much as it is an issue about adapting the community to new challenges.

Stevenaa and several others have mentioned their opinion that this is the way the board has always worked and it should not be changed. I would have to disagree. I think the board could continue to "work" that way, but that's no reason to look into making it work better for all involved. Things are changing with all of the new members and it's only going to get worse. Things will never be like they used to be in the grand ond days. We need to look for ways to update the community and make it better for all involved.

Very valid points. I actually thought the same thing myself and let it veer off course. Apologies to the thread starter.

[DCsportsfan53]

Again, just because a fan cheers an individual on the TEAM that they follow, doesn't mean they are ignorant to the team concept. Maybe some of you would like to see my "Redskins" shrine and then you could ask where my loyalties lie.

I'm not questioning your loyalty, you aren't one of the ones running around saying they hope Lavar terrorizes us and exacts his revenge in another NFC East uniform, but those posts are out there. I do question how people cannot see that the things Dale Lindsey was saying about Lavar are the same things his coaches have always had problems with. Again, refer to his comment about not being a moldable youngster. To me, that's a thinly veiled reference to the fact that he isn't very coachable and doesn't want to listen to the coaches. Again, like Art said, it's one thing to disagree, it's another altogether to ignore the plethora of facts available on a topic.

[cgray88]

If the n00b's and the toadies can't come to an agreement on a revised knowledge-sharing plan, does that mean that 2007 becomes an uncapped thread year?