AKM311 Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 I was wondering what each coach thought of the situation and each coach said there side of the story. I think the bottom line of this season is easy, its not the players, not the coaches, but the way Joe Gibbs setup this season. One, it should have been Gibbs setting up the game plan, so both the defense and offense was taken into account. With Saunders and Williams doing there own thing, who was responsible for putting the entire puzzle together every week? Who is responsible for time of possession? Who is in charge of keeping players rested? Who is who? Thats what is wrong with this team. What does Bugel do? Breaux? Why do we have two secondary coaches? This is the problem. Everyone wants authority because Gibbs is too nice. Now that Gibbs somewhat has found his balls again, the team started playing well again! The last 6 weeks actually were fun to watch the Redskins again. Now we just need to tweak the defense a little and add depth, and personally we should be good to go. I have honestly started to believe this past season was not the players but the setup. Yes we made some bad personel decisions, but that has a lot to do with 'If the system doesn't work, the players can't play". Thoughts? The reason why I am asking this in a different thread, because each article has there own thread instead of jelling them all together for one big topic. Please remove if this is against rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gallntfox Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 To me it clearly shows that the inmates have been running the asylum made possible only by the lack of direction provided by the coaching staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Fakeman Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 My thoughts on these 3 articles...can easily be seen in MY comment at the end of the 3rd article...on the WP website...where you can add comments / reply to the author's piece of work: These last 3 articles in the past 3 days are ridiculous. Its easy for one to make allegations and conjur up hysteria when you cannot identify your sources. For example: A Washington Post writer, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said Jason La Canfora likes to sleep around with young asian boys. That right there...is exactly how these last 3 pieces by the Washington Post have conveyed all of these problems with the Redskins. If you wish to throw the local NFL franchise under the bus Mr. La Canfora Mr. Howard Bryant...identify your sources. Anyone can attack anybody and anyone can make up anything by not providing the name of the source. Watch how easy it is: Howard Bryant spends all of his personal time on child pornography sites, said a Washington Post assistant who asked not to be identified because he considers Bryant a friend and admires his writing. Too easy. Perhaps in your next article you could try discussing the growth of Jason Campbell or how the Redskins have one of the best RB Tandem in the NFL w/ Portis Betts???? By jmicrodoc | Jan 3, 2007 8:38:15 AM | Request Removal http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/comments/display?contentID=AR2007010201192 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKM311 Posted January 3, 2007 Author Share Posted January 3, 2007 My thoughts on these 3 articles...can easily be seen in MY comment at the end of the 3rd article...on the WP website...where you can add comments / reply to the author's piece of work:These last 3 articles in the past 3 days are ridiculous. Its easy for one to make allegations and conjur up hysteria when you cannot identify your sources. For example: A Washington Post writer, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said Jason La Canfora likes to sleep around with young asian boys. That right there...is exactly how these last 3 pieces by the Washington Post have conveyed all of these problems with the Redskins. If you wish to throw the local NFL franchise under the bus Mr. La Canfora Mr. Howard Bryant...identify your sources. Anyone can attack anybody and anyone can make up anything by not providing the name of the source. Watch how easy it is: Howard Bryant spends all of his personal time on child pornography sites, said a Washington Post assistant who asked not to be identified because he considers Bryant a friend and admires his writing. Too easy. Perhaps in your next article you could try discussing the growth of Jason Campbell or how the Redskins have one of the best RB Tandem in the NFL w/ Portis Betts???? By jmicrodoc | Jan 3, 2007 8:38:15 AM | Request Removal http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/comments/display?contentID=AR2007010201192 I totally agree with you. I didn't even read much of the quotes by unamed sources, just those of Saunders and Williams themselves. Just based on there quotes, it looks like it was too much of a business being ran instead of a football team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsiaticSkinsFan Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 My thoughts on these 3 articles...can easily be seen in MY comment at the end of the 3rd article...on the WP website...where you can add comments / reply to the author's piece of work:These last 3 articles in the past 3 days are ridiculous. Its easy for one to make allegations and conjur up hysteria when you cannot identify your sources. For example: A Washington Post writer, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said Jason La Canfora likes to sleep around with young asian boys. That right there...is exactly how these last 3 pieces by the Washington Post have conveyed all of these problems with the Redskins. If you wish to throw the local NFL franchise under the bus Mr. La Canfora Mr. Howard Bryant...identify your sources. Anyone can attack anybody and anyone can make up anything by not providing the name of the source. Watch how easy it is: Howard Bryant spends all of his personal time on child pornography sites, said a Washington Post assistant who asked not to be identified because he considers Bryant a friend and admires his writing. Too easy. Perhaps in your next article you could try discussing the growth of Jason Campbell or how the Redskins have one of the best RB Tandem in the NFL w/ Portis Betts???? By jmicrodoc | Jan 3, 2007 8:38:15 AM | Request Removal http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/comments/display?contentID=AR2007010201192 hmm... yet most of the quotes on the third article were from Gregg Williams, and did not really slam him that much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsiaticSkinsFan Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 if anything... Saunders and the front office recieved the brunt of the criticsm... not Williams... its so sad/funny that so many people on this site cannot take someone criticizing the redskins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Fakeman Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 hmm... yet most of the quotes on the third article were from Gregg Williams, and did not really slam him that much LoL - what article did you read? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckus Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 My thoughts on these 3 articles...can easily be seen in MY comment at the end of the 3rd article...on the WP website...where you can add comments / reply to the author's piece of work:These last 3 articles in the past 3 days are ridiculous. Its easy for one to make allegations and conjur up hysteria when you cannot identify your sources. For example: A Washington Post writer, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said Jason La Canfora likes to sleep around with young asian boys. That right there...is exactly how these last 3 pieces by the Washington Post have conveyed all of these problems with the Redskins. If you wish to throw the local NFL franchise under the bus Mr. La Canfora Mr. Howard Bryant...identify your sources. Anyone can attack anybody and anyone can make up anything by not providing the name of the source. Watch how easy it is: Howard Bryant spends all of his personal time on child pornography sites, said a Washington Post assistant who asked not to be identified because he considers Bryant a friend and admires his writing. Too easy. Perhaps in your next article you could try discussing the growth of Jason Campbell or how the Redskins have one of the best RB Tandem in the NFL w/ Portis Betts???? By jmicrodoc | Jan 3, 2007 8:38:15 AM | Request Removal http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/comments/display?contentID=AR2007010201192 They are definitely making stuff up! How can anyone look at what the Skins have been able to do the last 10 years and think there is something fundamentally wrong with the organization? Crazy talk – it is working like a well oiled machine. We are clearly heading in the right direction and have seen nothing but success for the past decade. Oh – and everyone who complains about these sources being anonymous. Go check out the CP interview. He is pretty much confirming what is in these 3 articles, that organization is dysfunctional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grhqofb5 Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Its easy for one to make allegations and conjur up hysteria when you cannot identify your sources. I can understand the point you're trying to make here, but I think the analogy you draw is a little flawed. You're essentially insinuating that these writers invented these quotations, and thereby their stories. I think that's a pretty big stretch. When unidentified sources are used, it's generally a thing that is understood by the subject and the writer. The subject feels free to dispose of his thoughts without fear of retribution, akin to "venting." I think it's likely that these quotes are legitimate, but the "sources" were exaggerating the seriousness/depth of the circumstances. A lot of guys are looking to vent their frustrations, and what better way to do that than to find a writer who is willing to quote them anonymously, and then publish? My theory is that there are legitimate concerns here, but not to the extent indicated in these articles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Fakeman Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 They are definitely making stuff up! How can anyone look at what the Skins have been able to do the last 10 years and think there is something fundamentally wrong with the organization? Crazy talk – it is working like a well oiled machine. We are clearly heading in the right direction and have seen nothing but success for the past decade.Oh – and everyone who complains about these sources being anonymous. Go check out the CP interview. He is pretty much confirming what is in these 3 articles, that organization is dysfunctional. Clinton "IS" a source. He is giving you a real account - he's not some 3rd party Washington Post writer saying things like..."A player thinks this" and "A friend of the coach said this / that" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitejimmy Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Its easy for one to make allegations and conjur up hysteria when you cannot identify your sources. [clip] If you wish to throw the local NFL franchise under the bus Mr. La Canfora Mr. Howard Bryant...identify your sources. Anyone can attack anybody and anyone can make up anything by not providing the name of the source. I'm trying to be good and attack the post and not the poster, but this argument is embarrassingly stupid. Journalism 101: Never reveal your sources. Even a hack journalist would rather go to prison that reveal his/her sources. Does Watergate ring a bell? Inside information on pro football hardly merits destroying your career and compromising all journalistic integrity. So, like any other information that gets reported, would you rather have anonymous information or no information? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 I'm trying to be good and attack the post and not the poster, but this argument is embarrassingly stupid. Chalk up another win for the bad side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grhqofb5 Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 I'm trying to be good and attack the post and not the poster, but this argument is embarrassingly stupid.Journalism 101: Never reveal your sources. Even a hack journalist would rather go to prison that reveal his/her sources. Does Watergate ring a bell? Inside information on pro football hardly merits destroying your career and compromising all journalistic integrity. So, like any other information that gets reported, would you rather have anonymous information or no information? I think that you're misinterpreting his post. He's not suggesting that the writers reveal their sources now (after the fact). Of course that would destroy his career. He'd essentially be stonewalled by any player/subject that he approached who had knowledge of this actions. What I believe he is suggesting is that these writers should either insist that their sources go on the record, or simply refuse to publish the article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smitty71 Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 I don't understand how so many people here believe the reporters would make this stuff up?! We have all been wanting to know what is wrong with this team and why we are so bad and then we finally find out and some of us don't want to believe it? CP verified most of the info in his interview on 980. I kind of have mixed feelings on him doing it but at least has the gonads to not hide behind reporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love_Them_Dirtbags Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 The message I got is that there is no single, firm, steady, leader of the Washington Redskins organization. That leader needs to be Gibbs. Delegating away authority to assistant coaches, and having a GM-by-committee arrangement has failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USS Redskins Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Bottom line: It's all Gibbs fault! Gibbs is the prez and head coach. If all this crap is going on he should have done something to fix it. GIBBS IS AT FAULT! It is his responsibility - that's what he is being paid for. I believe the article, something has caused a one time playoff team to become a complete shambles and I am assuming it is all correct. LaConora is a good reporter in my opinion. He just gives the facts. If you dont like facts, look elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitejimmy Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 I think that you're misinterpreting his post. He's not suggesting that the writers reveal their sources now (after the fact). Of course that would destroy his career. He'd essentially be stonewalled by any player/subject that he approached who had knowledge of this actions.What I believe he is suggesting is that these writers should either insist that their sources go on the record, or simply refuse to publish the article. You expect the beat writer to refuse information that's off-the-record? That's not very realistic. His job is to sell papers. People are dying to know what happened to the Skins this year. I can understand complaints about the players for, as Portis said, mouthing off to reporters and not taking advantage of Gibbs' open-door policy. I can't understand the attack on the reporters, who are not just doing their job, but doing it well by getting players to confide in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitejimmy Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Bottom line: It's all Gibbs fault!Gibbs is the prez and head coach. If all this crap is going on he should have done something to fix it. GIBBS IS AT FAULT! It is his responsibility - that's what he is being paid for. I believe the article, something has caused a one time playoff team to become a complete shambles and I am assuming it is all correct. LaConora is a good reporter in my opinion. He just gives the facts. If you dont like facts, look elsewhere. ..and I believe Joe Gibbs would agree with you. He's a pretty stand up guy. *OOOH, look at me! I'm no longer a slouched-over benchwarmer. I'm a special teams ace! Happy happy joy joy..* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 what a shocker! Somebody doesn't like the story, so they assume its a bunch of lies designed to bring down the Organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kwitt Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Sum it up? How about hiring a GM? I think it is very clear what ails this franchise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Fakeman Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Say all you want about "Journalism 101" and how revealing your sources is damaging to one's occupation, etc. If you lean on "a player said this" and "a friend of a coach says this / that" then it leaves the door wide open for speculation. It's a two way street. I'm a Republican...so naturally...I have a detestation of the media and consequently hate the WP. Who is to say that the writer...is not making it up??? Do you really know??? Keep defending his smoke and mirror tactics. I won't feed his objective...I'll just wait until Gibbs, Snyder, and unfortunately...Cerrato, get this franchise on track. I'm not one to look to the Post for an "answer" or for "insider" information to the Franchise...I look to the Post for simple coverage. That's it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 and who's to say that the stuff Larry Michael says on his show isn't 100% B.S. also, he has even lower standards to live up to. Your insider coverage had people thinking of a playoff season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Fakeman Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 I think that you're misinterpreting his post. He's not suggesting that the writers reveal their sources now (after the fact). Of course that would destroy his career. He'd essentially be stonewalled by any player/subject that he approached who had knowledge of this actions.What I believe he is suggesting is that these writers should either insist that their sources go on the record, or simply refuse to publish the article. Exactly. "An anonymous player said that Clinton Portis hates all of Gibbs' grandchildren" It's of no use...reporting anonymously...and can easily be the truth...OR...can easily be a lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Fakeman Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 and who's to say that the stuff Larry Michael says on his show isn't 100% B.S. also, he has even lower standards to live up to.Your insider coverage had people thinking of a playoff season. Larry Michael, at times, actually sits in front of players / coaches...which collectively, most of the time, are sitting in front of a bunch of cameras that are FILMING them. A slight difference. "An anonymous ExtremeSkins member said that Bufford enjoys being spanked by large prosthetic, christmas-tree shaped sex toys" See what I'm getting at? Is it true...or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally3814 Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 I wouldn't damn LaCanorfa out of hand here, he has to respect people's wish for anonimity. But as any decent journalist does he has to weigh up what they're saying and give it credence because in the end it's being printed under his mugshot and bye line. He also shows some real journalistic prowess by at least giving a write into the excuses these sources use for requesting anonimity, from one being scared of retribution from Coach Williams to another citing friendship of both Coach Saunders and Williams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.