E-Dog Night Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 Sorry if this was already posted. I did some searches using different terms and didn't see it. About a week ago, WP Skins beat reporter Jason Canfora blogged his thoughts about the differences between the Ravens FO and the Skins FO. His blog can be found at: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/ A buddy of mine just emailed this to me. Here's the exerpt: Posted at 12:53 PM ET, 01/11/2007The Comparison Okay, I figured you guys would have drummed this up by now, but I guess I'll have to prod you. Take a look at the quotes in the article I wrote today about how the Ravens revamped their offensive line on the fly, and compare what they did to just about everything the Skins always do, and draw your own conclusions. The Ravens have gotten production out of basically their entire 2006 draft class, and a bunch of guys from 05 as well, who have given the team superior depth to withstand injuries, etc. They are the anti-Skins. The whole time I was sitting with Ozzie Newsome and Eric DeCosta, the Ravens director of college scouting and a former Skins intern, I couldn't help but think, "Man, these guys get it. They really all do work together. They all follow Ozzie's vision. This is what an organization is supposed to be." They are polar opposites from your boys out in Ashburn in almost every way. It was a very refreshing week in Owings Mills. The entire vibe about that franchise is top notch and classy, from the way they embrace and reach out to the former Baltmore Colts in town - you should hear ex-Skins talk privately about how they have been treated by their franchise since The Squire passed on - to their relaxed air. It's like they know they're doing it the right way, they don't have to try to sell you a bunch of crap about their process, and there is a quiet confidence to what they do. They don't have to try to covince you that they do it right, because the numbers speak for themselves. Since 1999, 75 percent of their draft picks have played in the NFL, either for the Ravens or elsewhere. Best in the league. Since 1999, they have received 16 compensatory draft picks due to players departing in free agency - like getting two extra drafts. And they used those picks on late-round studs like Bart Scott and Adalius Thomas. That means they are drafting so well that they can afford to let some draft picks leave as free agents, because they essentially replace them cheaply with the extra comp picks they get. I beleive the Redskins, in that same span since 1999, have received 5 compensatory picks. I do know this, Baltimore, New England and Philly are at the top of the comp list since 1999 (all receiving like 13 or more additional picks), and the Redskins are lumped in the bottom third with Houston, Cleveland, Arizona. That really tells you all you need to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 If he updated his comparison this week, he could have said that both FO's are currently watching the Paloffs in front of their respective TV sets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 Well, when the Redskins can keep a head coach around for 7 years, you can get production like this. What has hurt us is having 4 head coaches in the same time frame. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-Dog Night Posted January 19, 2007 Author Share Posted January 19, 2007 If he updated his comparison this week, he could have said that both FO's are currently watching the Paloffs in front of their respective TV sets. True, but one team finished last in their division, the other finished first. And you can't argue the point about depth from the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 yeah, and they were 6-10 last year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 True, but one team finished last in their division, the other finished first. And you can't argue the point about depth from the draft. Where did that get the Ratbirds in '05? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[[ghost]] Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 Its easy to mention that now. What about in 2005, when THEY were sitting at home, and we were in the playoffs. I'm guessing he'd say thats a completely different story. Yea, right. He has a point in that the Ravens were successful very much this year thanks to their draft class, but their quarterback, No. 1 WR, and No. 2 running back were free agents. But its easy to ignore that, not to mention the fact that we actually won a playoff game, while they sat at home for one week, left their offense at home the next week, and sat right back down this week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-Dog Night Posted January 19, 2007 Author Share Posted January 19, 2007 So, Bubba and ntotoro, do you just totally dismiss the point out of hand, and contend that the Redskins are running a 1st class organization under Snyder, and that a little depth from the draft would help the team, instead of going - yet again - into April with one first day pick? Just curious. Inquiring minds want to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fifty Gut Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 blah blah blah a team ran by an "offensive genius" who couldn't even score, what, double digit points, at home, against Indy's defense, in the playoffs? (no hate for my boy Air McNair) us the Ravens? that's an insult just like the Eagles, I respect that they take the draft seriously (unlike us), but that's the only thing about them I envy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 Just curious. Inquiring minds want to know. I think it's yet another example of a reporter merely going wherever the wind blows. Last year we were in the playoffs and the Ratbirds had a losing record. For all this talk of the Offensive Genius that is Brian Billick, he has yet to put anything other than a mediocre offense on the field. Ever. Last year you could have said that our way worked better. Now both teams are sitting home, the Ratbirds playing a total of one game more than us, a game in which they got home field and only put up two FG's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-Dog Night Posted January 19, 2007 Author Share Posted January 19, 2007 just like the Eagles, I respect that they take the draft seriously (unlike us), but that's the only thing about them I envy What about this quote, which I personally found interesting: "The entire vibe about that franchise is top notch and classy, from the way they embrace and reach out to the former Baltmore Colts in town - you should hear ex-Skins talk privately about how they have been treated by their franchise since The Squire passed on - to their relaxed air." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illone Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 ]']Its easy to mention that now. What about in 2005' date=' when THEY were sitting at home, and we were in the playoffs. I'm guessing he'd say thats a completely different story. Yea, right. He has a point in that the Ravens were successful very much this year thanks to their draft class, but their quarterback, No. 1 WR, and No. 2 running back were free agents. But its easy to ignore that, not to mention the fact that we actually won a playoff game, while they sat at home for one week, left their offense at home the next week, and sat right back down this week.[/quote']2005 was the exception for the Redskins, not the rule. In that same span the Ravens have made the playoffs four times and won the SB once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siven Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 Honestly, Billicks offense for the Vikings put up so many points because he had good players at so many positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headexplode Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 I wish the Redskins went 13-3 and lost in the playoffs rather than 5-11 and not in it at all. Not to mention that there 6-10 was an aberration and they won a super bowl within the last few years. Our 6-10 and 5-11 seasons are par for the course. But yeah, ya know, duh . . . the Ratbirds. Ha ha ha. So effing clever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fifty Gut Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 What about this quote, which I personally found interesting:"The entire vibe about that franchise is top notch and classy, from the way they embrace and reach out to the former Baltmore Colts in town - you should hear ex-Skins talk privately about how they have been treated by their franchise since The Squire passed on - to their relaxed air." true, I did hear Doc talk about how Snyder didn't get a **** about team history until Gibbs returned how he used to turn away former players at Redskin Park :doh: and had our lone division title banner (under his ownership) bigger than any of our championship banners Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Fakeman Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 *Sigh*....and *Shocker*... To quote Gibbs, again...... "Where would we be without Shawn Springs, Cornelius Griffin, and Marcus Washington?" ~ Joe Gibbs...defending the way we build a team through Free Agency...rather than the draft... For me...it is easy, simple, and fun to challenge Gibbs on that statement... "That's easy coach, you would be 5-11" ...when your highly paid free agents get hurt and you have to bring in donkeys like Mike Rumph...you will end up 5-11. I hate when Gibbs defends their process - they are the only ones that focus on free agency more than the draft...and they are most certainly a losing franchise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-Dog Night Posted January 19, 2007 Author Share Posted January 19, 2007 I think it's yet another example of a reporter merely going wherever the wind blows... Sure. And the Skins actually won a playoff game last year, so an argument could be made that they are the ones doing it right. But do you really believe that? Do you doubt for a moment that the Ravens have a better team with better players, regardless of what happened in the playoffs? There's a lot that goes into the success of a team, and the Ravens won 13 games - no needing to win the last 5 games to squeak into the wildcard. They got a lot closer to beating the Colts than the Redskins did, and they don't pay 44 gazillion dollars to safeties that can't cover and receivers who disappear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRMADD Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 If he updated his comparison this week, he could have said that both FO's are currently watching the Paloffs in front of their respective TV sets. Well, I don't think it's fair to judge either front office based on one year. That's out of their control. So compare the last five years, or seven years, if you want the whole Snyder era. The Skins vs the Ravens? Man, that's not even close -- you do remember they've been to the Superbowl, right? So I don't know what your point is here. The bottom line is indisputable -- the Ravens front office has done a better job in every way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 What about this quote, which I personally found interesting:"The entire vibe about that franchise is top notch and classy, from the way they embrace and reach out to the former Baltmore Colts in town - you should hear ex-Skins talk privately about how they have been treated by their franchise since The Squire passed on - to their relaxed air." If you don't think J La C has an axe to grind you are crazy. He probably had some great articles written dogging the skins and propping up the ratbirds to publish after a defeating the Colts too. Heck the one article even praised the ratbirds for doing a selection/decision by committee which J La C has been mocking the skins about. The Skins do THE SAME THING! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 But do you really believe that? Do you doubt for a moment that the Ravens have a better team with better players, regardless of what happened in the playoffs? That's a tough question, because I didn't see the Ravens as a great team. Great Defense, but certainly not a great team. Last weekend proved both those things. They have had one thing we have yet to enjoy since '92: stability. You certainly can't say they don't have any problem children or egos. That's for certain. They have stability, though, both in personnel and coaches. They're also just around the corner from a half-dozen starters getting significantly older and questions at the QB position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-Dog Night Posted January 19, 2007 Author Share Posted January 19, 2007 If you don't think J La C has an axe to grind you are crazy. I've never considered it, and I couldn't say for sure. But if he does, I'd bet dollars to donuts that it had a lot more to do with the Redskins FO (read: Snyder's devisive attitude permeating its way throught the organization) than Jason developing an axe grinding mentality for no reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 I've never considered it, and I couldn't say for sure. But if he does, I'd bet dollars to donuts that it had a lot more to do with the Redskins FO (read: Snyder's devisive attitude permeating its way throught the organization) than Jason developing an axe grinding mentality for no reason. If you read his blogs, he and the Redskins front office have had a few "disagreements" about information he writes as fact. I think he and Karl Swanson have exchanged a few emails. What better way to stick it to the Skins then write about the Ravens and how perfect they are Who wants to read about them in Washington anyway? The post is an embarassment in its handling of the skins, just as much as the reverse :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 Well, I don't think it's fair to judge either front office based on one year. That's out of their control.So compare the last five years, or seven years, if you want the whole Snyder era. The Skins vs the Ravens? Man, that's not even close -- you do remember they've been to the Superbowl, right? So I don't know what your point is here. The bottom line is indisputable -- the Ravens front office has done a better job in every way. Once again, MRMADD nails it. The truth hurts -- but it hurts even more and will keep hurting you if you don't acknowledge it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKM311 Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 This whole draft vs FA crap needs to stop. Why, because regardless what you do, you need to have good talent evaluators. Thats the problem here. We go for names, not talent. Look at the Giants, they sign a lot of FAs every year, but dont get bashed about it. The reason is, they have a guy who knows how to put a team together and evaluate talent for the system. Our org doesn't get that part. I do not mind building through FA, because it can work with great success, if you just put the right man in charge to build the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyRules Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 Having Ozzie & his F.O. staff with the Skins would simply be a total upgrade compared to Vinny & his boys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.