I need to know something in a poll form.

[UK Skins]

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Why didn't you come along four hours ago? Could have saved a lot of discussion!!

[skinsn24]

After 2 seasons... the Redskins had to hire a new offensive coordinator to improve the struggling passing game. The offense struggled to find any consistency and mid-season Joe Gibbs had to change the identity of the offense from a finesse approach BACK to a power-running game.

Late in the 2006 season, Gregg Williams publicly states that teams have figured out the Cover 2 defense the Skins have been employing - ironically, it's the same defense employed by the 2 Super Bowl participants - and states that he would be reviewing a lot of tape of the defense to figure out what's going to wrong.

And we had a 5-11 record to show for it.

So please...... don't tell me these coaches have any direction.

One minute they say they're identity is to be aggressive in free agency... and 24 hours ago we hear how Gibbs now values draft picks and he wants to go into the next draft with a full set.

For 2 seasons, he wanted full participation in voluntary camps... now, he's letting the players work out on their own.

There's no direction here... none. All I see is continual mistakes... and then Gibbs throws up his hands and says "Well, that didn't work... let's try something else".

That hardly inspires any confidence.

But hey, if you enjoy the "well, sooner or later he'll exhaust every failure so he's bound to get it right" philosophy... then carry on.

DH this was an amazing post. Thank you.

What i highlighted in yellow is so interesting and *should* help prove that at times, GW may not know what is best for his system (maybe his emotions, favoratism or pride get in the way).

Late in the 2006 season, Gregg Williams publicly states that teams have figured out the Cover 2 defense the Skins have been employing - ironically, it's the same defense employed by the 2 Super Bowl participants - and states that he would be reviewing a lot of tape of the defense to figure out what's going to wrong.

So interesting. Both Lovie and Dungy run a type of Cover 2 defense, very similiar to what Greg Runs, just slightly different. The bidding war over Archuleta and the want by both teams for Briggs, shows the similairties are there. Also flether and urlacher are both underized MLB.

Yet Lovie and Dungy aquire great defensive linemen, Dungy midseason, when he saw the gaping problems in his run D.

Williams had great sucess with goodline play as well. Yet now it seems he is ignoring or has forgotten what worked so well.

Maybe he has misdiagnosed the problems, just a little, wait that would be impossible.

(maybe, just maybe Lovie or Dungy could help us out just a bit, just maybe)

[Ryman of the North]

DH this was an amazing post. Thank you.

What i highlighted in yellow is so interesting and *should* help prove that at times, GW may not know what is best for his system (maybe his emotions, favoratism or pride get in the way).

Late in the 2006 season, Gregg Williams publicly states that teams have figured out the Cover 2 defense the Skins have been employing - ironically, it's the same defense employed by the 2 Super Bowl participants - and states that he would be reviewing a lot of tape of the defense to figure out what's going to wrong.

So interesting. Both Lovie and Dungy run a type of Cover 2 defense, very similiar to what Greg Runs, just slightly different. The bidding war over Archuleta and the want by both teams for Briggs, shows the similairties are there. Also flether and urlacher are both underized MLB.

Yet Lovie and Dungy aquire great defensive linemen, Dungy midseason, when he saw the gaping problems in his run D.

Williams had great sucess with goodline play as well. Yet now it seems he is ignoring or has forgotten what worked so well.

Maybe he has misdiagnosed the problems, just a little, wait that would be impossible.

(maybe, just maybe Lovie or Dungy could help us out just a bit, just maybe)

Or maybe just maybe you could do more than read on a message board and proclaim yourself an expert on our defence!!!!!!!

1-DH I dont disagree with you very often but I will here, This team has finally shown that they will do what THEY think is best for the team, to me thats huge.

2- what every critic of our D this year has failed to account for is this most improtant fact.... WE DID NOT RUN OUR DEFENSE!!!! We ran a cover 2 most of the year to cover up poor secondary play, normally we run a multiple front, blitz from several spots pressure defence with a lot of man and disguised zones and we are simply not built to play cover 2. Our normal philosophy is about as far from the tampa 2 as can be.

So beak off all you want about our defence playing porrly but bottom line is we had to swicth to a zone because our corners were not up to the task and once springs was out we had no true cover corners on the field. We tried to run our normal stuff but our corners were getting torched so they tried to stop the bleeding by going to the cover 2.

Heres the thing, In a Cover two you need three good pass rushers on the line and one mauler, we have one good pass rusher (who never showed until the second half of the seaosn) and three maulers (with two being solid at pressuring the QB).... in a Cover 2 you need three good cover Lbs and two safeties who are good at staying back and covering and being patient. What we have is Marcus(who is not known for his coverage) and taylor who is the definitive ballhawk type safety and not a deep third type. Marshall was ok at MLB but Holdman was terrible and slow. we should have had solid Cover 2 corners but Rogers may have the worst hands in the NFL and let several picks hit the ground. he needs to lose some weight and gain some quickness to be more effective this year when we go back to OUR stuff. at safety we had one big hole across form Taylor, this made him press and resulted in him getting burned when he tried to do too much.

Do I think that Gibbs is perfect, well honestly I think hes pretty close, if anything he is too willing to change ( I still think we would be better off if we had gIven him the tools that we gave suanders and let him run our old school O) Our trouble has been losing great assistants and replacing them with "name" coaches who were not up to par, losing Taylors first secondary coach reall hurt and it showed. this year and the next will be the telling years, before we all assumed that this was a superbowl team short a few pieces now we know exactly what we are, a solid team with a chance to go deep in the playoffs if everyone steps up.

[SkinsFTW]

When the offseason began you thought we needed a defensive lineman. The team has added four guys in the secondary, three linebackers and no linemen.

Do you think the people who coach our team have a better grasp of what was weak last year than you do? That's it.

Right or wrong, these same COACHES and FO PERSONNEL were the ones who also decided over the past 2-3 years that we didn't need Pierce, we didn't need Bailey, we didn't need Clark, we didn't need Smoot, we didn't need Harris, Arrington, or even Ohalete, lol.

But we needed Archuleta?

Now it is the LB's and the DB's that are the problem.

Fine.

If that's it though wouldn't it have been a lot cheaper, and let us use some draft picks over the past couple seasons on DL or OL since we are essentially replacing perfectly good players that we already had? I listed them above, we had the option to resign all of them.

I mean, to you Art, they were right in 2004, 2005, and 2006 when they made the decision that we didn't need any of those guys, and now they are right again after a 5-11 season in which our defense was by far the worst Redskins defense any of us have ever seen over a 16 game season.

My question to you is when are they wrong?

[Forever21]

Great poll Art!

It has been fun for months now reading how so many people know more about our defense than the coaches.

No DL help whatsoever in the offseason. hmmm...

Maybe the coaches know a thing or two we don't huh?!

Trust the coaches!

[UK Skins]

If you have read the whole thread you will see that some of us don't!!

[scruffylookin]

Trust the coaches!

Why?

[Die Hard]

perhaps the moves we made in the draft through the past couple days acknowledges that next step and necessary rectification? only time will tell, but i really do like the idea of looking forward, not back.

Given our FO's mistakes... and repeated mistakes.... some VERY HUGE mistakes... most of which are very RECENT.... I'm not sure why anybody still gives hits FO the benefit of the doubt (not looking back).

I mean.... last year they gave up the equivalent of a first round draft pick to select MacIntosh. And then just 3 weeks ago.... we're looking to trade for his replacement?

Just last season.... we signed Archuletta to the richest safety deal in NFL history. Less than 6 games into the season.... the club decided it was a mistake?

These are HUGE, HUGE mistakes regarding personnel.... just done yesterday.... but because they're so painful.... you've chosen to completely ignore it rather than learn from it.

The fact that the team has to fix the errors isn't a sign of "moving forward". It signifies the incompetence of the staff. And given their track record.... I don't know why they get the benefit of the doubt - assuming the problem has been fixed.

[Major Harris]

i refuse to play this game. still thinking that we should have gone d-line does not indicate that we believe our football knowledge is superior to that of the coaches.

iirc, there were more than one or two posters on here last year that said the arch deal was a big mistake. does that mean that they know, or even think they know, more than the coaches overall? no.

[bubba9497]

Why?

why not?

[Die Hard]

Funny, DH, but, in days gone by, Gibbs' willingness to adapt to his players was seen as his greatest strength. Now, if he lacks Marty's iron fist, he's utterly without soul or plan. Gibbs won with three 1,000-yard receivers and he won with one Diesel. He obviously had no consistent, clear plan or direction, right? No, that's silly brother.

I'm totally with you that he's made a ton of mistakes since returning. You saw, I hope, where I agreed with you that any other coach doing so poor a job would be gone by now. I have yet to have that lead me to believe he can't get things on track, likely a remnant of deeply grained respect for the man.

That said, I've been pretty open that this year is going to be telling and difficult to be all that encouraged about because in most cases when a staff loses a team like we did last year, it ends in termination before the following year finishes. I'm not sure how your point on Williams is a negative. Teams were exploiting what he was running. He said he has to fix it. That's a good thing, right?

No, it's not a good thing.

Give me a coach who has his methods/philosophies... and the reason why he isn't succeeding is because he doesn't have the right amount of quality players for his system yet.

Not a coach who has a system.... and then changes the system and the players every year because he can't win ball games.

I'm not sure there's any strength in the argument that Gibbs' is truly adaptable anyways. Gibbs' is loyal to the core... to his own detriment. His unwillingness to play rookies is evidence of it. All that talent in the draft.... and just 72 hours ago he said there isn't anybody in this draft that can earn a spot on our starting roster (a roster that went 5-11 last year).

I wouldn't be so liberal in stating how "adaptability" is one of Joe Gibbs' strongest traits. If he wasn't so stubborn... he wouldn't have waited so long to replace Mark Brunell when he was struggling.

[Major Harris]

why not?

6-10, 5-11

pierce, bailey, smoot. trading away draft picks like they have herpes or something.

[Die Hard]

why not?

2004- 6-10

2005 - 5-6 (until 5 game winning streak)

2006 - 5-11

That's pretty condemning..... considering the free leash Gibbs' has had signing players to lucrative contracts (and high draft picks) and assembling the highest paid coaching staff in NFL history.

In fact, the only reason why you're not questioning Joe Gibbs is because he won a few Super Bowl's 20 years ago.

That's the gist of your argument right there... hanging on to history. It's weak.

[UK Skins]

Just last season.... we signed Archuletta to the richest safety deal in NFL history. Less than 6 games into the season.... the club decided it was a mistake?

And then of course had/chose to use their only first day draft pick on his replacement.......

[Forever21]

Why?

Because they know more about football than you or I do.

[Mark The Homer]

In case a few didn't see this, read at least the first couple posts, and check the posting date:

http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=193163

[skinsfanno9]

This has been a pretty fun thread to read. Unfortunately for Art, he's painted himself into a strange corner - one where humans in football management are infallible to strategic errors, organizational ineptitude and inconsistencies. In the world of football management, it's impossible for them to incorrectly diagnose problems with their own strategy - only execution has the possibility of flaws. Unlike the rest of the management world, Arrogance, groupthink and all the other mgt maladies never enters into the equation. It's simply a postulate that their strategy and diagnosis is perfect (this of course means there is never disagreement among a football management's staff, as they all "know" the right answer). Who are we to even suggest they might have ever made a mistake with their strategy or overall approach?

Gosh, all I can say is they really should be quitting football and instead should be writing management texts. 'Cause wouldn't it be great if that fantasy-land somehow permeated the rest of corporate world? Here we have over 80% to 90% of the rest all organizations filled to the brim with all these problems - the vast majority of which have horrid strategic issues including massive amounts of infighting for different approaches and goals, but NOBODY in football management has these issues - 0%!!! Who knew that football management was the Nirvana of all that is right in management and operations? Truly I'm astounded, as I would have never considered the possibility that football management is where the true management geniuses of our society exist. Forget Harvard Business School - NCAA coaching is where its at!

Truly, the thread has been fun, but Art's argument has become pretty silly. As is the notion that dumping massive numbers of high draft picks for a few poorly investigated players isn't part of a strategy - that's just execution, which is a totally separate thing.

[rumpshakers]

They must have a master plan

[brooksflow]

Good grief. According to the poll 32% of our folks so far are either coaches in hiding and posting on this board, smartasses, genuinely full of themselves, or are answering the question based upon their Madden video game prowess.

[Hokieskins1]

its their job, thats what they do....

[onedrop]

well 40% of the voters live in a state of delusion. I bet in your alternate reality your co-workers respect everything you say and think you should be the next Redskins GM.

exactly opposite. i guess we read two different original posts. i criticize the coaches and FO with every loss. however, im not so foolish as to think i could do better or know more about their jobs than they do.

[RedskinzOwnU]

No, it's not a good thing.

Give me a coach who has his methods/philosophies... and the reason why he isn't succeeding is because he doesn't have the right amount of quality players for his system yet.

Not a coach who has a system.... and then changes the system and the players every year because he can't win ball games.

I'm not sure there's any strength in the argument that Gibbs' is truly adaptable anyways. Gibbs' is loyal to the core... to his own detriment. His unwillingness to play rookies is evidence of it. All that talent in the draft.... and just 72 hours ago he said there isn't anybody in this draft that can earn a spot on our starting roster (a roster that went 5-11 last year).

I wouldn't be so liberal in stating how "adaptability" is one of Joe Gibbs' strongest traits. If he wasn't so stubborn... he wouldn't have waited so long to replace Mark Brunell when he was struggling.

I agree with your arguments completely. Gibbs looked lost on the sidelines in year 1 (perhaps to be expected, somewhat excusable). The problem is, he STILL looks lost on the sidelines after 3 years. He is calling poor games, making poor game-changing decisions, still can't manage the clock, handle timeouts, etc. Adjustments? He may have been famous for them last time around - but I haven't see jack as far as mid-game, or even mid-season adjustments. It has taken him over 65% of a season just to pull Brunell - twice!!. Fool me once, shame on you... you know the rest Gibbs. He's not learning from his mistakes. With each new season he takes a shot in the dark at "new" things that might work since the last one didn't. His experiments stem from the fact that he is stumped and confused as to why the last plan didn't work, and "heck," just trying SOMETHING new hoping it will work. I don't want someone without a clear and successful plan coming in, being wishy washy, and trying all sorts of random **** to get it right. I want a guy that knows what he is doing, confident in HIMSELF to get his plan right. The fact that we brought in Al Saunders, and that fact that Joe wanted him so badly, was a sign that Gibbs had no confidence in himself. He has no idea what he is doing right now as a coach, and the fact that he has to make personnel decisions with Snyder and Cerrato is essentially the blind leading the blind. He wants to win, and that's lovely, but what NFL head coach doesn't? He did a fine job 20 years ago, but today's NFL is so different that he might as well be coaching baseball. After 3 years, he simply hasn't adjusted to the game today.

With that being said - I really hope he gets it right this season. But the notion that this coaching staff is infallible is just laughable. If we have to give them the benefit of the doubt on every issue merely b/c they spend more time with the players in practice and on the field - then what is the point of even having this message board?? We can see the games too. No, the coaches have been wrong about many things - too many things, over the past few years. A lot of which are the same things that the fans were absolutely right about. I will question this coaching staff to my heart's content - and they deserve nothing else until they show us consistent success that is derived from their leadership. I hope this is the year.

[PeterMP]

why not?

The TJ Duckett trade.

[Koolblue13]

Good grief. According to the poll 32% of our folks so far are either coaches in hiding and posting on this board, smartasses, genuinely full of themselves, or are answering the question based upon their Madden video game prowess.

Well although I answered they know more, I do run a GW attacking stlye D when I play Madden. I'm good too. Drives people nuts and LL is gonna make me even better!

[Art]

Skinsfanno,

The position likely would appear silly if you lack the mental capacity to understand the question. Where it might often be correct to wonder why X dollars or Y picks were used to acquire a specific guy, and, often the view that the price was higher than it had to be may come into your cranium and be a reasonable viewpoint. Or, you may sit back, stunned, it's Player M we acquired, because you hate Player M as a player and can't understand how anyone would think he's any good.

All of these potential flaws and areas of mistake exist, and will always have some sound reasoning in questioning. And this is a conversation outside of the question asked. I keep saying that, because BEFORE any price is paid, and before any grades are laid, something else happens.

The staff evaluates their personnel within their systems and they determine what type of player is required to make it go. At that core, functional level, you appear to believe the people who run it, call it and know it can't possibly know what types of things they require to make it go. Though, honestly, I know you don't think that. I know you just are willfully, or naturally, being too dim to actually speak to the question asked.

My guess is it's willful, because so much else melts away for you if you are honest enough to understand that core premise. Once you do, you will be left comparing Nelson and Landry for the price we'll pay, and you won't have to compare Landry and anyone else.