I need to know something in a poll form.

[Art]

it could mean a lot of things.

it could mean that they have a target for 6/1. it could mean that they had hoped to trade down and couldn't find the right partner.

or, it could mean that they thought the secondary was a bigger priority in terms of need. with which, i disagree with. and that's ok. doesn't mean i think i'm smarter than them, matter of fact, i'm hoping that they are right. i want to be wrong.

I have no doubt adding a quality starting level player to the defensive line was on the list of things to accomplish this offseason. Just as adding a sure, No. 2 receiver was. Just like adding a blocking tight end was, or adding a coverage weakside backer was, and adding a coverage corner was. A lot of priorities don't get filled every year. Some of that is circumstance. Some of that is ranking below other areas. We certainly won't be making a mistake if we sign a true starting level DT at some point before the season begins. Just as certainly, we haven't made one by not doing that yet, because, had it been at the top of the list of woes, long ago efforts toward fixing it would have taken place this offseason.

My guess is with all we've done elsewhere, the need for a defensive tackle is now at or near the top of the remaining areas we'd like to improve, whether we do or not this year, or it waits until next year.

[matty dread]

Interesting that so many people think they know how to run a D from their living rooms. I'm surprised there are so many idiots out there... well, not really.

[Art]

How 'bout dealing with my serious posts that address the heart of the issue - not addressing seriously my joke posts? Check back a page or two - you'll find two or three that you've ignored that take the rug out of your position, or maybe you've already noticed that, which is why you're responding to this instead?

I replied to what I thought was your serious thread when you indicated we didn't know we needed a DL as a DL was the sole problem we had last year and everyone knows it. What is the part you require me to reply to if not that? Sorry if I missed something pertinent.

[GibbsFactor]

I absolutely agree.

Last season I was screaming at the top of my lungs about how terrible our LB play was. It got to the point where I was watching them on almost every play. Terrible, absolutely terrible. Incorrect angles, poor reads, terrible tackling... and I'm including MW in this by the way. He had a terrible season.

The best example in my mind was when Holdman couldn't stop that full back from gaining 2 yards due to his poor execution, angle and being unaware of the play call. Can't remember the game but remember the play. Horrible. Washington stunk, must have been hurt, Marshall just couldn't clog the middle, and Holdman, as I said before lost such a step for a Will, during the first half of the year when Carter was sucking, frieght trains could have ran through some of the holes.

[Art]

Today is the day that Art officially sells out. You are just another representative for the Washington Redskins now. When people were worried about "The Merge" it was stuff like this that they were talking about.

Yawn, Shony.

If anything, I've remained consistent in views for many, many years. Here is no exception. I actually think we'll be a very bad team this year because I have doubts we will get the chemistry back we started to develop as is often the case when teams start to reject the coaches. So, this is no rah-rah thread.

It's merely an informational one. The desperation you, and others, seem to have to suggest you really know what's needed better than the people who design everything is a shame. My guess is of the seven guys we picked to fill those needs, several will fail and a few will succeed, and we'll address the failures in another round of attempting to repair and yoke the successes as long as we're able.

[skinsfanno9]

I replied to what I thought was your serious thread when you indicated we didn't know we needed a DL as a DL was the sole problem we had last year and everyone knows it. What is the part you require me to reply to if not that? Sorry if I missed something pertinent.

This is the primary one:

http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3738219&postcount=279

Here's another:

http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3738310&postcount=289

The heart of the issue is whether its possible for a group of really smart experts to make incredibly bad evaluations and strategic decisions. If you check these posts out, you'll see they accept your demarcation line for evaluation and selection of talent as a separate matter from strategy.

[Major Harris]

I have no doubt adding a quality starting level player to the defensive line was on the list of things to accomplish this offseason. Just as adding a sure, No. 2 receiver was. Just like adding a blocking tight end was,

and you wonder why people question the fo? you say that adding a #2 receiver was/ is a priority this offseason? do lloyd and randle-el ring a bell? blocking te? fauria, rasby?

[Dan T.]

Is it too late in the thread for the

:munchout: smiley?

[Art]

OK, so no need to question the issue that it's an organization of people, all who feel they have expertise, all who are working together to agree upon an evaluation and execute a strategy, right? Everywhere else, strategic and evaluation blunders are made based on poor decision making processes, not lack of knowledge, but in football management this is an impossibility? Hmm, I guess football management is immune to the issues that plague every other organizations. Previous to this thread, I'da thought someone had a mental issue if they said this, but seeing as how you're not going to address these points (which I've stated in detail two or three times), I guess you must be right...

Enjoy the discussion all.

At the root of it, football management is easy. It's not at all complex. There are no politics involved. There is an X and there is an O. That's all a system is. What those Xs and Os do, and how they fit, is what makes the system go. What each of the 11 men in the chain must do to make the chain hold is the system. Evaluating that is monkey work. If given the data that on this play, 11 guys are supposed to do this, but three don't, you see the failure in the system. You see that too often, you attempt to cover for those system failures with different plays to scheme around failure. And you do that and do that and do that every game, every week, every offseason.

The hard part comes when you attempt to humanize the Xs and Os. That's the special stuff most teams fail at. But, they never fail to understand what they are trying to accomplish and what they need to achieve it.

[GibbsFactor]

and you wonder why people question the fo? you say that adding a #2 receiver was/ is a priority this offseason? do lloyd and randle-el ring a bell? blocking te? fauria, rasby?

That is a good point. We've had need at line, #2 and blocking tight end for a few seasons now. Yet, we did not have a need for secondary or LB for a few seasons. Now, due to decisions made in the past, we have to alter our plan and fix things that previously were not broke. All the while, leaving a need for dline depth, a GOOD blocking TE and a GOOD #2. Lloyd and El just aren't it. Fauria isn't it... Hopefully our d-line will step up this year with Golston gaining strength and Carter being more familiar in his role. He did switch back to a position he hadn't played in a few years. I think that Golston and Montgomery will take the brunt of the preseason snaps to keep our studs healthy.

[LoudMouth12thMan]

The coaches, but I know lots about nothing. Does that count? :paranoid:

[skinsfanno9]

At the root of it, football management is easy. It's not at all complex. There are no politics involved.

Its amazing if you can say this with a straight face. In every other organization there are politics, power struggles, differences of opinions, and poor strategies and approaches as a result, but not in football management. Clear strategies and evaluations towards meeting strategies are a nightmare everywhere else, but not in football management?

No politics involved??? Everyone in management is always on the same page regarding strategy and evaluation? Please tell me you don't seriously believe this.

[Art]

and you wonder why people question the fo? you say that adding a #2 receiver was/ is a priority this offseason? do lloyd and randle-el ring a bell? blocking te? fauria, rasby?

Mistakes in the who, not the what, MH. Pull the two apart. ARE actually is a better fit than I envisioned in the slot for what they sought to fill. Lloyd was far worse at No. 2 than I thought possible, and we're left to hope he rebounds. Maybe he will. Kozlowski was a blocker who didn't play well. Fauria was a blocker who didn't play well. That doesn't invalidate the serious need in the system we play for a top blocking tight end to make it go. Thus, we draft a big boned kid who can't catch but might get to 290 pounds to give it a shot. Royal wasn't that great a blocker in the end, but, he was a key ingredient to the team's chemistry and leadership and soul. We shouldn't have ever let him go accepting his relative limitations in the role for his superior influence with the players. But, again, that's the who, not the what.

We make, like everyone, mistakes in the who. We also have successes in that. Like everyone. This is not a thread requesting anyone validate the front office and the who about fixing holes. Nor the how they go about it. Merely, that it is recognized on some level the what is always correct and accurate.

[DjTj]

you don't think okoye has a chance to be an impact defensive lineman?

Yes, I think he can be an impact defensive lineman like Cornelius Griffin, but he doesn't have the size to be a space eating tackle that can fill in for the oft-injured Joe Salave'a, our weakest link on the defensive line right now. I'm not going to lie, I would have been happier if Okoye's name were called on Saturday, but he would have been something of a project for us and probably wouldn't have seen the field this year.

I think we needed a DT like Branch more than we needed one like Okoye ... unfortunately Branch wasn't good enough and Okoye maybe didn't quite fit - certainly not as well as Landry, who is basically our new and improved Adam Archuleta.

[Art]

Its amazing if you can say this with a straight face. In every other organization there are politics, power struggles, differences of opinions, and poor strategies and approaches as a result, but not in football management?

No politics involved??? Everyone in management is automatically on the same page? Please tell me you don't seriously believe this?

There are no politics between you and 700 pages of plays. It's paper. It doesn't understand politcs. It's scribblings with lines. It doesn't get political. It's foundational principle, which leans neither left nor right. It's simple. Pure. Obvious. Understanding it is rare and held to an elite few who make them up and run them.

Understanding what makes it go is experience coupled with some innovation I suppose. Understanding the what is pure and uncomplicated. Exacting the who is hard, hard, difficult, variable stuff.

[jbooma]

I love Gibbs to death, but, I see the flaws in what he's doing since he's returned from a management standpoint. He's lost touch with the players and their emotions, primarily because the players are afraid of him and he hasn't gotten them to believe they don't need to be. Williams did lose his guys as Gibbs lost his as well. They both are the one's responsible for the negative impact of having the players reject them last year.

Ultimately, it's their fault that happened, even if we tire of the players being such babies. One element of why the defensive line was not as much a priority is because it was not the unit that seemed to rebel against the staff, meaning, they likely believe they remain coachable and will do as they are asked where they clearly had doubts as to getting that same play from other units.

I think Gibbs might have lost control because of Danny personally. Gibbs has pretty much turned into Danny's puppet, which is sad.

We both agree that Gibbs was always a better coach then GM, and he is showing it again. He can't do both jobs it is to hard, and has been proven not many coaches can handle it.

[KCJDLJ]

Believing that NFL coaches are always right is laughable.

No one said the coaches were always right. No one is always right. The question was, do they know more than we do about the needs of the team? Anyone who answers anthing other than yes is kinda silly.

[skinsfanno9]

There are no politics between you and 700 pages of plays. It's paper. It doesn't understand politcs. It's scribblings with lines. It doesn't get political. It's foundational principle, which leans neither left nor right. It's simple. Pure. Obvious. Understanding it is rare and held to an elite few who make them up and run them.

Understanding what makes it go is experience coupled with some innovation I suppose. Understanding the what is pure and uncomplicated. Exacting the who is hard, hard, difficult, variable stuff.

Ok, so, you're going to ignore the posts I've referenced? More to the point, you're now boiling down the entirety of evaluation and strategy to a playbook??? Um, I don't think that's really what you were talking about earlier. You were talking about the FO diagnosing problems with their systems and execution in relation to their strategy (not player selection) - this is not about a playbook, and I think you know this. I think you also know that the diagnosis and strategic direction is a group oriented process, involving everyone from Snyder and Cerrato to Gibbs and his offensive and defensive coaching staff. This is a LOT of people involved. There IS a decision making process involved. This decision making process is subject to the same maladies of every other organization. If there are problems in the decision making process, this DOES negatively impact the agreed upon strategy and assessment process. If there ever was a valid postulate in this discussion its that. Furthermore, if their decision making process lacks a rigorous risk management process (risk identification, assessment, mitigation), their overall decision making (independent of player evals) will almost certainly be flawed - this has again been proven in every other organization field.

To state that all of the above is child's play and that the only hard part is talent evaluation is really more an indication of your blindspot. Again, its silly in the extreme to say that diagnosis and strategic direction in football management is immune the incredible maladies facing every other type of business everywhere. Truly silly.

EDIT: Whether or not you get what I'm saying, at least try to realize that your view that "understanding the what is pure and uncomplicated" is an opinion on your part - a completely unsubstantiated one I might add - one that if we do not agree with topples the house of cards that is your argument.

[dfbovey]

No one said the coaches were always right. No one is always right. The question was, do they know more than we do about the needs of the team? Anyone who anwers anthing other than yes is kinda silly.

The question is silly in general. Of course the coaches know more than the fans do about alot of things. Doesn't mean that they are beyond criticism or that they are right about everything like Art would suggest.

This thread is nothing but a sad attempt to call anyone who might question the front office, ignorant.

[Passizle]

Well... I dont know much about coaching, but I did stay at a Holiday in Express lastnight. That makes me more knowledgable than the coaches.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Largely correct. We stopped no one. We were horrible against the run and the pass. And, to correct this, seven guys in the back seven were added. What's that mean?

It could be that our coaches are idiots.

It could.

It could mean that they are geniuses.

It could.

It definitively proves neither.

[skinsfanno9]

The question is silly in general. Of course the coaches know more than the fans do about alot of things. Doesn't mean that they are beyond criticism or that they are right about everything like Art would suggest.

Lots of really smart people make lots of truly boneheaded evaluations and strategic blunders all the time. The bookstore is filled with stories like these. Good thing Football Management is magically immune to that which cripples every other organization, including, incidentally, basketball management. The Michael Jordan Wizards fiasco comes to mind - nope, no politics or power struggles there, ladies and gents...

[Art]

Skinsfanno,

I've addressed your questions, rather repeatedly.

Understanding the system you run is something no staff can ever get incorrect. If Saunders knows he needs a tight end who can get to the 12-yard mark in a the seam at a specific point in time to make a play go, and that's a regular thing, he knows exactly what he needs. It's almost mathmatical and pure. That's the easiest thing there is.

When you evaluate your system and those in it, you have all the data at your fingertips. You know exactly what you're aiming to accomplish and exactly what you saw happen. It's not variable. It's fixed. When we evaluated ours, we already de-emphasize individual pass rush skills up front in favor of a different style and priority. When they evaluated that aspect, they clearly came out thinking while they can get better at every area of a football team all the time, it was a far lesser area to focus on than getting better elsewhere.

In this, there can't really be a mistake. They can't be wrong to look at tape, see who's making mistakes and draw up a chart that shows who it is more often and who did it right more often. This is not at all complex. It's tedious, but not hard. And, it's been the precise nature of this conversation, despite rather desperate attempts to move beyond it.

I want to move beyond it, as I have a second step in the conversation I'd be happy to add. But, until I'm reasonably sure everyone understand what I'm asking, I'm not sure we should go further, because there seems so much confusion despite so frequent a statement as to what I'm seeking an answer to.

The answer, for the record, is, "Yeah, obviously." But, you can't do it. You have to come up with reasons coaches could have the play in hand, look at tape, see mistakes and say, "Didn't happen.' Come on guy. This is the easy part of this exercise. Why can't you get there on your own?

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

At the root of it, football management is easy. It's not at all complex. There are no politics involved. There is an X and there is an O. That's all a system is. What those Xs and Os do, and how they fit, is what makes the system go. What each of the 11 men in the chain must do to make the chain hold is the system. Evaluating that is monkey work. If given the data that on this play, 11 guys are supposed to do this, but three don't, you see the failure in the system. You see that too often, you attempt to cover for those system failures with different plays to scheme around failure. And you do that and do that and do that every game, every week, every offseason.

The hard part comes when you attempt to humanize the Xs and Os. That's the special stuff most teams fail at. But, they never fail to understand what they are trying to accomplish and what they need to achieve it.

Having watched the Steve Spurrier era in DC, the Mouse Davis era in Detroit, and the Kevin Gilbride Era pretty much everywhere he has ever been, I respectfully disagree.

The Xs and Os can be wrong in and of themselves. Teams can scheme themselves out of games regardless of what the talent level is.

Even good coaches can do this. Gregg Williams' mentor is one of those people. Buddy Ryan set the world on fire with the 46 when it first came into the league. By the time he got to Philly, it was already showing some cracks, but he just happened to have arguably the greatest front four of all time running it. You could have run any system with those guys and made the playoffs. By the time he got to Arizona and Tennessee, he was making it impossible for his teams to win games.

I honestly think that our defense had two issues last year: schematic and talent. I think we have addressed the talent issue to some degree this year - though our D-line still terrifies me. The schematic I am concerned about still.

[Taylor 36]

This poll is spot on.

This is exactly why I've never gotten hyped up for the NFL Draft. It's a fool's errand. All of you clowns with your personal boards and draft insiders links... analyzing this crap for months prior to the big day.

Then... no matter who your team picks... you end up pissed off and you're weekend is ruined :loser:.

Jesus people. You're on the ****ing internet. You're not a scout. Get over yourselves. You all are like a bunch of ****es whining because someone stole your lollipop.

Show a little class. Welcome these kids that just got drafted to the Washington Redskins...

:notworthy Great post, Zoony!!! I agree. There are too many people here that think that they have it all figured out, like they spend 18 hours a day review tapes, hosting interviews and workouts, etc. The Draft is like Christmas, a media-exploded explotation that has ruined the original meaning and purpose of the event.