Clinton Portis # 26 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Wish they could hire him already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I ask again, why is this vaunted 'stability' so important, on a team that had to perform miracles twice in 4 years just to make the playoffs? Because we performed those miracles this team showed that it has the potential to be great. If we can play at that level ALL the time instead of only at crunch time, we will have a powerhouse. We aren't a team on the precipice of greatness. I disagree. You don't think we'd have run all over the Seahawks with Randy Thomas and Jon Jansen fully healthy? We were one red zone possession away from winning a road playoff game in arguably the toughest road stadium to play in this decade. We were one low pass to Cooley away, really. And that was with SEVEN starters down. SEVEN. That's a huge amount. In 2006, the only direction was up. We made the mistake of bringing in the high-profile FAs, and it was a HUGE mistake (except for Carter). In 2007, we corrected that mistake for the most part, and only brought in the key components. 2008 offseason will tell a lot as to where this team is headed - but I think it is definitely in the right direction. In light of that, and the age we have at some positions (especially the lines), I'm not confident going with an unproven head coach. I like Williams, but the reason to hire him isn't to maintain 'stability'. Of course players favor that, because 'stability'= job security. We need some youth on the OLine and DLine, for sure - and I am confident that we will address that in the draft. However the way our defense was playing at the end of last season, I don't want to make any personnel subsitutions (except Carlos and Rocky when they are healthy); I think they have earned job security. In the end, you may be right; "stability" may be overrated. However bringing in a brand new staff along with brand new systems is also an unknown, and would most likely mean a really different looking Redskins team in 2008. I guess it just depends on how you view our 4-year run with Gibbs...I see it as stocking up on high-character, true Redskin type guys. Om nailed it with his "these are Redskins" blog post - no true superstars, just blue-collar, lunch pail, Redskins getting the job done. I think Williams has bought into that philosophy, and will continue to maintain those ideals in Washington. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Ideals are fine ... but production on the field is another story. Under Gibbs, Williams, and Saunders ... the Skins chronically underperformed on the field. Get rid of the bums I say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HigSkin Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Personally, I think a lot of you guys are kidding yourselves that a Williams hire ensures success. Redskins fans, including myself, have guessed wrong over and over again. We're likely guessing wrong again here too. Join me in going Costanza here. I think we should decide exactly whats 'best' for this organization, and do the exact opposite.Then we might have a chance at making the right choice and experiencing consistent success +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Tarhog, The Redskins have already gone down Sit-com alley. Spurrier? Norv? Not giving Schott a shot? I say doing the opposite is not going outside the orginazation and staying with Williams at least for two years instead of the splashy hire. Change is good, but only so much of it. Gibbs leaving is the biggest change this team needed to endure this off-season. And remember these little tidbits, Cowboys are being raided and should be hurt by that, the Eagles are in disarray in serveral areas, Coughlin like Williams is hard nosed football coach who was about to be fired last year, he is still in the playoffs. Williams not only deserves a shot, but is more than worthy. His stint in Buffalo was marred by a team not willing to help out in Cap Hell and was good if you consider the talent on hand and the circumstances-besides what have they done since? The East is a tough place to play and you want to start over---AGAIN, Again? Nicely done and well thought! :applause: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tex Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Which would essentially give us the same level of 'starting over' we'll experience if they choose not to go in-house with their selection.Personally, I think a lot of you guys are kidding yourselves that a Williams hire ensures success. Keeping Coach Williams in house as HC would likely prevent wholesale radical change in favor of moving forward by building upon the foundation laid by Coach Gibbs and Coach Williams. No sense in trying to re-invent the wheel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passizle Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I like Williams, but the reason to hire him isn't to maintain 'stability'. Of course players favor that, because 'stability'= job security. It doesn't necessarily equal success. Check that. Google "success stability NFL". Or just take a look at all the successful franchises over the past 10 years. Steelers = Stability Patriots = Stability Colts = Stability Seahawks = Stability Giants = Stability Eagles = Stability Panthers = Stability Cheifs = Stability Etc... now we can look at a few teams without stability... Maimi Redskins Cowboys San Fran Atlanta New Orleans Buffalo Browns Etc... Nuff said? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scruffylookin Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Check that. Google "success stability NFL".Or just take a look at all the successful franchises over the past 10 years. Steelers = Stability Patriots = Stability Colts = Stability Seahawks = Stability Giants = Stability Eagles = Stability Panthers = Stability Cheifs = Stability Etc... now we can look at a few teams without stability... Maimi Redskins Cowboys San Fran Atlanta New Orleans Buffalo Browns Etc... Nuff said? We were stable in the 90's, we just had the wrong people in charge and lost just as much if not more. Being stable is one thing. Being stable with the right people is another. Is Snyder/Cerrato/Williams the right kind of stability we want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor 36 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Gods, people call Snyder an idiot, then fall into the same traps! I thought us fans had pretty much enough of major change, changing coaches, changing coordinators, changing players. I know I had enough of it.I think we have a lot here worth building on. We were pretty much in every game last year, and some of those could have been pulled out if maybe our QB had a bit more seasoning, if we didn't have some of the major injuries. At the same time, you shouldn't have continuity for the sake of continuity. We had made that mistake when we promoted one of Marvin Lewis' assistants to replace him, and we saw what a disaster that was. You need to make sure he is the right guy for the job. (which is why I'm glad they are doing so much talking.) Now, let's not get stuck on that keeping Williams here means that things will stay the same here. Williams is not Gibbs. His style will be different. How he runs the team will be different. His ideas and priorities will be different. Again, that is why it is important for Snyder to know these things before hiring him. That being said, he will be ahead of the game over anyone from the outside being brought in. He knows the players. He knows the opponents. Just make sure he is the right guy. Jason :applause: Excellent post, Jason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Edds Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Sorry ... I don't call limping into the wild card game by beating teams that have already clinched COMPETITIVE. The Skins were blown out by Seattle ... a team that didn't even show up at Green Bay one week later. Virtually none of the players on the Skins with a few exceptions would start for any other NFL team. The Skins are overaged, overpaid and undercoached. They need an elite QB and a fresh start ... They are far from competitive now ... any Skins' fan who thinks they are "one or two players away" is in denial. Its same old, same old ... and the record shows how dismal that is. denial my ass ... the Ginats, Vikes and Bears had not clinched playoff spots when we played them. They were playoff type of games and we won them, regardless of how, we did (and whipped Dallass' to boot). And this is the same mentality that Dan Snyder brought to the table with every coach he hired and fired on a whim. "Win now or go home." What has that gotten us? NOTHING. You look at every other team, and we can all agree that it takes time to build a winner. But it's not enough for the Redskins? A new regime started barely 4 years ago, and had to clean up 9 years of chaos. We can all identify the mistakes this team made in judging talent and some bad FA acquisitions were made. But, one thing is for sure, going in a new direction sets us back another 3-5 years. What is still up in the air, is whether this team can still make a run with a few more additions and tweaks. Why not wait one more year to make such a drastic change that will no doubt set us back to "rebuilding"? I see some older players with high salaries, they are what was left over from our "win now" FA sprees of the past. They are either going to be cut or restructure their contracts. The week of January 1st, there were 20 other teams in the NFL who were already cleaning out their lockers. We weren't one of them. Some of us look at the glass as half full ... I don't consider that denial my friend, and you shouldn't either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Sorry ... I don't call limping into the wild card game by beating teams that have already clinched COMPETITIVE. The Skins were blown out by Seattle ... a team that didn't even show up at Green Bay one week later. Virtually none of the players on the Skins with a few exceptions would start for any other NFL team. The Skins are overaged, overpaid and undercoached. They need an elite QB and a fresh start ... They are far from competitive now ... any Skins' fan who thinks they are "one or two players away" is in denial. Its same old, same old ... and the record shows how dismal that is. I call only one blowout in the season, to one of the best teams ever, while staying competitive, even leading, in every other loss COMPETITIVE. This is why I didn't get why Tarhog was saying we were not on the verge of greatness. With so many close losses, and a winning record and playoff appearance, with one of the hardest schedules in the league, how can you not think this team can go further? Oh, that's right, this fanbase as a majority has no patience unless the team goes 16-0 and wins every game by 50 points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Edds Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I'm sure this has been mentioned before on ES, but why does everyone think a new coach automatically means blowing everything up? Rarely(aka Never) in the NFL does a head coach come in and cut the whole roster. Getting a new coach also doesn't mean an instant regression to 3-13, we just think it does because we've hired Spurrier who did poorly and Gibbs had a re-learning curve in year one. Schottenheimer went 8-8 with an 8-3 end to the season in his first year. One early win for Schottenheimer and his season is equivalent to the "success" we had this year. Here's another point: Jon Gruden. The guy goes into Tampa and takes over a good team asembled by Tony Dungy. If some of us Skins fans were there we'd have been crying, moaning, and wailing about how this meant blowing up the team and some would be booking trips to New York for what they'd immediately assume would be the Number 1 pick in the draft. What happened when Gruden went to TB? They won the SB in his first year. Stablity isn't what a lot of Skins fans are making it out to be. Hiring Jon Gruden is the equivalent to hiring GW and keeping Saunders as OC. You see what has happened to them since Gruden came on board? And this is apples and oranges. W don't have the #1 defense in the league and a top flight offense waiting for someone who knows how to call the right plays at the right time. I think Dungy would have won that SB had Gruden not come in. he was the benefactor of being at the right place at the right time, though he is a damn good coach IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Ideals are fine ... but production on the field is another story. Under Gibbs, Williams, and Saunders ... the Skins chronically underperformed on the field. Get rid of the bums I say. Yeah. If only we had traded for Calvin Johnson. I guess 2 playoff appearances, a win (which Dallas still can't do) and a RB and WR breaking frachise records is chronically underperforming. I guess making the playoffs despite losing half the O-line, starting QB, the death of Sean Taylor, etc., beating teams in the playoff hunt as well is chronically underperforming. Or maybe, like always, you are over exaggerating just to get a reaction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor4Life Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Personally, I think a lot of you guys are kidding yourselves that a Williams hire ensures success. No hire "ensures" success, except maybe the hire of a good GM.:2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heidenreich Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Yeah. If only we had traded for Calvin Johnson. or drafted Brady Quinn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsfor4 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 In the end I hope its Russ Grimm but that is not looking good by this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatboy41 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I really want Williams to be named HC. And, I'm taking this as a positive thing in that direction. By the way, thank you for posting this. I am still a bit nervous about his cast of coaches though... Are the many many coaches we have in position right now good enough to help Williams out? I like the quote by London Fletcher, and if Williams is meticulous about the way things are done, than our team will be organized. Nervous, but hopeful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 I ask again, why is this vaunted 'stability' so important, on a team that had to perform miracles twice in 4 years just to make the playoffs? We aren't a team on the precipice of greatness. In light of that, and the age we have at some positions (especially the lines), I'm not confident going with an unproven head coach. I like Williams, but the reason to hire him isn't to maintain 'stability'. Of course players favor that, because 'stability'= job security. It doesn't necessarily equal success. Williams as a head coach is no less a crapshoot than any other unproven coach, no essential difference than bringing in a Steve Spurrier and hoping he can do the job.If thats the call we make, I'll support and root for him, but the 'stability' argument is somewhat meaningless. We can't turn over the entire roster, new coach or not, and its likely that his hire means Saunders goes and we bring new offensive and defensive coordinators in. Which would essentially give us the same level of 'starting over' we'll experience if they choose not to go in-house with their selection. Personally, I think a lot of you guys are kidding yourselves that a Williams hire ensures success. Redskins fans, including myself, have guessed wrong over and over again. We're likely guessing wrong again here too. Join me in going Costanza here. I think we should decide exactly whats 'best' for this organization, and do the exact opposite. Then we might have a chance at making the right choice and experiencing consistent success co-sign Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Elka ... get real ... the Skins barely beat the Phins, Cards, and Jets, have no franchise QB yet, and have been seriously outcoached game after game. They are closer to the bottom than the top. The team needs radical re-structuring ... under Williams ... they/you won't get it. I want to win as much as you do ... but objectively, the Skins are a long way from being perenial and I think you and most of the homers on this Board know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tritx3 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 G-Dubb!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Ideals are fine ... but production on the field is another story. Under Gibbs, Williams, and Saunders ... the Skins chronically underperformed on the field. Get rid of the bums I say. I apologize for being captain obvious however Gibbs made the playoffs two out of the four years he was here. Before Gibbs we had only made it to the playoffs, correct me if I am wrong but once in 9 years? The only way of knowing what works would be to stick with what we have in place. We would be fools to pass up on this opportunity and rebuild with out giving Williams and hopefully Saunders a shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Making the playoffs as the 6th seed is usually the result of winning a few end games against teams that have already clinched or are way out of contention. What satisfaction is there in playing one more game then getting blown out in embarassing fashion. When the Skins win the Division and have home field for at least one playoff game I will be happy. To win the Division they must beat some pretty good teams ... and that is what being competitive is all about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan07 Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 well I would assume that 4 interviews would mean he is getting the job because no other candidate has had more than one I'd hope so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hail2TheRedskins! Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Making the playoffs as the 6th seed is usually the result of winning a few end games against teams that have already clinched or are way out of contention. What satisfaction is there in playing one more game then getting blown out in embarassing fashion. When the Skins win the Division and have home field for at least one playoff game I will be happy. To win the Division they must beat some pretty good teams ... and that is what being competitive is all about. We split with every team in our division. We came very close to a sweep of giants and cowboys. The only team that had things sowed up was the cowboys on the last game and we embarrased them. I don't think its a stretch to say that we are close to as good as the other teams in our division. You are also ignoring the injuries (and death) that we sustained. How can you believe we are not competitive?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Edds Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Making the playoffs as the 6th seed is usually the result of winning a few end games against teams that have already clinched or are way out of contention. What satisfaction is there in playing one more game then getting blown out in embarassing fashion. When the Skins win the Division and have home field for at least one playoff game I will be happy. To win the Division they must beat some pretty good teams ... and that is what being competitive is all about. and keeping GW as our next HC gives us the best chance to achieve that in the very foreseeable future. No one is saying that GW gets a full 5 years to get us deep into the playoffs and that we are all going to be satisfied with being "mediocre" all the while twirling our thumbs. He is no doubt gonna be on a short leash. But your definition of "competitive" is not realistic, with the current situation being as it is. We're not gonna be the Pats. But I don't want to sit around and worry about how we did it, I just want to go deep in the playoffs and win a Super Bowl. I don't really care who it is with, I just happen to think we are closer to that than some other folks around here. It's time to move on and stop crying over spilled milk. You think you know what the homers around here really think? Well I think all the pessimists will be so caught up in why this and that aren't good or wasn't done in a certain way, that you won't even be able to fully appreciate it when we do start winning on a consistent basis. Sometimes you need to stop and smell the roses, put things in context and look at the bigger picture. Hiring GW as HC, and keeping as much of the coaching staff in place as possible, is the right decision for this team, right now. maybe not so much after next year or the year after. But we'll cross that bridge when we get to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illone Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 With the Giants being in the champ game this season, there is no way you can convince me that the Skins are far away from contending in the NFC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.