The Evidence Supports Optimism

[Oldfan]

A poster in another thread asked: Would you consider submitting a thread outlining what you feel the team must do to improve and become serious contenders once again?

Of course.

I'll open on an optimistic note: This team is now in a much better position to succeed than it has been for many years. The decision makers appear to be learning from their mistakes.

The Schemes, Offense and Defense

The schemes are headed in the right direction. Ideally, the offensive scheme does not require Grade A talent to be productive, especially at the QB position. The WCO approach is aligned with that goal.

If equal in talent, an offense designed to move the chains is superior in consistency to a big play offense. A consistent passing game is the key to winning in today's NFL. The WCO approach is aligned with those aims also.

I suspect that Jim Zorn can improve his scheme by simplifying the QB and receiver reads. Players have to get to the point where they are reacting not thinking. That seems to be taking too long.

I also suspect that Z will eventually overcome his bias and end up with about 50% of his plays run from the shotgun. It's a simple adjustment that makes the game easier on the QBs. There's too much evidence now to ignore the trend.

Blache simplified the defense this season. That was a good move. However, I think we need a far more aggressive approach on defense, like the way they played in the 2005 stretch run. That defense gave Brunell a slew of short-field advantages to exploit.

I think most fans underrated the offense and overrated the defense in 2008 -- I see this trend continuing because of the emphasis on ball control. I think we'll see low scoring games and few blowouts on the way to a winning record next season and beyond.

Building the Roster

After the 2006 season ended in a 5-11 record, the Skins realized their past mistakes and embarked on a more sensible approach to building a team. I'd like to see them stay on course. The general rules allowing for exceptions:

We should be bargain hunting each transaction because the salary cap acts as a budget. Bargains are players signed to play for less than they could get in free agency. Free agency should be avoided because of the Winner's Curse (the winner at an auction always pays too much).

Since it's a closed market, the draft is the primary source of bargains. We should be stocking up with draft picks.

To uncover bargains, the Skins need to evaluate prospects in a different way than the competition. A player's size and speed have been overrated factors since the invention of the game. Athleticism, intelligence and techniques have been underrated.

Roster building is about seizing opportunities as they present themselves and not about filling needs with whatever is available. The Skins seem to be on the right course by drafting the best player available.

In a 20 game season, injuries become a factor that needs to be minimized, so we should build a deep roster, avoid older players and avoid players with injury histories.

We should avoid the Mediocrity Trap. 30 NFL teams think they are just a player or two away from the Super Bowl, 29 of them are wrong. We have to stop giving up picks for veteran players like Jason Taylor to fill holes. In addition to the picks and the cap hit, he took a roster spot that might have been given to a good prospect like Andrew Crummey.

EDIT: I didn't make clear that, except for the trade for Jason Taylor, the front office seems to be following the general rules I laid out as near as I can tell. However, my optimism for this team would shatter if the front office backslides or if I learn next season that their 2008 draft picks stink. No roster-building strategy will work if they don't draft well.

Coaching and Techniques

Some months ago, I offered a thread entitled "My Ricky Proehl Theory." I can now rename the idea the "Jim Zorn Theory" because he's a more familiar and current example of what I had in mind.

Intelligence X Specialized Experience = Expertise

Jim Zorn is an ex-NFL QB with what we have reason to believe has the league's best expertise in spotting raw QB talent at the college level for the WCO and then refining it to NFL standards. We should be doing the same at every position. The position coach should be an ex-NFL player with top-notch expertise. He should have the final say on the draft selection and would supervise the training of the player.

On a negative note: Jim Zorn disappointed me in his handling of the endgame. He's going to need help with this. I think we win two more games this year if he gets just a few more critical decisions right and improves his clock management.

[REDALERT]

Your analogy is all fine and Dandy Oldfan, but the verdict is still out on Zorn and leading a team to the promise land. Developing QB's doesn't simplify leading an entire squad of men and getting them to gel come football Sunday and an entire season.

[Oldfan]

Your analogy is all fine and Dandy Oldfan, but the verdict is still out on Zorn and leading a team to the promise land. Developing QB's doesn't simplify leading an entire squad of men and getting them to gel come football Sunday and an entire season.

He has expertise in the WCO and in developing the QB. I weight those things far more heavily than the vague notions people have about the leadership of 53 different personalities in the lock room.

[Dick Edds]

nice analysis

[Oldfan]

nice analysis

Thank you.

[Chump Bailey]

Excellent stuff OF...

Thank you

[Stormy]

I always appreciate the depth of thought you put into your posts, I just hope that the evidence begins to actually support the direction you hope we're moving in. Your post has the proper vision for the direction of this franchise, in my opinion, but I'm not sure that's the direction evinced by the organization. Your title implies that the 'evidence' supports optimism, but I think it would be much more accurate to say that your speculative suspicion supports optimism.

For example, your conclusion that Zorn will adapt towards running 50% of his plays from the shotgun formation. I definitely agree with you that this *should* be the case, but most hoped for this adjustment to begin several weeks into the year, only to see Zorn finally (and somewhat grudgingly) adapt to running perhaps 15-20% of his snaps from it by season's end. I hope this process continues to evolve, but I'm not sure how much evidence says it will.

Likewise, the concept that our Front Office has 'learned from their mistakes' regarding impulsive roster transactions, and a systematic neglect of properly building through the draft. We currently have 4 draft picks for 2009, within a division where the already younger and deeper teams like the Eagles and Giants have 9-10 picks. They have learned the lesson you allude to, but have we?

This F.O. hasn't focused upon drafting early round OL/DL talent in a decade, and mostly neglected those spots again last year despite having 10 picks, and desperate needs along both lines. Instead, we ignored them, our OL imploded, and our DL made a desperation ploy to acquire a retirement age DE (in exchange for a 2nd round pick+). Was that a necessity for a team supposedly rebuilding, headed by a rookie coach, which barely sniffed .500? No, a Front Office which had learned from it's mistakes would have selected a DL early last draft, would still have their high 2nd round pick to attribute to OL in this draft, and wouldn't have the ill-suited Jason Taylor on the books for $8.5 million if he returns.

I like Jason Campbell, and have seen nice progress from him, but he's certanly not tailor made for the WCO for a number of reasons. Zorn is likely a very fine evaluator of QB talent, and mechanics. However, he also seems to possess a rigid disinclination for adapting his schemes to fit his personnel, and doesn't seem to have a knack for putting his players in positions to make plays. Which of these character traits will triumph in terms of Zorn restructuring his vapid offensive system moving forward?

You, like I hope that it progresses in the right direction, but the most current evidence we have largely says the opposite (via the trends demonstrated in the unmitigated train wreck that was the last 10+ weeks of the season).

[talk show host]

you talk about building the roster, but you're not supplying any EVIDENCE that what the skins will do gives us reason to be optomistic -- you simply tell us what you think the way to build a roster is. I think you provided a good roadmap on how to build a good team, but the content of your post doesnt match the title in my opinion. maybe its just me, but i see no evidence for optomism.

[Hunter_R]

you talk about building the roster, but you're not supplying any EVIDENCE that what the skins will do gives us reason to be optomistic -- you simply tell us what you think the way to build a roster is. I think you provided a good roadmap on how to build a good team, but the content of your post doesnt match the title in my opinion. maybe its just me, but i see no evidence for optomism.

Agreed. Not to mention we have Springs on radio talking about trouble brewing in the secondary. If that goes boom, you might see the second 0-16 team.

[Dick Edds]

I always appreciate the depth of thought you put into your posts, I just hope that the evidence begins to actually support the direction you hope we're moving in. Your post has the proper vision for the direction of this franchise, in my opinion, but I'm not sure that's the direction evinced by the organization. Your title implies that the 'evidence' supports optimism, but I think it would be much more accurate to say that your speculative suspicion supports optimism.

For example, your conclusion that Zorn will adapt towards running 50% of his plays from the shotgun formation. I definitely agree with you that this *should* be the case, but most hoped for this adjustment to begin several weeks into the year, only to see Zorn finally (and somewhat grudgingly) adapt to running perhaps 15-20% of his snaps from it by season's end. I hope this process continues to evolve, but I'm not sure how much evidence says it will.

Likewise, the concept that our Front Office has 'learned from their mistakes' regarding impulsive roster transactions, and a systematic neglect of properly building through the draft. We currently have 4 draft picks for 2009, within a division where the already younger and deeper teams like the Eagles and Giants have 9-10 picks. They have learned the lesson you allude to, but have we?

This F.O. hasn't focused upon drafting early round OL/DL talent in a decade, and mostly neglected those spots again last year despite having 10 picks, and desperate needs along both lines. Instead, we ignored them, our OL imploded, and our DL made a desperation ploy to acquire a retirement age DE (in exchange for a 2nd round pick+). Was that a necessity for a team supposedly rebuilding, headed by a rookie coach, which barely sniffed .500? No, a Front Office which had learned from it's mistakes would have selected a DL early last draft, would still have their high 2nd round pick to attribute to OL in this draft, and wouldn't have the ill-suited Jason Taylor on the books for $8.5 million if he returns.

I like Jason Campbell, and have seen nice progress from him, but he's certanly not tailor made for the WCO for a number of reasons. Zorn is likely a very fine evaluator of QB talent, and mechanics. However, he also seems to possess a rigid disinclination for adapting his schemes to fit his personnel, and doesn't seem to have a knack for putting his players in positions to make plays. Which of these character traits will triumph in terms of Zorn restructuring his vapid offensive system moving forward?

You, like I hope that it progresses in the right direction, but the most current evidence we have largely says the opposite (via the trends demonstrated in the unmitigated train wreck that was the last 10+ weeks of the season).

nice counter analysis

[Aston]

Nice post, Old Fan.

Agree on the Coaching & Techniques, and the majority of your Roster take. I'm a BPA guy at heart as well, and agree we're not one or even three players away from becoming a serious contender. That said, we do have a pretty glaring need along the O line, and to a slightly lesser extent, the D line as well. I'd be cool with reaching slightly in this draft in order to get some young talent along the lines.

Kind of confused on a few things in section one, though.

an offense designed to move the chains is superior in consistency to a big play offense

You can make a pretty good case either way. What's you reasoning behind this opinion?

I also suspect that Z will eventually overcome his bias and end up with about 50% of his plays run from the shotgun. It's a simple adjustment that makes the game easier on the QBs. There's too much evidence now to ignore the trend.

What evidence? Not saying I disagree necessarily, but just curious to know where this comes from.

With our current line playing the way it is, I would certainly agree the Shotgun would give him a bit more time because he's getting none at all now.

But the one thing about the shotgun I don't like is that it basically shows the defense we're going to pass, which puts us at a disadvantage. Campbell looks his best when Portis is rolling and the defense is off-balance.

Great insight, though. Enjoyed the post.

[Oldfan]

I always appreciate the depth of thought you put into your posts...

Thank you.

Your title implies that the 'evidence' supports optimism, but I think it would be much more accurate to say that your speculative suspicion supports optimism. For example, your conclusion that Zorn will adapt towards running 50% of his plays from the shotgun formation.

I'm projecting trends to a logical conclusion here. WCO coaches have been slower than others to accept the shotgun because it cancels out the advantage of throwing on rythym and reduces the play action factor. I understand their reluctance, but they are competitors. They want to win and the shotgun will help them do it.

Likewise, the concept that our Front Office has 'learned from their mistakes' regarding impulsive roster transactions, and a systematic neglect of properly building through the draft. We currently have 4 draft picks for 2009, within a division where the already younger and deeper teams like the Eagles and Giants have 9-10 picks. They have learned the lesson you allude to, but have we?

With one exception, the trade for Jason Taylor, their transactions have been in line with the general rules I laid out.

This F.O. hasn't focused upon drafting early round OL/DL talent in a decade, and mostly neglected those spots again last year despite having 10 picks, and desperate needs along both lines.

Drafting the BPA prohibits reaching to fill needs. Was there a top lineman we passed on last year?

Zorn is likely a very fine evaluator of QB talent, and mechanics. However, he also seems to possess a rigid disinclination for adapting his schemes to fit his personnel...

Give me an example.

...and doesn't seem to have a knack for putting his players in positions to make plays.

He was trying to teach vanilla WCO with a QB under pressure. That's a couple of limiting factors on a play caller. It's hard to be creative.

[ttr77]

I agree with others...this is how a team SHOULD be done. However, I still haven't seen any TRUE evidence that it's being done here.

[Oldfan]

you talk about building the roster, but you're not supplying any EVIDENCE that what the skins will do gives us reason to be optomistic -- you simply tell us what you think the way to build a roster is. I think you provided a good roadmap on how to build a good team, but the content of your post doesnt match the title in my opinion. maybe its just me, but i see no evidence for optomism.

Maybe I didn't express myself well enough. I said that the front office had made a turnaround and now seemed on the right course. Then I listed the general rules applying and added some of my own ideas.

Except for the Jason Taylor trade, their moves have been pretty consistent with what I wrote.

[ttr77]

Except for the Jason Taylor trade, their moves have been pretty consistent with what I wrote.

I dunno...from many reports this team was awful close to trading a couple of 1sts for Chad Johnson. Or a 1st and 2nd for Lance Briggs.

[Ernie5]

Maybe I didn't express myself well enough. I said that the front office had made a turnaround and now seemed on the right course. Then I listed the general rules applying and added some of my own ideas.

Except for the Jason Taylor trade, their moves have been pretty consistent with what I wrote.

I completely agree with this. The Taylor move is really the sole hiccup. & even there, though I disagree with the move, had been healthy and been able to generate more pass ruch, perhaps we win two more games and get a wild card spot. Then the trade doesn't seem so fruitless.

We need to see what transpires Cerrato Year 2.

As for a defensive back mutiny, I seriously doubt that. The Gnats had an enormous mutiny -- two years before they won the Super Bowl with the same coach.

[Oldfan]

Nice post, Old Fan.

Thanks.

I'd be cool with reaching slightly in this draft in order to get some young talent along the lines.

I've read that this draft is strong with OTs. I hope so.

You can make a pretty good case either way. What's you reasoning behind this opinion?

This is tough to explain. I'll try it by analogy.

Think about a RB's yards per carry average

1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,31 = 4.00 per carry

4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4 = 4.00 per carry

The Big Play Offense is less effective for the same reason that the big play back is less effective. The big play guy can't move the chains; can't help with ball control and can't help his defense stay off the field.

What evidence? Not saying I disagree necessarily, but just curious to know where this comes from.

The shotgun has been gaining in use in the NFL since Tom Moore introduced it with Peyton. The Patriots last year were in the shotgun more than 50% of their offensive plays. Kansas City in 2008 and Green Bay in 2007went heavily into it.

But the one thing about the shotgun I don't like is that it basically shows the defense we're going to pass...

You can run from the gun... but any formation has pluses and minuses to be weighed. bottom line: teams that use the shotgun score more than those that don't.

[Oldfan]

I dunno...from many reports this team was awful close to trading a couple of 1sts for Chad Johnson. Or a 1st and 2nd for Lance Briggs.

That causes doubts, but I can't grade them on rumors.

[Oldfan]

you talk about building the roster, but you're not supplying any EVIDENCE that what the skins will do gives us reason to be optomistic -- you simply tell us what you think the way to build a roster is. I think you provided a good roadmap on how to build a good team, but the content of your post doesnt match the title in my opinion. maybe its just me, but i see no evidence for optomism.

I evidently didn't make this point very well. I hope my response to others cleared this up.

[Rufus T Firefly]

I kind of disagree about the mediocrity trap. My fear is where we're headed, and even what you're advocating, is driving us straight into that trap. Let's say we just focus on building thru the draft, as so many people keep repeating. Where is that leading us?

We need serious work on both lines, at least one LB, a new kicking game, and some depth at other spots. It could certainly be argued that we need a real #1 WR, but let's leave that out of it. Can we fill those needs in one draft, especially given our current parcel of picks? I don't think anyone believes we can, and the 'build thru the draft' mantra seems designed for further into the future.

Can two drafts get us to SB contention? Possible, though it's going to take near perfection to do so. And then we're going to need that 2010 draft class to be immediate contributors. As well as a lot of other things going right.

Looking ahead all the way to 2011, at which point we certainly could have built up our lines, addressed several other needs and added depth and youth to our roster overall- look at where most of our "core" players will be. Portis, Moss, Samuels, Fletcher, Carter. These guys will all be well into a decline phase of their careers by then. Not to mention a number of role players (ARE, Betts, Sellers, Rabach, Smoot). Others, like Randy Thomas, will almost certainly be gone by then.

My fear is we're going to be building around a core of players who won't be much of a core at all by the time that building is complete. That is a good way to get trapped in a cycle of 8-8 seasons.

A competent FO would look at this team this offseason and realize there are really two options;

1. Go for it in the next two years, hard. This means, yes, some heavy spending on filling holes, but not throwing away draft picks. Still, the cap would be manipulated towards a short term run and filling every hole possible with impact players.

2. A full-scale rebuild. This means youth, it means spending two years clearing out our cap. And yes, it means looking at getting whatever return you can get for veteran players, including Portis, Moss and Samuels.

Really, I think anything but those two options is pretty much the definition of "The Mediocrity Trap".

[Oldfan]

RTF: A competent FO would look at this team this offseason and realize there are really two options;

1. Go for it in the next two years, hard. This means, yes, some heavy spending on filling holes, but not throwing away draft picks. Still, the cap would be manipulated towards a short term run and filling every hole possible with impact players.

2. A full-scale rebuild. This means youth, it means spending two years clearing out our cap. And yes, it means looking at getting whatever return you can get for veteran players, including Portis, Moss and Samuels.

Really, I think anything but those two options is pretty much the definition of "The Mediocrity Trap".

I think you might be making the same mistake I commonly make when you start listing the teams needs. You are forgetting that the competition isn't all that great. They have needs too. We don't have to fill all our needs, we just have to make significant improvement.

I think we could have significant improvement next year if we add a stud OT out of the draft. If we do that, and we get a significant contribution from the big 2008 rookie receivers, Zorn can put a good passing game together for next year. I think we could do a lot of damage in our division with a better passing game even if we didn't improve in the other areas.

[Rufus T Firefly]

I think you might be making the same mistake I commonly make when you start listing the teams needs. You are forgetting that the competition isn't all that great. They have needs too. We don't have to fill all our needs, we just have to make significant improvement.

I think we could have significant improvement next year if we add a stud OT out of the draft. If we do that, and we get a significant contribution from the big 2008 rookie receivers, Zorn can put a good passing game together for next year. I think we could do a lot of damage in our division with a better passing game even if we didn't improve in the other areas.

I don't disgree, but I don't see that as a Super Bowl contender, just maybe a contender for a Wild Card spot.

Also, I consider our defense overrated by most here. And I think some decline is likely with some players' ages. Without addressing the line or replacing Washington, the defense is nowhere near being a powerhouse next year.

On offense, I frankly am not tremendously optimistic about our recievers. More importantly, a T will help a lot. But how much in his rookie year. And what about the interior? Thomas is getting old, Kendall is a FA and Rhinehart is a big question mark.

I just think this is a textbook case of the mediocrity trap. Not really getting good enough to contend for a title, while holding on to older players who are just good enough to keep you in the middle of the pack. And watching them decline while trying to put the pieces around them.

[Skins PR]

The decision makers appear to be learning from their mistakes.

Bullcrap

[Oldfan]

I just think this is a textbook case of the mediocrity trap. Not really getting good enough to contend for a title, while holding on to older players who are just good enough to keep you in the middle of the pack. And watching them decline while trying to put the pieces around them.

The front office turned around after the 2006 season, following seasons of giving draft picks away like party favors. We still have a price to pay for that folly.

Your option two is closer to my idea of the way it should go, but we can't expect to turn more than eight to ten players a year. There's no point in wholesale dumping of all the deadwood unless you need their roster spots for real players.

[PortisBetts]

I found it hard to believe that out defense is overrated considering 4th in ypg, 6th in points allowed, at 18.5 per game. Also, 36% on third down, which everyone claimed was a huge fault in our defense, 7th, tied for 5th in penalties(lowest from top to bottom), 8th against the run, 7th against the pass, and 7th in qb rating. Now i am not saying another playmaker on d wouldnt hurt, but there is not much more up to go, our defense is top 10 in the stats that matter the most, which is stopping offenses in all facets of the game, no matter how inept our offense was.

I do agree with most everything else you said, and feel that the offense (even with jason campbell in, who i dont think is the answer but that is for another thread....Brennan) will put up more points and be more consistent next year. There is hope for next year. It is our defense as they always give our o a chance. BTW we are one of only 2 top 10 defenses in ypg to not make the playoffs (the other being Dallas)