The Evidence Supports Optimism

[IHOPSkins]

.....Most Wr's don't make it their first season, its a position that takes most players time to evolve, so no I don't think the verdict is out on the last draft. So i don't get the last draft was a bust drill......

I figured if 1 of the 2 WRs pan out....we are OK

I wasn't as happy with the TE

..... (Davis) may end up being the best of the bunch in the near term. He's certainly the one who is likely to make an impact next year, especially if the focus ends up being more in running formations.....

Davis blocks better than Yoder? (Cooley?)

[SearchHorizon]

As much as I respect Old Fan's posts, I disagree with his views.

Based on what I have seen so far, I'd say the Skin's future looks gloomier than it did at the end of 2007 season. I have not seen anything exceptional about Zorn's WCO. If anything, Saunders offensive scheme is superior to WCO.

Also, from watching how the Skin's season unfolded, it is most likely that the Skins' early success should be attributed to the 2007's momentum (Joe's coaching in 2007), As 2008 season progressed and players learned under Zorn, the team's performance deteriorated. This doesn't look promising at all.

Skins are still downtrending. Skins didn't finish the season strong, and I think the team will get worse.

[texasthunder]

Good post OP, and I will continue to ride the optimism train.

I guess I feel like if you are consistently pessimistic about something then you tend to loose hope. And if you loose hope, then what is the point in continuing to follow something, which you know will disappoint you ??

I feel like the FO has turned the corner, and learned from their mistakes. We didnt spend any money of FA's this year, and we tried to have a decent draft. The results (excluding Brooks) hopefully should be very positive this year.

Coach Zorn managed an 8-8 record, pretty decent for a first year coach. Went into Philly and Dallas to grab wins. And I believe he learned alot, and will translate that knowledge into success in 2009.

And my biggest reason for optimism is that Zorn will have the whole off season to work on problems, and IMHO, he is a pretty intelligent coach, so we should see some real progress next year.

[Thinking Skins]

I'm just optimistic because of the way we handled the offseasons the past two years. With the exception of the Jason Taylor trade (which I didn't support but kinda can rationalize), I think we learned patience. I don't know the extent of the Chad Johnson or Lance Briggs rumors but because they didn't happen, I can only be inspired that we were not willing to give anything (and everything) to get these guys.

That gives me hopes that this coming offseason will also be productive.

[HoyaSkins28]

god bless you man/woman. an optimistic person that makes good points. god bless you

[Metskins]

And you'll disappear into the woodwork if I'm right?

I won't have to worry about it. I well aware of your posting history and you're never right.

[fansince62]

Good post OP, and I will continue to ride the optimism train.

I guess I feel like if you are consistently pessimistic about something then you tend to loose hope. And if you loose hope, then what is the point in continuing to follow something, which you know will disappoint you ??

I feel like the FO has turned the corner, and learned from their mistakes. We didnt spend any money of FA's this year, and we tried to have a decent draft. The results (excluding Brooks) hopefully should be very positive this year.

Coach Zorn managed an 8-8 record, pretty decent for a first year coach. Went into Philly and Dallas to grab wins. And I believe he learned alot, and will translate that knowledge into success in 2009.

And my biggest reason for optimism is that Zorn will have the whole off season to work on problems, and IMHO, he is a pretty intelligent coach, so we should see some real progress next year.

here's the problem: where's the talent?

[TheLongshot]

I figured if 1 of the 2 WRs pan out....we are OK

I wasn't as happy with the TE

Understood. I wasn't exactly jumping up and down about it, but I do see the potential. There are a lot of offenses that use two TEs effectively. I also see him as an asset in the red zone, which we've had a lot of issues with in recent years. While I am disappointed that a lot of that didn't resolve itself this year, I still have a lot of hope that it will.

Davis blocks better than Yoder? (Cooley?)

I don't know if he blocks better than those two (and Cooley's blocking has gotten better over the years), but I have heard positive things about his blocking, which is probably a big accomplishment since it wasn't one of his strong points when he was drafted.

[texasthunder]

here's the problem: where's the talent?

I believe that alot of the talent is there. There are some pieces that need to be added, IE lineman, maybe a LB and a good FG kicker.

But to me the real key will be getting all these guys on the same page.

People talk about the losses and the squeek by wins over lesser teams, but in fact there were some plays that if had went our way, we would have made the playoffs.

Yes, we got outplayed in some games, and yes, Zorn got outcoached in some games, but we never got blown out ala the New England game in 2007 (52-7), and out of the eight losses we had, the Skins were within one score of winning four of them.

These are some of the things I think Coach Zorn will go over, and over again with the players and coaching staff.

[Oldfan]

As much as I respect Old Fan's posts, I disagree with his views.

That's okay.

I have not seen anything exceptional about Zorn's WCO. If anything, Saunders offensive scheme is superior to WCO.

We were 5-11 in Al's first year.

Also, from watching how the Skin's season unfolded, it is most likely that the Skins' early success should be attributed to the 2007's momentum (Joe's coaching in 2007).

Momentum? Do you have any evidence that such a thing exists aside from physics? Joe caught a break when Campbell went down and Collins finished strong in Al's scheme. That wasn't going to carry over even if Joe had stayed.

As 2008 season progressed and players learned under Zorn, the team's performance deteriorated. This doesn't look promising at all.

The players learned and performance deteriorated? That seems unlikely.

Did you consider other explanations? Like the accumulating injuries, especially to all three OTs, or the strength of schedule?

[Oldfan]

People talk about the losses and the squeek by wins over lesser teams, but in fact there were some plays that if had went our way, we would have made the playoffs.

The Skins were 3-0 against the teams that will play for the NFC Campionship. We need more talent; we're too old; but this is the era of parity in the NFL.

[fansince62]

The Skins were 3-0 against the teams that will play for the NFC Campionship. We need more talent; we're too old; but this is the era of parity in the NFL.

old....I will address your initial (and excellent) parry later as I disagree with most of your line of thought. Immediately: in the age of parity the Skins have achieved nothing for 16 years - not once moving to the conference championship game. the parity idea is meaningless if the team isn't built/run to understand and position itself advantageously in the conditions it operates in. more simply expressed - the team doesn't have a philosophy or knowledge of how to use the tools at its disposal to work parity to advantage. until it does.....it won't ever succeed.

[Pounds]

Davis blocks better than Yoder? (Cooley?)

To start the seaon? No. To end it? Yes. That's why Davis supplanted Yoder on the depth chart by the season's fourth quarter.

[Oldfan]

... in the age of parity the Skins have achieved nothing for 16 years - not once moving to the conference championship game.

Your point is a solid argument if we were debating how well the team has fared over a 16-year span. But, my basic argument is that there is evidence of change in managment since the 2006 season flopped. The team's 16-year history is not relevant.

[fansince62]

Your point is a solid argument if we were debating how well the team has fared over a 16-year span. But, my basic argument is that there is evidence of change in managment since the 2006 season flopped. The team's 16-year history is not relevant.

yes it is....it establishes a history...a pattern if you will. even more so if one necks down to the Snyder years. you are assuming - based on circumstantial evidence - what has to be proven: that a consistent philosophy is now being applied (we can discuss another time whether it is the right philosophy). I would argue that the anecdotal evidence does ont support your position. The move for JT clearly reflects a "we are on the cusp" mindset. we have ratcheted from 10 picks down to 4 picks. old patterns are on display again. one can argue change at the margins...but at the core...I do not see the smack you in the face actions that suggest a seminal change has taken place. in large measure...it's business as usual because they have boxed themselves in. the other interesting part of this is whether or not the intelligence and savvy exists to position the team as upper tier even exists.

let me ask you something.....just speculating...if Zorn goes 8-8/7-9 next season with the team getting physically beaten again in the latter stages of the season...does he get the hook?

[Oldfan]

F62: I do not see the smack you in the face actions that suggest a seminal change has taken place. in large measure...it's business as usual because they have boxed themselves in.

After the upcoming draft, let's do an accounting. We will compare the number of draft picks used 2004 to 2006 to those used 2007 to 2009. If the numbers don't show evidence of a significant shift toward building primarily through the draft, I will be proven wrong.

let me ask you something.....just speculating...if Zorn goes 8-8/7-9 next season with the team getting physically beaten again in the latter stages of the season...does he get the hook?

The won-loss record will be just one of many factors I'd need to know to answer your question.

As for the team being physically beaten late in the season, I would half expect it to happen again next year because roster depth is a problem. We had all three of our OTs playing hurt in the second half as well as expected injuries to our aged players.

We are still paying the price for the Gibbs penchant for trading picks for vets and trading up in the draft -- a thin roster.

[TheLongshot]

yes it is....it establishes a history...a pattern if you will. even more so if one necks down to the Snyder years. you are assuming - based on circumstantial evidence - what has to be proven: that a consistent philosophy is now being applied (we can discuss another time whether it is the right philosophy). I would argue that the anecdotal evidence does ont support your position. The move for JT clearly reflects a "we are on the cusp" mindset. we have ratcheted from 10 picks down to 4 picks. old patterns are on display again. one can argue change at the margins...but at the core...I do not see the smack you in the face actions that suggest a seminal change has taken place. in large measure...it's business as usual because they have boxed themselves in. the other interesting part of this is whether or not the intelligence and savvy exists to position the team as upper tier even exists.

I've been arguing that for a while, yet people want to think that since 2006 that the team has completely reversed themselves from what they did before, and it really isn't so. Most of the "changes" is more a result of having a stable roster, something we aren't used to having since Norv got fired.

let me ask you something.....just speculating...if Zorn goes 8-8/7-9 next season with the team getting physically beaten again in the latter stages of the season...does he get the hook?

I guess that would depend on what kind of moves the team makes in the offseason. It is hard to make any call on that until we see how much changes are made and who steps up to perform.

[Oldfan]

Most of the "changes" is more a result of having a stable roster, something we aren't used to having since Norv got fired.

What is a "stable roster?" Will you define that term, please?

[TheLongshot]

What is a "stable roster?" Will you define that term, please?

One where you know, for the most part, who your starters are. I'd say that the roster has been pretty stable since 2005-2006. With rosters like that, there are only a few positions where trades can help your team. I wouldn't expect many trades in the future to get players unless it is the only way to get a quality player at that position.

[Oldfan]

One where you know, for the most part, who your starters are. I'd say that the roster has been pretty stable since 2005-2006. With rosters like that, there are only a few positions where trades can help your team. I wouldn't expect many trades in the future to get players unless it is the only way to get a quality player at that position.

You are implying that trading picks for vets was necessary from 2004 to 2006. If I remember it right, I count six picks spent for Brunell, Duckett, Lloyd and Kendall, and all we have left is Kendall on his last legs. I don't know how you can justify those results.

If I recall, we spent eight, high to mid-range picks to obtain Cooley, Campbell and McIntosh. Trading up in the draft is almost always a dumb idea. You can't justify that.

I won't try to compare the 2003 roster to the current one, but gut tells me that the current roster is better, but mostly due to the free agents we picked up and overpaid. I don't see much value for the picks we traded away one way or another.

[fansince62]

I've been arguing that for a while, yet people want to think that since 2006 that the team has completely reversed themselves from what they did before, and it really isn't so. Most of the "changes" is more a result of having a stable roster, something we aren't used to having since Norv got fired.

I guess that would depend on what kind of moves the team makes in the offseason. It is hard to make any call on that until we see how much changes are made and who steps up to perform.

jason..in one sense you, me, Old are all in the same boat: there aint a lot to work with (info wise). Vinny isn't the sort who really speaks to the gameplan. and DS has all but disappeared as a return on the visibility radar screen! while Ozzie Newsome doesn't reveal the particulars - he is very clear on the priorities for the Ravens so it is easier to judge progress.

I'm like you in that I hope progress is around the corner. but I have been part of this board and before for a while now and we have been having the same off-season conversation for what seems like forever. the energy in "change is here" just isn't there any more. approaching this team with a suspicious frame of mind, regrettably, seems the best path to walk right now - at least to me.

anywho...I'd just like Vinny to step forward and explain what the Redskin philosophy is: "we are a defensive team first....we will build from the lines on out......we have a coordinated 3 year plan that will return us to the glory years and sustain any success...." you don't hear any of this most of the time. just platitudes such as player happy feel stuff.

[TheLongshot]

jason..in one sense you, me, Old are all in the same boat: there aint a lot to work with (info wise).

That's the truth. We are the blind men trying to figure out what the elephant looks like.

I'm like you in that I hope progress is around the corner. but I have been part of this board and before for a while now and we have been having the same off-season conversation for what seems like forever. the energy in "change is here" just isn't there any more. approaching this team with a suspicious frame of mind, regrettably, seems the best path to walk right now - at least to me.

Everyone deals with the offseason in different ways. Personally, I think the offseason is one where hope springs eternal every year. Every year is another year to try to get things right this time.

anywho...I'd just like Vinny to step forward and explain what the Redskin philosophy is: "we are a defensive team first....we will build from the lines on out......we have a coordinated 3 year plan that will return us to the glory years and sustain any success...." you don't hear any of this most of the time. just platitudes such as player happy feel stuff.

How is that any less of a platitude? You can say just about anything about what you plan on doing, but it is ultimately actions that count. I mean, Vinny had said before the draft that DT was a priority before last year's draft, but afterwards he explained it didn't happen because the players weren't there. So, what did those words really mean? Was he serious about that statement, or was it a statement just there to satisfy the fans that 'we did what we could'? Personally, I think it is the former, but you don't REALLY know, and certainly the suspicious think the latter.

[Rufus T Firefly]

If I recall, we spent eight, high to mid-range picks to obtain Cooley, Campbell and McIntosh. Trading up in the draft is almost always a dumb idea. You can't justify that.

I believe it adds up to 6 high round picks for those players. A future 2nd for a current 3rd (a lower 3rd than the one traded in the same draft for Brunell, btw) to draft Cooley. A 1, 3 and 4 for Campbell. And two 2nds and a 6th for McIntosh. Not counting the 6th as a high or mid-rounder, obviously, I get 6 picks, not 8.

[fansince62]

That's the truth. We are the blind men trying to figure out what the elephant looks like.

Everyone deals with the offseason in different ways. Personally, I think the offseason is one where hope springs eternal every year. Every year is another year to try to get things right this time.

How is that any less of a platitude? You can say just about anything about what you plan on doing, but it is ultimately actions that count. I mean, Vinny had said before the draft that DT was a priority before last year's draft, but afterwards he explained it didn't happen because the players weren't there. So, what did those words really mean? Was he serious about that statement, or was it a statement just there to satisfy the fans that 'we did what we could'? Personally, I think it is the former, but you don't REALLY know, and certainly the suspicious think the latter.

there's a difference in these two statements:

- we're going to draft a DT

- the core identity of this team is its defense

one is an isolated declarative the other is a statement about what guides and prioritizes the actions of the team

[Oldfan]

anywho...I'd just like Vinny to step forward and explain what the Redskin philosophy is: "we are a defensive team first....we will build from the lines on out......we have a coordinated 3 year plan that will return us to the glory years and sustain any success...." you don't hear any of this most of the time. just platitudes such as player happy feel stuff.

As Jason (The Longshot) implied, actions speak louder than words. That's what I'm working with -- actions.

In December, 2005, when optimism was high in this forum, I was labeled an extreme pessimist. My pessimism was based on what I saw as a relatively simple economics problem. The salary cap acts as a budget. Therefore, the team should be trying to build a deep roster by trying to make each transaction a bargain. Joe Gibbs was doing exactly the opposite. We overpaid for every player he obtained, in draft picks, salary or both.

After the 2006 season, the only transaction that didn't make sense to me was the trade for Jason Taylor. So, I see us on the right course. Whether Dan and Vinny will have the discipline to stick with it is an open question.

On the field, we have an offensive plan that makes more sense to me in today's game than the Coryell passing game.

Finally, as a proponent of the importance of QB mechanics, I am delighted with the results of Zorn's work with Campbell. I now feel that Jason and other Redskins QBs to follow are more likely to succeed than they were before Zorn.