WP (Wilbon): The Front Office and the Redskins in 2009

[Larry Brown #43]

Larry Brown your are right, joined the convo late, and maybe this is the wrong forum or method to convey my feeling, but my observation is that ANYTIME ANYONE says discrediting things about "The Danny", sure as the sun rises Califan explains it away.

I'll say this about Califan...he makes well-reasoned and well-supported arguments. You don't have to agree with his position on any particular issue, but you can still appreciate the fact that he puts thought and reason into his posts. This would be a very boring place if we all agreed on everything all the time.

Also, keep in mind that on the flip side, there are plenty of posters who hate everything about Snyder, who will be there to bash the organization at every turn.

Personally, I don't care if a poster leans toward supporting Snyder or leans toward knocking Snyder, as long as the person brings something informative to the table. There are good posters out there in either camp, and there are lousy posters in either camp.

Let's try not to bash someone for their position on an issue, but rather if they don't bring something fresh or informative to the table.

[SilkyDiamonds]

Larry Brown I couldn't agree more, there is NO malice in anything I've said, but I will NOT sit here and act like The Danny is BEYOND reproach

You sir are avgentleman willing to listen to opposing views but still hold firm to what you believe and that garners the UTMOST respect from me

Cheers!

[Mooka]

Again, I ask anyone defending Wilbon to point out how an owner can impact an already-constructed coaching staff and team during the season. PLEASE.

The wrong move in the off-season will impact your team every day thereafter.

Example, if you sign Terrell Owens when Bill Parcells is your head coach you are going to cause lots of problems.

However, what I'm calling into question is how you can look at a team up and down and say "This team can win 11 games" then look at them again when no personnel has changed, consider who the owner is, and say "Oh wait, never mind, they can only win 8 or 9 games."

It's illogical. It is actually the definition of illogical.

I don't see what's so illogical about it. Wilbon liked our moves in the off-season building on our strengths and predicted an improvement from last year. He now changed it because he remembered Snyder is a poor owner in his opinion. (i.e. doesn't know football) He didn't articulate it very well but I think that was the jist of it.

On paper, you don't think of our defense actually regressing this year. That Haynesworth and Orakpo won't improve our pass rush and for whatever reason our run defense regresses. On paper you'd never think our passing game in 2006 would be worse then in 2005 after signing Brandon Lloyd and Randle-El.

But its possible if your FO doesn't know how to build a team. If Brandon Lloyd is worthless and overrated. If Haynesworth is slamming into his gap every play trying to penetrate when Blache is running a 2-gap system. And so on.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

The wrong move in the off-season will impact your team every day thereafter.

Example, if you sign Terrell Owens when Bill Parcells is your head coach you are going to cause lots of problems.

I don't see what's so illogical about it. Wilbon liked our moves in the off-season building on our strengths and predicted an improvement from last year. He now changed it because he remembered Snyder is a poor owner in his opinion. (i.e. doesn't know football) He didn't articulate it very well but I think that was the jist of it.

On paper, you don't think of our defense actually regressing this year. That Haynesworth and Orakpo won't improve our pass rush and for whatever reason our run defense regresses. On paper you'd never think our passing game in 2006 would be worse then in 2005 after signing Brandon Lloyd and Randle-El.

But its possible if your FO doesn't know how to build a team. If Brandon Lloyd is worthless and overrated. If Haynesworth is slamming into his gap every play trying to penetrate when Blache is running a 2-gap system. And so on.

My problem with this line of thinking is this...if Wilbon, in his opinion, liked the moves, that should be the end of his decision. Just because it turns out he agrees with a front office that has made mistakes shouldn't sway him.

It'd be like saying "2+2=4" and then having someone you don't trust say "2+2=4" and changing your answer because you agree with someone you don't trust. What basis is that? It's ridiculous.

[bulldog]

Norv Turner and Charley Casserly's moves don't have any bearing on THIS team 10 years later.

Stubby and Wilky were acquired when the Cooke's were still on control of the franchise.

Complain about the team's ability to draft late and find depth?

How about:

Kedric Golston

HB Blades

Chris Horton

Kareem Moore

Anthony Montgomery

Marko Mitchell

Reed Doughty

Let's see what Dallas and Philly did in rounds 6-7 of the draft in recent years

[derekc4]

I don't think he really means Snyder.

Our team has often been crowned paper champs, offseason champs, predicted to represent NFC in the Super Bowl (2006 especially). You could say 10 to 12 wins. This is what Wilbon did. However we never live up to expectations . We have a history of failure/underachievement. He basically remembered, "oh yeah, this is the skins. They never win like they are supposed to. So rather than be let down again I will just lower my expectations". This is exactly what he did.

I do see the other side though, to look at a team and say this is an 11 win team and then look at the owner and say, "He will **** this season up" is illogical and borderline retarded. You never go full retard.

[BraveWarrior]

Yeah but keeping this to Wilbon he basically was saying that he thought the team would go 11-5 based on the talent, now he's switched gears to 8-8 not because of "coaching" -- he didn't mention Zorn as the issue -- he said it was becuase of Snyder/management.

More specifically, he cites the ticket issue/lawsuits filtering to their play on the field. To each their own, but to me that sounds ridiculous.

The way I read it was that he believes an owner/FO that can mismanage something such as tickets will also mismanage player/coach/football matters, and those will ultimately show up on the field. And I can agree with that for the most part. But if that is truly what he meant, then I think the past actions of this FO should have brought him to this conclusion long before now, and should have affected his earlier, more rosy, prediction for the team.

That leads me to agree with you that he is making sure the WP lawsuits story still has legs.

[ouvan59]

I don't think he really means Snyder.

Our team has often been crowned paper champs, offseason champs, predicted to represent NFC in the Super Bowl (2006 especially). You could say 10 to 12 wins. This is what Wilbon did. However we never live up to expectations . We have a history of failure/underachievement. He basically remembered, "oh yeah, this is the skins. They never win like they are supposed to. So rather than be let down again I will just lower my expectations". This is exactly what he did.

Did you read the article? He specifically meant Snyder. It was a lazy, poorly thought out article and Califan has nailed it. This is like Jerry Falwell saying he thought that gays in the military was a good idea until he talked to some recruiters who reminded him of the problems. Sorry, not fooled.

[TSO]

Don't kid yourself....everyone remembers:

1) The No Casual Fridays fiasco that sent the 2008 Lions into an 0-16 tailspin

2) The cancellation of Bring your Child to Work Day which devastated the 1-15 Cowboys of 1989

3) The 2% ticket price hike of 1993 that our Redskins never recovered from

4) And finally, the tragic Parking Lot Rezone that crushed the Packers for 1970s and 1980s

Califan was absolutely owning this thread with great responses; all having clear and decisive words, along with understandable logic. Then you come along and post this beauty. Sorry, Califan, he wins. :hysterical:

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Califan was absolutely owning this thread with great responses; all having clear and decisive words, along with understandable logic. Then you come along and post this beauty. Sorry, Califan, he wins. :hysterical:

That was easily THE best post of this entire thread lol :yes: :applause:

[Oldfan]

Larry Brown I couldn't agree more, there is NO malice in anything I've said, but I will NOT sit here and act like The Danny is BEYOND reproach

Silky, you really need to curb your tendency toward creating straw man arguments. No one here has said or implied that Snyder is beyond reproach.

Snyder's treatment in the Post, in the media in general, and on this board resolves to a choice of perceptions of the man. He is either:

-- a fool who had learned nothing from his experience

-- a bright man who has learned from his experience and is now a better owner than he once was

I'm not a psychologist, I don't understand why so many people need to think of public figures as fools. It's obvious to me that Dan Snyder is a bright man. It's equally obvious that most of the moves made by the FO since 2007 have made sense and they are paying off. I see signs of a very good football team emerging.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Califan was absolutely owning this thread with great responses; all having clear and decisive words, along with understandable logic. Then you come along and post this beauty. Sorry, Califan, he wins. :hysterical:

That was easily THE best post of this entire thread lol :yes: :applause:

Too kind...

Califan and Oldfan, among others, are doing a great job in here.

[Forever21]

Say what you want but this is a pretty fair article.

We have the talent everywhere - except the offensive line - to be an 11-5 team for sure and fight for the divison. Most likely thinking 8-8 and hoping 11-5 is the best course because of our offensive line and QB questions. This is what Wilbon is doing.

He's right about management and the field. Management breeds confidence which I think is something our team lacks. The players know they have talent but there is an air of 'but what...' around the team and it hovers over us like a black cloud.

Management is what gets rid of that cloud. If all the pieces fall into place then I think we can fight for the division but my honest preseason prediction is 8-8.

[Oldfan]

Say what you want but this is a pretty fair article.

We have the talent everywhere - except the offensive line - to be an 11-5 team for sure and fight for the divison. Most likely thinking 8-8 and hoping 11-5 is the best course because of our offensive line and QB questions. This is what Wilbon is doing.

He's right about management and the field. Management breeds confidence which I think is something our team lacks. The players know they have talent but there is an air of 'but what...' around the team and it hovers over us like a black cloud.

Management is what gets rid of that cloud. If all the pieces fall into place then I think we can fight for the division but my honest preseason prediction is 8-8.

You have it backwards. You are confusing cause and effect.

Confidence doesn't cause winning.

Winning causes confidence.

[James Moss]

To be honest—I'm still a bit miffed by his Dying young, and black, in America article. Wilbon was wrong, and he should have humbly admitted it. Instead, when confronted with the facts, he got ugly, and attacked his readers. Besides that; Wilbon doesn't write with the same passion that he did when he had Tony around to challenge him. JMHO

[Rocky21]

You have it backwards. You are confusing cause and effect.

Confidence doesn't cause winning.

Winning causes confidence.

We have had 3 winning seasons in the 10 years since Snyder has owned the club. Winning seasons have been so infrequent I can't remember what causes what anymore.

[Passizle]

Ah, so you touch on one of my points...that Wilbon's "evaluations" can and apparently do fluctuatte depending on what effects him from one moment to the next. NOTHING, outside of a major season-ending injury to a franchise player, should logically cause a win total prediction to drop down 2-3 games in just a matter of a week. So one of three things happened:

1) Wilbon let the "hype" of preseason effect his assessment of the Skins without taking a more realistic and logical evaluation...

2) Wilbon let the "hype" of the Skins suing fans effect his assessment of the Skins without taking a more realistic and logical evaluation...

3) Both.

Again, Wilbon's entire argument was "What the hell was I thinking giving ANY team owned by Daniel Snyder any credit?!"...There's no way in hell that speaks complimentary of Wilbon's football knowledge or intellect. I would bet a year's pay that no other sportswriter or NFL journalist has changed their minds about their predictions for the Redskins after that article came out. Only someone who is (overly)emotionally effected by that article would bother doing so. In fact, I haven't even seen any ES members change their stances about the Skins' chances. Wilbon is truly out there by himself on this one lol...

Regardless of every word you have typed in this rediculous thread... the point still remains, that there was nothing "illogical" about the article or what was said. That was you original point correct? You may not like that Wilbon changed his mind... and maybe it does not mak sense to you specifically... but he CLEARLY and CONCISLEY (sp) gave the reasons for it.

So all this banter back and forth is much ado about nothing. The article is logical.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Regardless of every word you have typed in this rediculous thread... the point still remains, that there was nothing "illogical" about the article or what was said. That was you original point correct? You may not like that Wilbon changed his mind... and maybe it does not mak sense to you specifically... but he CLEARLY and CONCISLEY (sp) gave the reasons for it.

So all this banter back and forth is much ado about nothing. The article is logical.

Saying that doesn't make it true. I'm sorry, but his basis for changing his mind was illogical. Simple as that.

He's perfectly within is right to change his mind, predict a .500 record, etc. However, if he thought we had an 11-win team and then, despite nothing changing on that team, he then decides we have an 8-win team because he remembers who owns this team...it's the definition of illogical. I made this comparison before (several pages ago), but it's the same use of logic as remembering that we wear burgundy and deciding at that point that, despite believing we have 11-win talent, we'll only win 8 games due to jersey color.

Neither jersey color nor an owner has an impact on the number of wins once the season kicks off. Had Wilbon said, the moves that this owner made make this an 8-win team...even if people didn't like the opinion, they'd have no basis to criticize.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Regardless of every word you have typed in this rediculous thread... the point still remains, that there was nothing "illogical" about the article or what was said. That was you original point correct? You may not like that Wilbon changed his mind... and maybe it does not mak sense to you specifically... but he CLEARLY and CONCISLEY (sp) gave the reasons for it.

So all this banter back and forth is much ado about nothing. The article is logical.

You obviously have not really paid attention to anything me or many others have said on this thread lol...

Amazing that, no matter how many times you say that you aren't bothered by the 8-8 prediction itself, someone will always claim that's the REAL reason you're upset.

Again, if you're that dense that you STILL can't understand the points we were making, you'll hopeless...and I'll just accept that instead of continuing to hold onto hope that, one day, while reading one post, you'll finally get it. I accept that you never will.

[PeterMP]

you obviously have not really paid attention to anything me or many others have said on this thread lol...

Amazing that, no matter how many times you say that you aren't bothered by the 8-8 prediction itself, someone will always claim that's the real reason you're upset.

Again, if you're that dense that you still can't understand the points we were making, you'll hopeless...and i'll just accept that instead of continuing to hold onto hope that, one day, while reading one post, you'll finally get it. I accept that you never will.

ols

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Saying that doesn't make it true. I'm sorry, but his basis for changing his mind was illogical. Simple as that.

He's perfectly within is right to change his mind, predict a .500 record, etc. However, if he thought we had an 11-win team and then, despite nothing changing on that team, he then decides we have an 8-win team because he remembers who owns this team...it's the definition of illogical. I made this comparison before (several pages ago), but it's the same use of logic as remembering that we wear burgundy and deciding at that point that, despite believing we have 11-win talent, we'll only win 8 games due to jersey color.

Neither jersey color nor an owner has an impact on the number of wins once the season kicks off. Had Wilbon said, the moves that this owner made make this an 8-win team...even if people didn't like the opinion, they'd have no basis to criticize.

I wouldn't bother anymore, seriously lol...We just have to accept that Wilbon's earlier optimism about the Skins was due to a series of good FO personnel moves, good draft picks, good talent evaluation and good talent acquisition that he just now remembered Snyder is too incompetent to make. Once he also remembered that Dana Stubblefield was signed to the team back in the 90s, it was done...Skins go 8-8.

Makes sense. Really.

[Passizle]

Saying that doesn't make it true. I'm sorry, but his basis for changing his mind was illogical. Simple as that.

He's perfectly within is right to change his mind, predict a .500 record, etc. However, if he thought we had an 11-win team and then, despite nothing changing on that team, he then decides we have an 8-win team because he remembers who owns this team...it's the definition of illogical. I made this comparison before (several pages ago), but it's the same use of logic as remembering that we wear burgundy and deciding at that point that, despite believing we have 11-win talent, we'll only win 8 games due to jersey color.

Neither jersey color nor an owner has an impact on the number of wins once the season kicks off. Had Wilbon said, the moves that this owner made make this an 8-win team...even if people didn't like the opinion, they'd have no basis to criticize.

But you are reaching betond the scope of th article and attempting to guess what is going on in the writers head. The only thing that can be proven... or disproven here is the factual words in the article.

Changing you mind midstroke midstroke happens to the best of us... have you ever had too much to drink and though you were going home with the prom quenn, only to wake up next to a seahag? Have you ever been stuck at "that stoplight" and 3 am with no-one around... decide to blow it and get busted by the cop you did not see?

Everybody makes mistakes... and Wilbon (like it or not) is admitting he made a mistake in ranking the Skins as high as he did. He states that, then goes on to state why he chnged his mind. End of story. That is completley logical. Perhaps his reasons for changing his mind are not logical to you (though I would disagree).

As for the highlighted part...

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/logic

log·ic n.

1. The study of the principles of reasoning, especially of the structure of propositions as distinguished from their content and of method and validity in deductive reasoning.
   

Again... nothing here is illogical. Wilbon is conceding that he made a bold prediction and gave reasoning for it... a week later he reads the article about the ticket fiasco which reminds him of some of the bone-headed things this FO does and has been doing for quite some time. He then recalculates his prediction while inquiring even further into the process by investigating and discussing this with football professionals... all the while giving reasons behind the recalculation.

All of that is perfectly logical. I dont see where there is validity to the continuing debate. If we want o dabte the rason why Wilbon journalistic skill have slipped... that can be discussed. Or if we want to talk about Wilbons flip-flopping or apparent dislike for Snyder... that can be distinguished here too. But to say the article is completeley illogical and deabte that here IS illogical.

[Passizle]

You obviously have not really paid attention to anything me or many others have said on this thread lol...

Amazing that, no matter how many times you say that you aren't bothered by the 8-8 prediction itself, someone will always claim that's the REAL reason you're upset.

Again, if you're that dense that you STILL can't understand the points we were making, you'll hopeless...and I'll just accept that instead of continuing to hold onto hope that, one day, while reading one post, you'll finally get it. I accept that you never will.

No reason to be disrepectful here. I dont take kindly to condecseding remarks so please be mindful of the people you address.

I never said and 8-8 prediciotn would bother you... so I dont know what you are getting at.

What I think happened here is that you did a knee jerk post without considering all the facts and got caught with your pants down. I have seen you do that before in Campbell debate. No big deal. I will assume thats whats going on since you clearly have an agenda with Wilbon... and not with the facts of the article which... ahem... you posted. Was it not you who asked about logic? lol :yes:

[Wrong Direction]

I wouldn't bother anymore, seriously lol...We just have to accept that Wilbon's earlier optimism about the Skins was due to a series of good FO personnel moves, good draft picks, good talent evaluation and good talent acquisition that he just now remembered Snyder is too incompetent to make. Once he also remembered that Dana Stubblefield was signed to the team back in the 90s, it was done...Skins go 8-8.

Makes sense. Really.

I have no idea why I've chosen this particular thread to start posting frequently on this site. It's not even about anything of substance. It's about the thought processes of a columnist from Chicago who's not an ESPN personality and only infrequently a writer for the Post. :confused:

Still, I think you're mischaracterizing his position.

He clearly implied that other pro football personnel highlighted the importance of the Skins disfunctionality. After talking to them, he decided to change his prediction.

If I were a writer who went out on a limb, and then subsequently spoke to other knowledgable people, I'd hope I was open minded enough to consider all opinions and reconsider my own position.

The ticket fiasco was the reason he spoke to other front office people. It wasn't the sole reason that he changed his prediction.

[Oldfan]

If I were a writer who went out on a limb, and then subsequently spoke to other knowledgable people, I'd hope I was open minded enough to consider all opinions and reconsider my own position.

If you did, I hope you would tell your readers specifically what was said that caused you to change your mind so that others would know that your reasons were sound. And, I hope you'd have something more substantial to offer than the vague "trickle down theory."