Suffering from Front Office Bi Polar Disorder

[PeterMP]

true, in order to get those bluechip QBs you usually have to pick in the top 5.

we could always trade up too if theres someone there we really want. but i dont think tanking a year to save one draft pick is a worthwhile trade.

Trade what picks?

Remember, you have already traded picks, AND you still need pieces to put around the QB.

[KDawg]

my opinion:

McNabb is not a WIN NOW move. He is a move set up to strengthen us at the QB position and in leadership. He is put in place to help transition a rookie QB into a starting job in the next few years. If McNabb plays well, gives us a winning record...or even gets us to the playoffs or the super bowl in those couple years, even better. But I view McNabb's presence here with the Redskins as a leadership role...A better locker room leader than Campbell with the ability to get us into the playoffs if that is in the cards. And to train and mentor a rookie for us for the future.

This is a good point, but there's an issue with it. I saw it this way as well, but the problem is two fold.

One, we don't have another QB learning behind McNabb. Beck is old and Grossman is not the answer. This can be addressed via the draft this year, or maybe free agency, I don't know the young QB free agent class or if there even is one.

Two, McNabb is only under contract for this year. This can be remedied. But it hasn't been yet.

If this was truly the plan, and not a win now move, don't you think something would be in place to make it look like that?

I don't mock your line of thinking, I originally had the same thought behind the McNabb trade. But I don't believe that now. It was a win now move.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

Not sure what your smoking, but getting McNabb was certainly a "win now" move. You don't trade a couple high picks to get a guy to just be competitive. You make the trade because you think he can help the team attain the goal of making the playoffs and going to the Superbowl. That doesn't preclude drafting a QB at some point, but like Gibbs trading for Brunell, the goal of the move is to win now rather than later.

Well, really you should be starting with the OL first, then get the QB. If you don't have an OL, the QB isn't going to do you much good. Unfortunately, the draft isn't a grocery store where you can get everything on your shopping list. Often, you either need to pick what is available to you and fill in where you can, or you make a trade to put yourself in position to pick the player you want.

look at what gibbs did vs what shanny is doing. its 100% different.

gibbs signed like 10 starter free agents, traded the farm for portis, got brunell. i mean the entire 2004 roster was littered with vets. griffin, washington, springs, sellers, portis, thrash, big joe, daniels, brunell. the list is probably bigger than that. i think outside of arrington, pierce, and taylor as a rookie, our entire starting defense that year was made up of brand new free agents. on offense he went out and got brunell, thrash, portis, ray brown, probably others i cant remember. that whole 04 team was just vets and castoffs from spurriers year that most were gone the year after.

look at shanny. mcnabb is maybe the only real vet contributor he brought in. he gave a chance to two crappy vet RBs, both were cut way early and their jobs given to inexperienced guys or rookies, he went with a guy from the dolphins practice squad for our 2nd WR (and galloway will be gone sooner than later), drafted a rookie LT, is starting inexperienced guys on the line, inactivated our best vet OL (dockery), and im not sure we added a single starter on defense outside of carriker who is young.

if you can honestly look at our current roster and say with a straight face that were trying to "win now", youre out of your mind.

[PeterMP]

my opinion:

McNabb is not a WIN NOW move. He is a move set up to strengthen us at the QB position and in leadership. He is put in place to help transition a rookie QB into a starting job in the next few years. If McNabb plays well, gives us a winning record...or even gets us to the playoffs or the super bowl in those couple years, even better. But I view McNabb's presence here with the Redskins as a leadership role...A better locker room leader than Campbell with the ability to get us into the playoffs if that is in the cards. And to train and mentor a rookie for us for the future.

And what the heck makes you think McNabb is going to be around here for a couple of more years under those conditions?

Just MAYBE McNabb wants to play for an organization that is REALLY trying to give him another shot at the SuperBowl before he retires, and isn't of the attitude, well if we make it that's great, but it is really about building for the next QB.

(I won't even get into finding the next QB.)

[Mursilis]

I've been saying the same. In a rebuild it doesn't matter who QBs your team, so if that was the vision (obviously, it's not) then you go with someone who doesn't cost picks. Campbell, Grossman, Brennan, JaMarcus Russell, JP Losman... Whoever.

Yup. Campbell's done 8-8 before. Heck, the combo platter of Jeff George/Tony Banks did 8-8 back in the day! Now Schotty, that was a rebuild the right way, for the most part. How stupid is that McNabb move going to look if he leaves? We'll be right back at the beginning re the QB position, AND we'll be down TWO picks on a team desperate for depth and youth!

[KDawg]

if you can honestly look at our current roster and say with a straight face that were trying to "win now", youre out of your mind.

Then why trade picks for guys that aren't going to make us legit contenders. And again, that's not McNabb's fault. He doesn't have the supporting cast. And its alot tougher to get a supporting cast without picks.

[The Mayor]

I think the McNabb decision was an attempt to hold together a team that had very little talent...of any age. McNabb will sign an extension and will help develop a young QB drafted, probably, next year. As for a patch-work O-line, they did all they could with what they had. I expect them to draft more O-line talent and/or sign free agent O-lineman in the offseason.

It was planned this way, with a mix of "old" talent and "new" talent. We fans may not understand or agree, but I do believe this was carefully planned. I do think that the coaches expected more from McNabb and the offense and they're grasping at anything that might jump-start the offense.

[TheLongshot]

Just to respond to the original post. The only real "Win Now" moves are McNabb and to a lesser extent, Brown. McNabb is 33 and has more years behind him than in front of him. At best, he's a stopgap until whoever we get next replaces him. Brown is just 29, so he potentially has years ahead of him to play and the FO figured that he was better than many players who could be selected in the 3rd-4th round. (Course, it isn't turning out that way so far...)

The signing of aging veterans was more out of necessity than anything, given the FA situation this offseason. Someone needed to fill the slots, so they got who was available for relatively cheap. There weren't any big-name signings designed to win now. Also, in general you are going to play veterans over young players until the young players prove that they are ready to play. Armstrong is a good example.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

Maybe, but what if we end up 7-9 or 6-10 anyway, with McNabb, and minus the draft picks? How's that better? KDawg is right - the front office needs to pick a philosophy and stick with it, because right now, the approach seems to be, lose now, and build toward losses in the future.

if we end up at 6-10 with mcnabb then we'll have good picks for next year, and hopefully a resigned franchise QB for at least one more year.

if we get to 8-8 with this garbage offensive roster we have now that means adding some players next year should help us get even better.

this is a 2-3 year plan. we should be talking about this after the 2012 season cause as of now, its a major work in progress. if we beat the lions last week this thread probably doesnt exist and were sitting at 5-3.

[PeterMP]

look at what gibbs did vs what shanny is doing. its 100% different.

gibbs signed like 10 starter free agents, traded the farm for portis, got brunell. i mean the entire 2004 roster was littered with vets. griffin, washington, springs, sellers, portis, thrash, big joe, daniels, brunell. the list is probably bigger than that. i think outside of arrington, pierce, and taylor as a rookie, our entire starting defense that year was made up of brand new free agents. on offense he went out and got brunell, thrash, portis, ray brown, probably others i cant remember. that whole 04 team was just vets and castoffs from spurriers year that most were gone the year after.

look at shanny. mcnabb is maybe the only real vet contributor he brought in. he gave a chance to two crappy vet RBs, both were cut way early and their jobs given to inexperienced guys or rookies, he went with a guy from the dolphins practice squad for our 2nd WR (and galloway will be gone sooner than later), drafted a rookie LT, is starting inexperienced guys on the line, inactivated our best vet OL (dockery), and im not sure we added a single starter on defense outside of carriker who is young.

if you can honestly look at our current roster and say with a straight face that were trying to "win now", youre out of your mind.

There is not a single position on this team where they aren't playing the best possible player.

The young RBs are playing because the older ones were REALLY REALLY bad. If LJ was better than Torrain, he'd still be here and be playing. There isn't a single position where they are saying we are going to put guy X out there and take our lumps with his mistakes and other things because in 2-3 years, he's going to be the better player, and having him out there now will speed the process up.

The FA pool this year was very weak and very shallow because of CBA and unrestricted free agents.

[Mursilis]

if you can honestly look at our current roster and say with a straight face that were trying to "win now", youre out of your mind.

If you can honestly look at our draft picks traded away for aged/injured guys and say with a straight face that we're trying to "build for the future", you're out of your mind.

[KDawg]

I think the McNabb decision was an attempt to hold together a team that had very little talent...of any age.

I can buy this line of thinking, for sure.

McNabb will sign an extension and will help develop a young QB drafted, probably, next year. As for a patch-work O-line, they did all they could with what they had. I expect them to draft more O-line talent and/or sign free agent O-lineman in the offseason.

It was planned this way, with a mix of "old" talent and "new" talent. We fans may not understand or agree, but I do believe this was carefully planned. I do think that the coaches expected more from McNabb and the offense and they're grasping at anything that might jump-start the offense.

This I can't buy. When it happens, I'll believe it.

Just to respond to the original post. The only real "Win Now" moves are McNabb and to a lesser extent, Brown. McNabb is 33 and has more years behind him than in front of him. At best, he's a stopgap until whoever we get next replaces him. Brown is just 29, so he potentially has years ahead of him to play and the FO figured that he was better than many players who could be selected in the 3rd-4th round. (Course, it isn't turning out that way so far...)

But they were win now moves. And in doing so it effected us in many ways. One, we lost draft picks to help supply a nucleus. Two, we have to find a way to get these guys under contract for another year, if they're deemed good enough/they want to be here. Three, we still need a QB to replace McNabb in a few years.

The signing of aging veterans was more out of necessity than anything, given the FA situation this offseason. Someone needed to fill the slots, so they got who was available for relatively cheap. There weren't any big-name signings designed to win now. Also, in general you are going to play veterans over young players until the young players prove that they are ready to play. Armstrong is a good example.

Armstrong appeared to be more ready than Galloway in the preseason. We didn't need to sign Willie Parker or Larry Johnson. People believed they would get the job now and help us win. That's a win now move that backfired.

[KDawg]

if we end up at 6-10 with mcnabb then we'll have good picks for next year, and hopefully a resigned franchise QB for at least one more year.

The bolded, underlined and italic part scares the crap out of me.

if we get to 8-8 with this garbage offensive roster we have now that means adding some players next year should help us get even better.

In theory. But then you take into account that we'll only get older next year and maybe more pieces of the puzzle to replace. And that also assumes Brown/McNabb resign. Although, Brown has been "meh" anyways, so the only real loss on him will be that draft pick. But he's also coming off a major injury, so he could improve next year.

this is a 2-3 year plan. we should be talking about this after the 2012 season cause as of now, its a major work in progress. if we beat the lions last week this thread probably doesnt exist and were sitting at 5-3.

I don't know if I would have created this thread or not if we won. I've been saying this for weeks on the forum. It's not a one loss panic kind of post. It's what I believe to be my honest assessment. But I do agree this is a long term plan. I just don't know if the plan was even crystal clear in the FOs eyes. Or maybe it was, but they saw things a bit different than I did. And hey, they're the professionals... Not me. But that doesn't mean I can't say "huh?"

[Homercles82]

Unless it's a QB-rich draft, having a top 5 pick usually means getting a shot at the best QB prospect in the draft. You don't get that same shot at picks 10-15.

So what are you advocating? You want the team go 4-12 again? I don't understand this mentality.

[Mursilis]

Armstrong appeared to be more ready than Galloway in the preseason. We didn't need to sign Willie Parker or Larry Johnson. People believed they would get the job now and help us win. That's a win now move that backfired.

I have to disagree with this. In my mind, it's OK to try out old vets if they cost you little in cap space (not an issue this year), and nothing in draft picks. Sure, give them a shot, see if they still have it, and send them home if they don't - no harm, no foul. It's good to have a mix in camp - youth and vets. I don't have a problem so much with those moves, and they were cut, so there's no real negative long-term impact.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

If you can honestly look at our draft picks traded away for aged/injured guys and say with a straight face that we're trying to "build for the future", you're out of your mind.

we traded a 3/4 for a franchise QB and a 29 year old RT. we also get an extra pick from the saints, most likely a 5th. you can still build for the future with what weve got (also considering how much talent we have on the defensive side of the ball).

offensive talent is the real serious issue. we're depleted almost everywhere. that can be fixed over 2 good drafts and some FA pickups. im far from worried at the moment about the future of this team.

[KDawg]

So what are you advocating? You want the team go 4-12 again? I don't understand this mentality.

No. Well. Yes.

Let me explain.

I'd rather endure a season or two of 3-13, 4-12 and then be good again than endure seasons of 10-6, 8-8, 8-8, 7-9, 5-11, 6-10, 10-6, 5-11, 9-7, 8-8, 4-12. That's a long stretch of mediocrity with NOTHING to show for it. Hey, if this works and we go 8-8 and everything falls in place and we're a Super Bowl contender, I'll be damn happy. I just don't see it happening right now. But I'll be really happy if it did happen.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

Then why trade picks for guys that aren't going to make us legit contenders. And again, that's not McNabb's fault. He doesn't have the supporting cast. And its alot tougher to get a supporting cast without picks.

because we add a franchise QB and a 29 year old RT. if brown can play for 3 years it was a good move for a 4th rounder. mcnabb we give the 3rd for. but we also recoup one pick from the saints, most likely a 5th. so that means going into next year draft we have:

a franchise QB (and even if he doesnt sign we can franchise him)

a franchise LT

a hopefully healthy RT

1st, 2nd, 5th, 5th, 6th, 7th round draft choices. plus an extra 4th rounder from the raiders in 2012 which can easily be traded in this draft for another pick.

we are doing ok at the moment. this isnt a gibbs draft where we have our first rounder and 2 picks in the 7th round.

[Mursilis]

And hey, they're the professionals... Not me. But that doesn't mean I can't say "huh?"

Being a professional is over-rated anyway. Allegedly, Chan Gailey is a "professional" too, but I can do what he's doing - I mean, how hard is it to go 0-7?

[Mursilis]

So what are you advocating? You want the team go 4-12 again? I don't understand this mentality.

What I want is a Super Bowl victory. This year. And if that's not possible (which it's clearly not), then next year. So then, ask yourself, what's going to get that Super Bowl title next year, or the year after? Trading away your picks next year just to get 7-8 wins this year? Don't think so.

[Mursilis]

we traded a 3/4 for a franchise QB

OK, maybe I'm remembering incorrectly, but didn't the McNabb trade also include a 2nd? Anyone?

[KDawg]

I have to disagree with this. In my mind, it's OK to try out old vets if they cost you little in cap space (not an issue this year), and nothing in draft picks. Sure, give them a shot, see if they still have it, and send them home if they don't - no harm, no foul. It's good to have a mix in camp - youth and vets. I don't have a problem so much with those moves, and they were cut, so there's no real negative long-term impact.

I can see why you disagree and don't fault you. But Ryan Torain was put on the practice squad and was able to be signed by anyone else due to keeping Johnson on the roster. We lucked out. Or we can give credit to the 'Skins FO there, I suppose, for knowing no one would sign Torain. Do whatever you want with that one. But yes, they both got cut, so it's a non point.

we traded a 3/4 for a franchise QB and a 29 year old RT. we also get an extra pick from the saints, most likely a 5th. you can still build for the future with what weve got (also considering how much talent we have on the defensive side of the ball).

offensive talent is the real serious issue. we're depleted almost everywhere. that can be fixed over 2 good drafts and some FA pickups. im far from worried at the moment about the future of this team.

We don't have that much talent on the defensive side of the ball. We have one real good end in 92 (who, if he really tried could be a good nose), but who knows what happens with him this offseason. We have another couple decent ends. We have no real nose. We have an aging middle linebacker (who is the heart and soul of the defense, which needs to be noted) and another inside backer that doesn't really fit. We have one very, very good edge rushing outside backer and one good depth guy that seems to be able to play any position on the field at the other outside spot. We have a corner on the last year of his contract. We don't have a free safety. We have another corner who is a GREAT playmaker but an okay corner and we have a stud strong safety. I see a lot of holes there.

That makes it harder to fix the offense when you have defensive holes as well. But maybe Perry Riley can step up and help fill one of those ILB spots. That was a very good pick, I think. Or maybe I hope. I don't even know any more

[Old Bay]

I don't know if it's really fair to give grief to Shanahan for stuff Vinny did. Trading picks shouldn't be disallowed because the previous GM failed at it.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

No. Well. Yes.

Let me explain.

I'd rather endure a season or two of 3-13, 4-12 and then be good again than endure seasons of 10-6, 8-8, 8-8, 7-9, 5-11, 6-10, 10-6, 5-11, 9-7, 8-8, 4-12. That's a long stretch of mediocrity with NOTHING to show for it. Hey, if this works and we go 8-8 and everything falls in place and we're a Super Bowl contender, I'll be damn happy. I just don't see it happening right now. But I'll be really happy if it did happen.

glad you brought this up. remember the last time the skins did this?

in 1993 the skins went 4-12 with a vet roster that had lost it. they had the 3rd overall pick, awesome, draft a franchise QB. heath shuler. and that didnt work out.

then they went 3-13, another high draft pick, time to draft another great player. michael westbrook. that didnt work out at all.

they go 6-10, trade picks, and draft an offensive lineman in the 1st round. i think he was cut in training camp.

point is tanking a few seasons doesnt always work out to your advantage. smart picks with competent people in charge work to your advantage. IMO we have that at the moment. hopefully lol!

[Homercles82]

What I want is a Super Bowl victory. This year. And if that's not possible (which it's clearly not), then next year. So then, ask yourself, what's going to get that Super Bowl title next year, or the year after? Trading away your picks next year just to get 7-8 wins this year? Don't think so.

So assuming we kept our picks and not traded McNabb who would have drafted with those picks that would immediately place us into contention for the Super Bowl next year?

There needs to be a proper combination of veteran players, players in their prime and youth.