Redskins.com: Shanahan Says Success Will Take Time

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

I'm not calling for Shanny's head, and I want him to be the coach for a long time, but, we brought in, and traded for older expensive players, if his plan all along involved taking time to get back in the mix, then why do that? Why get McNabb if we won't be competitive until he is 37?

It seems to me that he did one thing, and is not saying another.

Aside from the fact I don't think you can judge the impact of McNabb until at least another season down the line, I don't see what the big uproar is here over the picks for vets.

The new regime were tasked with improving a piss poor roster right across the board, with little to no draft picks to do that, and little to no "talent" of any description that they could trade to garner more picks. They went in HARD for one of the best collegiate prospects at QB to come out since Peyton, Sam Bradford; but ultimately didn't have enough ammo to land him. They'd decided from day one Campbell wasn't their guy, so he wasn't an option top keep around. And then a proven vet presents it's self in McNabb. A guy that can help with the transition both on and off the field with his leadership. Knowing your still gona' have a **** load of positions to fill in year two, and not expecting to be drafting that high again to get a Locker or Luck, a 2nd and what's turned out to be a 4th seems a fair trade off to have one less worry at the most important position on the team for a few years whilst you work on securing the other major needs.

Similarly with the other vet we traded for, Brown. Williams was a great pick at tackle showing their commitment to the future, but again, with so little else to bargain with, and a line as woeful as ours, what will be a 3rd round pick, for a proven vet starter in this league at tackle, with a 5th coming back to us in return, was a risk worth taking to upgrade as best we could. He hasn't panned out to date, mainly down to still not being 100% after injury, but even if he doesn't come through for a year or two's stability whilst we fill other holes; a 3rd round for a 5th is hardly a major give-up.

Hail.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

People who say Gibbs 2.0 was successful.

(I don't think the current FO is, but I am not sure they are doing everything they can to be a year in year out contender)

Sure...fans were satisfied with 10-6 and making the playoffs (years of NOT making the playoffs coupled with starting 5-6 will do that to you). But we're talking about organizations. What fans hold as their expectations is relatively insignificant to how an organization builds a team.

Which brings back one of the key cogs to the Shanahan "detractors" argument... The guy isn't a very good talent evaluator.

Well, in this case, probably not. However, there has been plenty of research showing that he has done a better job than his reputation would have you believe.

[KDawg]

Well, in this case, probably not. However, there has been plenty of research showing that he has done a better job than his reputation would have you believe.

What research is that?

[Commander PK]

Good luck with that Painkiller. The 106.7 listening base is strong on these boards.

I'm not even joking when I say that the station should be re-named 106.7 "The Moron"

"Let's go to Todd from Brandywine...."Hey man, I just left the game man....and WE SUCK MAN!!! (drunken burp) WE REALLY SUCK, and I'm going to root for the Ravens man, because at least they are good. Anyways, just wanted to tell you I love the show man....but WE SUCK! ..Click.."

[TD_washingtonredskins]

What research is that?

This article was eye-opening since I just assumed that what I heard about Shanahan was true:

http://washingtonexaminer.com/sports/nfl/2010/12/thom-loverro-shanahan-no-rough-draft

When looking for a reason not to like Mike Shanahan, his ability as a talent evaluator is often the one area most scrutinized.

They say while Shanahan the coach may have had success in 14 seasons with the Denver Broncos, Shanahan the talent evaluator -- considered to have final say on player selection in Denver and Washington -- falls short.

But if former Redskins vice president Vinny Cerrato had been as successful as Shanahan was in Denver in evaluating and drafting players, he would still have a job at Redskins Park and we would all be singing his praises.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/sports/nfl/2010/12/thom-loverro-shanahan-no-rough-draft#ixzz186t55T7S

---------- Post added December-14th-2010 at 12:57 PM ----------

I'm not even joking when I say that the station should be re-named 106.7 "The Moron"

"Let's go to Todd from Brandywine...."Hey man, I just left the game man....and WE SUCK MAN!!! (drunken burp) WE REALLY SUCK, and I'm going to root for the Ravens man, because at least they are good. Anyways, just wanted to tell you I love the show man....but WE SUCK! ..Click.."

Don't forget that they usually tell Lavar that he was their favorite player in the "good old days" or something dumb like that.

[The Tris]

What research is that?

My research here. Better drafter than given credit for.

That being said, he is a below average evaluator of FA talent. OTOH, Bruce Allen has shown to be a solid evaluator of FA talent, and demonstrated sound fiscal responsibility when signing FAs.

[KDawg]

This article was eye-opening since I just assumed that what I heard about Shanahan was true:

http://washingtonexaminer.com/sports/nfl/2010/12/thom-loverro-shanahan-no-rough-draft

When looking for a reason not to like Mike Shanahan, his ability as a talent evaluator is often the one area most scrutinized.

They say while Shanahan the coach may have had success in 14 seasons with the Denver Broncos, Shanahan the talent evaluator -- considered to have final say on player selection in Denver and Washington -- falls short.

But if former Redskins vice president Vinny Cerrato had been as successful as Shanahan was in Denver in evaluating and drafting players, he would still have a job at Redskins Park and we would all be singing his praises.

Comparing Shanahan to Cerrato is like comparing Ghandi to Charles Manson

---------- Post added December-14th-2010 at 12:59 PM ----------

My research here. Better drafter than given credit for.

That being said, he is a below average evaluator of FA talent. OTOH, Bruce Allen has shown to be a solid evaluator of FA talent, and demonstrated sound fiscal responsibility when signing FAs.

I've already told you how I feel about that. It's subjective. It's well done, but it's not necessarily the end all be all.

[Commander PK]

Don't forget that they usually tell Lavar that he was their favorite player in the "good old days" or something dumb like that.

I liked LaVar when he was a player here, but I have also come to realize what an under-achiever he was. More hype than anything.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Comparing Shanahan to Cerrato is like comparing Ghandi to Charles Manson

You didn't read the whole article, huh? I'll summarize...he went on to point out that over Shanahan's last 4 drafts only 2-3 players chosen are not on NFL rosters somewhere. Additionally, the majority of them are starters around the league and a pretty good number of them are Pro Bowl players (Cutler, Dumerville, Marshall, etc.) or potential Pro Bowl players (Hillis, etc.).

The article really doesn't have anything to do with Cerrato other than to use him as an example since he was the one making decisions for the Redskins.

[Oldfan]

... I don't see what the big uproar is here over the picks for vets.

The Skins problem is a lack of talent caused primarily by trading away draft picks for vets. So, you don't understand why we think it's dumb to try to solve the problem by trading draft picks for vets?

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

The Skins problem is a lack of talent caused primarily by trading away draft picks for vets. So, you don't understand why we think it's dumb to try to solve the problem by trading draft picks for vets?

Your better than cutting a post and taking the snippet totally out of context Of man.

FAR better.

Hail.

[tr1]

Obviously he made a mistake. A lot of us knew it when he did it, though.

Color me different.

Had JC stayed he'd be in another new system...something we'd all loathe...or excuse...take your pick. McNabb changed the subject at qb.

What Shanny saw on tape was a guy who was totally shell-shocked. The lack of protection had made him timid. Frankly, I'm surprised JC is having the kind of year (not great, by any means) he's having in Oakland.

McNabb was a fresh start for the offense...an improvement? Not with that o-line. Nothing was going to change with that line.

Oh, and were we going to spend the same for JC as we spent for McNabb? Who knows?

[KDawg]

Color me different.

Had JC stayed he'd be in another new system...something we'd all loathe...or excuse...take your pick. McNabb changed the subject at qb.

What Shanny saw on tape was a guy who was totally shell-shocked. The lack of protection had made him timid. Frankly, I'm surprised JC is having the kind of year (not great, by any means) he's having in Oakland.

McNabb was a fresh start for the offense...an improvement? Not with that o-line. Nothing was going to change with that line.

Oh, and were we going to spend the same for JC as we spent for McNabb? Who knows?

Could have still traded Campbell for the pick he netted us... And went with Grossman... And still stunk...

[Oldfan]

Your better than cutting a post and taking the snippet totally out of context Of man.

FAR better.

Don't patronize me and then not explain how my taking your statement out of context distorted your meaning. If it's not obvious, what did you mean by the following line?

... I don't see what the big uproar is here over the picks for vets.

[tr1]

Could have still traded Campbell for the pick he netted us... And went with Grossman... And still stunk...

Grossman?!? I'm sure that would have gone over well...

McNabb was a no-brainer for the cost...suddenly qb wasn't a controversy...well, at least for a few weeks.

[KDawg]

Grossman?!? I'm sure that would have gone over well...

Who cares how it goes over?

How are we doing now? And we lost a 2nd and a 4th to do it. Awesome.

Instead of having a 2nd and two more 4th rounders, we no longer have a second or one of the fourths and we're stunk with a clunker at quarterback.

[The Tris]

McNabb was a no-brainer for the cost...suddenly qb wasn't a controversy...well, at least for a few weeks.

2009 McNabb of the 22-10 TD-INT ratio with WR, RB, TE, and an OL was a no brainer for a 2nd and a 4th.

2010 McNabb of the 12-15 TD-INT ratio with no weapons and no OL is not a no brainer for a 2nd and a 4th.

We overestimated how much he would elavate those around him, and thus overpaid.

How many games has McNabb won for us? How much worse would we have been with Grossman?

[Mursilis]

Grossman?!? I'm sure that would have gone over well...

And how's being 5-8 playing out with the fans? Did you see the crowd at Sunday's game?

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Who cares how it goes over?

How are we doing now? And we lost a 2nd and a 4th to do it. Awesome.

Instead of having a 2nd and two more 4th rounders, we no longer have a second or one of the fourths and we're stunk with a clunker at quarterback.

I actually agree with that. You could have moved forward with Grossman for one year as a transitional QB and looked to draft a QB in 2010 or 2011. And, on the 0.5% chance that he actually plays well enough to keep the job, he's 3-4 years younger than McNabb.

[tr1]

Who cares how it goes over?

How are we doing now? And we lost a 2nd and a 4th to do it. Awesome.

Instead of having a 2nd and two more 4th rounders, we no longer have a second or one of the fourths and we're stunk with a clunker at quarterback.

Just imagine Shanny's FIRST move would have been acquiring Grossman to start.

Come on, be serious.

And, McNabb isn't a clunker when given a decent line. He's inconsistent, but he needs SOME help. And, he came cheap and will be a good guy on the bench should we decide to groom a qb.

I still say it wasn't a bad move.

There's a whole lot of suckage around McNabb...so let's not scapegoat him as our sole problem.

---------- Post added December-14th-2010 at 02:28 PM ----------

I actually agree with that. You could have moved forward with Grossman for one year as a transitional QB and looked to draft a QB in 2010 or 2011. And, on the 0.5% chance that he actually plays well enough to keep the job, he's 3-4 years younger than McNabb.

Grossman failure > McNabb failure.

There'd have been a revolt in FedEX...and we wouldn't have this many wins.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

Don't patronize me and then not explain how my taking your statement out of context distorted your meaning. If it's not obvious, what did you mean by the following line?

Au contraire Of, your the one taking the condescending approach here.

I specifically made reference to the said vets. traded for. That whole darn post. To take that totally out of context and broaden it out to other years repeated mistakes by virtue of using a throw away cut and diced end line, when you know full well the players and situation it was related to; is, for someone normally far better than **** like that, frankly beneath you.

And far from patronizing you, that's both a compliment to the higher standards you normally hold; and disappointment there in on the route you took.

Hail.

[tr1]

And how's being 5-8 playing out with the fans? Did you see the crowd at Sunday's game?

You may not realize it, but there are 10 other players on the field with the qb.

BTW, McNabb led us to the score at the end. He didn't snap, hold or botch that extra point.

[KDawg]

Just imagine Shanny's FIRST move would have been acquiring Grossman to start.

Instead his first move was wasting draft picks to start. Even better

Come on, be serious.

I respect you, but, this is funny to me. We have differing viewpoints. Cool. But I am being quite serious.

And, McNabb isn't a clunker when given a decent line.

Even when he has blocking he hasn't done much that's great. He's thrown entirely too many one hoppers.

He's inconsistent, but he needs SOME help.

Correct, which is a big reason why we shouldn't have made the trade for him. Actually, that line right there is TWO reasons. We have no help AND he's inconsistent.

And, he came cheap

Define "cheap". Via contract? Sure. Via what we gave up? No.

and will be a good guy on the bench should we decide to groom a qb.

You mean the same guy that doesn't know NFL games can end in a tie? The same guy who tried to call a timeout, off the back of another timeout (like Gibbs) but thankfully failed to do so because he wasn't aware that we were out of timeouts? Yeah, I'd want him mentoring my young QB. Shanahan is capable of doing that just fine. Shanahan is an offensive expert. I trust him to mentor and teach. I don't trust him to evaluate and sign.

I still say it wasn't a bad move.

You're more than entitled to that opinion.

There's a whole lot of suckage around McNabb...so let's not scapegoat him as our sole problem.

Who did? Saying he was a waste doesn't condemn him. It condemns everything. He might be good somewhere with a supporting cast. He's not here.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Grossman failure > McNabb failure.

There'd have been a revolt in FedEX...and we wouldn't have this many wins.

I agree that McNabb is better and we'd be worse this year with Grossman. I don't care about the fans who flip-flop every season...they can revolt/be happy/turn in their fan cards/etc. I don't want our decisions based on the fans' approval. If having Grossman start for one year would make us better in the future for 10 years, I'm in. If they had traded Campbell and signed Grossman, they'd have had an extra pick in last draft (2nd) and an extra pick in this coming draft (4th). That might have resulted in a couple more starters.

[tr1]

2009 McNabb of the 22-10 TD-INT ratio with WR, RB, TE, and an OL was a no brainer for a 2nd and a 4th.

2010 McNabb of the 12-15 TD-INT ratio with no weapons and no OL is not a no brainer for a 2nd and a 4th.

We overestimated how much he would elavate those around him, and thus overpaid.

How many games has McNabb won for us? How much worse would we have been with Grossman?

And, when McNabb had gone off to Minny, and lit it up with the guys around him, we'd have said, "Why didn't we grab McNabb?"

Hindsight is 20/20...especially on ES. :rotflmao: