Agree with this statement? "The short sighted moves Gibbs made over and over again KILLED this team's future"

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

I was alluding to your continued lambasting of both personnel moves and the state of the roster he both left Zorn and the repercussions still to this day on this team.

And nobody has said the ultimate goal wasn't a SB victory. And it darn sure wasn't for the want of trying and honest hard work. But because we fell short of that, you dismiss his second go-around, allied to the above, as a failure. Regardless of what he did achieve that we hadn't had in years.

Man I hope Coach Mike ends up in Indy next February. Heck knows what blame will be laid at his door if he doesn't.

Hail.

[hail2skins]

See h2s, I've zero problem with Coach Gibbs getting discussed and criticised when it's justified criticism. But when he's continually being slammed for something he wasn't even fricking hired to do, and the moves there in that were down to the bungling two-some above him; that's nothing more than a cheap shot at his expense. Which is the very LAST thing that man deserves from us of all people.

GHH, I guess the question I would pose would be: which things of Gibbs 2.0 do you think he should be justifiably criticized (and, for that matter, praised) for? Coaching decisions? Personnel decisions? What do you think?

[The Tris]

Yes. Coaching was definitely a major factor. The coach has to be first to blame when a team falls that far that fast.

So Zorn the coach is to blame the teams short comings in 2008 and 2009, but Gibbs the coach gets a pass from his teams short comings?

As you define failure, which is anything but winning a Super Bowl, then the answer must be yes. I contend that there is a case to be made that Joe had success in the form of progress. Ending the era of Dallas dominating us is a great example of what I am talking about.

I only define failure in that way when a team is engaged in a win now philosophy. If you are not building team to win a Super Bowl in the future or you are not competing to win a Super Bowl, then what exactly are you doing?

Gibbs did neither.

Like I said, I agree that Joe made mistakes, my only point is that you also have to give credit where credit is due.

Joe Gibbs is the best coach the Washington Redskins have had since Joe Gibbs, including our current coach.

At the same time, Joe Gibbs as final authority on all football decisions, presided over some of the worst personnel moves of the Snyder era. Whether he pushed for all of them, he signed off on every single one.

Fair enough. I guess the main point of difference here is that I think the 2008 roster was pretty good

As did Vinny Cerrato.

I think the blame lies with those who let the team atrophy in 2008 and 2009, whereas you think it lies with Joe Gibbs.

I simply think the roster atrophied well before 2008.

---------- Post added May-23rd-2011 at 07:34 PM ----------

Man I hope Coach Mike ends up in Indy next February. Heck knows what blame will be laid at his door if he doesn't.

If Mike continues to build this team as he demonstrated with this wonderful draft, I would not expect nor want us to end up in Indy.

If he choses to be very aggressive in free agency, and keep aging veterans over rookies, I will be upset if we are not in the playoffs.

If he choses the former, I will be excited and relieved.

If he choses the later, well, I will be dissappointed to say the least.

The problem wasn't Joe Gibbs failing to win a Super Bowl, the problem was his failure to become a SB contender despite four straight years of "win now".

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

GHH, I guess the question I would pose would be: which things of Gibbs 2.0 do you think he should be justifiably criticized (and, for that matter, praised) for? Coaching decisions? Personnel decisions? What do you think?

Oh, there's a lot I'm sure he'd do differently if he had his time over again man. Some of his game day coaching decisions left a lot to be desired at times, non least his use, or rather waste, of the clock with ridiculous TO's and play calling, particularly at the end of halves. One of his major strengths from his first tenure, spotting first half weakness' on both our side of the ball and the oppositions, and making the lil' but key adjustments in the locker room just never seemed to be there to that extent the second time out.

I have a personal issue in Joe, because he's Joe, letting Cerrato rough shot over him in the Saunders hire. The O never looked set that year until he took control back. But what I can't agree with is criticism for the personnel moves in the main. Yes, he had an input. But ultimately it was the owner and his lapdog that went ahead and did whatever they were gona' do. To think a 63 year old on a short window of time would try interfere with that when he's just so grateful to be back with one of his life loves is a tad naive, to say the least.

And the criticism that we didn't win a 4th Lombardi is just utterly unrealistic and uncalled for. To get what he got out of what he was given, in such a short space of time from what had gone before, and to then have it overshadowed by something no HC should have to deal with; and STILL give us two of the most memorable season's in the past two decades is nothing short of a miraculous accomplishment IMHO.

But hey. it fell short of silverware so he's a failure in some eyes.

Hail.

[stoney26]

I'm willing to bet most of the moves made during gibbs 2 were made by Vinny and Dan with Joe Gibbs signing off on them. I think it Joe would say, "hey guys I need a big running back". Vinny and Dan would find say a tj duckett and Gibbs would say ok. Gibbs had no problem taking the blame and passing off the successes to someone else.

I just dont think Gibbs had much to do with the personal decisions even if he said he did. I think he would give vnny and dan an area of need and they would go out and find a player. Maybe Gibbs first year he probably wanted to bring in a few core players that he liked but I really think he relied heavily on his scouting dept and vinny for player personel. He was out of football so long i doubt he had a firm grasp on all the players in the NFL so he leaned on the "front office" when it came down to picking up players.

[s0crates]

So Zorn the coach is to blame the teams short comings in 2008 and 2009, but Gibbs the coach gets a pass from his teams short comings?

Of course not. Gibbs is responsible for his failures, as he himself would be the first to admit. My point is not to excuse Gibbs for his mistakes, my point is that Zorn's mistakes were far more detrimental to the team, and a much bigger factor in our current problems. Danny made a big mistake in picking Gibbs' successor. Surely you will agree with that, won't you?

I only define failure in that way when a team is engaged in a win now philosophy. If you are not building team to win a Super Bowl or you are not competing to win a Super Bowl, then what exactly are you doing?

I am not sure about this distinction between winning-now versus rebuilding. You cannot win without rebuilding. Gibbs did rebuild. Look at the roster he inherited from Spurrier if you don't believe that.

Joe Gibbs is the best coach the Washington Redskins have had since Joe Gibbs, including our current coach.

About this we are in complete agreement. I am happy to hear you say this.

At the same time, Joe Gibbs as final authority on all football decisions, presided over some of the worst personnel moves of the Snyder era. Whether he pushed for all of them, he signed off on every single one.

Fair enough. There were some really bad moves.

I happen to think there were some really good moves too, but I do not think we will ever agree about that.

As did Vinny Cerrato.

Regarding the 2008 roster, I said it was pretty good, or at least would have been had we handled the 2008 draft better. I see the disastrous 2008 draft as the beginning of the regression, you place it earlier.

I guess I do agree with Vinny that we were in good position to keep building in 2008, but that offseason was a catastrophe, which I think is mostly Vinny's fault.

Vinny messing up the 2008 draft (and Danny hiring Jim Zorn) set us back more than anything Gibbs did.

Gibbs made some mistakes, but he deserves credit for cleaning up Spurrier's mess, and he does not deserve blame for problems that were primarily caused by Vinny, Danny, and Zorn.

[HailGreen28]

I'm beginning to think that if you and I were looking at the same wall I'd see green and you'd see blue. We just don't see things the same but that's OK, as I said that's what message boards are for.

lol. That's because the wall is

I've provided info and links to back up what I said.

I look at that list and I just don't see that as a lot of young core players. Pretty sure you can find more and better yoiung talent on today's Detroit Lions and nobody is ready to claim they are poised for a deep playoff run.

If you don't think they're ready to be contenders, why do you think they are a young talented team? These guys, who did SI's draft analysis recently, think so: LINK

Gibbs left a solid core that remained the core of the skins including last season. Three seasons after Gibbs left. How high are you trying to ramp up your "standards" to call Gibbs a failure?

Portis, as we have learned, only had 1 producive seasons after Gibbs left and now he's done.

Correction, CP had a great first half of 2008. Then the team went south the rest of 2008-09 (CP took a concussion halfway thru 09, and was put on IR because frankly, what was the point, that season of the "swinging gate"?) CP is still a good back, but Shanny's made it clear the Portis/Johnson/Parker trials were just to find a placekeeper till he could bring in a back to carry us into the future, the way CP carried us during the entirety of Gibbs 2.0.

Guys like Golston, Macintosh, and Doughty (someone else listed him) are just guys, players that are nothing special and hardly core guys to build around

Couldn't be more wrong. Guys like you mention ARE part of the core of the team. Look at what the Packers did when their starters went on IR. Look up the definition of a "solid" team. Short-sighted thinking like yours lead to mistakes like Ryan Clark. Which despite Gibbs being Team President, Snyder appears to have been involved in:

Clark told the team repeatedly that he would immediately sign, at any point, for $1.5 mil bonus on a four year deal worth a maximum, yes, that's maximum, of $5.8 million, according to sources. Snyder told him he would never see that kind of money. It was brought up to Snyder that in fact, all Ryan was asking for was in essence the contract that injured safety Matt Bowen had signed with the Redskins a few years prior, and, given the passage of time, and Clark's production, that was a plenty fair salary request for a starting safety on a top-10 defense.

Snyder told Clark that the team was through overspending on players like it did for Bowen, and he had learned from his mistakes. Yes, you read that last sentence correctly. He actually said that prior to last March's ridiculous free agent splurge.

Now this is JLC reporting back in '06, so I bow if TK, Murf, KDAWG, any mods or other knowledgeable posters tell me this story is crap like a lot of JLC stuff. But if true, it begs the question how many of the mistakes in Gibbs 2.0 really were Gibbs fault.

sSo that leaves us with Fletcher, who had a Darrell Green like deal with God that kept him productive despite his age, Moss, Cooley, Rogers, and Landry. 5 players. That''s it, that's the list. They had 3X that many holes, including all 5 OL starters who were over the age of 30. Again our backup tackles were Stephon Heyer and somethign called D'Anthony Batiste the year after Gibbs left and that was largely due to the fact that Coach never drafed and developed young OL to step in when the old guys got hurt, which everyone knew would happen given the age of that group.

What, our backup tackles weren't stars, so Gibbs 2.0 was a failure? And you dismiss guys like the QB that just lead us to the playoffs, they guy who got 1400 yards in 08 despite a disastrous second half of the season, and guys like Sellers, Golston, McIntosh, that you HAVE to have as much as the stars to win in the NFL. I'm telling you, Gibbs left a good team to build on, but an incompetent FO ruined it. Starting with the botched HC search, and went downhill from there.

As someone else posted the Redskins had the fewest draft picks, by far, of any team in the league during Coach Gibbs' tenure. You will never convince me that didn't hurt the team down the road.

Again, trying to argue principle without looking at the specifics. Gibbs 2.0 did well with the picks they made. Contrast this with the Eagles, who did collect picks the right way, and haven't won a Superbowl yet. You have to look at the results to see how the teams ultimately did. Gibbs left a solid core to build upon, which was trashed by his successors. Throw in Vinny thinking at that point all we needed was pass catchers as another way our FO immediately took us back towards the cellar.

And finally you contended that Coach Gibbs left the team in great salary cap shape. Can you provide any links to suppor this?

Well, let's see. I already provided links back in the McNabb Poll thread, that you were wrong in your contention that Gibbs hurt our future with the Archuleta and Randle-El deals. That the Bears picked up AA's contract, and after a middlin' #2 stint Gibb's successors chose to extend ARE's contract which if you read the link weren't crippling by any stretch anyways.

Vinny Cerrato wasn't constrained enough by any salary cap woes, to sign Jason Taylor for $16 mil for two years in 2008.

According to ESPN.com's John Clayton, Taylor told the Redskins he did not need to renegotiate and was willing to play for the final two years of his contract. He is scheduled to make $8.1 million this season. With around $9 million of cap room, the Redskins were able to work the trade quickly.

Nor were we too "crippled" to sign Fat Albert the following year in 2009.

Albert Haynesworth hit the free-agent jackpot Friday morning by reaching agreement on a seven-year, $100 million deal with the Washington Redskins

As for Casserly as someone said he didn't build that '91 team. Sure he plugged a few holes but the majority of that team was already in place before he gained total control.

And give Beathard beaucoup credit for that. But if that's all it took, if Casserly and Gibbs' work after Beathard left didn't matter, why didn't we win a Superbowl in dominating fashion in 1990? Why didn't we win the Superbowl played in 1991 in dominating fashion? Why did we only win the Superbowl played on January 26, 1992?

Beathard got us most of the way there, by far. But you seem to have a hard time giving all the credit where credit is due. Like your statements below.

And again look at his draft record since '91 and the overall record of the teams he has developed. It's no shock that Houston got good after Casserly left. And finally he did not chose Williams over Reggie Bush. If he preferred Williams all along then why did he start negotiating with Bush first? No he picked Williams because he could not agree to terms with Bush, that is much different than getting credit for making the right choice all along. I'm not claiming that Casserly was as bad as Vinny. He was probably near the top of the bottom third of GMs IMO. But he was far from an effective GM

I bolded the really stupid part. Oh for crying out loud. Casserly chose Williams. Are you trying to downplay Casserly being smart and weighing his options, including salary demands? "He did not (choose) Williams". That's like saying the Colts didn't choose Manning, since they looked hard at Leaf during their decision making process. Do you realize what you're saying, in trying to deny Casserly credit for a good decision?

For the rest, Casserly was about middle of the road as a GM. And as I said before, it's ironic and deserving of sympathy that Casserly got canned when he got decisions RIGHT. He and Turner were finally on the right track when he got bumped so Danny and Vinny could play fantasy football IRL. And the final move he made which led to his firing in Houston, turned out to be a good call. Choosing Mario Williams over Reggie Bush and Vince Young. (I'm still trying to wrap my brain over how you say he didn't really choose him. For whatever reason, HE MADE THE RIGHT CALL!)

*clears throat* I'm a little frustrated over having to make such a long post here. While it's probably just a refresher to more knowledgeable posters who could shed light in some areas like the JLC bit, which intrigued me, hope you got something out of it, DGF. At least we like the same Skin HOFer and team. Hail!

---------- Post added May-23rd-2011 at 08:20 PM ----------

That is a very sad statement. And if true, echoes the point that at his age, Gibb II was not the man for the rebuild job the Redskins needed.

I'm still not convinced that Gibbs didn't have final say - someone has to have that. This old thread was a good read on this subject:

http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?196686-Is-Joe-Gibbs-a-LIAR

Good read, and I'd love for TK or another knowledgeable member to lay out exactly how things went down in Gibbs 2.0. How much control was Snyder willing to give up, to get Joe to come back?

And the poster who made that title, Madd, should have been punched repeatedly in the face via TCP/IP. :mad:

---------- Post added May-23rd-2011 at 08:22 PM ----------

So do you think you can be considered a success when you fail at 50% of your job?

Get that batting average in the MLB, and you're a HOFer. Get that overall winning percentage up a couple points in the NFL, you're a HOFer too.

[stoney26]

I just want the people bashing Joe to remember what it was like before Gibbs, and think about how it's been since he left. Stop over analyzing everything and take it for what it is. Nobody is perfect and a couple of plays go our way in 05 in Seattle, who knows we might have made it to the super bowl. We could have beat Carolina in 05. **** Seattle beat them by 20 I think.

Would have making it to the super bowl in 05 make Gibbs 2.0 a success everything else the same? What about making it to the NFC championship? Yeah, the team was a little old after he left but he was trying to win now. And he almost did in my opinion. His best player got murdered for gods sake. Who knows what happens if that doesnt happen and Gibbs stays in 08.

[s0crates]

Nice thoughtful post HailGreen28. I think you have hit on some important points here:

How high are you trying to ramp up your "standards" to call Gibbs a failure?

Apparently, if you do not win the Super Bowl then you fail.

I'm telling you, Gibbs left a good team to build on, but an incompetent FO ruined it. Starting with the botched HC search, and went downhill from there.

Looking back on this, the thing that kills me is that Gregg Williams would have taken the job. Joe practically named Gregg as his successor. Instead we hired the QB coach Jim Zorn?!? I mean really.

So Gregg William goes on to get a Super Bowl ring with the Saints, while we watch Zorn be completely baffled as our team falls apart before our eyes.

Gibbs left a solid core to build upon, which was trashed by his successors. Throw in Vinny thinking at that point all we needed was pass catchers as another way our FO immediately took us back towards the cellar.

Right. First three picks: Malcolm Kelly, Devin Thomas, and Fred Davis. I mean what?!? We already had Santana Moss and Chris Cooley on the roster. We needed to get some young linemen to back-up our aging starters. Everybody knew that. That was a monumentally stupid draft.

Looking back on the 2008 offseason, I do not see how you can avoid the conclusion that it was our undoing. I blame Danny and Vinny. I cannot for the life of me come to any other conclusion, least of all the conclusion that this is all somehow Gibbs' fault.

---------- Post added May-23rd-2011 at 07:32 PM ----------

I just want the people bashing Joe to remember what it was like before Gibbs, and think about how it's been since he left. Stop over analyzing everything and take it for what it is. Nobody is perfect and a couple of plays go our way in 05 in Seattle, who knows we might have made it to the super bowl. We could have beat Carolina in 05. **** Seattle beat them by 20 I think.

Would have making it to the super bowl in 05 make Gibbs 2.0 a success everything else the same? What about making it to the NFC championship? Yeah, the team was a little old after he left but he was trying to win now. And he almost did in my opinion. His best player got murdered for gods sake. Who knows what happens if that doesnt happen and Gibbs stays in 08.

Thanks for this. I am glad I am not the only one who ponders that "What if?"

We will never know.

[stoney26]

I think you kinda have to give Joe a break. Given the hand he was dealt. All things considered, he did a good job and made us a contender, and you can't ask for much more than that IMO.

[hail2skins]

But what I can't agree with is criticism for the personnel moves in the main. Yes, he had an input. But ultimately it was the owner and his lapdog that went ahead and did whatever they were gona' do. To think a 63 year old on a short window of time would try interfere with that when he's just so grateful to be back with one of his life loves is a tad naive, to say the least.

I might be mistaken, but I think that the majority of Redskins fans expected that Gibbs was going to have more of an input than just letting Dan and Vinny "do whatever they were going to do." I don't think many fans thought that Gibbs was merely "grateful" to be back (and by this I don't mean he didn't give it his all from the coaching side of things).

If Joe was rolled by the Dan/Vinny machine that much, that indeed would make his second tenure here disappointing.

[s0crates]

If Joe was rolled by the Dan/Vinny machine that much, that indeed would make his second tenure here disappointing.

Or you could say that Joe was able to overcome the Dan and Vinny machine better than any other coach who was involved with it, he was just unable to completely overcome it.

[stoney26]

He's not sayin Gibbs was rolled by Dan and vinny. He's saying he deferred to them on personal decisions for the mere fact that Gibbs hadnt been in the NFL for the past 15 years. He was out of the loop on a lot of things, one of them being player personel in the NFL. You think Gibbs knew anything about most of the players in the NFL when he came back? Highly unlikely. He deferred to Dan and vin and signed off on things. He would give them the grocery list, they would do the shopping. At least that's what I think.

[hail2skins]

He's not sayin Gibbs was rolled by Dan and vinny. He's saying he deferred to them on personal decisions for the mere fact that Gibbs hadnt been in the NFL for the past 15 years. He was out of the loop on a lot of things, one of them being player personel in the NFL. You think Gibbs knew anything about most of the players in the NFL when he came back? Highly unlikely. He deferred to Dan and vin and signed off on things. He would give them the grocery list, they would do the shopping. At least that's what I think.

Fair point, and I think probably goes along the theme that fans probably expected too much when Gibbs came back.

[Gart Monk]

You know what's really sad?

As I type, we're upto 11 pages and 163 posts debating the value of the second tenure in charge of the greatest man ever employed by this organization. A period that regardless of anything gave us our most enjoyable and successful 4 year spell since his first go-around. And we're doing this at a time when the owner has finally given us what we've craved for so long, and we have a professional football outfit for the first time in eons from top to bottom doing things the right way again.

Now that is sad.

It's only the darn lock-out and no football that saves it from being tragic.

Hail.

There is no proof that they are doing things "the right way"

It just seems that way. It always seems that way FEB through SEPT every year.

with that said, I am cautiously optimistic for the future.

[Darrell Green Fan]

I'm willing to bet most of the moves made during gibbs 2 were made by Vinny and Dan with Joe Gibbs signing off on them. I think it Joe would say, "hey guys I need a big running back". Vinny and Dan would find say a tj duckett and Gibbs would say ok. Gibbs had no problem taking the blame and passing off the successes to someone else.

I just dont think Gibbs had much to do with the personal decisions even if he said he did. I think he would give vnny and dan an area of need and they would go out and find a player. Maybe Gibbs first year he probably wanted to bring in a few core players that he liked but I really think he relied heavily on his scouting dept and vinny for player personel. He was out of football so long i doubt he had a firm grasp on all the players in the NFL so he leaned on the "front office" when it came down to picking up players.

I will never believe this. Gibbs said he had total control and I refuse to believe he looked us in the eye and lied. Sure the 3 huddled together but I will always buy it was Gibbs, not Dan, who traded a 3rd for Duckett.

And that, Gibbs Hog Heaven, is why some of us are not buying KDawg's post. We believe that Coach Gibbs was in charge of personnel because that is what he told us when he took the job, during his tenure, and after he left. I chose to believe him. So if Gibbs was in charge then he has to be accountable for leaving a team with serious age and depth issues and very few young talented players.

[Mursilis]

I have a personal issue in Joe, because he's Joe, letting Cerrato rough shot over him in the Saunders hire. The O never looked set that year until he took control back. But what I can't agree with is criticism for the personnel moves in the main. Yes, he had an input. But ultimately it was the owner and his lapdog that went ahead and did whatever they were gona' do. To think a 63 year old on a short window of time would try interfere with that when he's just so grateful to be back with one of his life loves is a tad naive, to say the least.

Everything I ever read about the Saunders hire indicated it was Gibbs' idea, not Cerrato's. I can't imagine Gibbs, a HOF coach, being told by some no-name like Cerrato who to have on his coaching staff. Snyder/Cerrato can do something like that to Zorn, a first-time coach with no strong rep, but not to a HOFer like Gibbs.

[KDawg]

I will never believe this. Gibbs said he had total control and I refuse to believe he looked us in the eye and lied. Sure the 3 huddled together but I will always buy it was Gibbs, not Dan, who traded a 3rd for Duckett.

And that, Gibbs Hog Heaven, is why some of us are not buying KDawg's post. We believe that Coach Gibbs was in charge of personnel because that is what he told us when he took the job, during his tenure, and after he left. I chose to believe him. So if Gibbs was in charge then he has to be accountable for leaving a team with serious age and depth issues and very few young talented players.

What is there to buy?

That Snyder has been the common denominator for the last 11 years? That's fact.

That Gibbs needs to be held accountable for his two bad seasons while in win now mode? That's fact.

Gibbs should be commended for getting us to the playoffs for the second and third time in nearly 20 years? That's fact.

That Gibbs did what he was hired to do, build a win now roster? That's conjecture, but a logical deduction.

I don't think people are quite grasping what I'm saying. It's like people are taking out of my post what they believe rather than what they are reading.

Gibbs probably was in charge of personnel.

But he was also probably told he had a blank check to do with what he would. He was never tasked with rebuilding. Nor should he be. He was brought in to win. Not to rebuild. There was no long term vision when he was signed. It was all about the here and now.

Gibbs had two jobs:

1) Restore faith in the fanbase - He did that. Even if just for a short time.

2) Win. He did decently here. Posting two of our best three seasons since '90-'91. But he also posted two horrendous seasons. He didn't succeed and didn't completely fail. He was mediocre here.

All in all, Gibbs II was a decent run.

[Darrell Green Fan]

What is there to buy?

That Snyder has been the common denominator for the last 11 years? That's fact.

That Gibbs needs to be held accountable for his two bad seasons while in win now mode? That's fact.

Gibbs should be commended for getting us to the playoffs for the second and third time in nearly 20 years? That's fact.

That Gibbs did what he was hired to do, build a win now roster? That's conjecture, but a logical deduction.

I don't think people are quite grasping what I'm saying. It's like people are taking out of my post what they believe rather than what they are reading.

Gibbs probably was in charge of personnel.

But he was also probably told he had a blank check to do with what he would. He was never tasked with rebuilding. Nor should he be. He was brought in to win. Not to rebuild. There was no long term vision when he was signed. It was all about the here and now.

Gibbs had two jobs:

1) Restore faith in the fanbase - He did that. Even if just for a short time.

2) Win. He did decently here. Posting two of our best three seasons since '90-'91. But he also posted two horrendous seasons. He didn't succeed and didn't completely fail. He was mediocre here.

All in all, Gibbs II was a decent run.

I believe this will be the 5th time in this thread that I need to point out that the thread title is asking if Gibbs short sighted moves hurt the franchise after he left. That is what I have continued to try to discuss yet some of you continue to go off course. You seem to want to blame Snyder for the some of these short sighted trades and as much as I hate Dan Snyder I just can't go along with this. So if you agree that Gibbs was in charge of personnel then why are you blaming Snyder for the Redskins having by far the fewest draft choices in the league during Gibbs' 4 years and leaving the team with serious age and depth problems?

[KDawg]

I believe this will be the 5th time in this thread that I need to point out that the thread title is asking if Gibbs short sighted moves hurt the franchise after he left.

And you're still not grasping what I'm saying.

It wasn't his job to build for the future... So of course the moves made in his tenure left the team in rough shape. He was NEVER tasked with rebuilding. Ever. Putting the blame on him for ownerships failed direction is backwards.

[HailGreen28]

I believe this will be the 5th time in this thread that I need to point out that the thread title is asking if Gibbs short sighted moves hurt the franchise after he left. That is what I have continued to try to discuss yet some of you continue to go off course. You seem to want to blame Snyder for the some of these short sighted trades and as much as I hate Dan Snyder I just can't go along with this. So if you agree that Gibbs was in charge of personnel then why are you blaming Snyder for the Redskins having by far the fewest draft choices in the league during Gibbs' 4 years and leaving the team with serious age and depth problems?

Then for the fifth time, you're moving the goalposts from what you asserted in the McNabb poll thread. What I quoted from you, when I started this thread, to not derail the McNabb thread.

You said, "The short sighted moves Gibbs made over and over again KILLED this team's future".

That's what's in the thread title. And in the OP.

I and others have shown that just isn't true. Look at my previous post. Tell me how Gibbs KILLED our future, with the moves Vinny was able to make in 2008-2009.

[hail2skins]

It wasn't his job to build for the future... So of course the moves made in his tenure left the team in rough shape. He was NEVER tasked with rebuilding. Ever. Putting the blame on him for ownerships failed direction is backwards.

KDawg, do you think it was a mistake to bring Gibbs back?

[KDawg]

KDawg, do you think it was a mistake to bring Gibbs back?

Under the circumstances that he was brought back... Yes. I do.

We needed a rebuild, and our ownsership didn't want to go that direction. We hired a win now coach.

That was an ownership error.

I don't blame Gibbs for it, let's make that clear.

[HailGreen28]

Under the circumstances that he was brought back... Yes. I do.

We needed a rebuild, and our ownsership didn't want to go that direction. We hired a win now coach.

That was an ownership error.

I don't blame Gibbs for it, let's make that clear.

What if Williams and Saunders were retained as HC and OC. Say we still get Blanche as DC. Do we still have something to build on?

I wish we could handwave a competent FO in there, in this scenario, but that's not Gibbs' fault. We still have issues, like an old OL, but I think Gibbs left a decent team to build on, with smarter people in charge.

[celticsalmon]

Getting to the playoffs is to be expected from a HOF coach. IMO Gibbs did what Deoin, Stubblefield, Arculeta and most recently Haynesworth... did. And how he left the team-without ever telling his players or staff beforehand-and then not advocating for Williams to replace him-are decisions that taint an otherwise stellar career.