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

[JPCreativelab]

or you just really are that obtuse.

i just had a Shawshank flashback there, but i think you made a really great point

[The Tris]

How in the heck do you equate one with other?

Either your taking everything totally out of context, or you just really are that obtuse. Or maybe your just being as obstinately awkward as you can be for the heck of it.

Being as you flippantly ignore everything that's said, and only read what you want to believe, I honestly don't know which it is.

Seriously, how doe's someone saying how Gibbs took a team to the playoffs in such adversity equate to "that's the limit of our aspirations?"

Hail.

I am sorry to have angered you to the point of personal attacks. I had hoped you wouldn't stoop there.

Clearly the discussion has broken down at this point.

That's the main issue with discussing the most important figure in Redskins history - too much emotion tied up in him that clouds objective thinking.

[HEavyJumbo85]

I am sorry to have angered you to the point of personal attacks. I had hoped you wouldn't stoop there.

Clearly the discussion has broken down at this point.

That's the main issue with discussing the most important figure in Redskins history - too much emotion tied up in him that clouds objective thinking.

Aren't you arguing expectations? So the fans that were happy with George Allen in the 70s were stupid? Your aspiration of Super Bowl or failure isn't objective or realistic. It's pretty arrogant.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

I am sorry to have angered you to the point of personal attacks. I had hoped you wouldn't stoop there.

Clearly the discussion has broken down at this point.

That's the main issue with discussing the most important figure in Redskins history - too much emotion tied up in him that clouds objective thinking.

Oh dear lands, if you really think you've angered me you seriously do have a convoluted, high opinion of yourself.

That was more an observation that hasn't gone unnoticed by others looking at responses to you within this thread rather than a personal attack. But hey, being as you took it that way ..... if the cap fits and all that.

Nice way to avoid the question BTW.

---------- Post added May-24th-2011 at 12:57 PM ----------

i just had a Shawshank flashback there, but i think you made a really great point

That has to be one of Morgan Freeman's lines. Total aside, I was in Memphis, oh 6 years or so back, in Ben E. Kings club. and he happened to be in town and was just sat in the corner jamming. Now this was fantastic to witness by it's self, but in walks Morgan Freeman, and before the hours out the two are sat jamming together. Totally unpretenious, just kicking back and having a good time together like they were sat on the front stoop. Totally untroubled by the patrons who were just enjoying the moment. Real awesome experience,

Shrugs, just thought I'd share the memory. Back to the thread at hand .....

Hail.

[The Tris]

Seriously, how doe's someone saying how Gibbs took a team to the playoffs in such adversity equate to "that's the limit of our aspirations?"

I equate being satisfied with end results of Gibbs' tenure, to the point of calling him a success, a tacit endorsement that he achieved his goals, and is to be congratulated.

If you are happy with what Gibbs achieved, I would say you have limited aspirations of what the Redskins can feasibly accomplish.

Most Redskins fans are happy going 10-6 and squeezing into the playoffs. I am not. And I do not apologize for wanting this team to be better, nor do I think that is unrealistic to expect greatness.

[hail2skins]

IMost Redskins fans are happy going 10-6 and squeezing into the playoffs. I am not. And I do not apologize for wanting this team to be better, nor do I think that is unrealistic to expect greatness.

Tris, I think these days people would be happy with 10-6......as long as you had several consistent seasons of it. Another person mentioned George Allen, and he did have 5 out of 6 seasons where he made the playoffs from 71-76, including four seasons of 10+ wins (back in the 14 game seasons) and the SB appearance. Even Shanny after Elway left had 4 out of 6 seasons of 10+ wins from 2000-05, including an AFCCG appearance. To me that's not shabby, although I do hope he can garner a few more playoff wins here than he did after his franchise QB left. I can imagine those blowouts suffered in the WC round out there started to wear on Denver fans.

The problem with Gibbs 2.0 was that he wasn't around long enough for us to make a complete assessment. I do agree with you, though, that if we were indeed in full-blown "win-now" mode, as others on this thread have indicated, that we should've expected more than two wild card berths and two sub-.500 seasons. Even if he did have Dumb and Dumber to contend with. Hell, even Norv Turner.....the guy who some blame as the worst coach in the history of histories.......won a playoff game and had a winning record the next year under those clowns.

[JPCreativelab]

I equate being satisfied with end results of Gibbs' tenure, to the point of calling him a success, a tacit endorsement that he achieved his goals, and is to be congratulated.

If you are happy with what Gibbs achieved, I would say you have limited aspirations of what the Redskins can feasibly accomplish.

Most Redskins fans are happy going 10-6 and squeezing into the playoffs. I am not. And I do not apologize for wanting this team to be better, nor do I think that is unrealistic to expect greatness.

im not sure why you keep implying or point blank saying that fans are happy by not making the super bowl. it makes no sense, just cause some fans can find some happiness in bad situations, doesnt mean they arent expecting a super bowl win...you imply that fans could care less about the super bowl, as long as we are 10-6 and have one playoff game that we lose when we all know that every fan on this board wants the super bowl every year, its the general aspirations of every fan. to say they dont care about that and that you expect greatness and we dont, is just absurd.

---------- Post added May-24th-2011 at 01:28 PM ----------

Oh dear lands, if you really think you've angered me you seriously do have a convoluted, high opinion of yourself.

That was more an observation that hasn't gone unnoticed by others looking at responses to you within this thread rather than a personal attack. But hey, being as you took it that way ..... if the cap fits and all that.

Nice way to avoid the question BTW.

---------- Post added May-24th-2011 at 12:57 PM ----------

That has to be one of Morgan Freeman's lines. Total aside, I was in Memphis, oh 6 years or so back, in Ben E. Kings club. and he happened to be in town and was just sat in the corner jamming. Now this was fantastic to witness by it's self, but in walks Morgan Freeman, and before the hours out the two are sat jamming together. Totally unpretenious, just kicking back and having a good time together like they were sat on the front stoop. Totally untroubled by the patrons who were just enjoying the moment. Real awesome experience,

Shrugs, just thought I'd share the memory. Back to the thread at hand .....

Hail.

cool story

and nope, it was Andy (Tim Robbins)

Warden Samuel Norton: I have to say that's the most amazing story I've ever heard. What amazes me most is that you were taken in by it.

Andy Dufresne: Sir?

Warden Samuel Norton: It's obvious this fellow Williams is impressed with you, he hears your tale of woe and naturally wants to cheer you up. He's young, not terribly bright, it's not surprising he wouldn't know what a state he put you in.

Andy Dufresne: Sir, he's telling the truth.

Warden Samuel Norton: Let's say for the moment this Blatch does exist. You think he'd just fall to his knees and cry: "Yes, I did it, I confess! Oh, and by the way, add a life term to my sentence."

Andy Dufresne: You know that wouldn't matter. With Tommy's testimony I can get a new trial.

Warden Samuel Norton: That's assuming Blatch is still there. Chances are excellent he'd be released by now.

Andy Dufresne: Well they'd have his last known address, names of relatives. It's a *chance*, isn't it.

[Norton shakes his head]

Andy Dufresne: How can you be so obtuse?

Warden Samuel Norton: What? What did you call me?

Andy Dufresne: Obtuse. Is it deliberate?

Warden Samuel Norton: Son, you're forgetting yourself.

Andy Dufresne: The country club will have his old time cards. Records, W-2s with his name on them. Sir, if I ever get out, I'd never mention what happens here. I'd be just as indictable as you for laundering that money.

[Norton slaps the table]

Warden Samuel Norton: Don't you ever mention money to me again, you sorry son of a *****! Not in this office, not anywhere!

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

And I do not apologize for wanting this team to be better, nor do I think that is unrealistic to expect greatness.

You shouldn't apologize for wanting the team to do better. Every one wants the best for the team, or why else would you be a fan? But the second part of your post is the type of arrogance we readily accuse Cowboys fans of. We have NO divine right to win SB's. That right has to earnt, season by season.

Maybe it was just a bad choice of words, but wanting your team to achieve as much as it possibly can is one thing. Expecting it is something completely different again. Maybe it's a generational thing, but that's bordering on arrogance for us to say that to me. And makes that arrogance even more ridiculous when we lag behind in the Lombardi stakes.

Hail.

[Darrell Green Fan]

How in the heck do you equate one with other?

Either your taking everything totally out of context, or you just really are that obtuse. Or maybe your just being as obstinately awkward as you can be for the heck of it.

Being as you flippantly ignore everything that's said, and only read what you want to believe, I honestly don't know which it is.

Seriously, how doe's someone saying how Gibbs took a team to the playoffs in such adversity equate to "that's the limit of our aspirations?"

Hail.

This did have a pretty snarky tone to it.

And with that I'm out of steam on this one. Thanks for the discussion guys. As you can see by my post count I don't hang here very often but I enjoyed the back and forth quite a bit. Looks like you have a good group here. I may stick around if that's OK with you folks.

Hail To The Redskins

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

TY DGF...... I think :paranoid: lol.

Do stick around. I may not of agreed with some of your views here, but good debate is always welcome in this crazy place we like to call "a home from home."

Hail.

[AllBusiness]

Gibbs and HIS staff > anything else we have ever had. End of story.

Can't believe it has taken over 20 flippin' pages to give y'all the TRUTH!

[illone]

Most Redskins fans are happy going 10-6 and squeezing into the playoffs. I am not. And I do not apologize for wanting this team to be better, nor do I think that is unrealistic to expect greatness.

It's very unrealistic to expect that.

To want and hope for it? Fine, but to expect it is a bit unrealistic, dont you think?

[Mercuryrising]

It is over, it is done. From here on out Allen and Shanny have to own this. It is not the same as a previous president leaving the country bogged down in two expensive boondoggle occupations for the new crew to cleanup.... you just can't call in the president /people of Afghanistan and say " we are releasing you now, good luck...." but you can do that with NFL players /contracts....

We had 11 draft picks this draft. Time to put their stamp on this team and let us see what kind of job they can do..... No more blaming Gibbs or VC.

[panel]

GIbbs set us up for the future, he gave us an offensive Coordinator, a Defensive Coordinator, and Future head coach. But management decided to abandon what Joe built, and go a different direction.

It is unfair to say that Gibbs is at fault for current failures, because Gibbs was setting up for a future that would have been a similar style to himself, It was not Gibbs that decided to Fire Greg Williams or switch to a 3-4. Most of the guys we consider "core" guys that are still on the roster are Gibbs Pick-ups. Cooley, Landry, Lorenzo Alexander, London Fletcher, Santana Moss (if he returns), Kedric Golston, ect.

[MR2Drift]

The man did more with Snyder as owner then anyone else has, that says something and not in a negative way.

[88Comrade2000]

You do remember the state of the team when Spurrier left it. The anger people felt in 2009 was just as loud in 2003. Synder allowed Gibbs to done one thing he wasn't good out, being GM. I think Gibbs was gone too long that he really wasn't completely confident in his second go around. Despite all that, he took this mess of a franchise to 2 out of it's 3 playoff births in the Snyder era.

[HEavyJumbo85]

The downfall of the Gibbs tenure was after the '05 playoffs, when there was the overreaction to the offensive no show in both games. I'm convinced that Snyder and Vinny convinced Gibbs that he needed help. Nobody seemed to take into account how badly Brunnell's leg was hurt after that Giants game at the end of the year. The Saunders hiring was the most glaring mistake that was made, worse than any free agents, trades, or contract extensions.

[HailGreen28]

Vinny Cerrato KILLED this team's future, not Joe Gibbs. Not saying Gibbs did everything right in part 2, But he sure as hell did not kill this teams future.

You know, throw in Danny, and this statement may be the most concise accurate post here.

---------- Post added May-25th-2011 at 08:53 AM ----------

I still don't think we had the roster in place. Some disagree... But keeping them on without making some rebuilding moves wouldn't have changed a thing. If our philosophy changed after year three with Gibbs and then we transitioned to a rebuild with Williams as HC/DC and Saunders as OC, I think we would have been in better shape. Our roster, in my opinion, was bad. Our starters were okay, but we had absolutely no depth and we were old as dirt.

He left a decent nucleus, but it was a small one. Not a ton to build on, but a few pieces that could be kept. But again, that wasn't his job. He wasn't tasked with building this roster for the future, so of course he lacked in that department.

If they (management) had told him he had three years to win now and then they'd transition to a rebuild, I think it would have even worked better. After year three, Gibbs may have said "Alright, I'm out!" and then we rebuild under Williams with patience.

But, unfortunately, I think it would have been better to skip the Gibbs/Zorn years completely and begin the rebuild six years ago.

And that saddens me to say

The FOs direction has been horrendous.

I think our roster going into 2008 was better than you say. Yes the old OL and depth were issues, but we had a very good RB, WR, TE, DEs, LBs, and safety. I think our OL did play better than the league average the first half of 2008, so while they need reloading the situation wasn't as bad as suggested. Even Rabach 08, with the occasional bad timing penalty, was nowhere near as bad as '10 Rabach.

Portis

Sellers

Alexander

Cooley

Landry

Rogers

Rocky

Doughty

Golston

Blades

You also have a QB (Collins) and OL that are old, but know the system and did well in it in '07, with competent coaching. I think that's a good core of players to start out with.

[KDawg]

I think our roster going into 2008 was better than you say.

Yes. As I said above. Some would disagree.

Yes the old OL and depth were issues

They weren't issues. They were a glaring weakness.

but we had a very good RB

Portis was good. You're right.

Betts was a decent calibur backup. Our RB corp was decent to good. I'll give you that one.

WR

I wholeheartedly disagree. We had Santana Moss and ARE, who was a decent receiver. Other than that, we had nothing except James Thrash who had 9 receptions in 2008. We had two receivers that could do anything. I'm not sure where or how you figure we had a very good WR (unless you mean in singularity, meaning Moss. But then, you're completely discounting depth. We had none).

TE

We had one. Chris Cooley.

Todd Yoder and Kozlowski were the backups. Again, after the starter, our depth stunk.

DEs

Andre Carter and Phillip Daniels. I think these guys complimented each other well and were a scheme fit.

Demetric Evans and Chris Wilson were our backups. No depth again.

LBs

Once again, decent to good starters. London was a God send for that group.

Randall Godfrey, HB Blades, Khary Campbell was our depth. AKA: We had no depth.

safety

Only one I can't argue with. We had ST21 and LL30. I actually liked the way Doughty and Fox filled in for them as well.

I think our OL did play better than the league average the first half of 2008, so while they need reloading the situation wasn't as bad as suggested.

Disagree. They did well when defenses didn't know what we were doing. Once the defenses caught on and our old OL got worn down, they got beat up. It's a problem with having a OL collecting social security.

Alexander

Shaun? He was acquired in '08, not '07. And he was not a good addition.

If you mean Lorenzo, he's decent depth, I'll give you that.

You also have a QB (Collins) and OL that are old, but know the system and did well in it in '07, with competent coaching. I think that's a good core of players to start out with.

I don't I think it's an overpaid, shallow group.

[HailGreen28]

I was going to quote HailGreen or KDawg in my post but this one hits my point dead on. Look at that list closely. Are you guys really contending that Reid Doughty, Golston, Blades, Macintosh and Campbell qualify as good young talent that will be the foundation for years to come? Does that really look like the core of a team left in "great shape"? I see exactly 4 players, the first 4 you listed, who would qualify as good young talent. Pretty sure you can find comparable young talent on today's Buffalo Bills. You say they didn't have many picks. Again you are making my point for me. They didn't have many picks because Gibbs traded them away on shorTsighted, failed attempts. .

Those players are part of the talent. Nice how you somehow missed guys like Landry and Cooley, in your list. The NFL is not fantasy football. Not everybody is a superstar, on any good team.

I have not moved the goalposts. I have stated from the beginning in this thread as well as the other that Gibbs made bad trades that stripped the team of draft picks, and draft picks are how every successful team acquires and develops young talent. He left an aging team with no depth and very few good young players as ther lists above shows. And yes this had an effect, I believe, on the Redskins after he left. And once again I want to see the salary cap numbers. That 2007 tream had a lot of high prices players: Springs; Samuels; Fletcher, ARE to name a few. I am having a hard time believing they were in good shape cap wise either.

You have tried your best to move the goalposts. Your statement I replied to when creating this thread (to not hijack the old one): "The short sighted moves Gibbs made over and over again KILLED this team's future"

That's been proven false, in this thread.

Now you're copying other people's better arguments, that we had an old OL and lacked depth, and saying our roster from 07 was "garbage". Saying Gibbs 2.0 HURT our future.

Yet we were under the cap by $9mil when Vinny dropped 8 mil a year on Jason Taylor, had all our picks in the '08 draft, a team that played like world-beaters starting '08. By what standard are you saying that qualifies as "hurt"? Let alone "KILLED"?

---------- Post added May-25th-2011 at 09:25 AM ----------

(snip)

I want to disagree with you, but can't on your specifics. :notworthy:

I just believe that with Williams, Saunders, and someone at least as good as Blanche (not saying that much), and with a competent FO that tries doing what Shanahallen did this last draft, we had a good team to build on. And that our future wasn't "killed" by our lack of depth, that's what Vinny should have started bringing in, like you see in most regime changes (Gibbs first season and Shanny's current season).

[Going Commando]

Aren't you arguing expectations? So the fans that were happy with George Allen in the 70s were stupid? Your aspiration of Super Bowl or failure isn't objective or realistic. It's pretty arrogant.

Not a good analogy.

The Redskins WERE a have-not organization before the 70's. We absolutely were losers before he came. Lombardi started the process of change before he died but Allen gets the credit for pulling this team up from laughing stock status.

And Allen took us to a Superbowl and honest to goodness contention so that's a bad comparison with Gibbs 2.0 in and of itself.

Once the 80's and Gibbs 1.0 happened we can no longer be considered a have-not organization. We're one of the most powerful and storied franchises in the history of the NFL. Fan expecations are totally different now. Just like the Patriots will never be considered a have-not organization again like they were in the 80's.

---------- Post added May-25th-2011 at 12:07 PM ----------

I equate being satisfied with end results of Gibbs' tenure, to the point of calling him a success, a tacit endorsement that he achieved his goals, and is to be congratulated.

If you are happy with what Gibbs achieved, I would say you have limited aspirations of what the Redskins can feasibly accomplish.

Most Redskins fans are happy going 10-6 and squeezing into the playoffs. I am not. And I do not apologize for wanting this team to be better, nor do I think that is unrealistic to expect greatness.

I'm with you. Saying Gibbs 2.0 was ultimately a success is tantamount to admitting the Redskins are losers and that's the best we can hope for as fans.

There might have been nice moments from it but that doesn't even come close to establishing his tenure a success. There were similarly nice moments under Norv for God's sake.

I'll go further than you and say most Redskins fans have become happy with simply no longer being a laughing stock around the rest of the league. 8-8 is fine, 10-6 is gravy. Mediocrity and a few exciting defenders to talk about is enough to keep people coming back.

**** that, you're absolutely right that the point is to be the best. You're not really competing if that's not the case.

Even still, if our goal is simply to not be a laughing stock then Shanahan and Allen are doing a poor job of accomplishing that. Haynesworth, 3-4 defense, trading for and then benching McNabb, signing McNabb to an absolutely absurd extension, benching him again, getting 50+ dropped on us by the Eagles on MNF, having a QB battle play out between John Beck and Rex Grossman, so on and so forth.

Probably the only reason the media isn't mercilessly lampooning us right now is because they all like Bruce Allen personally and are afraid of Mike Shanahan.

I'd be making fun of us if I were the fan of another team. Cardinals fans get to make fun of us now...

[SkinsHokieFan]

I agree with Tris and SteveMcQueen.

Looking back objectively, after 3.5 years of Gibbs 2 ending, it was abysmal. In 4 years the Redskins won a playoff game, no division titles and never went beyond round 2 of the playoffs.

Two 10 loss seasons.

A top heavy team.

It simply didn't work and is the root cause of the mess we are in again

[Spartacus87]

I agree, 100% with SHF, Tris, and stevemcqueen, on this topic.

Gibbs was the Team President. All decisions ran through him. I really doubt Snyder and especially Vinny were convincing him of doing anything he didn't want to do, and on the off-chance that that was the case, than that's a pretty terrible move on Gibbs' part.

I think Gibbs did a great job getting some talent back after Spurrier ravaged the team. I think he did an unbelievable job coaching some of that talent (particularly in the 07 playoff run).

But I think he also acquired some of that talent at horrific costs, particularly with all of the trading away of draft picks, in a clear bid to "win now" before he retired again. And yes, the loss of critical early round draft picks under Gibbs' watch still haunts the team's design today.

It's pretty unbelievable to me that people are THAT loyal to Gibbs that they'll try to argue otherwise. I love the man and always will, but he presided over some huge franchise management mistakes in his 2nd tenure.

[HEavyJumbo85]

I agree with Tris and SteveMcQueen.

Looking back objectively, after 3.5 years of Gibbs 2 ending, it was abysmal. In 4 years the Redskins won a playoff game, no division titles and never went beyond round 2 of the playoffs.

Two 10 loss seasons.

A top heavy team.

It simply didn't work and is the root cause of the mess we are in again

Bolded first, you flat out can't blame Gibbs for the mess we're in again. He was not here to set the team up for the future. That was never meant to be the case, and I don't think the people that assumed he would, have gotten over the fact that he didn't.

As an aside, even if you still want to blame him for leaving them in a bad way, how the heck could you know? He left Williams as the successor, who wanted to keep Saunders and start Todd Collins. Williams wanted Vinny gone so he didn't get the job. Instead you get Zorn, Blache, and Campbell. That's not what Gibbs wanted at all. Can you blame Gibbs for the amount of turnover that occured soon after he left? They still went 8-8 that year. With Williams, Saunders, and Collins all returning, you don't think they make a bigger push than 8-8? Very hard to say either way, but if you can't know that, you can't say that Gibbs caused this. They went 4-12 in the full year that Vinny/Zorn were running the show.

The root cause of the mess we're in now was the line of thinking that Gibbs could fix what was broken in the first place. Bear with the horrible analogy, but he was never here to order the parts, wait 6-8 weeks, and fix the plumbing. He was in town for 20 minutes, and he could have chosen to use that time to make the call for parts (rebuild), or he could break out the duct tape and see if he could get it to work before he had to go. He gave us 2 shots at a Super Bowl, and don't say a 6 seed isn't a shot, because 2 of the last 6 Champs have come from that spot. I can't possibly see how that's abysmal, compared to what we'd seen the previous decade. Was Norv's tenure far and away better than Gibbs, with his "I won by default" NFC East title?

During Gibbs' tenure, Philly went to a a Super Bowl, The Giants won a Super Bowl, Dallas had a 13-3 season. It's not like the division wasn't competitive.

And the 10 loss season thing...What does that even mean? If they only lost 9 games, or went 8-8, how would that have been any less of a "failure" there? If it's Super Bowl or bust, I don't see how record matters. You won or you didn't, yes? I think in a league where there's 50% playoff turnover every year, that a 50% playoff rate is pretty right on. In the full-on Snyder era, so not counting '99, which he had not much to do with, they have made 2 playoff appearances, both by Gibbs. If you see Gibbs as a failure, you aren't being realistic. I can see wanting a Super Bowl every year, but to go as far as to hold the expectation of one, given the club history with this owner, and the several years prior, is ridiculous.

[KDawg]

I think this one has run it's course.

I think we're all (or most) in agreement that we were in bad shape after Gibbs' tenure.

However, the sticking point seems to be who's fault that is. Some of us blame ownership for hiring a guy who was going to come in and try to assemble a win now roster with no forethought for the future. A short sighted vision with no long term plan.

Others blame the coach that was hired to win now for not setting us up for the future.

And that's where this one is going to stay, is my guess