What's more important to the Redskins future success; losing, or a solid front office and coaching staff?

[KCClybun]

I keep seeing this argument pop-up, and I keep seeing it come up with teams like the Lions, Falcons and Bucs specfically; namely, that a prolonged period of losing seems to make it more likely you'll have success in the future. When you lose, you get better draft position, and I think people conflate that with getting better players and better success in the future.

I, for one, don't follow that mentality. But the idea that it would be better for the Redskins to go 3-13 than it would for them to win any games, and then suffer a couple more losing seasons to get continued high draft picks, has been floated more than once?

So, the question I have is this; is losing more important, or is a solid front office and coaching staff more important?

When I look at the success the Lions are having, I can't honestly tell myself it's because they lost. Yes, they grabbed Stafford. Yes, they got Suh. But if losing is the thing that really gained them their success...why the hell weren't the Lions dominating most of the decade?

The Lions haven't had a winning season since 2000 when they went 9-7. In that span, they've pretty consistently drafted players in the top 10.

Starting with the 2002 draft, the Lions have drafted 8 players in the top 10 of the draft. Of the 8 players they've drafted with top 10 picks since then, only THREE are currently on the team. They happen to be the most impactful players; Calvin Johnson, Matthew Stafford and Suh, drafted in the first round in three consecutive seasons.

Still, that's 5 players they drafted in the first round not even on their team anymore. Two of those five guys aren't in the league anymore, and Mike Williams was out of the league until last season.

After swinging blindly at air with a bat, Matt Millen finally got it right with Calvin Johnson, which really could be classified a lucky guess. The Lions success seemed to come when 1.) Matt Millen was fired and Martin Mayhew become their general manager, and they hired Jim Scwartz. A competent general manager, hand in hand with a young, fresh coach. They have made much better personnel decisions. And though they were losing, it was clear they had a vision and an idea of where they wanted their team to go, and what they wanted to be. They may have been losing, but they had a clear direction.

They haven't strayed from that direction, and the combination of continuity and better personnel decisions have finally begun to turn the team around.

But it feels like people see their last three number one draft picks and jump to the conclusion they're good BECAUSE they lost, not in spite of their losing. Having top picks clearly helped, but making the wise, smart choice with those picks mattered even more.

Likewise, I feel like people tend to give all the credit for other teams who have down seasons to the drafting of a franchise quarterback, or one guy here or there. It seems to me that ever team that has experienced a turnaround has done so when they've solidified their front office and coaching staffs. Lions, Bucs, Chiefs, Bills, Falcons (in the wake of Bobby Petrino's bullcrap); all of them made the turn around (or are in the midst of one), and the things they have in common are this. They found a solid general manager. They found solid coaching staffs. And THEN yes, they all found quarterbacks.

But I don't think the losing is the important part, and I don't think losing will guarantee you great players. It only works when you make the RIGHT choices in the front office and head coaching categories first.

What say you, other fans?

[SkinsHokieFan]

It all goes hand in hand.

Having an FO and coaching staff that is in sync and has a plan is the most important indication of success. And having stability with that structure is very important.

But you still need players, and have to be in position to get those players. In particular a QB.

The Lions, and Falcons got their QBs with top 3 picks. The Bills had one of those extremely lucky situations where a QB finds a home (ala a Trent Green/Kurt Warner type story)

The Chiefs had to make a big trade (which we attempted and failed) and the Bucs are the only example of a mid round pick working at QB.

The Lions core is set for the next decade at QB, WR and DT. Those 3 guys will be the leaders and tone setters of the team, regardless of who comes in and out.

I'd kill for the Lions roster and organization right now

Right now I believe we have a pretty good FO/coaching staff structure. It isn't ideal as I would prefer a structure similar to Detroit with more personell power in the hands of the GM, in the tradition of Bethard/Gibbs early 1980s.

I think the FO has a vision and is in sync, however I am not sure it is the best that it could possibly be

[chipwhich]

News to me, I hadn't noticed anyone wishing for years of losing in hopes of building this franchise. If they believe that, it's pretty dumb.

I do see a number of people wanting to tank this year for Andrew Luck, thats different from years of losing.

The key denominator between the Lions and the Redskins is a LOUSY front office.

The Lions finally got rin of Matt "Vinnie Cerrato" Millen. I can't believe that idiot even gets to be a football analyst. He showed his worth as a GM. He can't evaluate talent, and they have him as an announcer.

[SkinsHokieFan]

News to me, I hadn't noticed anyone wishing for years of losing in hopes of building this franchise. If they believe that, it's pretty dumb.

I do see a number of people wanting to tank this year for Andrew Luck, thats different from years of losing.

.

I think that is an excellent point.

Nobody wants to have top 5 picks for the next 5 years. A good chunk of us just want 1 particular number 1 overall pick to be the catalyst for getting this franchise off the mat.

Some of us believe that particular player is a franchise changer.

Suck for the next 5 years to stock pile top 5 picks? No way. I want to get this thing moving real fast and see a legit contender by 2013

[KCClybun]

I think that is an excellent point.

Nobody wants to have top 5 picks for the next 5 years. A good chunk of us just want 1 particular number 1 overall pick to be the catalyst for getting this franchise off the mat.

Some of us believe that particular player is a franchise changer.

Suck for the next 5 years to stock pile top 5 picks? No way. I want to get this thing moving real fast and see a legit contender by 2013

I think I misrepresented my point. I didn't mean to say that we should be losing for several seasons, exactly. More that losing in the short term will mean success in the long term, basically.

[SkinsHokieFan]

I think I misrepresented my point. I didn't mean to say that we should be losing for several seasons, exactly. More that losing in the short term will mean success in the long term, basically.

I really believe that right now.

A few examples.

Say the last game of 2008, Redskins vs 49ers, Joe Nedney does not make that kick and the Redskins win in OT. The Redskins would drop from the 13th pick to around the 20th pick and have no shot at Brian Orakpo, who at this moment is a core player.

2009, if somehow in Jim Zorn's last game we find a way to beat the 3rd string of the Chargers. The Redskins would drop to the 8th or 9th pick with a 5-11 record. No shot at Trent Williams NOR Russell Okung and thusly missing out on a key LT.

Now say last season we lose to JVille and end up 5-11. We have the 5th pick. Atlanta is giving us a call when Julio Jones falls and we end up having a chance to stock pile even more picks and get an extra first this year. Ryan Kerrigan just may have slid down to 27 and we still get him.

I'd kill for going into this year's draft with 2 first round picks and 2 third round picks

Essentially, until you start to get your young pieces, being mediocre does nothing. The Redskins still are far from having the young pieces on offense

[chipwhich]

I think I misrepresented my point. I didn't mean to say that we should be losing for several seasons, exactly. More that losing in the short term will mean success in the long term, basically.

If Luck is the next Peyton Manning, well it makes a lot fo sense.

If Luck is the next David Carr, Tim Couch, Joey Harrington, Cade McNown, Akili Smith, Heath Schuler, Ryan Leaf, Patrick Ramsey, shall I continue....well then it's pretty idiotic to lose in the short term.

Sorry I forgot Jamarcus Russell

[C26 Run]

Marvin Lewis (5-2) Bengals

Jim Schwartz (6-2) Lions

Rex Ryan (4-3) Jets

Hue Jackson (4-3) Raiders

*Mike Tomlin (6-2) Steelers

All these coaches have either been on our coaching staff or have interviewed for the Head Coaching position for the Redskins. Now I didn't include Norv Turner because he actually had a chance at Head Coach with us. Tomlin interviewed with us before getting the Steelers gig and is now leading his division. All these organizations have a solid FO and good ownership.

Now I also acknowledge that this is sort of a chicken and egg argument. Both things go hand and hand, having great players will help great coaches. Everyone of those teams has franchise type players at some key positions. Suh, Dalton, Roethlisberger, Sanchez, and McFadden are all franchise players leading their teams.

Hue Jackson couldn't sniff an interview with the Redskins and now he has the Raiders playing great football. We've got great players but our coaching is terrible right now. Now I don't think we should fire Mike Shanahan but he does need to hold Kyle accountable. That'll be the sign of a solid FO and coaching staff. Coaches have to be accountable to each other and the players.

With a solid FO and a coaching staff, our beloved Redskins won 3 SBs.

:helmet:

[Reaper 21]

The Chiefs had to make a big trade (which we attempted and failed) and the Bucs are the only example of a mid round pick working at QB.

That Rodgers for the packers isnt working at all?

[SkinsHokieFan]

That Rodgers for the packers isnt working at all?

Read his post. He didn't mention the Packers

[chipwhich]

Marvin Lewis (5-2) Bengals

Jim Schwartz (6-2) Lions

Rex Ryan (4-3) Jets

Hue Jackson (4-3) Raiders

*Mike Tomlin (6-2) Steelers

Rex Ryan never interviewed for a job here.

All these organizations have a solid FO and good ownership.

The Lions and Raiders have been laughing stocks. The Jets were laughing stocks for years. Great ownership? Sure Al Davis had his day in the sun....YEARS ago. BTW the Lions and Bengals have been considered two of the worst NFL teams with the worst ownership. Funny how you change history.

Everyone of those teams has franchise type players at some key positions. Suh, Dalton, Roethlisberger, Sanchez, and McFadden are all franchise players leading their teams.

The jury is still out on Dalton and Sanchez.

Hue Jackson couldn't sniff an interview with the Redskins and now he has the Raiders playing great football.

Yeah because he was part of the mess. I wouldn't claim anything special for Hugh Jackson just yet. Please.

We've got great players but our coaching is terrible right now.

The most ridiculous point in your post. We don't have great players.

Now I don't think we should fire Mike Shanahan but he does need to hold Kyle accountable. That'll be the sign of a solid FO and coaching staff. Coaches have to be accountable to each other and the players.

Yep lets fire everyone.

With a solid FO and a coaching staff, our beloved Redskins won 3 SBs.

:helmet:

Yep. It's easy to hire the best FO and coaching staff just go hire them

[Reaper 21]

Read his post. He didn't mention the Packers

read the post just laughing that you said only mid round qb being succesful. I personally dont think you need a top 5 draft pick to get a qb, and looking around the league other then mannings currently no others have had superbowl success yet. In todays game it takes more than a high draft pick qb, actually i would argue that if you draft a qb it better to be later in the first with a better supporting cast and less pressure to be a franchise savior.

[Rufus T Firefly]

The quality of the FO and coaching doesn't change with higher or lower draft picks, so these suggestions that higher draft picks don't matter becuase the quality of the people doing the drafting is more important, don't really mean anything.

Just like, you may be good at managing your finances, but I bet you'd still do better with more money.

[2006Skins]

I really don't see how people can blame the staff and FO. I've read a lot more on the team this week than most of the season and have looked at numerous sources, both with the skins (ie redskins insider) and outside (rotoworld, espn blog etc) and most of them seem to agree its the players NOT executing the plays, not the staff calling the wrong ones. This happens when you have to clean house, you get average players starting (3-1) and when they get hurt we have below average depth (0-3)

[chipwhich]

I really don't see how people can blame the staff and FO. I've read a lot more on the team this week than most of the season and have looked at numerous sources, both with the skins (ie redskins insider) and outside (rotoworld, espn blog etc) and most of them seem to agree its the players NOT executing the plays, not the staff calling the wrong ones. This happens when you have to clean house, you get average players starting (3-1) and when they get hurt we have below average depth (0-3)

By most media outlets we were pick as one of the worst teams to start the season.

Many opined we had the worst QB situation in all of football.

I saw numerous predictions with the Skins at 3 wins total for the year.

I think everyone agreed we couldn't afford an injury on offense.

Most honest evaluators had us on this board at 6 wins.

Everything has played out perfectly against us.

It's not the coaching, we have a long ways to go to field a roster with speed, skill, and depth.

[Stricknine]

Marvin Lewis (5-2) Bengals

Jim Schwartz (6-2) Lions

Rex Ryan (4-3) Jets

Hue Jackson (4-3) Raiders

*Mike Tomlin (6-2) Steelers

All these coaches have either been on our coaching staff or have interviewed for the Head Coaching position for the Redskins. Now I didn't include Norv Turner because he actually had a chance at Head Coach with us. Tomlin interviewed with us before getting the Steelers gig and is now leading his division. All these organizations have a solid FO and good ownership.

Now I also acknowledge that this is sort of a chicken and egg argument. Both things go hand and hand, having great players will help great coaches. Everyone of those teams has franchise type players at some key positions. Suh, Dalton, Roethlisberger, Sanchez, and McFadden are all franchise players leading their teams.

Hue Jackson couldn't sniff an interview with the Redskins and now he has the Raiders playing great football. We've got great players but our coaching is terrible right now. Now I don't think we should fire Mike Shanahan but he does need to hold Kyle accountable. That'll be the sign of a solid FO and coaching staff. Coaches have to be accountable to each other and the players.

With a solid FO and a coaching staff, our beloved Redskins won 3 SBs.

:helmet:

Holy Crap! Ive decided I will no longer call my fellow Skins fans morons, but dude...what are you smoking?! We have great players?! I know there was talk of trying to get Ryan as our D coordinator before Zorn was hired but I do not believe he ever interviewed here. And Dalton and Sanchez are franchise players?! Thats a long way from being proven.

[Destino]

Who cares about a top five pick? What you need is a QB. The lions had how many high picks... They are doing well the first year stafford has managed to stay healthy. It's not rocket science. Bills are having more success as Fitz improves.

Do you need a high pick to get a QB? No.... But you do if you want to improve your odds.

2011: Cam Newton 1st, gabbert 10th, christian ponder 12th, Andy Dalton 35th

2010: Sam Bradford 1st

2009: Matt Stafford 1st, Mark Sanchez 5th, Josh Freeman 17th

2008: Matt Ryan 1st, Joe Flacco 18th

2007: full of fail

2006: Jay Cutler 11th

2005: Alex Smith 1st, Aaron Rodgers 24th, Matt Cassel 230th, Fitzpatrick 250th

2004: Eli Manning 1st, Phillip Rivers 3rd, Big Ben 11th, Matt Schaub 90th

2003: Carson palmer 1st

20 starting QBs

8 are the first overall pick.

13 are top 12 picks

16 are in the first round

4 not in the first round

1st overall pick has the best odds. Heavy QB drafts feature many taken early.

Also it should be noted a top flight QB is more important than a big name coach. How many superbowl winning head coaches have had success on team two? How many head coaches are succeeding with bad QBs?

[chipwhich]

Holy Crap! Ive decided I will no longer call my fellow Skins fans morons, but dude...what are you smoking?! We have great players?! I know there was talk of trying to get Ryan as our D coordinator before Zorn was hired but I do not believe he ever interviewed here. And Dalton and Sanchez are franchise players?! Thats a long way from being proven.

Yeah his whole post was ludicrous.

[KCClybun]

Who cares about a top five pick? What you need is a QB. The lions had how many high picks... They are doing well the first year stafford has managed to stay healthy. It's not rocket science. Bills are having more success as Fitz improves.

Do you need a high pick to get a QB? No.... But you do if you want to improve your odds.

2011: Cam Newton 1st, gabbert 10th, christian ponder 12th, Andy Dalton 35th

2010: Sam Bradford 1st

2009: Matt Stafford 1st, Mark Sanchez 5th, Josh Freeman 17th

2008: Matt Ryan 1st, Joe Flacco 18th

2007: full of fail

2006: Jay Cutler 11th

2005: Alex Smith 1st, Aaron Rodgers 24th, Matt Cassel 230th, Fitzpatrick 250th

2004: Eli Manning 1st, Phillip Rivers 3rd, Big Ben 11th, Matt Schaub 90th

2003: Carson palmer 1st

20 starting QBs

8 are the first overall pick.

13 are top 12 picks

16 are in the first round

4 not in the first round

1st overall pick has the best odds. Heavy QB drafts feature many taken early.

1st overall pick has the best odds of...what, exactly?

And that wasn't the question I asked. I didn't ask "do you need a top 5 pick". I asked which was more important; losing because it might ensure better draft position, or having a solid front office and coaching staff to pick the right players instead of just A player?

[Destino]

1st overall pick has the best odds of...what, exactly?

And that wasn't the question I asked. I didn't ask "do you need a top 5 pick". I asked which was more important; losing because it might ensure better draft position, or having a solid front office and coaching staff to pick the right players instead of just A player?

Best odds of getting a long time starting QB.

A player, if that player is a franchise QB, is more valuable than a head coach and front office. Money can get you a coaching staff and GM. It can't get you a franchise QB as the redskins have proven.

I'd trade Shanahan and Bruce Allen for Cam Newton or Andrew Luck. Would you?

[B&GVol24]

2008: Matt Ryan 1st, Joe Flacco 18th

Don't mean to nitpick, but Ryan went 3rd overall.

[Reaper 21]

not at all. i would not. FO and coach are more important we are going to have to agree to disagree. Destino, trade the farm away for one player and you have the viking hershal walker deal learn from the past or it is destino to repeat itself

[Destino]

not at all. i would not. FO and coach are more important we are going to have to agree to disagree. Destino, trade the farm away for one player and you have the viking hershal walker deal learn from the past or it is destino to repeat itself

Walker was a running back... and note I said I'd trade the coach and GM, not the future. Coaches and GMs can be had for money and can be replaced. Not to mention the fact that Superbowl winning coaches aren't exactly known for duplicating their success with other teams.

[SkinsFTW]

I'd trade Shanahan and Bruce Allen for Cam Newton or Andrew Luck. Would you?

I'd trade Shanahan for a young up and coming coach but it's too late for that now.

I just look at the fact that no great coach has gone on to another team and ever had a 2nd great team. That and Shanahan was struggling in Denver his last decade there and still had the same amount of playoff wins as Gibbs 2.0

[Destino]

Don't mean to nitpick, but Ryan went 3rd overall.

Good call. Here is everyone:

Round Pick Team Name

1 1 Colts Peyton Manning

1 1 Raiders Carson Palmer

1 1 Giants Eli Manning

1 1 Eagles Mike Vick

1 1 Lions Matt Stafford

1 1 Panthers Cam Newton Rookie

1 1 49ers Alex Smith

1 1 Rams Sam Bradford

1 3 Falcons Matt Ryan

1 4 Chargers Phillip Rivers

1 5 Jets Mark Sanchez

1 10 Jaguars Blaine Gabbert Rookie

1 11 Steelers Ben Roethlisberger

1 11 Bears Jay Cutler

1 12 Vikings Christian Ponder Rookie

1 17 Buccaneers Josh Freeman

1 18 Ravens Joe Flacco

1 24 Packers Aaron Rodgers

1 25 Broncos Tim Tebow

2 32 Saints Drew Brees

2 35 Bengals Andy Dalton Rookie

2 36 Cardinals Kevil Kolb

2 40 Redskins John Beck

2 57 Dolphins Chad Henne

2 64 Seahawks Tarvaris Jackson

2 85 Browns Colt McCoy

3 90 Texans Matt Schaub

6 187 Titans Matt Hasselbeck

6 199 Patriots Tom Brady

7 230 Cheifs Matt Cassel

7 250 Bills Ryan Fitzpatrick

Undrafted Cowboys Tony Romo sits to pee

59% are 1st round picks (19)

47% are a top 15 pick (15)

25% are the 1st overall pick (8)

22% are 2nd round picks (7)

19% are 3rd round or later (6)