HTTR24-7:Interview Transcript W/ Michael Lombardi 11/14/12..

[TSO]

Agree and its a valid point.. People have a valid argument if you wonder IF shanny is capable of fixing a defense as a GM..

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfceast/post/_/id/34788/shanahan-mailbag-offense-a-family-affair

ESPN...I told Shanahan that I often get questions from fans about whether Kyle will be fired, and that I generally respond to them by pointing out that Kyle's father is his boss and that a firing is therefore unlikely. He seemed to agree with my assessment, but here's what he had to say about the criticisms and the coaching staff in general:

MS: "I think what I've always been able to do is look at things very objectively in terms of where we're at. So when somebody says, 'Hey, your offense sucks,' I go, 'Hey, wait a minute. You look at my body of work over the last 27 years, we're No. 1.' And we’re going to continue to be up there. And I also know what it takes to have a good offense, in terms of coaches and personnel, and we're gong to get there, on both sides of it. And if I have a bad coach, I'm going to make changes, and if I don’t have the right personnel, I'm going to make changes. And we're going to get that thing fixed the right way."

From that same interview:

Wendell Washington from Landover, Md., wanted me to ask the elder Shanahan about Redskins owner Dan Snyder -- specifically, whether Snyder has bought into Shanahan's belief that the way to build a long-term winner is through the draft rather than free agency and is sticking to his promise to let Shanahan do it his way.

MS: "Oh yeah, he's been very good. He's been very good letting me do it the way you want to do it. Been very supportive. I said to him, 'If you don’t count on me being here five years, you shouldn't sign me. Because this isn't going to happen overnight. We've got a lot of work to do. This is an older football team.' But he's been good."

---------- Post added November-15th-2012 at 01:05 PM ----------

Okay so you haven't said anything like that on here? lol

Not in the way you exaggerated it. Which is what I said. :nana:

---------- Post added November-15th-2012 at 01:06 PM ----------

Didn't we beat Tampa Bay? Their turnaround sucks IMO. Our turnaround's gonna kick ***

There ya go my man! :yes:

[Lavarleap56]

Locklear is an awful example to prove your point, lol.

How so ? He's not a great player but he was playing very well as a starter for the Giants.. Has had a lot better year than Tyler Polumbus..

* Jammal Brown missed practice " medical issue" ..

[TSO]

How so ? He's not a great player but he was playing very well as a starter for the Giants.. Has had a lot better year than Tyler Polumbus..

* Jammal Brown missed practice " medical issue" ..

I thought he's been awful for the Giants, hasn't he? I don't know, I'll concede that though since I'm not too sure and take your word for it. I know their Oline has been getting praise because Eli hasn't been touched, but that's not because of Locklear if I recall. I remember Giants fans saying he's the weakest link clearly and it's only cuz Eli gets rid of the ball fast he's doing well.

[DC9]

Yes.

Sometimes my boss tries to convey the logic behind the decisions he's already decided we're gonna to make.

Yeah, but no offense, DG, (and forgive me if I am wrong, here) but you don't have the contract that Shanny has. Just willing to bet that. This is a guy who is uber comfortable with his situation... I suspect it's because he has an airtight contract and the only way Danny gets out of it is to fire him and be out $14 mil over the next two.

[Lavarleap56]

From that same interview:

---------- Post added November-15th-2012 at 01:05 PM ----------

Not in the way you exaggerated it. Which is what I said. :nana:

---------- Post added November-15th-2012 at 01:06 PM ----------

There ya go my man! :yes:

You do realize that saying " IF you don't COUNT on me being here 5 years..." is saying Dan's intention should be to allow 5..

Shanny saying he should be gone at 4 is how he personally feels about where he should be in 4 years.. Every coach knows you don't win if it takes long than 4 to get to .500 football or above..

[TSO]

You do realize that saying " IF you don't COUNT on me being here 5 years..." is saying Dan's intention should be to allow 5..

Shanny saying he should be gone at 4 is how he personally feels about where he should be in 4 years.. Every coach knows you don't win if it takes long than 4 to get to .500 football or above..

I do realize that... not sure why you think I don't. I also believe we're going to be a lot better off next season and he's going to get another year, which plays into my desire to see that through.

[Lavarleap56]

I thought he's been awful for the Giants, hasn't he? I don't know, I'll concede that though since I'm not too sure and take your word for it. I know their Oline has been getting praise because Eli hasn't been touched, but that's not because of Locklear if I recall. I remember Giants fans saying he's the weakest link clearly and it's only cuz Eli gets rid of the ball fast he's doing well.

Locklear started the season at RT when the Giants Oline was playing lights out. Locklear was playing so well early they didnt insert Diehl into the lineup when healthy until recently.

http://www.bigblueview.com/2012/11/14/3642784/david-diehl-sean-locklear-new-york-giants-right-tackle

[DC9]

I agree with you. That has been disappointing. However, how much of that is due to the fact that we've had such an influx of young players starting for the first time in their careers on an NFL team? That's where I probably give him a little more leeway than you. Furthermore, our offense this year has been pretty innovative so that may just be part of the learning curve. We're not running things exactly the same as we were under McNabb/Rex/Beck and that almost makes it like this is an offense that's in its first year. ALMOST being the operative word here... we should still be better in terms of penalties.

No doubt on the young players. But to me, it just seems like the technique hasn't gotten better. I didn't pay attention to this until Darrell Green was interviewed about a month back and he was grilling the secondary technique. He said there is just basic things that he doesn't see out of the secondary that isn't being coached. To me, you have to focus on the little things like that and show improvement. Even if it's a young guy on the field. This goes for all positions.

From what I've heard regarding the secondary, Raheem "enchances what you do well" and has you work on that. Weird? So, if I am good at tackling but not coverage or jamming a reciever, I'm going to do tackling drills during the position portion of practice? Just doesn't sound like progress to me.

And it kills me when I watch games at home and I see a player that gets a penalty on another team and he walks off to the sideline and immediately a coach goes up to him and coaches him up. We don't see that here and I don't understand it. We haven't seen it in a while.

[wrecker]

We must have been wrong about Jim Zorn. He must have been great to get that many wins with zero talent on the roster.

How true oldfan. Jim Zorn got the biggest screwjob more than any coach in the history of the NFL. He was hired with SUCKER stamped on his forehead.

[darrelgreenie]

Yeah, but no offense, DG, (and forgive me if I am wrong, here) but you don't have the contract that Shanny has. Just willing to bet that. This is a guy who is uber comfortable with his situation.

My point is that Dan Synder is Mike Shanahan's boss. If Dan Synder wants to bring in a GM he can bring in a GM.

[Lavarleap56]

I do realize that... not sure why you think I don't. I also believe we're going to be a lot better off next season and he's going to get another year, which plays into my desire to see that through.

He wont get to 5 imo.. he gets to 4 unless the team obviously quits on him down the stretch.

[DC9]

My point is that Dan Synder is Mike Shanahan's boss. If Dan Synder wants to bring in a GM he can bring in a GM.

If it's in Mike Shanahan's contract that Mike Shanahan makes all of the football decisions until Mike Shanahan is no longer the Head Coach, Executive Vice President, yada yada, then Dan Snyder can "ask" Mike to hire a GM and Mike can decide yes or know; or, Dan can fire Mike and pay him $14 mil over the next 2 years.

I'm telling you, Dan did this contract in a moment of weakness, and Shanny got to hear how Steve Largent told espn that Jim Zorn's contract says "he has to listen to everything Dan Snyder says." I don't know this for a fact, but I am guessing, and reasonablly assuming that Mike has a pretty strong contract in that regard.

EDIT: Dan doesn't want to get sued for breech of contract... I know he's that smart.

[justice98]

I do realize that... not sure why you think I don't. I also believe we're going to be a lot better off next season and he's going to get another year, which plays into my desire to see that through.

This team is going to have to take what amounts to a huge leap next year, particularly at the rate they're going. With another year of the cap penalty and no 1st round pick. This current group is going to have to find a way to get better cuz reinforcements might be few and far between.

[Skinsinparadise]

He took a poor roster and made the situation worse by changing schemes on both sides of the ball. Why is that not his choice?

The first year IMO was a wasted year. The offense was going down hill by osmosis. Chris Samuels retired. Portis was on his last legs and got hurt fairly quickly in the season. They had to redo the line to fit the scheme. So they were bound to take a step back. But the defense although aging, talent wise IMO wasn't a train wreck -- they did take a step back with talent on both sides of the ball while trying to reorient scheme all at once.

That year seem to beg for a rebuild but he didn't go there.They were already missing picks via Vinny and they compounded it by trading more for McNabb. Really IMO an awful year for multiple reasons. He did seem to get a hit with Trent Williams, this year he's stepped up. Perry is decent but not great. They had few picks that draft. J. Brown trade bad. Carriker trade good.

The following year, I thought both the draft and free agency were decent. Kerrigan, Jenkins, I like Helu when healthy. Royster seems decent in limited opportunities. I have been critical of Hankerson, Robinson and Paul but I'll give them some time. FA -- Bowen, Cofield, Chester --decent.

This draft so far looks ok but too early to tell -- free agency looks bad unless Garcon can get on the field.

My problems with Shanahan are:

1. Defense -- can he hire a good coordinator, and can he acquire difference makers. I got my doubts. and IMO you can't be a winner in this league if one sidfe of the ball is a disaster.

2. Coaching -- I didn't really expect this as an issue when he was hired, but i got concerns about him in terms of clock management, motivational skills -- and the penalty issues indicates that he might not be as detail driven as I thought.

3. Building a roster -- I don't think he's been a disaster, and i like how they have handled the cap and contracts. i don't think he's terrible at it but a mixed bag, more good than bad. But are you going to be a winner in this league with C plus, B minus type of work which is how i'd rate him.

[SkinsNoles21]

Top two pass catching weapons (Garcon and Fred)

Top pass rusher

Top safety (not great, but top safety nonetheless)

Top 3-4 defensive lineman.

All gone.

That has a serious impact on your talent.

[darrelgreenie]

If it's in Mike Shanahan's contract that Mike Shanahan makes all of the football decisions until Mike Shanahan is no longer the Head Coach, Executive Vice President, yada yada, then Dan Snyder can "ask" Mike to hire a GM and Mike can decide yes or know; or, Dan can fire Mike and pay him $14 mil over the next 2 years.

I'm telling you, Dan did this contract in a moment of weakness, and Shanny got to hear how Steve Largent told espn that Jim Zorn's contract says "he has to listen to everything Dan Snyder says." I don't know this for a fact, but I am guessing, and reasonablly assuming that Mike has a pretty strong contract in that regard.

EDIT: Dan doesn't want to get sued for breech of contract... I know he's that smart.

I don't care to speculate about the terms of Mike Shanahan's contract. These are the facts: Dan Synder owns the football team. Mike Shanahan is under the employ of Dan Snyder. If Dan wants to bring in a GM that is Dan's prerogative whether Mike Shanahan is here or not. Its between Dan and Mike how this hypothetical situation would transpire. It could happen amicably with the shared intention of building a champship team at heart or it could be adversarial. But rest assured if Dan wants a GM he can hire a GM. Mike Shanahan can take elevator or the window.

[Hooper]

How so ? He's not a great player but he was playing very well as a starter for the Giants.. Has had a lot better year than Tyler Polumbus.

I gotta disagree with you there.

Locklear has been decent at best and helped by a vet QB who knows how to get rid of the ball.

Polumbus has graded out pretty good at times. It's a wash, at worst.

As much as I love RG3, he is still a rookie and he took some bad sacks against CAR that weren't on the o-line.

[TSO]

Locklear started the season at RT when the Giants Oline was playing lights out. Locklear was playing so well early they didnt insert Diehl into the lineup when healthy until recently.

http://www.bigblueview.com/2012/11/14/3642784/david-diehl-sean-locklear-new-york-giants-right-tackle

Cool, didn't know that... just heard the fans say different.

[Skinsinparadise]

Top two pass catching weapons (Garcon and Fred)

Top pass rusher

Top safety (not great, but top safety nonetheless)

Top 3-4 defensive lineman.

All gone.

That has a serious impact on your talent.

Agree it has an impact but Steelers for example lost key players and they are still humming. Giants have had some bad injuries. Shanny is the same guy who said before the year that the difference is this is a deep roster. If the roster is that deep it should be able to withstand injuries better IMO than they have. if Hankerson is supposed to be the future at WR or Robinson, they need to step up now. if Niles Paul reminds Shanny as he said of his Denver Hall of Fame TE, Shannon Sharpe -- be good to see some of that with Davis out. When the Giants lost S. Smith a season ago, Victor Cruz stepped up. Their safety, Phillips is hurt, Stevie Browns steps up. I just don't see how Shanny who touts now how he's built depth -- can use injuries as an excuse. He used injuries as the excuse last year, too. Is he expecting a season without key injuries, rarely any team gets that lucky.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

We had to undue years of mismanagement. That's unlike any other team. The situation did not "equally" affect everyone with that in mind. Teams like the Pats had most of their team in place and weren't looking to replace what amounts to almost the entire squad.

Re: the number of starters we added vs. the Pats in the past 3 years (5 to 8), it seems that your point makes it even MORE of an indictment of our front office. By your above post, I'm led to believe the Pats didn't have much upgrading to do, yet they added 8 starters via the draft. By contrast, we had gaping holes on our team and only added 5 starters via the draft over the same period of time. Good or bad, that supports Of's point that Belichick has done more with less (if you consider the draft position) than Shanahan has.

[DC9]

I don't care to speculate about the terms of Mike Shanahan's contract. These are the facts: Dan Synder owns the football team. Mike Shanahan is under the employ of Dan Snyder. If Dan wants to bring in a GM that is Dan's prerogative whether Mike Shanahan is here or not. Its between Dan and Mike how this hypothetical situation would transpire. It could happen amicably with the shared intention of building a champship team at heart or it could be adversarial. But rest assured if Dan wants a GM he can hire a GM. Mike Shanahan can take elevator or the window.

Well, we'll just have to disagree on that then. Legally, Mike Shanahan has the royal straight flush in this situation. That's all that would matter at the end of the day. If Mike didn't want one, he'd be well within his rights to say "I don't want one," and Dan can fire him. But Dan cannot force Mike Shanahan to have a GM.

[Hooper]

I stand corrected on the Locklear front.

Though I do think a savy QB like Eli makes a competent linemen look good.

The Jamaal Brown thing is just a joke at this time.

[Lavarleap56]

I gotta disagree with you there.

Locklear has been decent at best and helped by a vet QB who knows how to get rid of the ball.

Polumbus has graded out pretty good at times. It's a wash, at worst.

As much as I love RG3, he is still a rookie and he took some bad sacks against CAR that weren't on the o-line.

Hmm disagree with just about everything.. Locklear was getting applauded by the Giants and the media entering the Redskins game for his play. Polumbus has had some good stretches but overall had been terrible this season. Locklear is rated #49 and Polumbus #65 by profootballfocus.com.

Polumbus is 1/2 reasons we can not run our base offense with any consistency. I think Williams,Steiger, Monty, Chester have allowed 25 QB pressures combined while Polumbus has allowed 23 by himself.

Im not saying Locklear is great but you can argue he is better than Polumbus.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Well, we'll just have to disagree on that then. Legally, Mike Shanahan has the royal straight flush in this situation. That's all that would matter at the end of the day. If Mike didn't want one, he'd be well within his rights to say "I don't want one," and Dan can fire him. But Dan cannot force Mike Shanahan to have a GM.

I don't think I agree with this. Dan Snyder can hire whomever he wants. Now, he might not be able to make Shanahan listen to the GM, but that's true of several NFL teams. If Dan Snyder hired a GM tomorrow and then signed a FA based on the GM's recommendation, there's nothing Shanahan could do about it is there? He could choose to sit that player on the bench, etc. but he can't block Snyder's hiring of an employee nor his transactions.

[Oldfan]

...My problems with Shanahan are:

1. Defense -- can he hire a good coordinator, and can he acquire difference makers. I got my doubts. and IMO you can't be a winner in this league if one sidfe of the ball is a disaster.

2. Coaching -- I didn't really expect this as an issue when he was hired, but i got concerns about him in terms of clock management, motivational skills -- and the penalty issues indicates that he might not be as detail driven as I thought.

3. Building a roster -- I don't think he's been a disaster, and i like how they have handled the cap and contracts. i don't think he's terrible at it but a mixed bag, more good than bad. But are you going to be a winner in this league with C plus, B minus type of work which is how i'd rate him.

As you know, I want a dynasty and I don't think it can be achieved by a plan that tries to build and win now at the same time. So, I don't agree with the plan goals. As a consequence, I have never held out much hope that Mike Shanahan would fulfull my wishes.

He has done better than I expected in some ways. I marvel at his ability to mask the problems with his O-line and he's doing very well with his plan for free agents. I like his approach. But, he has never convinced me that he has a unified strategic plan, offense and defense. I don't see much potential in his drafting strategy either.

Right now, I'm expecting a team that will be fun to watch --because of RG3 -- but with a mediocre record, a team needing a perfect storm of luck to go anywhere in the postseason.