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

[DC9]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000095361/article/mike-shanahans-washington-redskins-must-start-winning-again

Adam Schein seems to echo a lot of the sentiments that I have about the Shanny era so far in the column above. It seems like he credits Mike and Bruce with changing the culture (namely with Dan), doesn't hate on all of the moves... but harps on the on the field product.

He is more into Shanny bashing than I am, and doesn't get into a lot of the stuff that Lombardi did in the interview... probably because Schein doesn't attract the above average football nerd like a lot of us are... but I'd say it's a pretty fair wrap up.

That said... this article and the timing of it's release make this weekend very interesting for this team. If this team loses on Sunday to what is likely to be a down trodden, apathetic Philly team... you're going to see things get very interesting on here.

[Lavarleap56]

Hey now, I didn't say "everyone", I clearly qualified it. I did that just so you couldn't hit me with that. :pfft: Here's what I said:

No need to apologize, I forgive you.

And I know you used him as an example, but the problem is my point still stood since I was talking in general. I may have been wrong about Locklear being a bad example, though. It was decent one, I guess.

I thought Locklear played at RT here too, though? I just remember him not playing well... but I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'll concede in this case since I don't know how Locklear has played for other teams that well. But, in all actuality, the fact that Locklear is the focus here is a good thing and makes my argument stand stronger, lol. There aren't too many examples we can pull from and the one you happened to use is pretty debatable.

Honestly the fact he has cut people that have not been picked up doesn't mean much. He has cut a lot of guys that were here due to vinny and has cut a lot of players he picked up himself either via draft or free agency..

During Training camp wasn't Shanahan saying " we are going to cut a lot of good football players that will make other teams rosters unlike in the past" ..

[DC9]

Honestly the fact he has cut people that have not been picked up doesn't mean much. He has cut a lot of guys that were here due to vinny and has cut a lot of players he picked up himself either via draft or free agency..

During Training camp wasn't Shanahan saying " we are going to cut a lot of good football players that will make other teams rosters unlike in the past" ..

Something to that affect... and that typically "teams that make the Super Bowl have four or more players picked up by other teams to start." I think we had six players picked up by other teams but I am not sure anyone started. Still... we seriously over estimated the players on the roster and the effect that coaching/or lack thereof has on a team.

I think it's clear that a lot of the players already aren't responding to Haz, and if the Panthers game is any indication... they aren't responding to Shanny.

[Lavarleap56]

I understand the questions about Shanahan and his defenses and where it comes from. But I disagree wholeheartedly that he has not made sound personnel decisions. In fact, his personnel decisions should almost be beyond question given what he's done since being here.

There is, of course, the obvious example of Donovan McNabb. Outside of that, I am hard pressed to find a single error in what Shanahan has done personnel wise. His drafts have been nothing short of outstanding. He has wheeled and dealed to garner extra picks. He has been extremely successful at drafting guys, regardless of what round, that are NFL caliber players.

2010: Williams, Riley, Dennis Morris, Eric Cook, Selvish Capers

2011: Kerrigan, Jenkins,Hankerson, Helu, Gomes,Paul, Royster,Robinson,Thompson,Hurt,White,Neild

2012:RG3, Leribeus, Cousins,K.Robinson,Gettis, Morris,Compton,Crawford,Bernsteine

I see 3 drafts with 5 legit starters drafted out of 26 selections. The offensive starters huge hits while the defensive starters are pretty good. The orange guys are guys I think all have potential but have not shown to be consistent enough to consider starter material yet.

I get the argument of, "Why in the hell isn't our record better when other teams seem to turn it around in one year?"

The issue is why do we look worse in year three than we did at times in year 1 and 2 ?

But again, Shanahan's free agency pick ups and drafts have been phenomenal. The questions about our offensive line and secondary are misguided - you cannot fix everything at once or get all the players you want with limited draft picks and money in free agency.

I would not say phenomenal at all bro.. I would say hit or miss. The Offensive line/secondary issues are legitimate. Who said fix everything at one, its been three years to show progression. Every other coach either turns it around by year three or doesn't get it done. The only exeptions to that are Belichick and Knoll.

He drafted Trent Williams and has brought in several linemen that have been much better than the guys they replaced. He has also drafted several guys who fit his scheme and will, in my opinion, pay dividends in the upcoming year. Shanahan's draft history with O-linemen is about as impressive as it is with running backs if you pay attention. Much like Lombardi said, great offensive linemen rarely hit the open market - well, then you can't fault Shanahan for not bringing in guys that way. And he has spent a #4 overall pick on the line, as well as our 3rd this year and several other solid developmental guys.

He has found some guys but is still lacking .. Redskins are not at the point to take flyers on developmental guys, they have needed players now not three years from now. The developmental guys they have drafted have not shown anything yet minus Hurt for a stretch in 2011.

In this day and age 3rd round picks need to contribute in some way in their first season..LeRibeus riding the bench is not ok at this point.

Again, he has had much success drafting these types of guys before. Is it where it needs to be? No, but he's building it for the future and our line has actually been pretty solid this year. A lot of that has to do with RG3 but they've blocked well for Morris and have not been bad in pass pro.

They have blocked well while in the zone read offense which has a lot of gimmicks to mask your oline. Year 3 and we can not run 60% of the Shanahan offfense with any consistency.

The secondary - well, we lost $18 million in free agency. That kind of takes you out of the market for premier guys like Finnegan and Carr. Finnegan's attitude and playing style may have kept us from targeting him anyway. Ultimately, once we lost such a hefty sum of money, we had to limit ourselves and Shanahan clearly decided it was most important to surround his young quarterback with offensive playmakers and fill out the defense with cheaper guys. I can't exactly say this was a bad plan. Ask yourself what our defense would have looked like with a healthy Orakpo/Carriker and Merriweather/Jackson at the safety positions. Our corners were not going to be anything special, but I think our defense would be performing at a markedly different level. When you lose 4 starters on defense at the start of the season, it simply hurts. Especially when you were forced into settling on risky guys like Jackson and Merriweather in the first place.

Mike is on record as saying they spent 2 years building the defense and he felt comfortable where they were at. He also said the 2012 off season was all about building the offense. Skins did have Finnegan targeted but the money changed that. You cant really use the penalty as a excuse because they played a role in it occurring.

Agree with what you said on Jackson and Merrriweater and its tough when you roll the dice on cast offs.

[KCClybun]

Wrong as usual..

Yes he went to a power based rushing attack and is not a good run blocker. ZBS and Power scheme is irrelevant when it comes to pass protection and Locklear has been done well.

In ten games Locklear had a negative grade in only 2 games. He hasn't committed many penalties ( 1 or 2 ) and he has allowed 0 sacks, 5 QB hits, and 21 hurries... Hurries are not great but they are serviceable.

Polumbus had has negative grades in all but 3 games and has allowed 5 sacks, 5 QB hits and 23 hurries.

Locklear signed his pink slip when he blasted Shanny for having a member of the military speak to the team instead of some rahrah team deal.

[DC9]

Locklear signed his pink slip when he blasted Shanny for having a member of the military speak to the team instead of some rahrah team deal.

I have the tweet somewhere, but it was something like "worst exit meeting ever."

I think he was more pissed that he didn't get a one on one conversation from the coaching staff.

[Oldfan]

Just don't think its a realistic argument. It's like writing a diet book that says drink just water and eat bread for a month and watch you lose 25 pounds, no one is going to do it..

I don't think you understand me. I'm not the least bit interested in what would be popular. The plan I advocate would, without a doubt, be the surest and quickest way to rebuild an NFL team.

If being popular was my goal, I'd bring in big names. Fans have always loved them and I'm sure they always will.

There would be a price to pay at the beginning, but once paid, it would never have to be paid again. The alternative is mediocrity, in my opinion. I think this belief that the Allen/Shanahan team has sold this fanbase, that we can win now and build long term at the same time is the promise of a free lunch and a guarantee for mediocrity.

You need a model? The Washington Capitals intentionally went to the cellar, suffered, then came up to the top. They still have some finishing to do, but their fanbase is now rabid. It never was before the rebuild because the team was stuck in mediocre-mode.

[TSO]

Honestly the fact he has cut people that have not been picked up doesn't mean much. He has cut a lot of guys that were here due to vinny and has cut a lot of players he picked up himself either via draft or free agency..

During Training camp wasn't Shanahan saying " we are going to cut a lot of good football players that will make other teams rosters unlike in the past" ..

That's clearly faulty logic considering I was mainly focused on the beginning of this rebuild whereas you are focusing on the cuts made this year. The fact is, he's cut almost every single player that was on our pre-Shanahan team and they went on and have done NOTHING for the most part. I'm not sure how that wasn't clear in my posts, but now it's like we're going in circles because you really want to prove Mike is failing here. Don't make this your agenda, LL, you're better than that.

[KCClybun]

I don't think you understand me. I'm not the least bit interested in what would be popular. The plan I advocate would, without a doubt, be the surest and quickest way to rebuild an NFL team.

So what you're saying is, basically, you'd throw the season in an attempt to get better draft position.

---------- Post added November-15th-2012 at 10:44 PM ----------

I think he was more pissed that he didn't get a one on one conversation from the coaching staff.

I'd imagine if he wanted a one-on-one meeting with someone he likely could've gotten one at the end of the year if he requested it.

[Oldfan]

So, do you have a comparable team you could provide? Many would argue that the Giants have won 2 Super Bowls by being an above average team that got hot at the right time in 2007 and 2011. I think the Patriots are now a team that has to out score its opponents and will need to string together some good fortune to win it all in any given season. To me, the teams that SHOULD be considered favorites in today's NFL are the Texans or Ravens.

I'm not sure what you mean by a comparable team.

I regard the Patriots as the #1 franchise. They are showing some signs of weakness, but I'd still take them over the Texans or Ravens. My goal would be to be better than they are. A lesser goal would be pointless.

Have I answered your question?

[Lavarleap56]

That's clearly faulty logic considering I was mainly focused on the beginning of this rebuild whereas you are focusing on the cuts made this year. The fact is, he's cut almost every single player that was on our pre-Shanahan team and they went on and have done NOTHING for the most part. I'm not sure how that wasn't clear in my posts, but now it's like we're going in circles because you really want to prove Mike is failing here. Don't make this your agenda, LL, you're better than that.

Not making that my agenda at all bro lol.. Shanny had to cut those Vinny players, most of them were old and only here due to our salary cap issue. The team knew Jon Jansen was done as a player but gave him a extension to create more cap space..that's the type of stuff we were dealing with.

I never said Shanny cut all these guys that were successful anywhere else lol Sounds like cutting a bunch of Vinny guys earns plus points with you because they didn't get picked up by anyone else, that's flawed logic. I don't think anyone is surprised that they were not picked up by anyone else because most of them were old,injured, or sucked.

Shanny gets credit for cutting 1 player from the vinny era in my book and its Haynesworth and that's it. Everyone else that was cut from Vinnys roster would of been cut by most of the NFL GMS.

Shanny has cut his own guys to so to me that whole argument is really moot and has no basis. He's cut his own draft picks, FA signings, etc.. so its a wash.

I'm not just focusing on this year either but the reality is the team has not cut a lot of good players regardless if they were vinny or shanny guys. Shanny has probably let more talent walk out of here from not re-signing them than cutting but that's a whole other argument.

* JUST BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE CRITICAL OR QUESTION SHANAHANS MOVES DOES NOT MEAN THEY WANT TO FIRE HIM....<---message to everyone

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

You need a model? The Washington Capitals went to the cellar, suffered, then came up to the top. They still have some finishing to do, but their fanbase is now rabid. It never was before the rebuild.

The Nationals are a far better model for this (largely because the Caps imo aren't going to win a Cup, while the FLOOR for the Nats is 1 World Series this decade, and their ceiling is something like the 90s Yankees). If I was to argue the "We need to tear it down to the foundations and cut every veteran, or we should have in 2010" point, I'd use the Nats. The Nationals are in position to win multiple World Series over the next 10 years, and imo are the #1 franchise in the MLB. Looking back, a "tear it down" strategy would have gotten us considerably more blue-chip talent, and we probably would not have had to trade up for RGIII in year 3 (though the fear is that the team reaches for a Blaine Gabbert or Jake Locker in 2011, which is the only thing that throws a wrench in the strategy)

Right now, our ceiling is a Super Bowl title this decade, even with all the mistakes (RGIII is that good) and our floor is something like the pre-Dungy Colts. Eventually, RGIII will be good enough that the surrounding personnel won't matter.

[KCClybun]

I regard the Patriots as the #1 franchise. My goal would be to be better than they are. A lesser goal would be pointless.

It's funny, because Mike went up and spent a lot of time with Bill Belichick in his year off and has put a lot of the stuff they do in to effect here.

He moved to a 3-4 defense. (The Pats have sense moved back to a 4-3)

He has only drafted four year starters and team captains with who have won multiple awards. (Even Robert is a four year start, even though he was technically a redshirt junior).

He's traded down and maneuvered in the draft to try and attain value over staying at a certain position.

He's bought in veteran players from other teams and allowed them to compete for jobs and play.

He hasn't hesitated to cut/trade a player with an attitude issue.

He's somehow milked trade value out of players who would otherwise be untouchable on the trade market.

The difference is, it helps when you have one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time (though I know you don't not regard Brady as such) and a base system and organization structure that's been in place for the better part of 10 years, as opposed to trying to build all that from scratch. And I'll remind you that Bill Belichick certainly didn't can all of his veteran players when he took over as Patriots head coach, even after he went 5-10 his first season there. Belichick didn't even do that in Cleveland.

[TSO]

Not making that my agenda at all bro lol.. Shanny had to cut those Vinny players, most of them were old and only here due to our salary cap issue. The team knew Jon Jansen was done as a player but gave him a extension to create more cap space..that's the type of stuff we were dealing with.

I never said Shanny cut all these guys that were successful anywhere else lol Sounds like cutting a bunch of Vinny guys earns plus points with you because they didn't get picked up by anyone else, that's flawed logic. I don't think anyone is surprised that they were not picked up by anyone else because most of them were old,injured, or sucked.

Shanny gets credit for cutting 1 player from the vinny era in my book and its Haynesworth and that's it. Everyone else that was cut from Vinnys roster would of been cut by most of the NFL GMS.

Shanny has cut his own guys to so to me that whole argument is really moot and has no basis. He's cut his own draft picks, FA signings, etc.. so its a wash.

I'm not just focusing on this year either but the reality is the team has not cut a lot of good players regardless if they were vinny or shanny guys. Shanny has probably let more talent walk out of here from not re-signing them than cutting but that's a whole other argument.

* JUST BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE CRITICAL OR QUESTION SHANAHANS MOVES DOES NOT MEAN THEY WANT TO FIRE HIM....<---message to everyone

Hmmm... I think you're misunderstanding me. I never said I thought you wanted Mike fired, either.

Almost everything you said here is exactly where my argument stems... but you seem to confuse it as me saying that we need to give credit to Mike for cutting those players. Of course not! I didn't say anything remotely hinting at that!

My point is that the amount of players we had to cut were unlike any other recent rebuild going on the NFL. Maybe the Lions? Still, no one had to cut as many players who did nothing elsewhere than us. To me, that automatically makes this rebuild a more difficult one than any other team we can compare it to. Secondly, we not only had to deal with that, we also had to deal with external conditions that arose which were totally out of Mike's hands.

That is and has been my point here, which you have not actually refuted. Everything you state here was based on a straw man that I stated we need to give Mike credit for cutting Vinny's players. I never said that.

And of course Mike is going to cut his own players, especially as time goes on considering almost everyone on the roster IS SOMEONE HE BROUGHT IN, lol. That's basically by default. Not sure how that makes anything "a wash".

Don't take offense to anything here, LL... just some good natured discourse. I'm sorry if it bothered you that I stated it's like you have an agenda, but I interpreted it like that since it almost seemed like you were purposely misunderstanding me and going in circles.

[Oldfan]

The Nationals are a far better model for this (largely because the Caps imo aren't going to win a Cup, while the Nats are going to win 1 World Series at an absolute minimum, and their ceiling is something like the 90s Yankees). If I was to argue the "We need to tear it down to the foundations and cut every veteran, or we should have in 2010" point, I'd use the Nats. The Nationals are in position to win multiple World Series over the next 10 years, and imo are the #1 franchise in the MLB. Looking back, a "tear it down" strategy would have gotten us considerably more blue-chip talent, and we probably would not have had to trade up for RGIII in year 3 (though the fear is that the team reaches for a Blaine Gabbert or Jake Locker in 2011, which is the only thing that throws a wrench in the strategy)

I don't think the Nats ever deliberately went to the cellar. They just didn't have a clue at the time.

As for your Gabbert speculation, no rebuilding plan will work if you can't execute the plan. Picking the right players and coaches is key, naturally.

[Lavarleap56]

That's clearly faulty logic considering I was mainly focused on the beginning of this rebuild whereas you are focusing on the cuts made this year. The fact is, he's cut almost every single player that was on our pre-Shanahan team and they went on and have done NOTHING for the most part. I'm not sure how that wasn't clear in my posts, but now it's like we're going in circles because you really want to prove Mike is failing here. Don't make this your agenda, LL, you're better than that.

Not making that my agenda at all bro lol.. Shanny had to cut those Vinny players, most of them were old and only here due to our salary cap issue. The team knew Jon Jansen was done as a player but gave him a extension to create more cap space..that's the type of stuff we were dealing with.

I never said Shanny cut all these guys that were successful anywhere else lol Sounds like cutting a bunch of Vinny guys earns plus points with you because they didn't get picked up by anyone else, that's flawed logic. I don't think anyone is surprised that they were not picked up by anyone else because most of them were old,injured, or sucked.

Shanny gets credit for cutting 1 player from the vinny era in my book and its Haynesworth and that's it. Everyone else that was cut from Vinnys roster would of been cut by most of the NFL GMS.

Shanny has cut his own guys to so to me that whole argument is really moot and has no basis. He's cut his own draft picks, FA signings, etc.. so its a wash.

I'm not just focusing on this year either but the reality is the team has not cut a lot of good players regardless if they were vinny or shanny guys. Shanny has probably let more talent walk out of here from not re-signing them than cutting but that's a whole other argument.

[TSO]

^^Ok, this board is driving me crazy now... I already replied to this post, lol.

[Lavarleap56]

^^Ok, this board is driving me crazy now... I already replied to this post, lol.

lol you need to breathe and relax..

---------- Post added November-16th-2012 at 04:28 AM ----------

We can be critical and question Mike Shanahan and not want him fired. I'm tired of people assuming this is what you want because your not sitting on the golden pot at the end of the rainbow. I have started looking at Mike as only if he ever coached for the Redskins and have erased anything from Denver. Reality is nothing he did In Denver matters to us at this point. He earned a lot of goodwill from the Bronco fans and Mike was given some goodwill with the Redskins fans when he took over based on his past accomplishments. That goodwill has faded for me and I think it is perfectly logical and objective to evaluate the coach like we would any other coach who has been here for 41 games and counting.

I understand this may not be a popular opinion but it is where I am and what I'm thinking. The honeymoon is gone and the NFL is a results based business and right now we have poor results. I feel my concerns are valid, based on solid issues, and come from wanting the best for the Redskins. Lately I have been thinking what If the

I speak my mind and enjoy the convo but don't label me as having a "agenda" to fire Shanahan because that is not accurate and not what I want.

Maybe the Redskins job is too much for Shanahan at this point in his career. Maybe he will be known for laying the foundation that began to change the Redskins for the future?. He may not benefit from it as a HC but maybe he lays the groundwork for another coach to come in and have less work to do towards being a consistent winner.

[Oldfan]

^^Ok, this board is driving me crazy now... I already replied to this post, lol.

Earlier, you replied to me twice before I posted. I thought, Jesus! This guy's amazing!

[Lavarleap56]

Earlier, you replied to me twice before I posted. I thought, Jesus! This guy's amazing!

lol he can tell the future

[MartinC]

Earlier, you replied to me twice before I posted. I thought, Jesus! This guy's amazing!

If he can read your mind OF he's more than amazing

I think the reality is that baring a complete melt down the rest of this season Shanny is going to get another year and he should IMO. He needs a winning season next year though and to do that we need to fix the defense and maybe RT on offense.

It's going to be tough sledding with all the needs we have on defense though and no first round pick and not a huge amount of cap space to play with. Even setting that aside I'm not sure we have the people in place in coaching or the front office who can set the defensive strategy and evaluate the talent needed to execute that strategy.

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

If he can read your mind OF he's more than amazing

I think the reality is that baring a complete melt down the rest of this season Shanny is going to get another year and he should IMO. He needs a winning season next year though and to do that we need to fix the defense and maybe RT on offense.

It's going to be tough sledding with all the needs we have on defense though and no first round pick and not a huge amount of cap space to play with. Even setting that aside I'm not sure we have the people in place in coaching or the front office who can set the defensive strategy and evaluate the talent needed to execute that strategy.

That is it right there. 100%

If we finish up weak again this year, his seat will be flaming going into 2013 but he'll be here to start the season

[AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy]

That is it right there. 100%

If we finish up weak again this year, his seat will be flaming going into 2013 but he'll be here to start the season

I think you're right. A few W's to finish the year out would stop a lot of this "chatter".

I'm hoping that we can pull out one against Philly. It would motivate our guys a lot going into Dallas next week. I think the underlying issue here is, can Shanny be a GM and a head coach and get us to where we want to go? I'd like to think that the answer is yes, but if we lay an egg this weekend...look out.

An interesting thought from LL on his podcast...he mentioned how Shanny would not call his own plays anymore, no matter what happens going forward. And LL seemed to imply that this somehow took away from Shanny's "edge". I tend to agree. When you look at coaches who become "figure head" types later in their careers, it never seems to go well. You see it a lot in the college ranks and in the NFL. Just an interesting point that I haven't seen much discussion on.

[veteranskinsfan]

I liked a lot of what Lombardi said about Shanny's poor evaluation and recruitment of defense players with both Denver and Washington. I agree with most of his key points outlined in the Wash Post article. I want to point out that our owner could have hired Lombardi as the GM but chose Allen. I wonder if Lombardi believes he could have done a better job if he had been hired as our GM. I do not believe Shanny should have been given both the GM and Head Coach titles any more than I felt Joe Gibbs should have held both titles. The Skins won those Super Bowls when Beathard and Gibbs reported to Jack Kent Cooke. He held court deciding who he would back when both men could not agree on trades or key acquistions. He would intervene to do what was in the best interest of the Skins organization. Shanny does not want input from Snyder on football matters. His contract probably spells it out completely that only he has full authority. I wonder if Cooke were alive today, would Shanny even listen to him? I will replay the full transcript of what Lombardi said tonight on nfl.com

[rskin72]

Thanks for the interview post LL. It pretty much covers all the ground that has been bothering me for a while now about this team under Mike. While I was not a huge Mike homer, I did think that things would change for the better under him. I also took it as a huge positive when Snyder hired him and Bruce, and hopefully decided to take more of a backseat role.

But, for all the changes that have taken place in the roster, for the good that is RGIII, Morris, others.......we are still at 3-6 in year 3 of the rebuild....and more importantly we have not been competitive against our last two opponents, one of which was a game at home vs a then 1-5 team.....a "must win" game.

While we do have different players on this team than the one Shanny inherited.....and we have skewed younger and quicker.....apparently that also has not added up to an exponential increase in NFL level talent. With the cap hit and loss of top draft picks next season, most of us already realized that all the issues that are apparent on this team may not get fixed in the off season.

But, another problem with this team could very well stem from the front office decision makers WRT personnel/talent evaluators.....and also some of our coaches like the DCoord, Slowik, Special teams coach....etc. Maybe Shanny himself is not a true motivator.....I don't know as I am not in the locker room. But I have seen all the questionable sound bites and comments since he has been our HC, and he has made me shake my head on more than one occasion.

The fact is....if this team does not perform the miracle turn around this season....and though I would love to see that, how many of us really think that this will happen.......what will change to make us more competitive next season? The things we can change, as alluded to in one article, are coaches (quality and maybe quantity), front office scouting staff composition and skill level there.......think maybe Dan should also consider taking away the mantle of GM from Mike, and bring in a true GM seperate from the coach. Keep Bruce as our capologist.

I hope I am wrong and Philly game is the start of our turnaround......I will be in the stands cheering at any rate, hope to sing Hail to the Redskins a lot on Sunday!!!!