We Have To Keep The Shanahans...

[Rufus T Firefly]

Well, You could, but it cost you a 36 million cap penalty to do it.

Or, you know, he could have used the uncapped year to actually get rid of those players, rather than star throwing away draft picks on a dumb win-now strategy. All while defying the league and hoping they wouldn't actually  give us the cap penalty they were threatening.

[WinSkinsWin83]

I stand corrected then I was wrong my apologies. However I did admit the Meriweather deal was an expensive deal, should have been 2 years /$4 million in my opinion.

Shanahan said he wasn't going to ask Fletcher to take a pay cut for the betterment of the team, you can't ding shanny for that one, EVERYONE wanted fletcher back there wasn't a soul who said get rid of fletcher so stop it.

Licht and montgomery played very well last year shanahan's philosophy is to keep the offensive line together we still have one of the top ranked offensive lines units in the whole entire league so i'm not sure why you're complaining?

Guess what Bill Billacheat cuts players who are perceived by Pats fans as the life of the team. When it is time to. That's why he is successful. Mike failed there. He could have rolled Fletch 5 million into an Olinemen. Or another hole. But he didn't and now we have 2 holes to fill. He is paid not to think like a fan but as a teambuilder. Should have known Fletcher wasn't worth that money. And if he did know, then he should have done whats best for the team and ask Fletcher for a pay cut or got him out of their.

[Boss_Hogg]

Lol @ those thinking if Shanny is gone, the offense wouldn't be able to score 20+ points. Shanny wasn't scoring 20+ his 1st 2 seasons. Main reason for scoring is RG3 and Alf. Those players will still be here.

 

True but will they be put into an offensive system that tailors to their strengths?

 

One of Snyder's biggest fails was hiring a coach with a completely different system from the previous coach.

[Redskins Diehard]

Fine. I know that you don't agree about Shanahan specifically. That's OK.

 

Generally speaking though, I think a typical fan is much more qualified to identify a coach who isn't getting the job done than he/she is in knowing who viable replacements are. So, if I think any coach should be fired, the fact that I don't have a solid replacement in mind isn't really a counter-argument. That's all I was really trying to state.

 

Back to Shanahan, haven't you said that you would be ready to move on if the Redskins go 5-11 or 6-10 this year? If so, why would 3-4 over the final 7 games (just about Shanahan's record from 2010 through now) change your feelings about the way he conducts business, his roster, or the division championship?

Actually I haven't said those things. I have said that I would be much more skeptical about keeping him at 5-11 or 6-10. I think the specific way I worded it was that at 5-11 probably and at 6-10 I would be looking at how we got there. I would be ready to move on at 3-13 or 4-12. 

Or, you know, he could have used the uncapped year to actually get rid of those players, rather than star throwing away draft picks on a dumb win-now strategy. All while defying the league and hoping they wouldn't actually  give us the cap penalty they were threatening.

That is interesting.  How would you have proposed ridding the team of those contracts during the uncapped year without incurring the cap penalty?

[RG3Hunna]

There were plenty of us who knew it was time to move on from Fletcher, and in a year where ILB was one of the strengths of FA.

 

The point, one last time, is that you can't claim guys who Shanahan is paying 3 to 4 times the minimum, or 3 mil, or 6 mil, aren't even worthy of a roster spot while at the same time claim that, given more money, Shanahan would surely have spent it well. The further point with guys like Fletcher, Montgomery and Lichtensteiger, not to mention one of the league's worst, yet highest paid, Punters, is that he had plenty of opportunities to spend money. He just hasn't done much with it.

Cut it out!!!!

 

up until this year people thought Fletcher had a resurgence after he exploded for 5 interceptions last year and people were begging fletcher to come back and play 1 more year. Now all of a sudden you're saying a lot of people wanted us to get rid of fletcher because ILB was a strength in the offseason? lol

 

That's what makes me laugh about fans like you, you guys ALWAYS knew the right decision all along, sure wish you were in the front office so we could ALWAYS make the right decision........

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

True but will they be put into an offensive system that tailors to their strengths?

 

,,,,,

 

That suggests their in one now. Which in 2013 is open to debate. Particularly as regards the QB.

 

Hail. 

[Rufus T Firefly]

That is interesting.  How would you have proposed ridding the team of those contracts during the uncapped year without incurring the cap penalty?

Trade or release them. No one was punished for doing that, nor were we for players like Randle El, Betts, etc.

[SJValleySkinz]

True but will they be put into an offensive system that tailors to their strengths?

 

One of Snyder's biggest fails was hiring a coach with a completely different system from the previous coach.

 

Is a coach who uses the west coast offense hard to find?

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Actually I haven't said those things. I have said that I would be much more skeptical about keeping him at 5-11 or 6-10. I think the specific way I worded it was that at 5-11 probably and at 6-10 I would be looking at how we got there. I would be ready to move on at 3-13 or 4-12. 

That is interesting.  How would you have proposed ridding the team of those contracts during the uncapped year without incurring the cap penalty?

 

Sorry about that (seriously). I don't like misrepresenting someone's point on here. So, let's look at that then. Why would 1-6 over the last 7 games change what you consider some very nice developments over the past 3.5 years?

[Rufus T Firefly]

Cut it out!!!!

 

up until this year people thought Fletcher had a resurgence after he exploded for 5 interceptions last year and people were begging fletcher to come back and play 1 more year. Now all of a sudden you're saying a lot of people wanted us to get rid of fletcher because ILB was a strength in the offseason? lol

 

That's what makes me laugh about fans like you, you guys ALWAYS knew the right decision all along, sure wish you were in the front office so we could ALWAYS make the right decision........

You know, I suspected that it was a waste of time trying to discuss anything with you and since your arguments have added up to nothing and now you are resorting to pathetic attacks, I'll return to my initial instinct and ignore.

[Fat Stupid Loser]

 

Certainly if a bunch of fans with real jobs can't identify anyone better, there isn't a candidate right? I hope that whenever we replace Shanahan, the list of replacements is made up of names I barely know. That's what would tell me we have real people (Allen and/or a new GM) running the show.

 

As long as the list is Cowher, Gruden, and Lovey Smith...I might as well be the one making the decisions.

 I'm sure there are a lot of qualified candidates, I just doubt any of them are better football coaches. So we start the process over like so many times the last 25 years. Maybe we stumble on to the next Bilicheat. Unlikely. The "we can't do any worse" approach never really inspires me.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

 

 I'm sure there are a lot of qualified candidates, I just doubt any of them are better football coaches. So we start the process over like so many times the last 25 years. Maybe we stumble on to the next Bilicheat. Unlikely. The "we can't do any worse" approach never really inspires me.

 

What makes you say that? You think no one on this planet is a better football coach than Mike Shanahan?

[Redskins Diehard]

Trade or release them. No one was punished for doing that, nor were we for players like Randle El, Betts, etc.

Randle El and Betts didn't have huge bonuses due in the uncapped year.  That is what it was all about right?

 

So if you sign a player to a long term contract with a huge bonus then the money is guaranteed but for cap purposes is equally spread over the remaining life of the contract.  If the player is cut then the remaining bonus is accelerated into the current year.  Unless it happens after a certain date(like June 1st) and then it is spread over the current year and the following year. 

 

How does the trade work? If we trade Fat Al before the second 20 million bonus then that means the new team would be responsible for that and we would accelerate the remainder of the first 20 million in bonus to the current year? 

[Rufus T Firefly]

Randle El and Betts didn't have huge bonuses due in the uncapped year.  That is what it was all about right?

 

So if you sign a player to a long term contract with a huge bonus then the money is guaranteed but for cap purposes is equally spread over the remaining life of the contract.  If the player is cut then the remaining bonus is accelerated into the current year.  Unless it happens after a certain date(like June 1st) and then it is spread over the current year and the following year. 

 

How does the trade work? If we trade Fat Al before the second 20 million bonus then that means the new team would be responsible for that and we would accelerate the remainder of the first 20 million in bonus to the current year? 

Couldn't have traded Haynesworth before the bonus was due. Trade him and the bonus accelerated into the uncapped year. No one was punished for cutting or trading players that year, just for structuring contracts to dump bonus money into that season.

[Redskins Diehard]

Sorry about that (seriously). I don't like misrepresenting someone's point on here. So, let's look at that then. Why would 1-6 over the last 7 games change what you consider some very nice developments over the past 3.5 years?

I appreciate the apology(seriously!)  I think with 1-6 over the last 7 games would signal that there was a swinging gate/double timeout situation along the way.  Either one that we publicly saw like with Gibbs and Zorn, or one that was behind the scenes. 

 

As I have mentioned I would not expect a Lombardi in the next 3 years with any coach, or any team for that matter.  I'd take the "field" over any team someone picked right now this year.  Hell, I may take the "field" over any team at the beginning of the playoffs.  Too much can happen.  So I would like to see the organizational turnaround continue.  Give Shanahan the extension if that is the en vogue thing in the NFL. And if it is true that Allen makes the contracts then I would give him specific instructions that there will be no Haynesworth or Hall signings.  Use the cap responsibly in the offseason.  And if we make no more progress next year then move on.  The great thing about coach salaries is that they have no bearing on the team that is put on the field.

Couldn't have traded Haynesworth before the bonus was due. Trade him and the bonus accelerated into the uncapped year. No one was punished for cutting or trading players that year, just for structuring contracts to dump bonus money into that season.

Cut him and the same thing happens though? We could have avoided the second 20 million but we couldn't prolong it beyond the June 1st cut without incurring the second bonus.  It was a colossally stupid contract. 

What makes you say that? You think no one on this planet is a better football coach than Mike Shanahan?

Well they do have to be coaches that aren't currently employed as Headcoaches in the NFL.  And they would have to want a job coaching in the NFL.  That does narrow the pool a little.  How many of last offseason hires would you rather have right now?

[Rufus T Firefly]

Cut him and the same thing happens though? We could have avoided the second 20 million but we couldn't prolong it beyond the June 1st cut without incurring the second bonus.  It was a colossally stupid contract. 

There was no way not to pay that bonus. We had trade offers, Shanahan turned them down and gambled on his accounting trick working when the league told him it wouldn't. hill Haynsenworth predictably turned malcontent and destroyed his own trade value.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I don't mind that approach (extending Shanahan, not going crazy with the cap money, etc.). I just don't see how it's fair to keep the guy around but not let him spend the money as he sees fit. Since he's both the GM and the coach, he is likely to spend as much as he can to fill out the roster with guys who fit our current scheme.

 

It's that situation coupled with another bad year (and ultimately firing him then) that concerns me. I'd hate to let a lame duck GM/coach be the one to shop for the groceries with the cap room we are about to have. It would possibly saddle us with more light OLs who only fit his scheme and/or 3-4 defensive personnel.

[Redskins Diehard]

There was no way not to pay that bonus. We had trade offers, Shanahan turned them down and gambled on his accounting trick working when the league told him it wouldn't. hill Haynsenworth predictably turned malcontent and destroyed his own trade value.

I'm not sure I buy the fact that we had legit trade offers from teams willing to take on the second set of bonus money.  And even if they did we would have had to accelerate the first set of signing bonus.  I really don't think there was much way around this one than to hold your nose and take your medicine.  We were able to trade him at all only because by that time we had sucked down the medicine.  At least in my opinion.  I agree it was a gamble to play the accounting trick.  But there was really no downside. 

I don't mind that approach (extending Shanahan, not going crazy with the cap money, etc.). I just don't see how it's fair to keep the guy around but not let him spend the money as he sees fit. Since he's both the GM and the coach, he is likely to spend as much as he can to fill out the roster with guys who fit our current scheme.

 

It's that situation coupled with another bad year (and ultimately firing him then) that concerns me. I'd hate to let a lame duck GM/coach be the one to shop for the groceries with the cap room we are about to have. It would possibly saddle us with more light OLs who only fit his scheme and/or 3-4 defensive personnel.

I think it is certainly fair and reasonable to tell a coach that he has to sign contracts that are in the long term best interests of the team.  Nor do I think that should only be applied to a coach that is, or may be, on the hot seat.  Besides, the next coach we hire will be so much smarter and use the players we have to their strengths right?

[Rufus T Firefly]

I'm not sure I buy the fact that we had legit trade offers from teams willing to take on the second set of bonus money.  And even if they did we would have had to accelerate the first set of signing bonus.  I really don't think there was much way around this one than to hold your nose and take your medicine.  We were able to trade him at all only because by that time we had sucked down the medicine.  At least in my opinion.  I agree it was a gamble to play the accounting trick.  But there was really no downside. 

Once again- we paid the bonus money. We HAD to pay the bonus money. Once it was paid, we could have dealt him. I'm not going to search out the links again, but there were multiple teams making offers for him.

 

And of course there was downside. That is what got us the cap penalty. Shanahan knew that was a risk and took it. What there wasn't was UPSIDE to doing that.

[stopmakingsense]

I would Keep the Shannys even if we did not make the play offs this year. I am sure we would not have this discussion now if we had the salary cap space that was stolen away from us. Shouldawouldacoulda, I know. But I am trying to think of the players we could have signed with 36 Mio.  

 

However, in my opinion, Shanny has just made one mistake. A big one. Letting RG III play in the play offs last season. Here comes a bold prediction: Redskins will win the Superbowl in 2015!    

[s0crates]

Name any coach who started 24-33 in his first 3.5 seasons who won a SB or had sustained playoff success. I'll wait.

That is an oddly specific question, which of course has no answer. However, I can give you multiple examples of coaches who did poorly before winning a Super Bowl.

Dick Vermiel was 9-23 in the two seasons before winning the Super Bowl with the Rams in 1999.

Sean Payton was 15-17 in his two seasons before winning the Super Bowl with the Saints in 2009.

Bill Belichik was 10-22 in his two seasons before winning the Super Bowl with the Patriots in 2001.

Not exactly what you asked for, but what you asked for was too specific. It can be shown that coaches can turn the corner after poor starts to their tenures.

I'm not sure if this really furthers the Shanahan debate, but I just wanted to point out that the assumption underlying your question is mistaken.

[darrelgreenie]

That is an oddly specific question, which of course has no answer. However, I can give you multiple examples of coaches who did poorly before winning a Super Bowl.

Dick Vermiel was 9-23 in the two seasons before winning the Super Bowl with the Rams in 1999.

Sean Payton was 15-17 in his two seasons before winning the Super Bowl with the Saints in 2009.

Bill Belichik was 10-22 in his two seasons before winning the Super Bowl with the Patriots in 2001.

Not exactly what you asked for, but what you asked for was too specific. It can be shown that coaches can turn the corner after poor starts to their tenures.

just wanted to say this is the only thing I've read that makes me feel remotely good about keeping them next year

[Redskins Diehard]

Once again- we paid the bonus money. We HAD to pay the bonus money. Once it was paid, we could have dealt him. I'm not going to search out the links again, but there were multiple teams making offers for him.

 

And of course there was downside. That is what got us the cap penalty. Shanahan knew that was a risk and took it. What there wasn't was UPSIDE to doing that.

If you trade him after the bonus money then you own the bonus money.  It doesn't go with him.  The only way we avoid that is if we trade him before the roster bonus. 

 

http://insidethecap.blogspot.com/2010/03/redskins-finally-leverage-uncapped-year.html

 

The cap penalty was ours unless someone would take the trade PRIOR to the 21 million option bonus.  Our cap penalty was decided the minute that contract was signed.  It was just a matter of us inflicting it on ourselves or the league shoving it up our ass. 

[Rufus T Firefly]

If you trade him after the bonus money then you own the bonus money.  It doesn't go with him.  The only way we avoid that is if we trade him before the roster bonus. 

 

http://insidethecap.blogspot.com/2010/03/redskins-finally-leverage-uncapped-year.html

 

The cap penalty was ours unless someone would take the trade PRIOR to the 21 million option bonus.  Our cap penalty was decided the minute that contract was signed.  It was just a matter of us inflicting it on ourselves or the league shoving it up our ass. 

I don't know how else to explain this. We had to pay the 21 mil. It was paid, done. The question is how it would count against the cap. If you trade or release a player, the bonus money accelerates into that season. If that season is uncapped, then there is nothing for it to count against. Trade Haynesworth then and the 21 mil (plus a little left over from the previous year's bonus) "counts" against the cap in 2010, except there was no cap for it to count against. It's gone after that year. 

 

Per your link, all the players we did release totaled 30.5 mil in dead cap (that's the same thing, those are the prorations from bonuses). That 30.5 mil "counted" against us in the uncapped year and then were gone.

 

Again, no one was punished for trading or releasing players in the uncapped year.

[Boss_Hogg]

Is a coach who uses the west coast offense hard to find?

 

No but Dan Snyder will probably be the one who selects the new coach. While I like Dan as a die-hard Skins fan, he leaves a lot to be desired as a football guy.

 

Perhaps if he hired an actual football GM to aid with the coaching search then I would feel more at ease.

 

Bruce Allen, while a very good numbers guy is'nt your prototypical football GM like Bobby Bethard or Bill Polian.