Over 25 Million Reasons Why Shannahan Most Likely Won't Get Fired

[chipwhich]

Shanny has FULL control of player personnel, hiring coaches, etc. You do the math.

 

Yes and your point?

 

You hire a GM who is in charge of player personnel NOW.  You let the GM decide what to do.  Do that math.

[GoldSkinner]

Yes and your point?

 

You hire a GM who is in charge of player personnel NOW.  You let the GM decide what to do.  Do that math.

 

Bringing a new GM would imply that you trust Snyder in his ability to find a competent one. Even if he did, Shanahan wouldn't go for it because his contract seems to explicitly state that he has control of player personnel. Bringing in someone to "relieve" Shanahan of that responbility would be a breach of contract.

[chipwhich]

Bringing a new GM would imply that you trust Snyder in his ability to find a competent one. Even if he did, Shanahan wouldn't go for it because his contract seems to explicitly state that he has control of player personnel. Bringing in someone to "relieve" Shanahan of that responbility would be a breach of contract.

 

He can't find a competent coach, so who cares.  As far as breach of contract, who cares.  Shanny will either deal with it or take his 7 million and run.  Meanwhile we need a GM who picks players AND coaches.

[88Comrade2000]

Shanny will walk if we strip him of gM duties; which would be perfect.   Shanny will also walk if Dan demands he fires coaches that Shanny doesn't want to.

[texasthunder]

There is not an answer that is going to satisfy all of the fans.

 

At this point I see Snyder keeping Mike S. for his 5th year. And I believe he will make a determination as to wether or not to 

extend him, based on how we do in the off season and at least till the midway point next season.

I do believe that Haslett and Burns will be gone for next year.

 

I like the idea of keeping the continuity on offense, especially for the sake of RGIII.

 

But I do not like the overall spirit of the team. The poor time management, the stupid 15 yard penalties, and the team playing very 

uninspired football.

 

Bringing in a new coach doesn't neccessarily equal success, nor does it mean a low win season while rebuilding.

 

As usual, things with the Redskins are always very interesting.

[chipwhich]

Bringing in a new coach doesn't neccessarily equal success, nor does it mean a low win season while rebuilding.

 

It has never meant success for the Redskins under Snyder.  It has ALWAYS led to a low win season.

[That Redskins Fan]

There is not an answer that is going to satisfy all of the fans.

 

At this point I see Snyder keeping Mike S. for his 5th year. And I believe he will make a determination as to wether or not to 

extend him, based on how we do in the off season and at least till the midway point next season.

I do believe that Haslett and Burns will be gone for next year.

 

I like the idea of keeping the continuity on offense, especially for the sake of RGIII.

 

But I do not like the overall spirit of the team. The poor time management, the stupid 15 yard penalties, and the team playing very 

uninspired football.

 

Bringing in a new coach doesn't neccessarily equal success, nor does it mean a low win season while rebuilding.

 

As usual, things with the Redskins are always very interesting.

 

So you want to empower a lameduck with 35 million to shape the redskins future. No No No No

[texasthunder]

It has never meant success for the Redskins under Snyder.  It has ALWAYS led to a low win season.

Yup.

And this fan base and media is so hard, two years of a mediocre season and they are screaming for the next 

new doll to play with.

[texasthunder]

So you want to empower a lameduck with 35 million to shape the redskins future. No No No No

I see this argument thrown out there alot.

And when you step back and look at it from a logical stand point. 

Who or what type of players are they going to bring in that could be so different then a new coach in 2015 would bring in?

If he were to stay and did spend the money, most likely he will bring in a new receiver, a inside LB, a DB or two, and maybe upgrade

the OL.  Those are positions that even a new coach would upgrade. But how different would they actually be?

Its not like a RB or QB that they build an offense around, maybe a different style of offensive lineman is the only position I see.

Not to mention we drafted a QB that fits the scheme we have now. 

Do you believe that if we brought in a new coach he would bring in a different qb? Naw, Snyder wont let that happen.

Plus if you bring in a Bevel or Carmichael  then they will be running the same scheme anyway.

The only real place I could see a change is if they made a change at HC and he wanted to switch back to a 4-3 defense.

[drowland]

Or lets change coaches every 3 years because the problem is always the coach right????

 

Shanny's had 4 years.  The FO structure has been the main problem since Snyder's owned the team.  He either gives the HC full FO control or let Bugeyes and himself do it.  

[chipwhich]

Shanny's had 4 years.  The FO structure has been the main problem since Snyder's owned the team.  He either gives the HC full FO control or let Bugeyes and himself do it.  

 

3 years was a pull it out of my ass average time he keeps coaches.

 

Every good team in the league has a much better average time of keeping coaches.

[Lavarleap56]

I see this argument thrown out there alot.

And when you step back and look at it from a logical stand point. 

Who or what type of players are they going to bring in that could be so different then a new coach in 2015 would bring in?

If he were to stay and did spend the money, most likely he will bring in a new receiver, a inside LB, a DB or two, and maybe upgrade

the OL.  Those are positions that even a new coach would upgrade. But how different would they actually be?

 

 

There all different.. 34 ILB's are different from a 43 ILB. CB's depend on what scheme and physical traits a coach wants, long and lean guys that can press,looking for zone guys, or some combination of both? WR's? West coast route runners, Verical threats, possession guy, blocking > receiver talents? etc etc... OL- smaller zbs, bigger zbs with more of pass pro focus, maulers in a man power scheme etc..

 

Every coach has different characteristics and talents they look for in players so the players could be night and day between coaches. 

 

 

Plus if you bring in a Bevel or Carmichael  then they will be running the same scheme anyway.

The only real place I could see a change is if they made a change at HC and he wanted to switch back to a 4-3 defense.

 

 There not hiring Carmichael, but that offense is totally different than the Redskins schemes.

[Mania]

Bolded - So knowing that this team was going to be dealing with 30% total less money then every other team which meant that bringing in free agents was not a possibility then how can you justify that Griffin trade where we lost our draft

The trade happened before the penalty. Besides I believe in the end it will be the Rams that will be kicking themselves for not taking RG3.

[texasthunder]

There all different.. 34 ILB's are different from a 43 ILB. CB's depend on what scheme and physical traits a coach wants, long and lean guys that can press,looking for zone guys, or some combination of both? WR's? West coast route runners, Verical threats, possession guy, blocking > receiver talents? etc etc... OL- smaller zbs, bigger zbs with more of pass pro focus, maulers in a man power scheme etc..

 

Every coach has different characteristics and talents they look for in players so the players could be night and day between coaches. 

 

 

Interesting.

And I see your point on defense. But could those decisions not be predicated on who the DC will be next year?

And based on how the Skins defense has been this year, I would consider it a major shock if Haslett returns next year.

 

But the offense is built around Robert. So essentially we would run a scheme very similar to what we are employing now. No ?

Which should equate to similar type players. And given that they are wanting Robert to be more of a pocket passer, I would think

that they would want to go with the "bigger zbs" type lineman.

[Lavarleap56]

Interesting.

And I see your point on defense. But could those decisions not be predicated on who the DC will be next year?

 

 

Absolutely, but do you really expect a drastic change on Defense IF Shanny hangs on? I expect change at DC but Shanahan's ego is too big to make a drastic change like going back to a 43. That would mean he is admitting he was wrong in 2010 to scrap the 43 in favor of the 34, which was the defense he decided to run when he was out of football for a year. He would also be admitting that he was wrong to make Haslett run a 34 when he wanted to run a 43. 

 

The second part is a big issue imo.. What DC that is worth his weight will want to come to DC knowing Mike Shanahan has 1 year left on his contract? Is it smart to give Mike a prove it year BUT strap him with a new DC & a defensive overhaul in regards to players and coaches? New defenses typically take time to find themselves as the coaches adapt to the players and vice versa. If Shanahan stays I see a DC that is familiar with the personnel and the coaches, so more of a change of leadership for the sake of sacrificing Haslett. That would mean  Raheem Morris, Bob Slowick, Larry Coyer, Or a longshot reach out to Lou Spanos or Kirk Olivadati ( Don't think either of these two happen)..

[Tyron Biggums]

I just want accountability. The coaching staff has none right now. Mike hired a yes man 4-3 DC in Haslett. Mike hired his son as OC. Those 2 coordinators are not worried about their jobs. Mike wants total control, then he should receive the total blame when things don't work. He pretty much made the same exact mistakes in Denver when given full control. The man is a walking example of insanity. 

 

My feelings towards Mike are not personal. The eternal question as Richard Pryor put it: How long?

 

I honestly feel Mike S. is the best HC for the Redskins, but at the same time he is the worst possible GM/EVP. Even Vinney would be more objective and would have fired Haslett by now.

 

The best case scenario in my eyes: Kyle takes a job elsewhere, Mike steps down from GM/EVP remains HC and Mr. Snyder hires a real GM. No more leaks out of Ashburn, no more players in the dog house.

 

Please for the love of God.

 

I would have total respect for Mike S. if he would admit he made a mistake by trying to be GM, DC and Daddy all at once. Thats too many Hats for anyone. You have tried for approx 10 years to be HC and GM. It doesn't work. I give Mike S. credit for trying, but

 

How Long?

 

HTTR

[clskinsfan]

The NFL is a very small world. Micromanaging Shanny would be the worst possible move.

If Snyder gave his word on 5 years he need to honor it. Period. If anyone remembers it was Snyder who aggressively pursued Shanahan

This is organizational leadership 101.

 

This is the only reason I believe Shanny will be back. Dan gave his word on the 5 years. As much as it sucks he cant go back on his word or no coach will ever trust him again. That is the reason you dont give guarantees in the business world. Another stupid move by Snyder if it's true. 

 

It seems as though Mike has lost the team. And Dan cant do a damn thing about it.

[Lavarleap56]

This is the only reason I believe Shanny will be back. Dan gave his word on the 5 years. As much as it sucks he cant go back on his word or no coach will ever trust him again. That is the reason you dont give guarantees in the business world. Another stupid move by Snyder if it's true. 

 

It seems as though Mike has lost the team. And Dan cant do a damn thing about it.

 

lol..Dan can do whatever he wants about it. Mike being fired would be justified, this isn't a guy getting fired in year 2 of a 5 year deal.

[skinfan2k]

how awesome would it be for Mike to step down and take the Houston Job? 

[drowland]

This is the only reason I believe Shanny will be back. Dan gave his word on the 5 years. As much as it sucks he cant go back on his word or no coach will ever trust him again. That is the reason you dont give guarantees in the business world. Another stupid move by Snyder if it's true. 

 

It seems as though Mike has lost the team. And Dan cant do a damn thing about it.

 

Is there a quote from Snyder where he actually promised Mike 5 years or are people just assuming this because he got a 5 year contract?  Mike publicly staked his reputation on John Beck, but didn't resign when Beck failed.  Joe Gibbs publicly committed to 5 years and resigned after 4, but no one called Gibbs a quitter.  Why should Snyder feel he can't fire Mike with 1 year left on his contract when Mike's results after 4 seasons say he deserves it?

[chipwhich]

Is there a quote from Snyder where he actually promised Mike 5 years or are people just assuming this because he got a 5 year contract?  Mike publicly staked his reputation on John Beck, but didn't resign when Beck failed.  Joe Gibbs publicly committed to 5 years and resigned after 4, but no one called Gibbs a quitter.  Why should Snyder feel he can't fire Mike with 1 year left on his contract when Mike's results after 4 seasons say he deserves it?

 

Shanny has said since day 1 of his hiring that he told Danny not to hire him if he wasn't committed to giving him 5 years.  Shanny said this day one, and multiple times over the years.  I would assume this was a discussion they had.  It does make sense given how long our previous coaching regimes lasted.  And besides, who cares?

[drowland]

Shanny has said since day 1 of his hiring that he told Danny not to hire him if he wasn't committed to giving him 5 years.  Shanny said this day one, and multiple times over the years.  I would assume this was a discussion they had.  It does make sense given how long our previous coaching regimes lasted.  And besides, who cares?

 

People saying Mike should stay seem to care.  I don't care what Dan promised him.  Mike hasn't exactly lived up to his side of the deal so he shouldn't expect Dan to honor anything.

[chipwhich]

People saying Mike should stay seem to care.  I don't care what Dan promised him.  Mike hasn't exactly lived up to his side of the deal so he shouldn't expect Dan to honor anything.

 

At this point all I care about is the fact that switching coaches every few years is not what this franchises problem is.

Mike hasn't lived up to his side, and Dan hasn't lived up to his side.  Hire a freaking GM in charge of player personnel and have him hire a coach.  Having your coach pick the groceries doesn't work.

[Hunter_R]

Which Shanny thread to put this in. Maybe I should just start a new one.

 

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=113198

 

It's actually kind of interesting. It's Denver fans discussing Shanahan right now. They're wondering if the game has passed him by. They honestly sound a lot like us, but they got to enjoy and suffer through Shanny much longer, so I thought their insight might intrigue some people.

 

Here's one thing they all seem to agree on, though. They hate Bob Slowik. Imagine that.

[hail2skins]

Shanny has said since day 1 of his hiring that he told Danny not to hire him if he wasn't committed to giving him 5 years.  Shanny said this day one, and multiple times over the years.  I would assume this was a discussion they had.  It does make sense given how long our previous coaching regimes lasted.  And besides, who cares?

Shanahan also said in an interview posted on ESPN early in 2012 that "they never give you the final year" of the contract, meaning that some sort of decision is reached before the start of the last year of the deal.  To be fair, I believe this interview was given before the salary cap penalties were announced.