It's about the Process

[MassSkinsFan]

I know a lot of fans think that Allen as GM is a bad scenario, but I also think what he's doing is taking the reins for now, and doing some evaluation of his current staff. At some point in the next year or two I wouldn't be surprised if someone currently in the organization becomes the GM and Allen is elevated.

 

Before that can happen I think it's prudent for Allen to look at who has the skills and who performs, and help them grow into the role. He'll undoubtedly be leaning on his supporting cast this offseason, partially to figure out who's going to be reliable going forward.

 

Hail

[SoCalSkins]

It comes down to finding a coach willing to tie his tenure here to RG3. The bar for success is RG3s rookie year. Any coach will be expected to pump out around 10 wins in year 1 and the investment in RG3 dictates that he has to play the next two years.

 

That is a ton of pressure taking over a 3-13 team without a top draft pick. Jon Gruden said as much in our last MNF game.

 

Obviously RG3 is a top notch talent, but he is the elephant in the room. This is a unique situation where the QB has had success in an unconventional NFL offense and the new staff will have to take him back to that level in a very short time frame.

 

Most coaches would be leery being tied to a player they did not choose and I don't think the fans or front office is willing to take a step backward before taking  two steps forward.

 

I don't think the process makes much of a difference in this unique situation. There is a huge precondition that comes with the job and regardless of who is extending the offer, the expectations and limits are in place.

 

It's a high risk/low reward situation. You get back to 2012 success, then you met minimum expectations and simply replicated what was already accomplished with a rookie QB. You come up short of that and you are a failure. Tough spot.

[KDawg]

strong OP, KD. 

 

A bit of woosah is necessary at a time like this.

 

I've been rooting for Morocco to get a shot for a little while now.  Who is to say that he can't get promoted next year if we turn a good class?

 

I said from the start that I think they didn't do the Bruce Allen = VP, Brown/Campbell = GM because they wanted to have a bargaining chip with Brown/Campbell. They could easily pull that out if they needed to as soon as tomorrow

It comes down to finding a coach willing to tie his tenure here to RG3. The bar for success is RG3s rookie year. Any coach will be expected to pump out around 10 wins in year 1 and the investment in RG3 dictates that he has to play the next two years.

 

 I don't have any expectations for wins in year one aside from "better than 3-13" with the beginnings of a plan coming to fruition.

 

Asking a new coach to come in, or expecting a new coach to come in and reach ten wins is treacherous.

 

It's possible it happens, sure. But you have to be careful with expectations. The coach will have expectations to be successful. How we define successful matters. 

[dcdiscokid]

Well I saw what he did in Tampa, not a fan. 

The only problem with that is like Shanahan he was hamstrung by Gruden.

[SoCalSkins]

 I don't have any expectations for wins in year one aside from "better than 3-13" with the beginnings of a plan coming to fruition.

 

Asking a new coach to come in, or expecting a new coach to come in and reach ten wins is treacherous.

 

It's possible it happens, sure. But you have to be careful with expectations. The coach will have expectations to be successful. How we define successful matters. 

 

The last regime took a 5-11 team to the division championship with a rookie QB and had a huge cap penalty.

 

Given the state of the division and the success Chip Kelly had, success will be defined by competing to win the East at a minimum.

 

If you think that a 5-11 year in 2014 will not call for changing the coach next off season, then you have much more hope in this fan base and media than most.

[KDawg]

The last regime took a 5-11 team to the division championship with a rookie QB and had a huge cap penalty.

 

Given the state of the division and the success Chip Kelly had, success will be defined by competing to win the East at a minimum.

 

If you think that a 5-11 year in 2014 will not call for changing the coach next off season, then you have much more hope in this fan base and media than most.

 

I have no idea if 5-11 would keep the new coach employed. Although, I think it matters how the team goes 5-11. And the Shanahan's were already in place. It wasn't a new regime going from 5-11 to 10-6.

[SoCalSkins]

Agreed, but it was a rookie QB and he had the best rookie season of anyone in the NFL. If a new regime can't even get rookie production out of him, there will be questions.

 

I am not saying it is insurmountable, but it is not an easy job to take on regardless of how good the front office has been setup.

 

I like Bruce and he is in a tough spot as well. Nothing is easy with the Redskins.

[skinzplay]

My guess is that AJ Smith was hired last March because the team thought it would eventually lose Morocco Brown; almost lost him last year and might lose him to the Bucs in short order. So Smith was available and maybe they brought him in to avoid having a vacancy at the head of pro personnel, especially with no one else on staff with the acumen to evaluate talent the way Brown has shown himself capable of doing, and doing quite well. You're right KDawg -- how the new front office structure evolves with/for Smith will be interesting to watch.

[MattFancy]

The one thing I like so far is that they don't seem to be in a rush to find the next coach. Take your time interviewing guys and see which one wows you the most. It's also nice that we're not out there chasing names like a Cowher, Gruden, Dungy, etc. I'm completely fine bringing in an unproven guy who wants to make a name for himself and succeed. No one heard much about Gibbs before we brough him here.

[texasthunder]

I for one am happy with the way things have developed since the Shanahan dismissal.

The Skins have tried lots of options, from a qb coach, to college coach, to "retreads" and rehires. Its good to see

them doing a thorough search and covering a wide range of candidates. 

 

As for the FO structure, its not all that important to me, rather its who you have in those positions. 

Kinda like the talent on the field and the talent in the front office.

 

The Patriots have had good success with Bellicek and no GM, the Bengals and the Cowboys have their owners

as gm's.  Of course you have Holmgren and Shanahan that didnt work out so well as HC/GM.

And it will be interesting to see if Lovie Smith is going to be the GM/HC in Tampa.

So to me its all about having talented people in their positions.

[chipwhich]

The Patriots have had good success with Bellicek and no GM, the Bengals and the Cowboys have their owners

as gm's.  Of course you have Holmgren and Shanahan that didnt work out so well as HC/GM.

And it will be interesting to see if Lovie Smith is going to be the GM/HC in Tampa.

So to me its all about having talented people in their positions.

 

Bill Parcells tended to leave teams in good shape.

[PeterMP]

I don't get all of the AJ hate.  He had some darn good drafts in San Diego.  Other than being a bulldog with Vincent Jackson and hiring Norv, I'm not sure what all the fuss is about.

 

As a Redskins fan, do you need anything other than he hired Turner?

 

And just wasn't Jackson, but other FA to Antonio Gates missed a game on year becuase of a contract dispute, and he had issues with Schotenhiemer.

 

It seems to me that AJ wanted to be the face of the franchise, which is not where I think the GM should be.

 

The draft is hard because it is hard to know how much was him and how much was the scouts.  With decisions that I think it is more likely him, I don't think he did very well.

 

Hiring Turner.

He got nothing for Brees (and Rivers and Brees were on the same roster for 2 years).

He got nothing for Micahel Turner.

He got nothing for Jackson (how you don't trade Jackson after that contract dispute and get something back for him I really don't understand).

 

And it would be one thing if they won a SuperBowl with some of those guys in those last few years, but they didn't.

 

If he comes here as the director of college scouting, I guess I'd be okay with that.

 

But I don't want him to be in a position of any real control.

Bill Parcells tended to leave teams in good shape.

A guy named Pete Carroll coached for New England too.

[Bantu]

Sorry to the OP, but you're leaving out the biggest bone of contention with the FO structure as it is. The perception, whether true or not, is that Allen is Snyder's pal and, thus, an extension of Snyder. I prefer to call it Snyder's flunky, but that's just me. The other issue is that there isn't an outsider that hasn't been associated with the organization, especially within the last four years, that was brought in to stabilize the front office.

 

I'm not saying these perceptions are correct, but they are out there and this franchise deserves every bit of scrutiny from the fans. Do we know that Brown and Campbell weren't listened to? No, we don't. Do we know that Brown/Campbell/Allen are just more "yes" men for Mr. Snyder. Nope. 

 

I'm a fan for life, but I promise myself that I will not think positively about any moves they make until we start seeing results. Hopefully, season ticket-holders think the same way.

[Mr. Sinister]

Great op. I have made similar points as well, so I won't repeat them since its all been covered masterfully.

 

I am just giving these guys a shot. A real shot. I could just as easily be pessimistic about everything, shooting down various HC possibilities etc, but I am going to look at this with a glass half full perspective. I do not believe things are as bad as they seem, so I will have faith that things will work out.

 

If it fails (and depending on how season 1 goes, it will take 2 imo to get a good picture), it fails. We're used to it by now. Try again. I'm just tired of being all Terrible No Good Very Bad Day all the time. I trust that these guys are going to at least go about things the right way (multiple people working together, hearing each other out, making decisions, and not one guy making all of them essentially by himself) which will give us the best chance at success.

[Voice_of_Reason]

I had the opportunity a couple years ago, as a former club level ticket holder, to attend a "chalk talk" with Bruce Allen at 'Skins park. He spoke for about 45 minutes, and basically just answered questions. No media (except for that boob Larry Michael, who was trying to moderate, and failed at even that). Just a group of former season ticket holders and Bruce.

 

This was actually before they made the trade for the Ram's pick, and before the Cap penalty, and some of the questions were actually about bringing in Peyton Manning.

 

But, one topic that Bruce hammered home, over and over and over again, was how much he respected Morocco and Campbell.  He just kept coming back to how great they were at putting together grades, the draft board, etc. He didn't have to.  But he did it anyway.  Over and over.  

 

Which is why you can go back through my posting history and find numerous posts where I said that what was going to happen is that Bruce was going to be elevated to "grand poo-bah in charge" whether by title or not, Morocco and Scott were going to run the personnel, and they were going to find the new HC together.  And everybody was going to work for Bruce.

 

Which is EXACTLY what happened.  Bruce is running the entire organization.  Morocco and Scott are the personnel guys.  The new HC will be the HC.  The staff will be chosen by the HC.  

 

Everything about this screams like a "normal" organization, except maybe some titles.  Heck, Snyder is not even involved in the first rounds of interviews, which are not even taking place here in the DC area.

 

One of the things that I really believe is that whoever is running the show doesn't have to be the best talent evaluator.  They have to be the best leader, and put other people in place to succeed.  I think that's what Bruce is.  We've been clamoring for a GM. Now we've got one with complete authority.

 

And still people are not happy.  The reason is because they don't think Allen is the right guy.  Well, maybe he is, maybe he isn't.  We have no idea.

 

But what we do know is that the structure is now in place:

 

GM -> Personnel Guys

GM -> HC -> Staff

 

We've got that scenario.  Conspiracy theories with Snyder be damned. 

 

Being a good GM doesn't mean that you have to be the best scout.  It means that you have to be the best General Manager.  The General Manager puts together the personnel side, and coaching side, and everybody works for that person. That's what we have.  

 

The best CEO at a tech company isn't the best coder.  They are the person with the vision, leadership and management ability, then they hire the best people to execute that vision.  That's what Bruce has to do.  Hire the best personnel guys, the best scouts, and the best coaches.  

 

(falling off soapbox.)

[hail2skins]

Czabe's positive take so far:

 

http://czabe.blogspot.com/2014/01/a-sensible-start.html

 

I'd like to see this team go after some new blood and pick an OC or DC from another squad.  People can say that we already tried it with Zorn (who wasn't even a coordinator before he came here) but he doesn't even count to me because he wasn't even on our original list and get the job pretty much by default.  I was happy that one retread in Lovie has already been claimed by Tampa. Also, Snyder said a few years ago that "as long as I have a coach like Joe Gibbs or Mike Shanahan, I don't have to be as involved," which made me concerned that we were going to be doomed to retreads from here on out.  Not that the organization should swear off retreads forever, but I'd like to see if Snyder could keep hands-off if a superstar isn't the head guy on the sidelines.

[leesburgvaskinsfan]

KDawg,  Great OP (as usual)!

 

As a STH, I just hope "the process" brings us the best candidate.  I was one of the very few who was hoping we could finish strong and keep Shanahan for his last year to see what was left in his tank.  I guess too many bridges were burned there.  Sad really! 

 

I hope this is the bottom and it now starts to get better for us. 

 

Based on what I've seen of the potential pool of HC candidates, Whisenhunt looks the best to me: Former Redskin TE, HC experience with a SB run under his belt in AZ (resurrected Kurt Warner), OC for Rivers having a pretty good year and young enough to relate to the players, product of a winning organization in Pittsburgh....who of us really knows right? 

 

I hope whoever we get, gets a fair shot and gets a real chance to turn things around!

 

Hail!

[ThomasRoane]

I will stay wait and see as well.  Your quote from the other thread should be wait and see as well.  If the process churns out Art Briles I will again feel betrayed.

 

I'm in the same boat as you.  I tried to point out the problems with Briles but UCF did more than enough to prove my point.  That's UCF from the AAC.  Not the SEC.  Not even the ACC.  But the American Athletic Conference.  They dropped 7 as I said a team would, matched up in zone and did enough to win the game; despite having slower athletes.  Sure, Baylor scored 42 but they weren't playing someone with the talent of an SEC team.  UCF gets the left overs from Florida, Florida State, and Miami. Not to mention they're a relatively new program.  George Leary did a good job with stunts and I noticed that, similar to RG III, Petty didn't change any plays or protections.  And his Post snap reads are as bad as Roberts.  He either had to run or throw the ball away.  And people think that Briles will somehow magically be able to prepare Robert for NFL games when he still hasn't learned how to coach up who he has now?!?!  I won't even go into the penalties!

 

Back to the doubts about the Coaching Search.  Most of us do not trust that Bruce Allen will suddenly grow the backbone required to tell Dan to stay the hell out of football matters when Bruce CLEARLY failed to do so even with a control freak like Mike Shanahan as coach!  Here's what I want.

 

Owner --> Firewall --> GM --> Coach --> Coordinators --> Players

 

Dan can and should give the final approval but should have zero input on who to bring in as a coach or a player.  He never played the game nor coached and his track records clearly shows he doesn't have a freakin clue what it takes to put together a winning football team. 

 

As for the coach?  I don't want someone wedded to a system.  Every system can be figured out.  Despite all my critics who ganged up on me about Briles I take comfort that Cooley agrees with me.  Anyone can fire up Madden NFL or NCAA and get anyone's plays.  Of course a system is more than just plays.  It's how you teach and coach it. 

 

The disadvantage of a 'system' coach is that the new coach will come in and start over.  That means another three years at least.  He'll need to get his type of players to succeed.  Even if he does get them all what happens when someone is injured?  The team (system) shouldn't fall apart because of a couple of injuries.  (See the Atlanta Falcons).  Gibbs 1.0 came in wanting to pass but realized he had a power team.  After he lost Riggo and Riggs didn't work out he realized he had a lot of good receivers.  So he went to the Fun bunch.  (Most people still run a lot of his bunch sets today.) The point is Gibbs adjusted to the personnel he had on hand.  In the long run, a coach with that philosophy will have more success for the long haul.  (See Belichick! No Gronk? No Hernandez? No Welker? No problem.  They keep winning)

 

Leadership is THE most important quality a Head Coach must possess.  He must be able to develop trust with the players.  He doesn't have to be their buddy.  Usually when you hear the words 'Player coach' that often means that the coach doesn't make the guys work too hard.  Not always a good thing.  Age is not really that much of a factor although I'd rather have someone younger because the job takes a heavy toll on a person.

 

The team will take on the personality of a Head coach so it is very important to get it right.  Under Turner the Redskins were soft and mistake prone.  Under Marty they were tough an disciplined but not very innovative.  Under Spurrier they were clearly unprepared and had no answer to the adjustments other teams made.  Under Gibbs 2.0 they overachieved despite what we now know was a lack of talent.  Under Zorn they were enthusiastic but easily outmaneuvered.  Under Shanahan the lack of trust became a poison and without trust a team is doomed to fail. 

 

I'd prefer that the Head Coach hire innovative coordinators.  Similar to Sean Payton; although he's a Head Coach of course.  While everyone else is spreading people out he decided to condense his formations; i.e. their Mars package.  All those tight sets are being copied in college and the Pros now.  You still see Payton changing that up based on who he has available.  It reminds me of a saying that the best tool is the one closest to you.  Sure, a coach would like to have a Megatron but an innovative coach can take what he has and make it work.  For defense I'd like to see a coordinator that can run a hybrid system (3-4 or 4-3) based on what is the best match up for that weeks opponent and something that takes advantage of the talent he has. For Special Teams I'd like a no nonsense, lunatic who barks at the moon!  You have to be a little whacked out to like playing on Teams.  I'd even support Bmitch because they would take on his personality.  Teams are more about attitude than schemes. 

 

I really hope they get this hire right.  But based on what appears to be Dan's desire to jump back in and play with his toy team I'm not optimistic.  Hopefully, they'll prove me wrong.

[KDawg]

Some of you don't understand... Bruce worked for Mike. Mike was higher on the totem pole. For all we know, Bruce did say "no". But no one had to listen to him.

[Mr. Sinister]

Some of you don't understand... Bruce worked for Mike. Mike was higher on the totem pole. For all we know, Bruce did say "no". But no one had to listen to him.

 

Yup. Mike for all intents and purposes got Bruce hired. Mike chose Bruce, and Dan signed the contracts.

[Boss_Hogg]

Some of you don't understand... Bruce worked for Mike. Mike was higher on the totem pole. For all we know, Bruce did say "no". But no one had to listen to him.

 

 

LL and the other Skins insiders mentioned that Bruce wasn't 100% sold on giving Mike Shan full team control but went along with it anyway because at the time Dan was on his hands and knees begging Mike to come and coach.

[WhoRUSupposed2Be]

Good Thread KDawg... don't indulge the bishes in this thread

Yup. Mike for all intents and purposes got Bruce hired. Mike chose Bruce, and Dan signed the contracts.

Think it might've been the other way around... Dan was courting Mike but Mike wanted someone good with contracts on board in Bruce.  They were both a package deal in some ways.

[daveakl]

I'm obliviously on this train for the long haul, but I have seen too much of the "it's always something" (no matter what the "something" is) to be anything other than "just waiting to see" until the pudding is actually proof. The future I want to see is to have a different identity than the "it's always something" team as used to explain why we suck so broadly and deeply so often for so many years, overall.

Even just being consistently associated with qualities like "competent" and "tough" and "well-coached", and over-500 w/l records as a standard, would be a huge leap forward.

Aside from a select few teams each decade, everyone falls into "it's always something". What sucks is for us the decade has become decades.

But based on what appears to be Dan's desire to jump back in and play with his toy team I'm not optimistic. Hopefully, they'll prove me wrong.

I have seen this thought pop up over and over. What specifically have you seen or read that makes you think Dan is involved?

[DC9]

As a Redskins fan, do you need anything other than he hired Turner?

 

And just wasn't Jackson, but other FA to Antonio Gates missed a game on year becuase of a contract dispute, and he had issues with Schotenhiemer.

 

It seems to me that AJ wanted to be the face of the franchise, which is not where I think the GM should be.

 

The draft is hard because it is hard to know how much was him and how much was the scouts.  With decisions that I think it is more likely him, I don't think he did very well.

 

Hiring Turner.

He got nothing for Brees (and Rivers and Brees were on the same roster for 2 years).

He got nothing for Micahel Turner.

He got nothing for Jackson (how you don't trade Jackson after that contract dispute and get something back for him I really don't understand).

 

And it would be one thing if they won a SuperBowl with some of those guys in those last few years, but they didn't.

 

If he comes here as the director of college scouting, I guess I'd be okay with that.

 

But I don't want him to be in a position of any real control.

 

Great post Pete.

 

I guess I was only considering how stacked that roster was.  Not sure I'd mind a problem like that but he never did have a bed side manner with his players.  And I would obviously be on board with getting a pick for someone who didn't want to play for me.

[Mr. Sinister]

Good Thread KDawg... don't indulge the bishes in this thread

Think it might've been the other way around... Dan was courting Mike but Mike wanted someone good with contracts on board in Bruce.  They were both a package deal in some ways.

 

Thats exactly what I said. Bruce is here because Mike wanted him here.