joanieloveschachi Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 When is the right time to plug in a young guy? Seems like this team has no problem when veterans screw up their assignments, miss tackles, or commit penalties. The best chance a young guy has to get on the field is when there are injuries or suspensions. Example: Rambo the safety we cut a few weeks ago. Obviously, he committed a couple of big errors where two long td's were scored. His reward was being cut. It's true he shouldn't have been starting yet but if he's good enough to start the first two weeks shouldn't he be good enough to keep around on the bench and try to develop him a little longer? A chance to learn from his mistakes? Meriweather can get personal fouls, get beat over and over like a drum, miss tackles, get suspended, and the coaches don't seem to notice. There are no repercussions for him to under perform. Another example would be Biggers. This guy doesn't appear to cover well or tackle well and almost never makes a positive impact. Yet, he's playing a big part of our games every week. Every freaking week? Shouldn't Minnifield get more of an opportunity? Someone else? He may not be the answer but I think anyone with a pair of eyes knows that Biggers isn't the answer. Another example would be Riley. He can't cover worth a dang. It's been going on for weeks and even going back to last year. Nobody else wanted him when he was a free agent for a reason. Finally, Compton gets a chance and looks pretty good. Obviously, it's just one week and is probably going to start this week too because of Riley's injury. However, it sounds like they can't wait for Riley to get back and take the job again. I know these players have been talked about a little individually in other threads but when you're a bad team with bad veterans playing bad football it seems like insanity to keep doing the same thing. Don't get me started with the offensive line. The veterans are making lots of errors and haven't learned from them. Let some more young guys play and make mistakes and see if they can learn from them. It just seems like coaches love making examples of young guys and showing them the door when they screw up but turn a blind eye when the vets do it. Let's put a fire under the rest of the vets by benching a few of them for a change. There shouldn't be diplomatic immunity for under performing vets. Am I crazy or does our philosophy need to change? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoDeep81 Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Couldn't agree more and especially once the season is out of basically over.. I really wanted Moses and/or Compton to get some serious game reps before RGIII came back, just to see if we possibly had replacements on the roster for the pylon (orange cone) types like Polumbus and Chester.. I don't really care what they look like in practice, some guys just perform better in games.. Give em' a "real" shot!! Biggers, I have no idea why he's even on the team, much less starting.. They bring him back for what? Cause he's familiar with this pile of crap D?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RhodeIsland Ave Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 I agree with the premise of the OP but I ask you to look at the current situation and can you really say the young guy is better than the vet. In our case, since we treat the draft like crap, the answer is NO. So, if this was a top flight organization, then yes, play the young guy, get him the experience. But this is your Washington Redskins where we don't draft well and trade picks like they contracted the Ebola virus. I wish we had young guys to threaten the vets, when they make mistakes, they should feel their jobs are on the line. However, our reality is, there is no depth, there are no young guys to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoDeep81 Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 But were talking about replacing Tyler ****ing Polumbus.. The dude literally stands there so we don't get called for not having 7 men on the line of scrimmage.. It's about all he's good for.. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roanoker Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I long for the days when we had players who were super smart and would fight their guts out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoDeep81 Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I long for the days when we had players who were super smart and would fight their guts out. It would be interesting to hear what kind of research our scouting dept and GM actually do, in regards to players they want to acquire... Something tells me they just open a book and say "X has 6 more tackles than Y, so lets see if he's available.. When they should approach it like a private investigator, try and find out who were the smartest players, if their teammates think they are leaders, who were captains, etc.. I'd take smart/football iq over raw talent (especially on this team of non development) any day.. Year after year I think we have the dumbest roster (to go along with the dumbest front office) in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 They use a computer, they don't even scout the traditional way. Well they probably scout but I don't like this: http://www.news-sap.com/washington-redskins-benefiting-from-sap-scouting-to-manage-team-roster-and-performance/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 They use a computer, they don't even scout the traditional way. Well they probably scout but I don't like this: http://www.news-sap.com/washington-redskins-benefiting-from-sap-scouting-to-manage-team-roster-and-performance/ Actually, this is REALLY cool technology with predictive Analytics and an memory database. HANA is a pretty nifty in memory DB platform, all things considered. (Though very expensive)If they're using it on top of traditional scouting and to manage their data and statidtics, that's really cool stuff. I'd be interested to see what kind of Analytics the solution provides. I actually have a vision of a piece if software which could, using some predictive capabilities and image recognition do all kinds of cool things. This seems like a first step. EDIT: yes, I'm geek. Sue me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Actually, this is REALLY cool technology with predictive Analytics and an memory database. HANA is a pretty nifty in memory DB platform, all things considered. (Though very expensive) If they're using it on top of traditional scouting and to manage their data and statidtics, that's really cool stuff. I'd be interested to see what kind of Analytics the solution provides. I actually have a vision of a piece if software which could, using some predictive capabilities and image recognition do all kinds of cool things. This seems like a first step. Well it may be cool, but does it work? I am very familiar with HANA, before I started my business I worked for a company that was purchased by SAP. I work with SAP on some contracts. They are pushing HANA all over town. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Well it may be cool, but does it work? I am very familiar with HANA, before I started my business I worked for a company that was purchased by SAP. I work with SAP on some contracts. They are pushing HANA all over town. Does this work? Dunno. I've implemented HANA a couple times and I like it. But you've got to understand what it can and cannot do. I'm going to assume it kind of works. Probably like most first gen products. As I said, as an addition, it's great. If they think it's going to replace scouting, or film Study, not so much. At least not yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Does this work? Dunno. I've implemented HANA a couple times and I like it. But you've got to understand what it can and cannot do. I'm going to assume it kind of works. Probably like most first gen products. As I said, as an addition, it's great. If they think it's going to replace scouting, or film Study, not so much. At least not yet. LOL I know HANA works as a product. I am talking about the scouting tool. SO far the results are FAIL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 LOL I know HANA works as a product. I am talking about the scouting tool. SO far the results are FAIL.Well, if SAP spit out Murphy, I'd tend to agree with you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinny21 Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Couldn't agree more and especially once the season is out of basically over.. I really wanted Moses and/or Compton to get some serious game reps before RGIII came back, just to see if we possibly had replacements on the roster for the pylon (orange cone) types like Polumbus and Chester.. I don't really care what they look like in practice, some guys just perform better in games.. Give em' a "real" shot!! Biggers, I have no idea why he's even on the team, much less starting.. They bring him back for what? Cause he's familiar with this pile of crap D?? Isn't Biggers is our nickel corner with Breeland starting opposite Amerson? I agree with your assessment of him though. The staff (on both sides of the ball) has shown a willingness to use young guys - Compton, Breeland, Long, Moses, Grant, Davis, the young NT and now maybe Minnifiield - so I can't really hold that against them. But you have a point about having a real chance regarding some of these guys. I agree about working Moses/Long into the lineup and give them a few games before Griffin comes back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdlives Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Analytics could be very effective, however with something as varied as football, you would need your basic data input to be based on fundamental football evaluation by true experts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSO Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I actually like that they're trying to be innovative and use different technology. It's what I want to hear, honestly. It's their first year, so who knows what they used it for or how effective it was... but I want to keep hearing our scouting department is on the cutting edge of things. Hopefully it's actually something that works for once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Well, if SAP spit out Murphy, I'd tend to agree with you... You know it did. He had some stats, too bad they were against mostly garbage teams. Is that taken into account? I doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
London Kev Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I like the OP as a discussion topic, (although it contains too much hyperbole and too few paragraphs for my liking). You have to believe that the coaches want to put the best team out there that they can, (if they don't then we really are screwed!) and will play the younger players when it's deemed most beneficial for the player personally and for the team as a whole. Breeland is starting because DHall got injured and although he's made some mistakes, he does show some promise. It's impossible to know whether he will turn out to be a better player for it, or whether it will have a negative effect on his confidence and stunt his development. Would he have benefited more by sitting behind DeAngelo until he was really ready or is it all irrelevant and he'll become the best player that he can be, no matter what? Obviously in Breeland's case it's kind of moot, next man up and all that, but what about the other young'uns? Would throwing them in at the deep end be the best move for their personal development or should they sit and learn? How would it affect the team as a whole having all the rookies starting and the vets sitting on the sidelines? Would this dissuade FA's from wanting to sign here because of how we treat our veterans? We're all frustrated at the teams lack of progress but starting young players when they're not ready is not the solution IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD0506 Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 At this point I am so frustrated w/ the coaching the young'uns get (ESPECIALLY on the D side) what are ya waitin' for? Game experience might benefit them more now, before they are aberrant-discoached into ineffectiveness, just go out and play like you know. How much worse could it be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I am frustrated that we're not playing our young ol, but otherwise I'm pretty happy with the way were playing the youth. First thing is when's the last time we've had this many young players? Because of bad drafts recently we've got a lot of young guys who have potential but are considered rear. Like Chase Minnifield. Sometimes, I don't want to play the youth because they're just not ready. And some guys can just lose their confidence if they make mistakes early. But with the rash of injuries we've seen we've kinda been forced to play youth. The op talks about Rambo but I think his problems were repeating the same mistakes and unwillingness to play teams where he can develop. But look at T.Robinson, andG.Ducre who we brought in after cutting Rambo. So we're still going for youth. I've got to believe that they're a plan in place and we're going to see these guys eventually. I just hope it doesn't turn into a Kirk Visits thing where we're saying "oh, that's why he's not playing" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoDeep81 Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I think it's more of them being forced into playing youngsters (due to injury) than actually giving them a chance when the vet their behind isn't getting it done.. Moses, for example, wouldn't of gotten a snap if TP hadn't gone out for a couple plays.. And after the one god awful play, where he appeared to not even see the guy on the outside, he held his own.. Should of let him finish out the game, imo.. Or at least until it became apparent he was definitely NOT ready.. I understand loyalty to "quality" FAs and vets, but if they're garbage, they're garbage.. We've seem plenty from a bunch of these guys to know what they bring to the table.. Maybe they get another shot if we bring in different line coaches or something, but with this staff and players, it's pretty black and white, imo.. I also love analytics/specialists! Something the NHL has started using as well.. But like has been said, it should be a tool, not the end all be all.. No idea how they (Washington Redskins) use it, but it wouldn't surprise me if they kicked their feet up on the desk as soon as the software showed up and started puffing on a cigar or something.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 GoDeep81, isn't it progress though to have young guys in those reserve roles? Most of these young guys are udfas instead of draft picks. Udfas are more of a gamble than draft picks, but the fact that that's our first option instead of finding career backups and hoping to make them stars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC9 Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 To me, it comes down to EXPECTATIONS vs PRODUCTION. The two loudest noises a team hears from when a season goes on are obviously the fan base and the media. So the FO has to be smart in it's approach to the season and have a plan in place. Always focusing on this year and looking to the next two or three at the same time. Some foresight and stuff. If you go out and stack up your team with vets that you as a FO think is going to dramatically improve the team... then you had better have those veterans humming. If you have a youth movement and your mission for the season is to develop that youth and find guys who "fit" or can improve and then further develop and build the roster from there... whatever veteran that is playing and making mistakes gets written off as a stop-gap. It's very difficult for the fans to get all lathered up for a bunch of splash signings and then to see that team play poorly. Regardless of who is in there or why they are in there (talent, injury, etc), the fans and the media are going to give them hell because you've already raised the bar of expectation. Last year look at Rambo... this year look at Brieland. Brieland was covering Larry Fitzgerald in one of his first NFL starts. No safety help, just he and Fitz on an island together, and Fitz made some REALLY good plays on the ball cause that's what he does. And people were in here cooking Bashaud. Why? Cause we're either stupid, disappointed, or both. If you zero out your roster and build it correctly for a year or two, I think the venom in the evaluations will subside and the focus will be more on what a player has done correctly then what he's done wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustangSteve Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Good post! There is definitely a problem in Washington, especially on the Defensive side of the ball. Haz can't get the best out of any player on this defense whether it's the vets or the rookies. Players will suck on this defense, move to another team and make the Pro Bowl the very next season, it's ridiculous. Every player on this defense is set up for failure, and I'm afraid that they will never get the opportunity to show how good they really are under the right leadership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RG3Hunna Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Morgan Moses for 60 minutes would get Kirk Cousins killed. Did you see the guy in the limited reps he played? I forget which team we were playing, I think it was seattle but yea he was just getting out of his 3 point stance (all other lineman were getting ready to engage their defenders) while the seattle's pass rusher drilled cousins so hard. They took Morgan Moses out of the game after that play. The guy just isn't ready to play yet, sure I want him to get reps too but I also don't want to see Kirk get paralyzed. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Somewhat related to this topic... there is a tired cliche used by color commentators when a young guy gets beat or otherwise messes up. The color guys always say "There's a rookie mistake." Well, maybe 10% of the time the error is caused by inexperience, but 95% of the time that's what the color guy will say. It's such an overused comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.