CSN - Gruden says he'll recommend Redskins retain Haslett

[DogofWar1]

Well then he should consider a career change. 

 

Jay says we lost Hatcher? So did Dallas. Dallas was supposed to have the worst D, lost their stud for the year, and clearly did just fine. All things equal the talent levels of teams, and injuries, all tends to even out in the end, or over large sample sizes like Hasletts 5 years. Using injuries as an excuse is a cop out, as coaches have a hand in selecting and inking injury prone players. Some may even argue tagging some. 

This is what gets me.

 

Injuries are a reasonable excuse one year, maybe even two, and early in a tenure can get you out of accountability.  But 5 years in?  No.  At some point, you have to look at teams that have faced struggles with injuries and personnel that have continued to succeed nonetheless and question what the difference is.  Why can Dallas' D perform at least respectively despite losing almost all of its key leaders, while ours cannot?

 

Five years on, you should not be allowed to plead talent gap, since you, as the coach, have had 5 years to make sure such a talent gap doesn't exist, that your backups are competent enough to step in, etc. etc.

 

If you're truly pleading that you get snake bitten and handcuffed every year, shouldn't cutting you loose be best for everyone, especially yourself, where you can leave and start a new life somewhere else?

[TSO]

This is what gets me.

 

Injuries are a reasonable excuse one year, maybe even two, and early in a tenure can get you out of accountability.  But 5 years in?  No.  At some point, you have to look at teams that have faced struggles with injuries and personnel that have continued to succeed nonetheless and question what the difference is.  Why can Dallas' D perform at least respectively despite losing almost all of its key leaders, while ours cannot?

 

Five years on, you should not be allowed to plead talent gap, since you, as the coach, have had 5 years to make sure such a talent gap doesn't exist, that your backups are competent enough to step in, etc. etc.

 

If you're truly pleading that you get snake bitten and handcuffed every year, shouldn't cutting you loose be best for everyone, especially yourself, where you can leave and start a new life somewhere else?

 

It's utter nonsense, 100%. All of his excuses are. None are valid, have never been. The worst one by far was when he threw Mike under the bus and claimed he handcuffed him when, just the year prior, he allowed his players to call him a "mad scientist" in the media and never once said it was Mike calling those blitzes. But this is what you get when you have nothing but back-stabbers running the show, starting with the owner himself and Bruce Allen, who acted like they had nothing to do with the failures of this team under Mike. 

 

He's as big a snake as any of them and Fletcher was totally right. Last season, we had virtually no major injuries, if I recall correctly. His defense was still pathetic. 

 

Gruden, hopefully, knows better than this and is just doing his buddy a favor, publicly. If not, he's allowing himself to be mislead by a con-artist because he wasn't here the last 4 years prior to see it all. Come on, there can be no way Haslett is allowed to be retained. It's mind-blowing. The guys up top, at least, have seen him 5 years straight now. Enough.    

 

But like you said, either he's the unluckiest D Coordinator in the league or he just stinks. Both are good enough reasons to let him go. 

[buck1]

It's utter nonsense, 100%. All of his excuses are. None are valid, have never been. The worst one by far was when he threw Mike under the bus and claimed he handcuffed him when, just the year prior, he allowed his players to call him a "mad scientist" in the media and never once said it was Mike calling those blitzes. But this is what you get when you have nothing but back-stabbers running the show, starting with the owner himself and Bruce Allen, who acted like they had nothing to do with the failures of this team under Mike. 

 

He's as big a snake as any of them and Fletcher was totally right. Last season, we had virtually no major injuries, if I recall correctly. His defense was still pathetic. 

 

Gruden, hopefully, knows better than this and is just doing his buddy a favor, publicly. If not, he's allowing himself to be mislead by a con-artist because he wasn't here the last 4 years prior to see it all. Come on, there can be no way Haslett is allowed to be retained. It's mind-blowing. The guys up top, at least, have seen him 5 years straight now. Enough.    

 

But like you said, either he's the unluckiest D Coordinator in the league or he just stinks. Both are good enough reasons to let him go. 

I don't think this point has been driven home enough. We were told by Bruce that mike undermined Jim. Then we find out from London that everyone knows hasllet stinks and Bruce is pedaling haz excuses. He's a politician that is just shifting blame and trying to keep his job as long as he's here we have no chance

[elkabong82]

Most on here know that I typically favor the optimistic side. That being said, if we keep Haslett then I have ZERO faith in the FO, in Bruce Allen, and in Jay Gruden. Sticking with such a failure would be boneheaded and not a decision smart teams make. SO we likely crash and burn again and everyone is fired, and we all have to just pray that one of the QBs on the roster survives it and manages to do well and contribute to the next regime rather than have their careers ruined by continued team failures.

 

If Haslett is retained, we need Fassel-level outburst from fans to undo it.

[s0crates]

Gruden does have a point about all the injuries, but he should get used to it. There is some kind of bad voodoo hex on this team or something, it seems we have more than our share of bad luck every year.

[skins island connection]

 Well, doomsday is here. Can't wait to hear what 'Uncle Baldwin' has to say. He's looking more and more like one of the Baldwin brothers each day.

 

 Aside of Allen and Haslett, lets spread a little love [ actually hate ] to the scouting dept as well; they have their hands just as dirty as these other 2 assclowns.

 

 Please, someone go to the HarvestFest or whatever it is and pee in Allen's drink. If Gruden really does stand by Haslett, and this isn't just PC talk he's spewing out, pee in his drink too. Duct tape them together and give them to the taliban.

[bradboyd80]

Wouldn't be at all surprised if Allen comes out and says Raheem is gone, but Haslett stays.  If Fletcher was right about Haslett being a bus driver, then I could totally see him kicking Raheem under the wheels and claim the D-line played well, but the secondary was hindered by Raheem. 

[Skinsinparadise]

Well, the reason I don't see it that way is because Jay made a name for himself absent of Allen and even absent of his brother. He had earned himself a spot at the top of the list for Head Coaches to be in the NFL on his own. Even if one had the opinion that his resumé was lacking there is no argument that others have been given the job of Head Coach with much less success in their past.

I'm also of the belief now that coaching is a smaller part of the success of an organization than most think. It's the FO, the scouting department, and the way its structure is geared towards systemic accountability that means way more than any Head Coach can affect. So I guess I just can't bring myself to care enough to "hate" Gruden, you know? Unless he does something so outrageous like retain Haslett, which would be total proof he cares less about winning, lol. So, yeah, there are limits of course, I guess mine is far wider now than most and my main focus is solely on the FO.

 

To me its not about hating Gruden.  I don't hate him.  I don't even per se want him gone now.  I think its a PR disaster for THIS team to dump any HC after one season.  Having said that, I'd be surprised if they don't have another big time losing season next year with more dysfunction as part of the process and Jay is gone in 2016.

 

My differences with you here are the following

 

A.  Being an NFL head coach and coordinator are different things.  About 99.99% of coordinators who are elevated to head coach have had success in their prior capacity and plenty of them fail as head coach.   Norv can call plays, in fact he's one of the best at it.  But few consider him a good head coach.  You don't really elevate any coordinator to HC who struggled -- they pretty much all did well previously. It's never heck this guy was a dud as a coordinator, but what the heck lets see what he can do as a HC?  The Kyle analogy to me doesn't work, he made a lateral move.  He was a coordinator before and was a coordinator here. 

 

B.   I don't see this as a no brainer hire from Bruce.  It's not to me, Bruce signed him to a 5 year 20 million contract, but who wouldn't. This was Jay Gruden, a gem of hire.   He wasn't at the top of the coaching hiring list as you say here.  He wasn't the hottest guy up for grabs.  He was far from the Jim Harbaugh of 2014.   Granted, it wasn't a crazy, Jim Zorn type hire.  He was a "decent" prospect but far from the hottest one that year.   Granted though few sexy HC picks were available in 2014.  But do you recall any holly molly, wow! the Redskins got Jay Gruden feeling either here locally or nationally that year?  

 

I listened to all the commentary back then. Some liked it but don't recall much gushing about the hire.  And there were some national NFL pundits who actually thought it was a bad hire.   Some said he was a good, not great coordinator.  Didn't have a balanced offense, was easily outwitted in the playoffs. If I had to define him as a coaching prospect, I'd say he was a B.  

 

C.  You say you see the qualities for him being a good head coach without listing them.   Personally I don't see the qualities outside of like Zorn he seems like a cool guy to hang out with.  By his own admission, he's not a workaholic like his bother Jon.  He seems overwhelmed in games.  Unlike Joe Gibbs I, other teams seem to make the half time adjustments and take the team apart in the 2nd half.  Gave up multiple times late in the games and at halves with time on the clock.  Unlike Kyle, he seems stubborn about sticking to his "schemes" without adapting to his players.  The I don't care much about the running game drill that he was accused of in Cincy - clearly has followed him here.   According to some who cover him, he is impatient and by extension not the greatest teacher.   He himself contributed to the team's drama this year via his press conferences.   The team's locker room as been reported by multiple reporters is unusually loose, undisciplined and unperturbed by losing -- apparently ditto when they are on the road.    John Keim talked recently about how when the team came off of a bad loss, he saw no difference in their demeanor and in the manner of how they practiced the following week.   Guys like Parcells for examples supposedly put his teams through hell after coming off of a bad loss.  Heck I recall Gregg Williams doing the same.

[Est.1974]

Do you feel this staff can come back and compete? 

Gruden: You lose a lot of your packages, like when Brian Orakpo is hurt and now Trent Murphy is the starter as opposed to being a third-down guy who does the move-around stuff, so you lose that element of your defense.

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/washington-redskins/post/_/id/14375/jay-gruden-qa-part-2?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

 

move around and stuff...sounds like a Vinny quote.

[Skinsinparadise]

move around and stuff...sounds like a Vinny quote.

 

Who would think years after canning Vinny that we'd look back at those years as the golden ones compared to the Bruce years.  I don't want Vinny back but his record is significantly better than Bruce's.  

[Voice_of_Reason]

I tend to try and fund justification, if not agreement, I'm whatever the Skins do. I try and at least understand what their thinking might be, good or bad.

If they retain Haslett and Morris, it might be the first time I'd throw my hands up and say that there is absolutely no way I could explain or justify the move in any way.

I get the situation Haslett has been in. But at some point you've got to priduce. And it's been too long.

[Chump Bailey]

Even though IIRC Gruden stated publicly that Sunday's effort by the defense was some of the worst he's ever seen - something to that effect I believe...

 

It doesn't matter. I think it's apparent he's laying the groundwork for Haslett to return unfortunately.

[Skinsinparadise]

My main hope for Jay is there is clearly a learning curve on any job maybe it clicks in year #2.  My hunch is no but I don't rule it out.

 

 

Keim is pretty reasonable.  He rarely has an angle.  Here is how he summarized the hire at the time.  

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/washington-redskins/post/_/id/4701/jay-gruden-offers-hope-and-concern

 

I like him, but his offense wasn’t more creative than any other coordinator out there,” one NFL defensive coach said. “If his last name wasn’t Gruden, we wouldn’t be talking about him.” 

When it comes to the Redskins’ new coach, there’s a split opinion, and it makes this one of the more unusual hires they have made. Yes, he has a last name everyone knows. But it was his brother Jon Gruden’s success that made it a big name, not Jay's own success. In the past, all but one of the coaches hired by owner Dan Snyder was a big name. 

But when it came to this coaching search, there was no big name left to hire. Bill Cowher wasn’t coming out of retirement. Nor was Jon Gruden. And no coach in this field had that wow factor the Redskins often gravitate toward (with the exception of Jim Zorn). 

That doesn’t mean it’s a bad hire. We also don’t know if it’s a good one. 

[TSO]

To me its not about hating Gruden. I don't hate him. I don't even per se want him gone now. I think its a PR disaster for THIS team to dump any HC after one season. Having said that, I'd be surprised if they don't have another big time losing season next year with more dysfunction as part of the process and Jay is gone in 2016.

My differences with you here are the following

A. Being an NFL head coach and coordinator are different things. About 99.99% of coordinators who are elevated to head coach have had success in their prior capacity and plenty of them fail as head coach. Norv can call plays, in fact he's one of the best at it. But few consider him a good head coach. You don't really elevate any coordinator to HC who struggled -- they pretty much all did well previously. It's never heck this guy was a dud as a coordinator, but what the heck lets see what he can do as a HC? The Kyle analogy to me doesn't work, he made a lateral move. He was a coordinator before and was a coordinator here.

B. I don't see this as a no brainer hire from Bruce. It's not to me, Bruce signed him to a 5 year 20 million contract, but who wouldn't. This was Jay Gruden, a gem of hire. He wasn't at the top of the coaching hiring list as you say here. He wasn't the hottest guy up for grabs. He was far from the Jim Harbaugh of 2014. Granted, it wasn't a crazy, Jim Zorn type hire. He was a "decent" prospect but far from the hottest one that year. Granted though few sexy HC picks were available in 2014. But do you recall any holly molly, wow! the Redskins got Jay Gruden feeling either here locally or nationally that year?

I listened to all the commentary back then. Some liked it but don't recall much gushing about the hire. And there were some national NFL pundits who actually thought it was a bad hire. Some said he was a good, not great coordinator. Didn't have a balanced offense, was easily outwitted in the playoffs. If I had to define him as a coaching prospect, I'd say he was a B.

C. You say you see the qualities for him being a good head coach without listing them. Personally I don't see the qualities outside of like Zorn he seems like a cool guy to hang out with. By his own admission, he's not a workaholic like his bother Jon. He seems overwhelmed in games. Unlike Joe Gibbs I, other teams seem to make the half time adjustments and take the team apart in the 2nd half. Gave up multiple times late in the games and at halves with time on the clock. Unlike Kyle, he seems stubborn about sticking to his "schemes" without adapting to his players. The I don't care much about the running game drill that he was accused of in Cincy - clearly has followed him here. According to some who cover him, he is impatient and by extension not the greatest teacher. He himself contributed to the team's drama this year via his press conferences. The team's locker room as been reported by multiple reporters is unusually loose, undisciplined and unperturbed by losing -- apparently ditto when they are on the road. John Keim talked recently about how when the team came off of a bad loss, he saw no difference in their demeanor and in the manner of how they practiced the following week. Guys like Parcells for examples supposedly put his teams through hell after coming off of a bad loss. Heck I recall Gregg Williams doing the same.

This is way too much hindsight is 20/20 revisionist thinking. Who was the hottest prospect? You had guys like Caldwell, Zimmer, Trestman, Pettine and O'Brien who took jobs. I mean, it's not like there was this one "hot" name to go and grab. As Skins fans, that idea should be a joke to us considering our "hot" hires in the past, anyway.

Secondly, all of your talk about coordinators failing as HC means nothing. One of the way you find good head coaches for the long term is to pick a successful coordinator and go from there. This isn't some new idea. The way you propose it here it's like you'd be an idiot to do so. If so many fail then are you saying one should rarely do that and should only pick guys who have been Head Coaches in the past? Are you saying then their past success has no bearing? Either you're being hyperbolic or spouting nonsense. Not good either way and I don't see the purpose of the argument.

Third, I disagree with the qualities you are trying to negate. To say you "...don't see the qualities outside of like Zorn he seems like a cool guy to hang out with", to me is an admission from you that have no idea what you're talking about or are just desperately trying to hide his accomplishments. And, no, his admission that he isn't as hard of a worker as his brother was one in reference to his past, not what he is now or how we went about things after re-entering the NFL.

I also love how you use Kyle as a shining example of willingness to bend when I recall you were one of the most vocal critics against him and don't remember you ever taking issue with people trashing his unwillingness to change. They did that all year last season. It's tiring seeing these same posters act like they're not just big complainers.

The locker room is definitely going to be different from what we had under Mike, so that'll be one reason why the media finds it noteworthy. Never mind the fact that they'll find anything to criticize, anyway. But, hey, maybe it is "too loose". That was one of the worries when we first hired him, that the players would run the team too much. Gruden certainly needs to learn how to do things better and to act like he can't or won't is simply ignoring his past. One of the qualities that lead to his hire was his willingness to use his personnel to its strengths. Suddenly that's gone and you can tell immediately after one year with this crap organization?

I will certainly take the word of a significant amount of players, past and present here or with other teams, that say he's a players coach and will listen to you as well as tell you like it is, which they like, over your insistence as you sit on a message board that he doesn't know how to adapt and is too much of a scheme guy. The locker room story actually fits that style of coach more than the style of "my scheme or the highway" you're trying to paint him with. Seems like every coach that comes here gets that billing and I'm tired of hearing it. It's a lazy criticism that is often derived from a lack of knowledge as to what they're trying to accomplish or what they can accomplish with the personnel handed to them. Kyle, for instance, was destroyed last season with claims that he didn't expand the 2012 offense enough for Robert and was forcing him into an offense that doesn't work anymore. Now it's "at least Kyle was trying to put Robert in an offense that suits his strengths", by the same posters at that. It's annoying. Just proves most are talking right out of their butts no matter how much they claim they know football or do know football.

It's extremely difficult to judge schemes and play-calling, especially knowing the mis-matched personnel and issues at the most significant position on the field, from outside the organization (even, admittedly, by other coaches or NFL execs, let alone fans). That's not to say any criticism of it is illegitimate, it's just that it should be qualified better and lack the finality with which some judge, like you are here.

So you can say you don't "hate him", whatever. Your intense focus on him belies that notion, but I really don't care either way I'll trust you. What you can't say you're not doing is judging him. It's clear you think you got the book written on him. You'll deny that, but again, I think your actions and focus here prove that.

My point is not that Gruden was a great hire or that he's a great coach. I can't even believe that I'm like his biggest defender in this friggin board now, even though when all the "Mike the evil villain" crowd were going crazy for Gruden and how wonderful of a change he would be, I was one of the few laughing at that. This place is just crazy and as obsessed as Snyder is with trying to point the finger at a small piece of the puzzle. My point is that there is no way any of us can really know what Gruden is or will be with any solid ground right now so early in his career. He failed his first year like the vast majority of coaches here do, but there are simple ways he can improve that he's acknowledged himself recently and there's no reason to think he won't.

[ZRagone]

If we keep Haslett at this point it's beyond ridiculous. And all of those who have defended Gruden saying this, and have also suggested he needs to have more power get "his guys" on this team, better not attempt to put the blame squarely on Bruce if Haslett is retained.

If Haslett is retained the ONLY legitimate reason it could happen is that the front office is trying to let Gruden have "his guys" and GRUDEN has deemed that he wants this piece of crap, horrendous, laughingly bad coordinator back on this team.

It's utterly outrageous that it's even a question at this point, and it's a question largely because of our Head Coach having his Head up his own ass when it comes to Haslett.

[Rex Tomb]

I would not be at all surprised if Gruden is trying to protect Haslett in public, but looking elsewhere in private.  It is clear that they are good friends and I don't think he wants to lambaste him in the media.  It wouldn't surprise me that, if the right coordinator were to come along, then Gruden would move to replace Haslett.  That's my hope anyway - otherwise, I may not be planning my entire Sundays around Redskins games next season.  I can't take it.  The offense was far from great, but my goodness - the defense was so bad.  I never thought I would miss Greg Blache so much.

[Skinsinparadise]

Secondly, all of your talk about coordinators failing as HC means nothing. One of the way you find good head coaches for the long term is to pick a successful coordinator and go from there. This isn't some new idea. The way you propose it here it's like you'd be an idiot to do so. If so many fail then are you saying one should rarely do that and should only pick guys who have been Head Coaches in the past? Are you saying then their past success has no bearing? Either you're being hyperbolic or spouting nonsense. Not good either way and I don't see the purpose of the argument.

 

 

Some accusations in your post are off.  Yeah I am fine comparing Shanny with Jay on offense.  And I got no problem doing it, there is no revisionism on my end.   I wasn't one of the ones trashing Kyle or Mike as being bad at running offenses.  Definitely not Mike who I had a lot of respect for in that regard.  When, I was critical of Mike in his last season, I said the dude knows offensive and I usually even included it in my point -- what I said was I've just had enough with Shanny's poor defenses, special teams, and personnel moves.  I've said multiple times (including in my most critical posts) I'd hire Mike in 2 seconds to be my offensive coordinator, I don't like Kyle as much as Mike but I'd hire him too.  In those days, I spent a lot of time on Mike, very little on Kyle, the main Kyle hit that i recall making was posting Doc's comment that Kyle doesn't always have a feel for the game as its being played.  Would I want either Mike or Kyle as my head coach, nope.   Over, Jay?   Maybe.  Time will tell.

 

As for you suggesting my thoughts about Jay are different then how am generalizing them.  I've elaborated on what I think about Jay quite a bit.  If I really hated him, I'd say it.  If I really thought he should be fired, I'd say it too.   It's you that doesn't really elaborate much about Jay aside from you back him and he was a good coordinator.   I got better things to do than make up an agenda that's different than how I feel.  And I am also willing to change my opinion as time evolves and more circumstances play out.  Am not so married to a point where it bothers me to admit when am wrong.   I've said many times when I talked about Shanny in negative terms for example that I loved the hire at the time and I've never backed off of the idea that he knows offense. 

 

As for the shot at me spouting nonsense when it comes to my point in response to yours about coordinators being elevated as head coaches.   I'll say it again.  You are hanging your hat on the fact that Jay was a successful coordinator as a reason why we should have faith in him as a head coach.  My response is yeah then just about every head coach deserves faith because they all have had success as coordinators. 

 

And no am not saying their prior success has no bearing, we all get it that's why they got the job in the first place.   But being an offensive coordinator is DIFFERENT than being a head coach.   I don't get why this is a radical theory.  Even Jay talked about this himself this week.  Running a WHOLE team versus calling plays for one facet of it is different.  It's not the same job. 

 

The coaching graveyard is littered with multiple excellent coordinators.  You could just look at this team.  Petition great D coordinator arguably bad head coach.  Norv.  Gregg Williams great D coordinator at Tennessee, failure as head coach in Buffalo.  Teams beating as his door for a time to be D coordinator but not as a head coach.  Dick LeBeau who many consider the best defensive coordinator of all time, had an awful record as head coach, and no one seemed to want him ever again in that capacity.  But am sure every team would kill for him to run their defense. 

 

I don't get whats wild and radical about this.  It's not some off beat theory, its a cliche.  You hear it plenty this dude is a very good coordinator but would he be a good head coach?  It's far from a given that one equals the other.    And am talking about absolute stud coordinators failing as head coaches, no one talked about Jay in that glowing way.  Was Jay a good coordinator, sure, but the Dick LeBeau of NFL offenses, that would be laughable.   My point of course its conceivable that Jay could fail.   People said so when the hire took place -Keim hit it in the article I posted on this thread. 

[NIKKI8]

              Sometimes I wonder if Gruden isn't just trying to "Shanahan" his way out of Washington. The way he talks to the media, the way he bashed the owners favorite player and now backing a clearly weak link on this team. If Snyder is a fan like the rest of us as he says he is I got to think he has had it with Haslett also and Gruden knows that and is just trying to get fired by backing an incompetent coach.

[Cooleyfan1993]

              Sometimes I wonder if Gruden isn't just trying to "Shanahan" his way out of Washington. The way he talks to the media, the way he bashed the owners favorite player and now backing a clearly weak link on this team. If Snyder is a fan like the rest of us as he says he is I got to think he has had it with Haslett also and Gruden knows that and is just trying to get fired by backing an incompetent coach.

Haslett is gone

[ThomasRoane]

That's where my money was too. I can't figure out if I think that's a good or bad thing, though.

 

More important to me is if they head back to the 4-3. If so, I could probably deal with Morris. Who else is out there that's a clearly better option? Too bad they burnt GG.

 

Terrible idea to hire Morris!  The DB's have consistently been the weak link for this team.  If he's the new DC then be prepared to endure more conversions of 3rd and long by opposing offenses.  He's HORRIBLE! 

[NoVaSkins21]

Haslett being gone is definitely a good thing, but only a small part of the solution.  This team has got a LONG way to go.

[Jacoah]

Why the hell would Gruden even suggest that the team retain Haslett? Thank God Haz is the hell out of here. 

[Glenn X]

Probably because he's rooted into this mess from birth, like the rest of us?

 

Ever tried just giving up on "your" team and rooting for another? (serious question) I wouldn't know, because it's impossible to even consider, if your a true fanatic..

 

I'm not sure I buy that.  There were a couple of years back when Norval was in charge that I sort of "mentally checked-out" on the 'Skins.  You had Darrell Green crying in the locker room after we got blasted by the Vikes; you had Norval looking totally overmatched every week; it was just a really bad scene.  And I had the luxury of being in college at the time, working on my undergrad degree, which helped in occupying my mind.  Moreover, I was matriculating at a football school (USC) that had just won the Rose Bowl during my freshman year, which also helped in terms of getting my football fix, in lieu of the 'Skins.

 

Did I quit the 'Skins and go root for another NFL team.  Nope.  And when Norval's bunch finally got their act together (albeit briefly) and won the divisional crown in 1999, I re-upped.  In fact, that fleeting glimmer of hope in '99, along with the blasted Internet (which allows me to too-closely follow the 'Skins), has been my problem, making it very difficult for me to put down "the crack pipe" of my 'Skins fandom during a period of extended suckitude (e.g. the present time).  However, as others have stated on this message board, if Jim Haslett is retained, that will be my breaking point and I will turn in my metaphorical Fan Card.  No, not to go root for another NFL team.  (Although I would probably follow USC even more closely than I already do.)  But that would be the final indignity for me.

 

And I'd only start following the 'Skins again after I was certain that they had finally, mercifully gotten their **** together.  But, hey, everybody's different.

[TSO]

Some accusations in your post are off.  Yeah I am fine comparing Shanny with Jay on offense.  And I got no problem doing it, there is no revisionism on my end.   I wasn't one of the ones trashing Kyle or Mike as being bad at running offenses.  Definitely not Mike who I had a lot of respect for in that regard.  When, I was critical of Mike in his last season, I said the dude knows offensive and I usually even included it in my point -- what I said was I've just had enough with Shanny's poor defenses, special teams, and personnel moves.  I've said multiple times (including in my most critical posts) I'd hire Mike in 2 seconds to be my offensive coordinator, I don't like Kyle as much as Mike but I'd hire him too.  In those days, I spent a lot of time on Mike, very little on Kyle, the main Kyle hit that i recall making was posting Doc's comment that Kyle doesn't always have a feel for the game as its being played.  Would I want either Mike or Kyle as my head coach, nope.   Over, Jay?   Maybe.  Time will tell.

 

.....

 

Hey, just saw your PMs, will reply to you there, we're pretty much on the same page, bro. I think, more than anything, the focus should be directed above Jay and we have a real chance, like the jsteelz tweet you sent me, to do something if we simply don't allow any diversions. Whether or not Gruden is a problem is something that's hard to judge right now, even if there are legitimate criticisms about him to be had, but we do know for a fact that Allen, and our FO as structured totally is a problem and will remain so. Our posts should be proportionate to that and reflect that  belief.

[Skinsinparadise]

Hey, just saw your PMs, will reply to you there, we're pretty much on the same page, bro. I think, more than anything, the focus should be directed above Jay and we have a real chance, like the jsteelz tweet you sent me, to do something if we simply don't allow any diversions. Whether or not Gruden is a problem is something that's hard to judge right now, even if there are legitimate criticisms about him to be had, but we do know for a fact that Allen, and our FO as structured totally is a problem and will remain so. Our posts should be proportionate to that and reflect that  belief.

 

Sounds good, it seems like if the energy is spent directly at the FO.  And regardless of the angle of how you get there, if the bottom line is the structure of this team is unacceptable and if enough people are saying it -- maybe there is a shot, it changes.

 

Dan doesn't seem to embrace change unless he's forced into it by his customers (fans)