RandyHolt Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 He is a perfect signing. @ RebuildNow - no, we do not NEED to rebuild. The backbone of our team is in place. Some may want to let Trent and our 3 young QBs prime years go to waste. I don't. Getting a viable DC in here is going to go a long ways to curing the woes of our team. It will make the job of the offense much easier, and hope that those that prefer a sell off of assets / full rebuild reconsider how much easier it will be to try a new DC, versus 4+ yrs of a rebuild. With Allen still pulling the strings, you want a rebuild? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 I would like to see us go 90% draft and 10% free agency as long as the free agents are NOT the top tier that are overpriced. If we add one mid level free agent each year that can contribute then there is no reason not to sign him just because we think the draft is the only way to go. See, I don't think you have to set a ratio. I believe it's more an art than a science, which is why having the right people in place is so critical. The good front offices can use the draft and strategically strike in FA when needed. Some years it might be 100/0 and others it could be 60/40. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paloosa Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 I was against the signing of Haslett when they first introduced him. But this possible hiring of Phillips is one that needs to happen. Phillips teams are always good and they aren't predictable like Haslett's. The other benefit of this is that he would bring a new fresh look view of the talent. He would be able to give good recommendations to who to go after either in FA or in the Draft. Phillips does have a good rep around the league instead of the one that Haslett has. I don't think that Jeff Fisher would say Phillips was predictable like said about Haslett. If Phillips is hired I see us being a top ten defense at the end of the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogofWar1 Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 If Phillips is hired I see us being a top ten defense at the end of the season. I'd settle for top 16. Heck, getting both points and yards allowed into the top 20 together for the first time since 2009 would be an improvement. I'm trying to temper my expectations of Phillips a bit (which, between tempering for the FO actually hiring Phillips AND actual Phillips performance if he's hired means there's a lot of tempering going on), but it's hard not to see us improving next year if Phillips is the DC, potentially by a lot considering how poor we've been the past couple years. If we ended up top 10 I'd be ecstatic. Top 10 means the opponent is scoring less than 22 points a game. Games where we manage to actually put up 23+ we might actually win! Of course the problem there is that the offense must improve. 18.8 points per game ain't gonna cut it. But it's a step in the right direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 Glad to see he's coming in for an interview. Hope he gets the job. me too. i think he's just what we need. A/ he produces. His defenses are always good, and aggressive. B/ he's a calming presence. he has a TON of experience of living under intense media scrutiny, and he can provide Jay with the intangibles that brings in helping Gruden get his feet under him. it's for this reason that I would MUCH rather have Wade than the next potential young hotshot. A young hotshot needs to have time to grow into a larger role, he needs to convince players to buy into his new ideas. We have that all over the coaching staff. we need that anchor. A guy who the players can look back and see repeated success from Wade's defenses and players. Confidence is important, especially on a team that is as immature and spun out as this one. Our defense will get better the moment he signs on. Let's say he comes on and stays for 3 years and retires at 70. In those three years he'd make the defense respectable, develop players, and if we decide at that point to go with the next young defensive mind, we would have ANCHOR players, seasoned and possible pro bowl caliber young vets in key positions to make that transition something that could work, rather than the desperation (and low success probability) move it could be now. Chipwich mentioned above that th Ravens just played and won a great playoff game with ac hodgepodge of DBs, and this is 100% true, and it's not because they necessarily spotted amazing talent, (1 guy bounced off of 2 or 3 practice squads this year and is starting in a playoff game.) but to me the key is their secondary coach is Steve Spagnoulo. You build through the draft, you fill through free agency, and no matter what, you hire quality coaches, or it doesn't matter. Wade is a top shelf defensive coordinator. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSO Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 I don't think that FA is the terrible beast it used to be for us. If Bruce is nothing else, he's a cap guy. He knows how to work it. He knows how to structure contracts so that the dead money doesn't kill us, we just have to be willing to let go at the right time. A good example of this are Garcon and Jackson. In 2016, they combined will count 19.45 million against the cap, which is huge. However, we only owe them a combined 4.7 million that year if they are cut. Essentially, we recoup 75% of their cap costs This is actually a good example as to why Free Agency is such an issue in the first place. You're right, it's good in that we can cut both of them and "only" have 4.7 million in dead space... but the problem with that is, due to having them in the first place, you: 1) Took up two guaranteed roster spots at a significant chunk of your cap space. Which means... 2) You couldn't bring in as many "chances" as you could otherwise and add to your roster for development purposes at WR, to either hit on someone who out-produces what you're paying him or be able to replace them when you have to cut them. So, come 2016, and say we have to cut both of them... can we legitimately replace both of them with guys we've developed? Very hard to do since they probably combined for most of the playing time and took up such a significant part of your cap that you couldn't add as many WRs as you like to develop there. That means we'd have to, most likely, dip back into Free Agency for their replacements while already having 4.7 million tied up in cap space there at the position. That's why the key to utilizing FA properly is to make sure you have developed a sizable core of players, that encompass all or near all the different positions, first and then only going to it to supplement a small weak spot or make you dominant at one position. Anything more than that and you're just forcing yourself into a negative cycle like the one here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSO Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 See, I don't think you have to set a ratio. I believe it's more an art than a science, which is why having the right people in place is so critical. The good front offices can use the draft and strategically strike in FA when needed. Some years it might be 100/0 and others it could be 60/40. Yeah, totally agree with this as well... you do see, however, that the best organizations really use FA as a supplemental deal and not a major part of what they do. But it certainly is an art and there is no perfect way to do it. Look at how the Colts went through a rebuild after Manning. It was mainly through the draft and, of course, the biggest thing was getting Luck... but one of the first things they did was pay Reggie Wayne who was a Free Agent. And it was an important move. That being said, they did let Garcon go. So they balanced it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Hammer Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 I somewhat agree, but I think you have to make a distinction between "big name" FAs, which we should avoid. Versus those that can improve the depth of the roster, which we need to do. Thats precisely why all those free agents splashes never worked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuriousD Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 Thats precisely why all those free agents splashes never worked. Um,.. yeah well,... never say never my friend. Tim Johnson, Brad Edwards, Danny Copeland, Eric Williams, Fred Stokes, Matt Millen and their Superbowl rings have legitimate reasons to disagree with you. Call them the inconvenient truth of the "free agent splashes are bad" arguement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWJ Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 Better sign Wade quick before Jerrah Jones gives him a call wanting him to come back to Dallas as their DC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joanieloveschachi Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 I definitely like Wade Phillips over Fangio(I understand his interview has been denied for now) or another up and coming coach. The main reason is his track record and his age. Hear me out on this one. He's 68 and probably won't get another chance at a head coaching position. Let's say you bring in Fangio or insert another amazing young coach and he does the impossible and makes us a great defense. Highly likely he leaves in a year or two and becomes a head coach somewhere else. Then we're back to square one. Where as with Wade if he's successful he'll more then likely just stay here for his twilight years. Kind of like Lebeau in Pittsburgh. I understand it may be a fantasy our defense becomes elite quickly but I like Wade and his history and the chance of him remaining if he's successful. Hopefully, he hasn't already had his twilight years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dont Taze Me Bro Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 This is actually a good example as to why Free Agency is such an issue in the first place. You're right, it's good in that we can cut both of them and "only" have 4.7 million in dead space... but the problem with that is, due to having them in the first place, you: 1) Took up two guaranteed roster spots at a significant chunk of your cap space. Which means... 2) You couldn't bring in as many "chances" as you could otherwise and add to your roster for development purposes at WR, to either hit on someone who out-produces what you're paying him or be able to replace them when you have to cut them. Did you really just suggest that Garcon and Djax were taking away roster spots for developmental players? I don't know weather to laugh or cry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perez24 Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 Did you really just suggest that Garcon and Djax were taking away roster spots for developmental players? I don't know weather to laugh or cry Yes I think he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 From the names that I have seen I would prefer Wade Phillips, but Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck could probably get better results than we've seen the last five years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSO Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 Did you really just suggest that Garcon and Djax were taking away roster spots for developmental players? I don't know weather to laugh or cry It depends on what you mean by "developmental" players. If you mean guys who are long shots, don't have much in the way of past success or solid pedigrees, and are thus labeled "developmental" players, no... that's not what I meant. I meant that they take up guaranteed roster spots when, otherwise, you'd be drafting guys who you'd assume could be developed to produce just as much, if not more, than them at a much more cost efficient level. I never used the term "developmental players", which has always implied something quite different than what I meant, which was finding players you can likely develop (including high-to-mid round draft picks). Once you have a solid foundation there, by all means, grab a DJax or Garcon in FA to make you dominant at that position. All three of our starters at WR are Free Agents. Name a team other than us that has the same situation and is successful. The best WR corps have guys that were drafted or undrafted gems and maybe were supplemented in FA by one more (Packers, Bears, Colts, etc...). Rarely it's more than one, like with the Broncos and Sanders and Welker, but their best guy (Thomas) was drafted and Welker was not nearly as big a factor once Sanders was brought in. So even the Broncos really use their drafted guys (Demaryius Thomas, Julius Thomas and Eric Decker) more and supplemented them with one guy (Sanders or Welker). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogofWar1 Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 I think Garcon and DJax were predicated on 1) building a winning team (Garcon) and 2) taking a team that had been 10-6 a year earlier and getting it back to that point. DJax, who really puts the WR position's costs over the top, was indeed something of a win now move, but it makes sense in the context of a team that anticipated being able to compete within the division for a playoff spot (obviously, that didn't work out the way we'd hoped). I'll admit I had initially been uneasy about the DJax grab, while I celebrated it in part, it was bad timing unless the positive results were tangible and forthcoming. The WR reckoning was given a date, but thanks to the RGIII trade, the resources to ensure we didn't bear the brunt of it was not available. That's not really a failure of FA, indeed the Garcon and DJax contracts are actually not bad in a vacuum (Garcon's costs didn't hit critical mass until years 4 and 5, DJax can be cut with minimal damage after year 2 and no payments after year 3), the issue is that we lacked the draft resources to supplement, but we can't blame our FA moves for that, at least not entirely. We can't vilify any one part of the team building process, the approach must be done in tandem, and when it can't be done in tandem (like with WRs in 2016) we need to recognize and take appropriate steps. I disagree that the best organizations don't use FA as a major part of what they do. It's a major part, but conducted in tandem with drafting, and often taken into consideration post-draft. That makes it "supplemental" in the technical sense, but it is not hugely secondary. I think the primary issue is that other teams draft better than us very consistently, so they have fewer things to supplement. We see other teams building through the draft and think "why don't we do that?" Then we complain about free agency, but the simple reality is that we don't build through the draft as much because we make significantly more mistakes. We then are forced to turn to FA. That being said, Free Agency isn't the hellhole it's made out to be. Some teams have managed to have large numbers of Free Agents and be successful. Seattle had 7 major free agent pickups on their Superbowl team last year (RB Lynch, TE Z.Miller, DLs McDonald, Bennett, Avril, Clemons, CB Browner) Free agency is and will continue to be a crucial part of the future of every football team in the NFL. The key is to get better at it, not stop engaging in it altogether. Which, again, is why we need Phillips and Smith up in here. This is actually especially true due to the fact that FA comes before the draft. We talk about supplementing your roster after building through the draft, but you have to make FA moves prior to the draft. You literally cannot afford to not perform FA moves and draft plans in tandem, doing drafting first means you'll lose out on any supplementing you needed to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatBuzz Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 Just so we are clear, pretty much everyone wants to draft players instead of going through FA. You are all aware we only get 7 picks, right? Sure we can trade back for more picks but I don't think we are getting 35 picks which is the amount of holes we have. The draft isn't going to help us enough. We just need to do FA right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan35yrs. Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 From the names that I have seen I would prefer Wade Phillips, but Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck could probably get better results than we've seen the last five years. See, we still have confusion. Do you want Mickey or do you want Donald? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsInFebruary Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 35 picks which is the amount of holes we have. Lol.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD0506 Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 I just hope that Wade has the resume and rep and....gravitas to insist on doing things his way with his staff if he takes over the D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hersh Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 This entire thread is hilarious. People scream for changes to the foundations of this team, the team lets go of one coach that everyone wanted gone and now all the sheep are coming back over the possible signing of Wade Phillips. As if he will magically change the culture of the organization. This reeks of just bringing in a guy who is connected to AJ Smith rather then there being a robust search. Oh, it's ridiculous if any member of the defensive staff is retained. Not sure why anyone defends the train wreck that is Morris. Wait, is his son really the TE coach too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmania123 Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 This entire thread is hilarious. People scream for changes to the foundations of this team, the team lets go of one coach that everyone wanted gone and now all the sheep are coming back over the possible signing of Wade Phillips. As if he will magically change the culture of the organization. This reeks of just bringing in a guy who is connected to AJ Smith rather then there being a robust search. Oh, it's ridiculous if any member of the defensive staff is retained. Not sure why anyone defends the train wreck that is Morris. Wait, is his son really the TE coach too? Moving in the direction of a DC that has had actual success in the NFL is the only way to go for this organization. Hazlett never had success in the league and in my opinion did not belong here in the first place. Finally we are moving on. Morris will be dismissed in my opinion by the new DC who will want to assemble his own staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogofWar1 Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 This reeks of just bringing in a guy who is connected to AJ Smith rather then there being a robust search. At the end of a robust search Wade Phillips would likely be one of the top candidates on merit alone, and would probably have one of the best track record of our applicants. Consider who we've been granted/have access to: - Wade Phillips - Ed Donatell - Kirk Olivadotti - Raheem Morris - Joe Barry Who among those is superior to Phillips? One might argue that Donatell could perform better in the long term, but he doesn't have the track record of Phillips, so that's speculation. Olivadotti has potential, I think, but is very unproven. Fangio and Schwartz might be similarly good to Phillips, they've handled the DC role deftly before, but we've been denied access to them. Lou Spanos, who I'm surprised we haven't contacted yet, similar to Olivadotti has no DC track record, he's young with potential, but also unproven. Don't trash a coach merely because he's got deep roots in the NFL. He's done well in multiple places and deserves more respect than merely being considered an AJ Smith groupie, which, by the way, he's not. He spent 3 years in SD out of a 34 year DC or HC career (first DC job was with the Saints in '81), treating him the same as Morris or Joe Barry, who've come from the Tampa/Tusker club (which Phillips is not a part of, mind you) is not fair to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hersh Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 At the end of a robust search Wade Phillips would likely be one of the top candidates on merit alone, and would probably have one of the best track record of our applicants. I question the claim that there is a robust search actually going on and I would want to hear what each candidate said in their interviews. What are their takes on what is going on with the Redskins defense and the culture of the club? How would they help change things? etc. Seriously, I can't take a search seriously that includes interviewing Morris. His unit was terrible this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conn Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 Interviewing an under-qualified guy already on staff is, unfortunately, a popular way to "fulfill" the Rooney Rule. I hate to say it, but I hope that's what we're doing with Morris. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.