Mike Shanahan Tells All on ESPN 980 (RGIII, McNabb, Manning, Haynseworth) Link included w/ Audio

[Momma There Goes That Man]

LMAO at the people defending Danny boy. Gee I guess all the coaches are just liars.

You mean the coaches like Mike Shanahan that specifically said Dan didn't meddle?

[TheLongshot]

I really think we're splitting hairs here. I don't see the difference between Snyder openly working as a team with Gibbs and Vinny and Snyder coaxing/pressuring Shanahan into making decisions he wants behind the facade of it being Shanahan's choice.

 

Like I've said many times, the latter is something bosses/managers do in every profession and it just boils down to their personality and how much BS they're willing to shovel in order to continue the farce that their underlings are making the decisions themselves.

 

I don't think there was much coaxing or pressuring here.  I think he just gave him the thumbs up and Shanahan did it.  I don't believe at all that he didn't want McNabb and was pressured into it.

 

What I will blame Snyder for is for giving a head coach that kind of power yet again.  There aren't that many coaches who can use that power wisely (Jimmy Johnson, Andy Reid, Bill Belichick are the only ones that come to mind).  Snyder isn't the only one who makes that mistake, but he's done it too often.  Hopefully, he won't fall back on that again in the future.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

This is a weird place I gotta tell you. Great traffic and most are really good posters. But defending this owner, this QB's antics, and finally claiming that Griffin is not a bad pocket passer, are quite honestly positions I am surprised have support.

When did anybody suggest Griffin wasnt struggling as a traditional drop back pocket passer? Nobody did.

There is a huge chasm to cover between you declaratively stating that he is the worst pocket passer we've ever seen and others acknowledging that yes, he was awful at times last season and needs a lot of work.

Not sure what thread you are reading

[gtn130]

i do think theres a huge difference, in the case of mcnabb, with mike not wanting him (as many believe) and mike wanting him, and danny saying 'if it takes a third along with a second, then go for it'.

 

i think the latter is what happened.

 

Uh, yeah the difference in that scenario is that Shanahan would have walked away. Instead they gave up two picks for McNabb. Seems monumentally different than Snyder not having any involvement whatsoever. 

[TheLongshot]

Uh, yeah the difference in that scenario is that Shanahan would have walked away. Instead they gave up two picks for McNabb. Seems monumentally different than Snyder not having any involvement whatsoever. 

 

No, the argument is between Snyder forcing McNabb on Shanahan or Shanahan making the decision to trade for McNabb, but after the fact blame Snyder for the decision.

[gtn130]

I don't think there was much coaxing or pressuring here.  I think he just gave him the thumbs up and Shanahan did it.  I don't believe at all that he didn't want McNabb and was pressured into it.

 

What I will blame Snyder for is for giving a head coach that kind of power yet again.  There aren't that many coaches who can use that power wisely (Jimmy Johnson, Andy Reid, Bill Belichick are the only ones that come to mind).  Snyder isn't the only one who makes that mistake, but he's done it too often.  Hopefully, he won't fall back on that again in the future.

 

Huge lol at Andy Reid being a good coach/GM.

 

But to your point -- you're just choosing not to believe what Shanahan is saying. That's fine, I'm sure he was painting himself in the best light possible in that interview, but nothing I'm saying is really based on that interview. I don't know explicitly what happened with each move and who was behind each deal, but I think we can safely assume that Snyder was involved on some level.

 

We're giving Gibbs a pass because Snyder/Vinny were involved, but demonizing Shanahan because he apparently had 100% complete control, yet we can say with absolute certainty that Snyder outright lied about his involvement during the Gibbs era. People who are assigning so much blame to Shanahan are now blindly accepting what Snyder is saying about his role as gospel even though he's lied about it in the past. 

No, the argument is between Snyder forcing McNabb on Shanahan or Shanahan making the decision to trade for McNabb, but after the fact blame Snyder for the decision.

 

No, my whole argument is that there is middle ground there. 

[darrelgreenie]

but nothing I'm saying is really based on that interview. I don't know explicitly what happened with each move and who was behind each deal, but I think we can safely assume that Snyder was involved on some level.

^^^Lol, "nothing I'm saying is really based on that interview"

[gtn130]

but nothing I'm saying is really based on that interview. I don't know explicitly what happened with each move and who was behind each deal, but I think we can safely assume that Snyder was involved on some level.

^^^Lol, "nothing I'm saying is really based on that interview"

 

In this particular context, yeah. Nice try tho lol

The most ridiculous thing about the DEMONIZE SHANAHAN group is that Gibbs is given a free pass. In both cases Snyder said he was completely hands off, yet people only believe it as it applies to Shanahan. 

[88Comrade2000]

It's over and done with. 

 

I have no doubt Snyder is the one who heavily suggested Mcnabb.

 

As for trading for Griffin, I have no doubt that Snyder probably put some pressure to make sure the Skins get him.  Shanny was a failure his first 2 years.  Snyder probably told him, if you are coming back for 2012; we are trading up for a QB.

 

Of course, that's what I believe.   As many of said, the truth is probably somewhere in between Shanny's spin and what we saw happened.

 

 

Robert is one his final shot this year. He has to stay healthy and show that he is the future or else he will be gone in 2016.

Hopefully, Marcus Moriata falls to #5 and Scott can recoup some of what we traded to get Robert; to some QB desepate team.

[grego]

i dont get the whole joe gibbs angle. even if both made exactly an equal amount of bad personnel moves, what redskin fan wouldnt be more annoyed with mike and be less annoyed with joe?

 

we are only having this conversation because mike went on the radio in an attempt to take almost no responsibility for his moves. joe never did anything remotely like that.

 

why are we talking about gibbs?

[gtn130]

i dont get the whole joe gibbs angle. even if both made exactly an equal amount of bad personnel moves, what redskin fan wouldnt be more annoyed with mike and be less annoyed with joe?

 

we are only having this conversation because mike went on the radio in an attempt to to almost no responsibility for his moves. joe never did anything remotely like that.

 

why are we talking about gibbs?

 

Because it's obvious that the hatred and villainization of Shanahan is unjustifiable. The benefit of the doubt is given to Gibbs, but not given to Shanahan almost entirely because people like Gibbs more.

 

I don't see why Shanahan's tenure can't be viewed through the same lens Gibbs' tenure was, but for whatever reason people keep holding up this 100% CONTROL nonsense as if it's gospel. The hypocrisy and inconsistency among fans is acute when comparing the opinions of the two coaches and their recent tenures in Washington.

[goskins10]

 

Removed for space per the rules -

 

Robert lied to his coach about the extent of the injury, he told Trent this on the field.  Then he cried like a little beotch when he was sat down for the Cleveland game even though it was a 2 week minimum.  I can only imagine how he would have reacted had Shanny done the right thing and pulled him against Seattle.  And of course he threw him under the bus, his Tweets as he was recovering were pretty clear. 

 

 

 

 

I appreciate you clearly have a viewpoint here, but making claims to things being fact that are no more than conjecture is just realistic. Not to mention the whole calling him names and giving him ugly labels just shows your bias against him, despite your earlier claims.

 

Your quote:

When 2 different coaching staff as well as most of the locker room, hates your guts that's pretty revealing.  As were his comments recently about his play this season.   He blamed the ankle and the coach, again, for his poor play instead of looking in the mirror.  What exactly does that say?  

 

They hate his guts????   Two coaching staffs and most of the locker room??  Where did you get this data? Please show me the actual article from actual people in the locker room that said these words - And I don't mean Sally Jenkins, Skip Bayless, Wilbon or Stephen A Smith. I mean players. coaches. people that were actually there. You can't. All that rhetoric is just that, rhetoric.

 

Demanded??  Please show me the credible resources that can prove he "Demanded" the plays be removed. Again, this is hearsay made up by peope anting their 5 minutes of fame or to just sound important.

 

You are completely ignoring the fact that all players lie about being injured unless it blatantly obvious!  And this is a young and immature young man who wants to play. MS is the HC. He is the one who should have the cooler head and make the right decision. He has a medical staff there. It was clear after the Ravens game he was not going to let you know if he is really hurt. So as the HC you have to do it for him. IT's YOUR JOB!!

 

But just for one insane moment let's say you are right. MS and RGIII came in every day and fought like cats and dogs and RGIII talked to everyone like crap and made sure they knew he was king dog even though was playing like crap. Let's assume that that's even half true.   WHO WAS IN CHARGE?????   It was Mike Shannahan. Not a 1st yr HC. A guy that had been In the league at several places. He had experience. Even if all those things were true, it's still on Mike for letting him get away with it.

 

Not sure what point you are trying to make on the last 3 games. I already said he screwed up by starting him in the opener, so yea since I was one of those people I sure as hell remember!!   May want to read that part of my post again. My point about the last 3 games is he lied about why he did it. If he just said Roberts not playing well enough we need to give Kirk a chance, while he think he should have done that much earlier, I would at least believe him.

 

It's way too easy to listen to the BS out there and just dump all over Robert. It's a bit too convenient for me, so I try to look at the facts and data not the rhetoric. The facts say they all made mistakes and they all get some of the blame, but when you are the guy in charge, you get most of the blame.   MS supposedly had full control of the team. If he didn't exercise it that it's on him.

[grego]

i said earlier in this thread that if mike took at least some responsiblity for his decisions, i wouldnt rip him.

 

ive said that i think he can coach. he just makes some nutty personnel moves. 

[darrelgreenie]

In this particular context, yeah. Nice try tho lol

I don't care about the other arguments you are having couldnt care less about your Gibbs angle.

Point of fact that you are missing is that Mike Shanahan said Snyder didn't meddle.

So when you say your comments have nothing to do with the interview your are dismissing what Mike actually said.

[gtn130]

I don't care about the other arguments you are having couldnt care less about your Gibbs angle.

Point of fact that you are missing is that Mike Shanahan said Snyder didn't meddle.

So when you say your comments have nothing to do with the interview your are dismissing what Mike actually said.

 

LOL no I think you might be missing what Mike actually said considering he absolved himself of the McNabb trade by way of blaming it on Snyder. 

 

"Snyder didn't meddle except he did"

I don't care about the other arguments you are having couldnt care less about your Gibbs angle.

Point of fact that you are missing is that Mike Shanahan said Snyder didn't meddle.

So when you say your comments have nothing to do with the interview your are dismissing what Mike actually said.

 

Did you read the article at all?

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-sports-bog/wp/2015/02/18/mike-shanahan-says-daniel-snyder-led-the-push-for-donovan-mcnabb/

[darrelgreenie]

...

LOL no I think you might be missing what Mike actually said considering he absolved himself of the McNabb trade by way of blaming it on Snyder.

"Snyder didn't meddle except he did"

So you are gonna just make stuff up? Okay.

Mike didn't flat out say McNabb was Snyder decision YOU are saying that.

However; Mike said directly to Sheehan that Dan didnt meddle with personnel decisions.

If I wasn't on my phone id quote it

[Momma There Goes That Man]

I don't see why Shanahan's tenure can't be viewed through the same lens Gibbs' tenure was, but for whatever reason people keep holding up this 100% CONTROL nonsense as if it's gospel. The hypocrisy and inconsistency among fans is acute when comparing the opinions of the two coaches and their recent tenures in Washington.

Gibbs made 2 playoff appearances in 4 years. Shanahan 1, Shanahan's tenure also including overseeing the worst defense in Redskins history as well as the worst overall single season record

Gibbs walks away on his own, leaving on good terms. Shanahan was fired for poor performance both on and off field and after a slew of internal leaks and political games in addition to allegedly leaving in 2012 before deciding to come back.

Both made bad traded and had failed draft picks and didn't exactly set their successor up well.

Shanahan also had his hands in the mismanagement and career altering trajectory of the best asset this franchise has had in decades.

So yeah it's easy to see why their tenures aren't viewed the same. I criticize Gibbs 2 all the time, didn't like the news when he came back in 04 and called for him to leave many times and he shares a huge amount of blame for the state of the roster during snd after he left and the poor moves that caused it.

However, don't act like the two had the same amount of success or even conducted themselves in close to the same manner personnel failures aside. That is why Shanahan is criticized more than Gibbs 2.

It's pretty obvious to most though I'm not sure why you feel the need to continue this crusade for justice

[goskins10]

In this particular context, yeah. Nice try tho lol

The most ridiculous thing about the DEMONIZE SHANAHAN group is that Gibbs is given a free pass. In both cases Snyder said he was completely hands off, yet people only believe it as it applies to Shanahan. 

 

 

Actually to me the more ridiculous thing is lumping people into groups. I think MS is lying little weasel who would do anything to get out taking responsibility. I also think Joe Gibbs made quite a few mistakes that kept the team from getting better. So which group am I in? 

 

But what you are calling a pass is actually people being willing to believe what Joe Gibbs said - BTW I posted a link showing he said directly that DS never meddled in player evaluation. He would help sign players but he left the player evaluation up to him and his coaches. On one hand MS says he didn't meddle and then he comes back later and said he had his hand forced. Well which one was it?

 

Joe Gibbs 2 was only slightly more successful than MS. The records are fairly close and they both made quite a few disastrous personnel decisions. But people like Joe more because he is honest. When he retired the 2nd time he said it was because the game was past him. He no longer felt like he was helping the team. MS had to be run out of town.

 

That's the difference.

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

Point of fact that you are missing is that Mike Shanahan said Snyder didn't meddle.

 Well to be fair, Gibbs also said that Danny didn't meddle. There are things that we know he did though that I think most would classify as meddling.

[gtn130]

Gibbs made 2 playoff appearances in 4 years. Shanahan 1, Shanahan's tenure also including overseeing the worst defense in Redskins history as well as the worst overall single season record

Gibbs walks away on his own, leaving on good terms. Shanahan was fired after a slew of internal leaks and political games in addition to allegedly leaving in 2012 before deciding to come back.

Both made bad traded and had failed draft picks and didn't exactly set their successor up well.

Shanahan also had his hands in the mismanagement and career altering trajectory of the best asset this franchise has had in decades.

So yeah it's easy to see why their tenures aren't viewed the same. I criticize Gibbs 2 all the time, didn't like the news when he came back in 04 and called for him to leave many times and he shares a huge amount of blame for the state of the roster during snd after he left and the poor moves that caused it.

However, don't act like the two had the same amount of success or even conducted themselves in close to the same manner personnel failures aside. That is why Shanahan is criticized more than Gibbs 2.

It's pretty obvious to most though I'm not sure why you feel the need to continue this crusade for justice

 

tl;dr

 

but I was never arguing Gibbs didn't have better results. My point is that Snyder was involved in personnel decisions during both tenures, but only Gibbs is given a pass according to some posters.

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

So you are gonna just make stuff up? Okay.

He's not making it up.

 

“And the decision was made, and I think mainly from Dan. Even though Bruce orchestrated the trade. I think Dan was the guy that really wanted Donovan the most.”

[Momma There Goes That Man]

Well to be fair, Gibbs also said that Danny didn't meddle. There are things that we know he did though that I think most would classify as meddling.

I think if you are inclined to villianise Snyder then any involvement he has in any personnel move is likely to be viewed as meddling or demanding rather than something that might be harmless, helpful, constructive or even just useless either way in other franchises.

[gtn130]

Actually to me the more ridiculous thing is lumping people into groups. I think MS is lying little weasel who would do anything to get out taking responsibility. I also think Joe Gibbs made quite a few mistakes that kept the team from getting better. So which group am I in? 

 

But what you are calling a pass is actually people being willing to believe what Joe Gibbs said - BTW I posted a link showing he said directly that DS never meddled in player evaluation. He would help sign players but he left the player evaluation up to him and his coaches. On one hand MS says he didn't meddle and then he comes back later and said he had his hand forced. Well which one was it?

 

Joe Gibbs 2 was only slightly more successful than MS. The records are fairly close and they both made quite a few disastrous personnel decisions. But people like Joe more because he is honest. When he retired the 2nd time he said it was because the game was past him. He no longer felt like he was helping the team. MS had to be run out of town.

 

That's the difference.

 

The only group I've lumped them in is two coaches who have suffered under Snyder. 

 

And I have no idea what you're talking about. Just read this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-sports-bog/post/dan-snyder-joe-gibbs-and-being-hands-off/2011/06/03/AGi1ryHH_blog.html

I think if you are inclined to villianise Snyder then any involvement he has in any personnel move is likely to be viewed as meddling or demanding rather than something that might be harmless, helpful, constructive or even just useless either way in other franchises.

 

Are you joking? three of the last 16 years haven't been complete failures. I'm gonna keep assuming Snyder's involvement is a net negative but enjoy your fantasy world

[Momma There Goes That Man]

tl;dr

but I was never arguing Gibbs didn't have better results. My point is that Snyder was involved in personnel decisions during both tenures, but only Gibbs is given a pass according to some posters.

Maybe you should read what other response to you if you want to have any conversations on the board.

Since you couldn't be bothered with reading 7 simple and brief paragraphs, I will gladly accept that you have nothing more to add to the conversation and that your posting etiquette is as shallow as your arguments

[gtn130]

Maybe you should read what other response to you if you want to have any conversations on the board.

Since you couldn't be bothered with reading 7 simple and brief paragraphs, I will gladly accept that you have nothing more to add to the conversation and that your posting etiquette is as shallow as your arguments

 

Maybe try writing in a more concise fashion? I would say my posting etiquette is elite considering I don't write novels and expect people to actually read them