WP - The Redskins won’t be any better in 2017. Can Dan Snyder accept that?

[HapHaszard]

Article by Jerry Brewer, that I fell might be of interest and comment from the members

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/redskins/the-redskins-wont-be-any-better-in-2017-can-dan-snyder-accept-that/2017/09/01/c903a5e8-8f4a-11e7-84c0-02cc069f2c37_story.html

 

In their most honest moments, the Washington Redskins have tempered expectations for this season. Quarterback Kirk Cousins mentioned recently that the offense — the most vital organ of this team — might need until October to find itself. Coach Jay Gruden is already conditioning his players to compete through the kind of uneven football that made last season so exasperating.

 

The regular season doesn’t begin until next Sunday, but the ceiling seems to be lowering. Barring extreme good fortune, Washington won’t make a dramatic leap in 2017. This is merely a different version of the teams that finished just above .500 the past two seasons. This is a younger, more talented and more athletic version that could set up the franchise for a greater future, but if you seek definitive signs of progress this season, you figure to be disappointed.

 

Nevertheless, this is the most important of Cousins’s three seasons as the starting quarterback, of Gruden’s four seasons as the head coach and of this entire process to finally make Washington a consistent winner again.

 

click on the link for more

[elkabong82]

The offense should/will still be top 10. The defense could defnitely improve and if that happens the team will likely be better.

 

I get Brewer's message of patience fo a still-developing product, but think it's incredibly stupid for a local journalist to declare the season's result as determined before a single regular season snap. Doing that hurts his message because he comes off like a dick because of it. Really all he had to do was use the word "if."

[TSO]

I agree with his premise, and my concern is the same as his... the desire will be to blow everything up if that's the case and it'd end up a majorly wrong move to do so. It'd be so Redskins, though, as much as I hate that phrase. 

 

That being said, I'm trying to retain a bit more optimism about our prospects this season than that. If we come out looking bad against the Eagles I'll change my tune, but for now I still think the talent on this roster is better than an average finish, and the coaches we've got can get it out of them. 

 

I do believe in stability, probably more so than most here. For me, the significance of stability goes, in order: 

 

1) Head of Personnel Department

2) HC

3) QB

4) Rest of player personnel

5) Rest of coaching staff

 

If you have stability at 1 you can overcome most changes to what's below it, and even improve there. An overriding philosophy is applied to the roster and you can find people who fit that philosophy as necessary. 

 

If you don't, you'd better have stability at 2 because then at least you have a chance to benefit from a standardized system of development in terms of scheme. 

 

If you don't, stability at 3 will still give you a chance, though you can easily put his career in jeopardy by not being stable with the above two. 

 

If you don't, stability at 4 won't matter much and 5 even less so. 

 

So we're at 2 and 3 right now, in my mind. We lost 1 this offseason, obviously. We have significant change at 4 and 5.

 

 It's not ideal, but I feel like they've proven enough to continue building around them for at least the immediate future (2-3 years minimum). And not because they've been awesome and have left no questions in terms of their abilities, though I personally rate them higher than many do on that front, but because destabilizing either of those two spots will more likely end in failure than trying to make it work with them. 

 

Suffice to say, I don't trust our hiring process nor scouting process enough to believe they can replace either of those two with people who give us a better chance. 

[Skinsinparadise]

Some key mentions in the article for me are the parts that I cited below.  I think "weird" sums it up well as for the Kirk situation.  You have a team that in theory is on the rise but arguably the key cog to it will possibly be gone soon.  The FO drill is weird, too as Jerry touches on.  But the operative point I think he's trying to make is Dan's impatience has arguably been the key variable in this team's lack of long term sustainable success.  You got teams like the Steelers preaching patience and stability as the hallmark traits to NFL success.  And Dan just doesn't seem to buy in regardless of how many times he washes, rinses and repeats the same approach and it doesn't work. 

 

Even the articles that cite people who dig Dan (and he has some fans indeed) they say while his intentions are good and he does good things for them and people they know -- however, he's an impatient, emotional, seat of the pants kind of guy.   I take Brewer's article as about can Dan finally overcome that.  Every now and then we read an article about how he's changed but those same articles often have some doubters mentioned in the soup.  And then years later, we hear in a new article -- well he didn't exactly change but maybe now he has.  On and on. 

 

He's done good stuff for charity and causes.  Some people like Gibbs swear by him.  But I've heard and read a gazillion times in various articles/interviews from those who work with him -- he's irascible and impatient and even when he stays away from involving himself in roster moves, he never completely does so, he still likes to mingle just not as much.   Do I think he's a key reason why this team has been one of the NFL's biggest losers during his reign.  Yes.  

 

And I have to admit I had a phase myself where I thought he finally got it.  I recall well, the references at the time of Scot's hire.  The ones that stuck out to me the most telling in retrospect were:  Dan telling Scot he is embarrassed so he will let Scot do his thing. And the other was a report where Bruce asked Dan are you going to patient and allow Scot to do his thing.  Now I don't know what went down with Scot so my point isn't really about him.  It's about returning to the same old GM structure that Dan seems to love where you don't have one strong voice (expert) in control.

 

One of the more illuminating Shanny stories about Dan to me was him saying that Dan came into his office and said lets go get Randy Moss. Shanny said he told him no.  To Dan's credit he listened to him.  But I find it curious that our present GM structure is set up in a way where if Dan wants to do something like that on a whim, he could do it.  There is no one in the way to stop him.  

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/redskins/the-redskins-wont-be-any-better-in-2017-can-dan-snyder-accept-that/2017/09/01/c903a5e8-8f4a-11e7-84c0-02cc069f2c37_story.html?utm_term=.d32385893ad3

.... Failure to achieve closure with the Cousins situation clouds the franchise’s future and makes this season weird, no matter how professional the quarterback acts.

 

...After the season, Washington will have to make a choice: trust that this crew can finish the job without clear evidence or start over for the 227th time. You know too well the hapless cycle of transience that the latter creates. But blind faith? Yeah, that would be something.

Something wise, perhaps. And definitely, something new....

[carex]

impatience?  He's given the past two coaches four years each.   People complained he didn't change DCs quick enough

[Skinsinparadise]

1 minute ago, carex said:

impatience?  He's given the past two coaches four years each.   People complained he didn't change DCs quick enough

 

Dan isn't the one advising on DC changes (at least I hope not) so not sure sure where that point was going.    Patience is not about coaches exclusively.  But this sort of makes a point anyway.   Most successful teams do not seeing a run of two coaches in a row given 4 years as stability.  To us it feels that way.   It's actually Dan's best run of coaching stability as far as I recall.   We've had 3 different versions of a FO in the last 4 years.    Dan hasn't been great as for his patience with coaches.  But not a disaster either.  I'm sure he would have stuck with Gibbs for example if he didn't retire. 

 

But IMO his problem has been mixing himself into buying the groceries and that part of the operation hasn't been stable and sound.    I take what Jerry is saying here is even if they take a step back give Jay more time.  Dan fired Shanny for example one year removed from winning the division. He's also advising to give the current FO team time.   Patience + Stability = Helps Breed Success.  

[carex]

14 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Dan isn't the one advising on DC changes (at least I hope not) so not sure sure where that point was going.    Patience is not about coaches exclusively.  But this sort of makes a point anyway.   Most successful teams do not seeing a run of two coaches in a row given 4 years as stability.  To us it feels that way.   It's actually Dan's best run of coaching stability as far as I recall.   We've had 3 different versions of a FO in the last 4 years.    Dan hasn't been great as for his patience with coaches.  But not a disaster either.  I'm sure he would have stuck with Gibbs for example if he didn't retire. 

 

But IMO his problem has been mixing himself into buying the groceries and that part of the operation hasn't been stable and sound.    I take what Jerry is saying here is even if they take a step back give Jay more time.  Dan fired Shanny for example one year removed from winning the division. He's also advising to give the current FO team time.   Patience + Stability = Helps Breed Success.  

 

He fired Shanny one year prior to his contract expiring.  Meaning he either goes into the year with a lame duck coach with FULL control over the roster or he lets him go.  That was actually a very smart move IMO.

 

Overall I would say his rep with coaches is overblown.  He fired Norv his first year, but Norv had been here seven, he fired Marty after one, but Spurrier quit on him after two and Gibbs retired on him after four.

[bobandweave]

The only thing we can all expect is that things will be different every year. Lets not forget the NFL is known as Not For Long. Not sure if the whole NFL like the entire AFC East is just waiting for Tom Brady to retire before really trying but there are eras for everything. We have all been living in a Patriots world the past decade and that will end soon. When it does (probably this year when they win another title) then we will all be seeing a new era begin. The ending will be marked by guys like Tom Brady, Bill Belichick, Drew Brees, Eli Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, Phillip Rivers, Carson Palmer, Larry Fitzgerald, Frank Gore, Darren Sproles, and Adrian Peterson ending their careers and then the new era will begin. That's what's so interesting to me about this season. 

 

If Daniel Snyder thinks like this and takes a longer view of the league and sees we are all knocking on the door to a new era then someone like Cousins who is a major player in the new era becomes irreplaceable and gets re-signed no matter what happens this year. If the owner however sees Cousins struggle this year and his production drop off (I personally think this is bound to happen and have for months) then he will ultimately make a grave mistake and Cousins will leave and our team will remain bottom dwellers for another 20 years. 

 

If we are honest with ourselves we should all see the offense is going to take a step backwards this season, our defense is going to take a small step forwards this season, and ultimately that the 2017 season is not this franchises season to win it all. Rome was neither built in a day or destroyed in a day. It will take time to get ourselves up to elite team level and as TSO points out stability is required to build a championship talented roster.

 

I personally believe in today's NFL that his rankings are too low with the QB position but otherwise is a great point. About the QB I'd raise the QB position to number one on the list because in today's NFL no team will win anything if they do not have a top 15 QB. Teams without one will be stuck in QB hell forever losing season after season much as we witnessed ourselves the past 20 years continuing to look for one until they finally find that guy.

 

A team like the Texans with an all world Defense aren't going anywhere without a top 15 QB, Calvin Johnson as hall of fame worthy as he was never took the Lions anywhere because he didn't have a top 15 QB. Even the all mighty Patriots when they lost Tom Brady who had arguably the greatest head coach ever never went to the preseason without that top 15 QB. Nothing not a GM, not a head coach, is as important today as the QB position in today's NFL. Part of the reason is how the rules have been changed to accommodate that position over the years. Whatever reason without a top 15 QB forget about it.  

 

If the owner or we the fans take the opposite view of this season then what I predict is in store then only disappointment will reign supreme, and we will lose our white whale and go straight back into QB hell in 2018. If we are honest and say this team is rebuilding and anything over 6 wins with this schedule is great this year then we will keep building our team the right way brick by brick until one day we see it in the Superbowl. It all depends on how we look at this season as a whole.  Not trying to discuss Cousins outside of the Cousins thread but ultimately this teams future rests on his shoulders more then anyone else and losing him next year strengthens my belief that long term this franchise is doomed if the owner has unrealistic expectations. If he has realistic expectations we all basically should be viewing this season as one to get guys like Doctson, Perine, Allen and others acclimated to the NFL and a step in the right direction to the new NFL era and brighter days ahead. 

[Skinsinparadise]

2 hours ago, carex said:

 

He fired Shanny one year prior to his contract expiring.  Meaning he either goes into the year with a lame duck coach with FULL control over the roster or he lets him go.  That was actually a very smart move IMO.

 

Overall I would say his rep with coaches is overblown.  He fired Norv his first year, but Norv had been here seven, he fired Marty after one, but Spurrier quit on him after two and Gibbs retired on him after four.

 

Whether it was smart or not is for Shanny to go is a different debate.  Aside from Gibbs, I can't think of a tenure that ended smoothly.  If the debate about stability is ALL about head coaches (which IMO it isn't) then his track record isn't hot but there are owners (not successful ones) who are even more impatient.  But IMO that isn't the operative point with Dan's tenure.   So if you want to argue that Dan's been good on that coaching front, have it.  

 

As I said in other thread, like Dan I grew up glorifying the 80s Redskins.  Based on how Dan operates as a owner -- he comes off like his takeaway from that era is that it was all about Joe Gibbs not Bobby Beathard.  The FO and roster building process has mostly been a wild and tumultuous ride.

 

I take Brewer's point is lets play this nice and steady.   Dan has adopted that approach in spurts but it rarely lasts.  Some of the more successful franchises are stubbornly consistent and stick with it through thick and thin.  

[Rufus T Firefly]

Lack of stability has not been the problem in the Snyder era. Lack of competence has. Mostly, but not exclusively, in the front office area.

[TSO]

9 hours ago, carex said:

impatience?  He's given the past two coaches four years each.   People complained he didn't change DCs quick enough

 

You're right, but I don't think you're realizing that it's not just about patience on the coaching level, it's having patience with a process that starts from top to bottom and maintaining that organizational hierarchy the entire time, trusting in it and avoiding any undermining of the roles as initially assigned within it.

 

But it most importantly starts with a sound hiring process. You don't have that, you're just going to make the wrong hires and no amount of stability will work. I mean, we had a "stable FO" with friggin Vinny Cerrato at the top and Snyder heavily involved. Not good.  

 

So, yeah, as much as I value stability I'd place the hiring process above it. That matters more. 

 

I digress back to the stability deal... We know that hasn't happened in terms of the FO recently, I don't think anyone can argue that at this point. And, to me, that's more important than anything coaching-related. 

 

As for coaching, we can argue that it hasn't happened with either of the coaches that lasted the 4 years that you're mentioning here, either. Just looking at it on the surface and saying "they got 4 years" doesn't really tell the entire story in terms of stability/patience, right? 

 

 But then that goes back to what you believe in Mike's stories about Dan/RG3 and whatnot. I tend to believe in it a little more than most here, though I don't think he's 100% being honest. The first year with Jay was, in my mind, the total opposite of stability. I'd argue Jay has only gotten two years of a stable environment, with this one in question now since Scot was fired. 

 

I'll grant you that it's all debatable, but man, the evidence is overwhelming to me. The point is, I don't call it a stable environment, nor commend Snyder's patience, when the title of HC is being undermined itself. Whether he gives them 4 years or 100 years. 

 

But even with Gibbs, who was another guy who lasted 4 years, we had major turnover in every other aspect. Be it at QB, offensive systems, and player personnel in general with the FA acquisitions. One side, the defense, stayed stable for the most part and, surprise surprise, was the strength of the team (for the most part - but when they regressed majorly in 2016, they stuck with it so, again, stability/patience + the right personnel changes).

 

Which goes back to the earlier point I was making - FO stability in Gibbs' case wasn't a good thing, because Snyder and Vinny were heavily involved and had no business being in those positions. Gibbs himself should've never been given final say on personnel. Again, hiring process. 

 

So it's not one or two things or three. It's a bunch of things that the organization has done wrong during Snyder's tenure. He's stable when he shouldn't be with people he shouldn't be, he can hand out roles to people who don't deserve it, undermine those who do, and then it's instability virtually everywhere else. All of that has led to a bad overall environment where the further down the totem pole you are the more you're setup to inevitably fail.

 

Right now, for me, it's simple. I think Jay and Kirk can do a lot of good. I think we have a higher chance of winning a championship, or at least contending for one, with those two in their roles. My concern is with whether or not they are in an environment where they can thrive, and the way this current FO is setup affects that. 

 

I worry that we continue to fall into the trap of targeting the wrong people so as to make it easy for Dan/Allen to set up a new savior/villain dichotomy for us to eat up while the core organizational problem remains as is. 

[veteranskinsfan]

Thanks for posting this article.  I think Brewer is reading the situation correctly.  As fans we need to temper our expectations for this season.  It was a big deal to lose both of our big play receivers and who knows if our tight end can stay healthy for a full season.  I wonder how much rope Snyder will give Allen or if Allen could be the fall guy if we go 6-10 this year.  In Snyder's world everyone is expendable except himself.

[Jacoby66forHOF]

Brewer is a troll.  Don't feed him.

 

He also thinks that opinion/commentary is journalism.  

 

 

[I Love The Skins]

3 hours ago, veteranskinsfan said:

Thanks for posting this article.  I think Brewer is reading the situation correctly.  As fans we need to temper our expectations for this season.  It was a big deal to lose both of our big play receivers and who knows if our tight end can stay healthy for a full season.  I wonder how much rope Snyder will give Allen or if Allen could be the fall guy if we go 6-10 this year.  In Snyder's world everyone is expendable except himself.

Like it has been said Jerry Brewer is a troll;. I don't take what he says seriously.

[Veryoldschool]

It is easy to imagine things heading south this year because the near league best passing game has a made a crappy team seem respectable.  With green wide receivers and a different OC the passing game could drop considerably even with Cousins performing his job.  Couple that with a faithless owner who is comfortable blowing things up and marketing a new creation and the odds of a meltdown are pretty good.

[I Love The Skins]

I am going to take the opposite view and be positive I can see things going well.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

Some fans remind me of the folks constantly calling out fake news when it comes to politics.  If they don't like the message it's fake news.  Same thing applies here in DC, any media member not writing fluff pieces about the Skins is a joke, can't be trusted, has a grudge/bias, etc.

 

The only local writer I can think of off hand that almost habitually appears to have an axe to grind and takes pleasure in trashing the Skins is Sally Jenkins.  But even her stuff can be filled with truths folks don't want to hear about.

[AzSkinsFan63]

"The WP is still is still a rag"..can Washington  fans keep reading?

[Jacoby66forHOF]

3 hours ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Some fans remind me of the folks constantly calling out fake news when it comes to politics.  If they don't like the message it's fake news.  Same thing applies here in DC, any media member not writing fluff pieces about the Skins is a joke, can't be trusted, has a grudge/bias, etc.

 

The only local writer I can think of off hand that almost habitually appears to have an axe to grind and takes pleasure in trashing the Skins is Sally Jenkins.  But even her stuff can be filled with truths folks don't want to hear about.

 

Jenkins is a columnist, so is Brewer.  They write opinion pieces to get reactions.  Jenkins is legit, IMO, but Brewer is just a troll on the level of UnWise Mike. That's the issue. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

Perhaps I'm missing the Brewer trolling as I don't read everything he does.  Most everything I've read has been even keeled.

[barnacle]

Redskins fans only trust news from Larry Michaels. 

[dyst]

Nothing about this offseason or the preseason leads me to believe the offense will be as good. Running game looks worse, QB play seems worse and WRs look worse.

[XxSpearheadxX]

23 minutes ago, dyst said:

Nothing about this offseason or the preseason leads me to believe the offense will be as good. Running game looks worse, QB play seems worse and WRs look worse.

Can't really argue with that, I am staying positive though - there is alot of talent there if everybody doesn't just run into each other every play. 

 

I have faith in Kirk - everytime he starts shaky he seems to pull it together. I honestly wonder if he has massive nerves that he regularly has to overcome. 

 

Next Sunday can't come fast enough. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

5 hours ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

The only local writer I can think of off hand that almost habitually appears to have an axe to grind and takes pleasure in trashing the Skins is Sally Jenkins.  But even her stuff can be filled with truths folks don't want to hear about.

 

I think it's more that they don't want to hear about it from her, and for the reasons you mentioned...

[Califan007 The Constipated]

7 hours ago, Jacoby66forHOF said:

Brewer is a troll.  Don't feed him.

 

He also thinks that opinion/commentary is journalism.  

 

 

That part in bold is an excellent point for everyone to remember...

 

Journalism usually means conveying facts and information about a topic, and basically letting the reader decide what it should mean. Opinion and commentary is one (often very) subjective view on a topic, and doesn't get filled with all the facts, usually just the ones that back up the writer's perspective.

 

Most sportswriters deal in subjective opinion pieces. Most readers believe these articles are objective facts presented by journalists. It gets blurred and some writers make use of that blurred perception.