Per Russini, Gruden will be back for 2018

[SkinsFTW]

On 12/31/2017 at 7:53 PM, Reaper Skins said:

Dianna Russini

 

✔@diannaESPN

 

The Washington Redskins will retain head coach Jay Gruden. Ownership vocally informed the staff Gruden will be staying per sources

 

My question is what about Bruce Allen?

 

The team comes out with a statement, as if we are supposed to be surprised or believe that he was on the hot seat, but maybe this also puts it in everyone's mind that they are actually putting him on the hot seat for next year. Like, "We've held discussions on this internally and have decided to give Jay another chance" They didn't come out with "He's our guy long term because we believe he's going to win us championships". It's more like "We mulled it over and decided that he deserves 1 last opportunity to win with the enormous amount of talent we've provided him."

 

So why not an announcement that Bruce and Doug are going to keep their jobs and get another chance despite their failure to find a QB that they'd sign long term over their 8 year tenure with the Redskins? Or despite their failure to field a top 15 defense ONCE in 8 years? Or their failure to roster a single receiver in 2017 that would start on any playoff team? Or RB? Couldn't find a returner anywhere on any practice squad or CFL, for real?

 

Bruce Allen and his crew need to be given notice, IMO.

[Voice_of_Reason]

58 minutes ago, Monk4thaHALL said:

 

Honestly I think this is the underlying theme from VOR's post. Who cares if he was fixated on Gruden specifically? Gruden has a voice in the hierarchy. But it's an out of tune chorus. 

The structure nonetheless is ... ****ing complex, man. 

I appreciate the response.  

 

There are three things leadership needs to have in any organization structure in the world, doesn't matter industry or business type:

Responsibility

Authority

Accountability

 

You could toss in "Clarity" as well if you want, though it can also be combined with Responsibility.

 

- A PERSON, not a group of people, needs to be given a responsibility.  He/she (I'm just going to stick with he since this is a football conversation) is responsible for something. 

- Then you give that person the AUTHORITY to do the job. If you're the President, this means hiring your staff, defining other roles/responsibilities, and delegating

- Then you hold that person ACCOUNTABLE.  If you have a clearly defined responsibility, and have been given the authority to do the job, and enough time and resources to carry it out, and you still don't do a good job, then you are accountable. This doesn't necessary mean fired immediately, but at least held accountable and made to create a recovery plan. Over time, if you can't get it right, the organization moves on.

 

If the Redskins relied on Wins/Losses as a component of revenue, (which they do, but only to a VERY minor extent), then Bruce would have been out of a job a while ago.  The fact is that because of revenue sharing and TV revenue, the team (Dan) is going to make money whether his team sucks or not, and whether people go to the game or not.  Now, he could make MORE money if the team was good through merchandise sales, premium seat sales, etc.  But the Redskins are not losing money, so there's no real urgency for change. 

 

The problem is in this FO structure, it's extraordinarily unclear who has what responsibility.  And if that's the case, you can't possibly hold anybody accountable.  Maybe that's why I just migrate to Jay as the accountable person, since he talks the most on behalf of the organization. Though, honestly, I know that it's Dan who's the biggest issue because he has not held Bruce accountable for essentially 7 crappy seasons, with 1 magical 10-6 run, and a back-door 9-7 playoff appearance. 

 

Good organizations of any type, again, doesn't matter what industry, have structure, roles and responsibilities.  Even the CEOs of Google, Disney, Yahoo, Boeing, etc.  are accountable.  If they miss their number several quarters in a row, they get whacked to the curb. (Granted, which a magnificent golden parachute.)  

 

Within the organization, you can have multiple structures, some more hierarchical, some more collaborative.  In my experience, R&D type companies tend to do better with the collaborative, less rigid structure, while the more operational companies (and a football team would fit into that category) are better with more defined roles and responsibilities.  

 

58 minutes ago, Monk4thaHALL said:

 

I think VOR called into question why there's always such divergent visions within the FO. You highlighted it. The Head Coach wants Cousins as our long term franchise QB. Apparently the highest ranking FO exec hasn't been willing to make that happen, for various reasons. 

 

I would have agreed that Jay wants Cousins back until I just heard his season ending presser.  If you just heard Jay's press conference, that was about the most luke-warm evaluation of Cousins' season as you could have. And he was pretty effusive about Colt, saying he trusts him fully and he could come in and play and be effective.  He did say they weren't giving Colt the job, and they were still negotiating "with the other quarterback".  So I'm not sure that Kirk is REALLY his guy.  Not saying Colt is, just that there wasn't a big, "Yeah, we are going to try everything we can to get Kirk back." He said "he's showed some flashes, couldn't really put us on his back, nice to have back, but we'll see what happens." (That's paraphrasing, but he used the terms "flashes" and "could not put us on his back." 

 

Read into that what you will, but it was pretty shocking when I heard it.  

 

[TSO]

2 hours ago, Monk4thaHALL said:

In summary, I know you and I are on the same page. I'm just venting here.

But my point is simply, I think you and VOR are probably arguing over the same coin.

 

Yes, we are, as you know I’ve been at the forefront discussing these issues on the board here the last how many years. Almost word for word verbatim of your post. I could literally go back and just post old posts on the topic I have and no one would know whether it was mine or yours here. 

 

That being said, I think it’s important we target the right people. Hence, my response to VOR. To his credit, he acknowledged it. It just gets frustrating seeing people we hire here end up handicapped over and over again by an improperly structured FO that has no one to blame except Dan and his top exec, only to see fans attack the surface level targets which actually plays right into their hands and makes it easy to pacify said fans.  :/ 

 

Everyone has weaknesses. That’s the thing. You’re not going to hire someone who is perfect. It

doesn't exist. But that’s what “organization” is all about. The support structure. The roles and responsibilities given via titles, the way those balance each other out, don’t over burden anyone, and allow

people to operate in their realm of expertise without unwarranted interference. 

 

We don’t have that, so the weaknesses are highlighted. Strengths minimized. And then we target who we see on a daily basis versus recognize their handicap while ignoring the root of the issue since they operate behind the scenes. 

 

What makes it absolutely maddening this time around is we actually have a coach who isn’t so egocentric and is willing to defer to a strong GM on personnel. This is actually rare for us. Yet, here we are completely squandering that golden opportunity to properly structure the FO with people willing to accept their roles. Just maddening. 

[RemoveSnyder]

2 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

only to see fans attack the surface level targets which actually plays right into their hands and makes it easy to pacify said fans. :/ 

 

Well, I was going to craft a post in the free agent thread concerning the o-line and how the front office ultimately decides which positions need upgrading, which ones are steady, etc. Essentially I was going to detail how predetermination is a routine tactic from this FO. Everyone does that in the NFL, I guess (I suppose I do too in my own evals), but you have to be able to see your defiances very clearly and unbiasedly and not be swayed by any form of prejudice if you're going to fix it properly. 

 

And that prejudice can be in the form of choosing scheme over talent. It could be something as simple as allowing the positional coach to sway a hung jury within the FO. And if the coaches are the ones driving the bus on why the rookie 6th rounder should be slated at #1 on the depth chart instead of allowing another contingent within the FO to emphasize that the position needs to be targeted ... oh say, in the 1st round of the Draft, that's a big decision. 

 

 

And further, that when a deficiency becomes apparent concerning our o-line, it seems that our positional coach and now head coach (cite the Roullier tweet recently by Keim) are in fact determining just how pressing the idea of upgrading the LG and/or Center position is. 

 

And who has the biggest voice on who should be the back-up swing tackle? The o-line coach himself / the head coach or the divergent group lead by ... (IDK) Ky Smith (just an example) who wants someone else rather than our 32 year old declining back-up swing tackle? 

 

Does Bruce step in and flip a coin?

 

That matters when decisions in free agency hinge upon there being a decision made about whether to retain the guy currently on the roster who had a craptacular year (Ty Nyskhe) or go after a younger version OT in free agency. So, if that decision ultimately comes down to Callahan's appraisal, and we kick the can on a guy who was beat like a drum this year ... YES it really matters. 

 

 

 

The implication being that they miss the opportunity to get better players and/or difference making players who we all look at in retrospect and lament were not brought in. You only get one chance. And this FO has often proven to hitch themselves to declining assets for a year too long, and in other instances hitch themselves to relatively obscure young guys, unproven, with sometimes too much unwarranted optimism for future growth. 

 

Essentially they miss opportunities, often. 

 

And this FO has a long history of making the wrong choice on who to keep and then how to proceed thereafter in both FA and then the draft. And one example I was going to point was from a few years ago when Bruce and S. Campbell and M. Brown were running things before bringing in McC on the "Iraqpo" situation. 

 

The 'Po franchise tag (wrong move), then the selection of Trent Murphy with our 1st selection that draft instead of Jarvis Landry (wrong move), and Landry was "my guy"  incidentally, then furthermore never getting anything in return for 'Po. I had actually promoted trying to abstain from FA that year and try to get a comp pick. But after he was franchise tagged I argued that they should try to trade him on the spot for anything within the top 100 of the upcoming draft. A draft that was clearly the best WR class in modern history. I digress.

 

It was just a combination of wrong deployment. And that's why when I watched McC operate, it buoyed me because I recognize that decision were being made from a football standpoint. A fundamental understanding of the trenches standpoint. And that alone gave me confidence to let the man work and make his fair share of misses and hits. But if he was right in the one bug area of the QB ... he had a lot more leeway from me. 

 

I guess that's why I'm so broken from all this. 

 

 

[TSO]

@Monk4thaHALL Agreed.

 

I will reiterate my point being that, while we have a structure now where coaches are likely given too much personnel say in some convoluted soup of roles, it’s not their fault that’s the case. We shouldn’t punish them for it. They were not the ones pushing the whole “added responsibilities” crap Allen pushed after firing Scot last offseason. 

 

We know for sure that Jay, as HC, had no problem deferring to Scot on personnel, even when they’d disagree (which is inevitable). There’s no doubt in my mind that the assistants would feel the same regarding that. 

 

In the end, we completely agree about the role of GM and having a unified vision that can sort through all the voices and come to the right conclusion regarding the intricacies of roster building. To know when to be cold and calculated versus the overly loyal tendency of a coach. To know who fits the coach’s scheme better than the coach himself or, better yet, is the type of player so multi-dimensional he’s not scheme-dependent. 

 

I’ve had to argue about what “final say” means, how valuable it is, and why it’s essential here quite a bunch. 

 

Good talk. And, as always, I’ll look forward to the post you mentioned.   

[LadySkinsFan]

If Jon Gruden is hired by the Raiders, a big NFL story next year is the brother coaching story. Even if they don't play against each other.  

 

If Cousins isn't here next year, our Gruden won't be back for 2019.

[dyst]

On 1/1/2018 at 9:29 AM, bradboyd80 said:

 

Why? He's been a HC for several years now.  I can't imagine he would want to give that up just to be an assistant to his brother.  

Let's say they don't sign Cousins, a lot of the 1 year guys sign elsewhere, maybe he says "enough of this, I'm out"....probably not though. 

[VRIEL1]

Sorry edited: Caldwell could give our Offense a boost. He's done well as an OC. He might help the team. 

[Ghost of]

No one should be retained from this group, but at least if they're going to keep Gruden, they have to get a playcaller.

[SkinsFTW]

8 hours ago, Ghost of Nibbs McPimpin said:

No one should be retained from this group, but at least if they're going to keep Gruden, they have to get a playcaller.

 

Actually I'd fire them all for not even remembering how this went last time, 2014, when Gruden also did not have a play caller. Oh and a GM too. That's another reason why Allen is fired. And if Allen decides that Cousins is not his franchise QB that means that in his 8 years he still hasn't found the one piece that every winning team has = fire this mother****er pronto.

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

I’m sure a bunch of folks saw/heard/read the after season wrap up presser from Gruden.  

 

After listening to it twice, it really sounds as if he’s comfortable with McCoy, Doctson, Grant (“They will do everything they can to bring him back”), Reed (We’re counting on him to stay healthy), Crowder, and he hopes the RB is already on the roster.

 

I’ll freely admit that some of this is coach speak.  But we heard the same coach speak last year and it turned true.

 

this is where a competent FO with a GM who has authorit would say, “Look, I know you love all those guys and they know your scheme.  But we gotta get some new folks because that group isn’t good enough.” And then they work together to figure out how to add a WR1, fix the running game personnel, etc.

 

if we go in with the group Gruden just praised the heck out of, it’s a 4-12 team. Unless the defense becomes the Broncos defense from a few years ago where they could win games 6-3 every week if they had to. 

 

Amd a GM would know that.

 

i love the post from @Monk4thaHALL, where he talked about “predetermined” and scheme prejudice.  I think that hits the nail on the head.

 

And while Dan is to blame for allowing Bruce to run this spider web, I really wish Jay would be able to overcome it a bit more and understand that more changes are needed.  But it’s hard to see that from inside the fox hole.

 

Which is why you need the damn GM we don’t have.  

[Conn]

Just read this article about Sean McVay and made myself feel sick all over again that we allowed this home-grown, in-house genius to leave and are stuck with Gruden.

 

http://www.nfl.com/labs/sidelines/sean-mcvay/sean-mcvay.html

[TSO]

On 1/3/2018 at 9:53 PM, Voice_of_Reason said:

And while Dan is to blame for allowing Bruce to run this spider web, I really wish Jay would be able to overcome it a bit more and understand that more changes are needed.  But it’s hard to see that from inside the fox hole.

 

Therein lies the ridiculous nature of this entire ordeal. 

 

You’re expecting the HC to “overcome” problems given to him by what is supposed to be his own supporting cast. It is the very antithesis to “organization”. What’s the point then? Why have an owner? A team president? A personnel department? Why separate any responsibilities? 

 

Let’s just make Jay all of those things and assign the blame to him then. Let’s remove all titles since they’re essentially meaningless. It’s friggin ridiculous. 

 

We really don’t know how much Jay is actually trying to overcome or how much we know he recognizes in terms of what needs to change. Going off of pressers, as you admit yourself, is silly.

 

We do know he’s the one who pushed for FO help after 2014 which led to the Scot hire. But it’s ridiculous we’re stuck here hoping he “overcomes”. Not overcome other team’s strategies, gameplans, and general opposition. Not overcome whatever teaching issues there are with some players or coaches. Nope, he needs to overcome obstacles setup within his own environment, separate from his main duties, that are supposed to be a means of elevating him, of supporting him, and allowing him to focus on the area of his expertise of which he was assigned his title. Amazing! 

 

Here’s the dilemma. As HC, his main job is to coach whatever assets he’s given. He’s not supposed to complain about what those are. He’s not going to want to admit he’s incapable of handling anything they throw at him. If they get cheap on hiring assistants, or provide no help in the hiring process, he’s just going to move forward. If they fail to scout properly, give him bad info, or don’t override him regarding personnel when necessary as should be their authority since that is THEIR DEPARTMENT, he’s going to do what he believes is best. He’s not going to refuse to give his input for God’s sake. 

 

So when that happens, and he’s continually dealt a bad hand, we should be directing our ire exclusively at those who are the root cause of said bad hand. If he’s thrust into a position where he’s tasked with handling things he’s not an expert at handling, separate from what his title is supposed to entail, and something WE KNOW he’s not demanding himself, how can we punish him for it!? Or anyone that comes here with that title!? 

 

How many of these cycles do we need to go through to recognize this? We need another coach to come in here and suffer embarrassment? Or another one to leave and excel elsewhere? If anyone thinks McVay being put in the same situation would’ve produced better results than Jay... lol. Maaaaaybe, but I’d put that at about a 5% chance and I’ve got plenty of precedent for that. McVay gets to do what he’s good at with the Rams and that’s it. He gets to be focused on his expertise. Read the article @ConnSKINS26 just posted closely, you’ll see exactly what I’m saying. I’d even argue McVay doesn’t get to hire Wade if he was elevated here because Wade doesn’t come cheap and demands certain things personnel-wise (that’s what makes him a smart coach). 

 

Here? We’d be saying the same things, asking the same questions, wondering why he can’t “overcome” better. Insulting him, trashing him, killing him, etc... What’s the over/under on the amount of “boy wonder”s we’d see sarcastically posted? We’re seriously confused still? 

[Ghost of]

18 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

Just read this article about Sean McVay and made myself feel sick all over again that we allowed this home-grown, in-house genius to leave and are stuck with Gruden.

 

http://www.nfl.com/labs/sidelines/sean-mcvay/sean-mcvay.html

Yep.

 

I know people will accuse you of hindsight but I actually think this goes to the fact that I think the Skins have become a stagnant, fearful, conservative organization.  Being conservative when you're the Patriots makes sense.  BUt people tell you what they are, and what Gruden is, is mediocre.  Better that McVay ended up being a failure that was a smart "risk" than continue to plod along with this loser we have.

 

Everyone who ever spoke of McVay spoke highly of him.  That is maybe the person you take a risk for, and see how it works out.  It may be the "bad" playcalling people complained about was Gruden overruling him or interfering with the gameplan installation.  Hard to say.

 

But because of the organization's fear of change (including dumping Griffin too slowly and including allowing Griffin to rush back after rehab), of taking the risk that the fans will be upset about, they have to deal with being locked in at a low level.  I think this same fear surrounds Cousins.  We know what he is, he should be better someplace else.  But he isn't Brady and he's not Brees.  If not for injury, the Cardinals could have been to TWO SBs with castoff QBs (Warner, they were good before Palmer's re-injured knee or whatever.)  Other teams like the Packers have Rodgers and what has that really meant for them in years?

 

Skins had their next Gibbs sitting there and were afraid to take a chance or look bad.  

[RemoveSnyder]

Honestly, I think in a short time from now whenever Gruden eventually gets canned, we'll look back and see opportunities lost. 

 

I think I can make a good case for our special teams coach to be fired. And I can at least make a decent argument that there are better d-coordinators out there.

I can argue why our o-line never seems to be able to get that 1 or 2 yards when it absolutely needs it, why our interior gets out manned routinely, and it has to do with our o-line coach and his filter for what type of linemen we get. And the FO obliges our coaches like Callahan, who ... I guess also calls the run plays, but Jay chooses whether to pass or run ...?

 

And I can certainly point to a long line things that haven't gotten better while Gruden's ruled the roost. But I guess I have to acknowledge that the 2-minute offense and 2-minute defense and the associated clock management has been hijacked by Bruce himself so it's not just Jay's fault why we suck so much at it, every year. 

 

 

If I had to spitball a coaching staff together I think Dave Toub (Kansas City) for HC, which umbrellas over to special teams.

Dan Enos for offensive coordinator (Arkansas/Central Michigan). With Sam Pittman (Georgia) or Butch Barry (Tampa/Central Michigan) for o-line. 

Scott O'Brien for special teams (New England). 

 

Would have to do a full fledged search for D-Co. Perhaps start with Nick Rapone (AZ Cardinals). Look at staff currently under contract. Ask Toub. 

Ask D coaches I respect for insight/advice, like Rocky Long (SDSU). Look at Mike Pettine again, maybe Del Rio, others, etc. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

10 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

Therein lies the ridiculous nature of this entire ordeal. 

Ok, I'm not entirely sure that I was clear, I think we're saying the same thing.  When I said that I "wished" he could overcome, that's hope.  I also said that from a personnel side, it's hard to see from inside the fox hole. That was my way of saying that I really didn't expect it.   Hope is hope.  Wish is wish.  You've convinced me, I'm not holding him accountable for the roster. (I'm going to skip other parts of your post where I basically agree with everything you are saying, so anything that is not directly commented is a tacit "yup me too."  

 

10 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

We really don’t know how much Jay is actually trying to overcome or how much we know he recognizes in terms of what needs to change. Going off of pressers, as you admit yourself, is silly.

Agreed.  However, some things you can read from pressers.  The evaluation and the way that he spoke about Kirk and Grant were polar opposites.  Take that for what you will. I have no idea if he was "waterboarded" (like Doc likes to say) to come up with those answers or not.  However, color me a little concerned by the answers anyway. 

 

Also, the fact that there don't seem to be any changes to the coaching staff, which in theory should be his decision as HC, as those ARE part of his job description. Medical/training staff, eh, whatever. 

 

I have no idea if our medical/training staff is good or not, nobody does, and I have no idea who's decision that would be either.  Others have been having an issue with no changes since we had tons of injuries.  I think you can have the best training staff in the world, if a guy breaks his leg, he breaks his leg.  I'm not holding Jay responsible for the injuries or any of that nonsense. (and on that point, I've been very consistent, and defended both Jay and the training staff throughout the season when folks wanted to put injuries on them.  That's silliness. 

 

I do think we need a change at ST Coordinator.  4 years of "eh" ST play at best, and "ick" ST play at worst, even if it's not entirely his fault because of the guys he's got, BK probably needs to be flipped out.  

 

10 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

Here’s the dilemma. As HC, his main job is to coach whatever assets he’s given. He’s not supposed to complain about what those are. He’s not going to want to admit he’s incapable of handling anything they throw at him. If they get cheap on hiring assistants, or provide no help in the hiring process, he’s just going to move forward. If they fail to scout properly, give him bad info, or don’t override him regarding personnel when necessary as should be their authority since that is THEIR DEPARTMENT, he’s going to do what he believes is best. He’s not going to refuse to give his input for God’s sake. 

 

So, while you have convinced me not to hold him accountable for the roster, there are some thing that I think you can hold a HC accountable for:

- The coaching staff

- Preparation of the team

- Game planning

- In game management

 

If you say that he can't be held accountable for any of those things also, then I politely disagree.  Unless Bruce is picking the coaching staff, which I doubt.  I think Bruce has an opinion, and will push guys, but I think there Jay probably has veto power at the least, and can pick his guys.  

 

 

10 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

Here? We’d be saying the same things, asking the same questions, wondering why he can’t “overcome” better. Insulting him, trashing him, killing him, etc... What’s the over/under on the amount of “boy wonder”s we’d see sarcastically posted? We’re seriously confused still? 

I have no illusion that McVay might be set up to fail here. And if he had to do all the personnel stuff, or Allen was still bungling it up, the results might be the same.

 

That said, purely on football acumen, leadership, in-game management, I think McVay might be a better coach than Jay.  And if he's not already, he certainly will be in a few years.  Some guys are just special.  McVay looks like one of those guys. 

 

Now, you don't have to be special to win it all.  Jim Harbaugh is good, but not special. Same with Tomlin.   Whatshisnugget from Denver a few years ago was REALLY not special. (Wade might be a special DC.) Clearly Gibbs was, Parcells was, Bill Walsh was. Bellichick is special.  McVay might be in a few years. Not yet, though.  But he looks like he could grow into one of those guys.  

 

Shrug.  I'm not going to heap praise on Jay.  But I'm backing off of all criticisms about how the team is put together. I do feel it is appropriate to question coaching staff decisions, game plan decisions, in-game decisions, etc.    

[TSO]

On 1/5/2018 at 10:40 AM, Voice_of_Reason said:

Agreed.  However, some things you can read from pressers.  The evaluation and the way that he spoke about Kirk and Grant were polar opposites.  Take that for what you will. I have no idea if he was "waterboarded" (like Doc likes to say) to come up with those answers or not.  However, color me a little concerned by the answers anyway. 

 

 

Sorry it took so long for me to respond, not ignoring you. Just wanted to give it the time it deserved.  

 

Honestly, I'm not big on parsing and dissecting pressers. Never have been. I don't like what Jay said or how he said it, I'm obviously a big Kirk guy and think he shouldn't have framed it the way he did. That being said, the final loss sucked and there was some emotion involved. I'm not into raking a coach over the coals because of comments, especially made after bad losses. They happen. Not a concern for me until it really shows itself to be one. 

 

On 1/5/2018 at 10:40 AM, Voice_of_Reason said:

Also, the fact that there don't seem to be any changes to the coaching staff, which in theory should be his decision as HC, as those ARE part of his job description. Medical/training staff, eh, whatever. 

 

I have no idea if our medical/training staff is good or not, nobody does, and I have no idea who's decision that would be either.  Others have been having an issue with no changes since we had tons of injuries.  I think you can have the best training staff in the world, if a guy breaks his leg, he breaks his leg.  I'm not holding Jay responsible for the injuries or any of that nonsense. (and on that point, I've been very consistent, and defended both Jay and the training staff throughout the season when folks wanted to put injuries on them.  That's silliness. 

 

I do think we need a change at ST Coordinator.  4 years of "eh" ST play at best, and "ick" ST play at worst, even if it's not entirely his fault because of the guys he's got, BK probably needs to be flipped out.  

 

I actually agree that we should be looking into both, Special Teams as well as Strength and Training. I understand Kotwica was dealt a bad hand this year with all the injuries, but it's not like they've otherwise been great. And some of the plays they give up are just too damaging, too game-changing if you will. I think an upgrade would be prudent. Regarding conditioning, my only concern regarding the latter is I'm not sure it's the new guys that were the problem, as it's been a consistent issue before their arrival with guys like Larry Hess. I feel like that's been an issue at the organizational level that every coach here has seemingly struggled with. 

 

But to your overall point, I disagree that it "seems" there won't be any changes. Just because he didn't say so in the presser means very little. We're already interviewing someone to help Callahan on the Oline. Let's see what happens. The playoffs are still ongoing and if someone they want becomes available, you never know.    

 

 

On 1/5/2018 at 10:40 AM, Voice_of_Reason said:

So, while you have convinced me not to hold him accountable for the roster, there are some thing that I think you can hold a HC accountable for:

- The coaching staff

- Preparation of the team

- Game planning

- In game management

 

If you say that he can't be held accountable for any of those things also, then I politely disagree.  Unless Bruce is picking the coaching staff, which I doubt.  I think Bruce has an opinion, and will push guys, but I think there Jay probably has veto power at the least, and can pick his guys.  

 

Definitely never said we can't hold him accountable regarding any of those things. My main point is that we've got to understand context, circumstance, and the extremely limited info we're working with as fans in terms of being able to properly assess those things and, thus, make judgments. That's what bothers me the most in general regarding fan input when it gets to that point where final judgments are being issued.  

 

For example, regarding the coaching staff... you often cite the "Tampa connections" thing, and while that certainly exists to a degree, we've seen Jay bring in others off of the advice given to him, like Manusky and Gray right now. Tomsula, as well. I believe both Manusky and Tomsula were Scot guys who he advised Jay on. Now, Jay has final say, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't be helped on these things. With regards to Wade, we don't know how much of that was because of the limits placed on Jay financially. We know that was a big reason why they didn't hire Wade the first time around. That he was asking for too much. So is Jay hamstrung there, but just dressing it up for public consumption so that the organization doesn't look bad? Did he go into his infamous interview with him knowing that and, thus, it affected his approach? 

 

There's a lot of give and take here. There's more to it than just "final say", though that's extremely important. But organizations are meant to be support structures for those operating within them, and they should help mitigate any weaknesses that appear even within one's realm of expertise. Jay has shown no problem with taking good advice, as proven above. So how much does it fall on him that our FO, for instance, retains a Jim Haslett knowing his past with him? He's not going to dump him, even though he came in wanting Guenther. This something the FO should foresee, instead of the priority being to save some money they’d otherwise eat by retaining Haslett, not to mention rewarding him for his insubordination to Shanny when he sided with them. It's little things like this that add up and hurt whoever works here. Help the guy if he's struggling with finding a coordinator. Doesn't have to automatically be all on him. Don't do the worst thing and put him in more of a spot where he's even likelier to make bad decisions!  

 

We know he's been a good employee and hasn't aired out any grievances, even when it's reported they exist. It's what he does. We shouldn't automatically assume anything and be punishing him for it. Not when, time and again, anyone who comes here fails to receive the proper support, and then when they leave all this crap comes out... I mean, at what point do we recognize this as it's happening? 

 

Regarding those other things you mentioned, it's all so intrinsically linked to personnel that assessing those things without recognizing all the various factors involved, with the level of info we're privy to as fans, is a fool's endeavor. Just quickly, how good did Manusky look as a coordinator early on in the season when Jonathan Allen and Ioannidis were killing it in the interior and everyone was feeding off of that? Everyone recognizes Tomsula as an elite Dline coach, yet how bad did that unit become once both of those guys got hurt? Suddenly, our run defense went to ****. Which affects everything. 

 

Things snowball. What looks like "game management", for instance, sometimes has to do with depth, or too many young guys being thrust into action too early in their development and they're not communicating as well. In the end, it falls on the coaches to have them ready, I get that, but you also must take all of that into account and then judge whether they did the best they could given the situation. I find it difficult to claim otherwise as it stands right now and don't see anyone else around the league in other similar situations excelling. 

 

On 1/5/2018 at 10:40 AM, Voice_of_Reason said:

I have no illusion that McVay might be set up to fail here. And if he had to do all the personnel stuff, or Allen was still bungling it up, the results might be the same.

 

That said, purely on football acumen, leadership, in-game management, I think McVay might be a better coach than Jay.  And if he's not already, he certainly will be in a few years.  Some guys are just special.  McVay looks like one of those guys. 

    

Well, obviously that's all totally subjective. But I could've told you McVay was special a long time ago. Always have on this board. But same goes for Jay. Doesn't mean a thing. And, honestly, it just surprises me that someone as smart as you, and for as long as you've been a hardcore Skins fan, doesn't know better at this point. McVay "looks" like one of those guys, or is it because he's not inside this building anymore? By all accounts, he had free rein offensively here. He called the plays. He ran what he wanted to. It's the same stuff he's running with the Rams. Yet, we struggled immensely in the redzone before, for instance. People trashed him for it. Same old, same old as it always is. 

 

I just think how one defines "special" is way too arbitrary and based on way too little info. There are plenty of fluff pieces about Jay. He's beloved by anyone who gets around him. He also "commands a room". We've seen, up close, his ability to scheme offensively and it's as good as anyone in the league. For me, those things are enough for an FO to then elevate whatever weaknesses he has and help. We need to start holding them more accountable than we do with our vague words and empty talk that just insults them more than pinpoints exactly what issues they have organizationally and as a support to those they hire.