Daniel Snyder ...Dare We Say Maturing....as a competent owner

[KillBill26]

2 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

I think SIP makes a great point about not being able to handle prosperity.  Also, the point about having a few great players. There is no one person on the Skins that teams prepare for and have to fear. All the best teams have at least one or two players that other teams think about in their sleep. I like the team aspect. And we have some really "good" players. But just a few players that just take thier game to another level when needed would do wonders for this team. 

Just like I mentioned in my previous post, I feel a team like the eagles won because of a collection of above average players across different position groups, and I don't feel that roster had elite superstars.  I feel the Redskins are building a strong core where we can expect to have sustained success beginning in the next year or two, and the core of those teams is already on our roster. But no one will get their recognition until they actually win.  

 

I think we agree on most things, I just have more optimism that the core we have in place is stronger than you believe it to be. And you may very well be correct, this would not be the first time the Redskins have let me down.  But for now, I am so pumped for the upcoming season and seeing how everything progresses and comes together.  As I've mentioned before, I feel our schedule and inexperience are two significant obstacles this upcoming season, but I think the potential is already there.

[KillBill26]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

But the guy behind the scenes that seems to get plaudits is Jay.  Multiple people covering the team have expressed that they hear from people at Redskins Park that Jay is an essential talent evaluator. Not Doug. Not Bruce. But Jay is the guy kicking things around with the scouts and adding his 2 cents.  I've said many times on different threads, Scot told me personally that Jay is a great evaluator and a great guy, too. 

 

Part of me wonders (in a bad way) what would happen if Jay wasn't here.  He isn't perfect.  But he's almost the perfect combination to deal with the dynamic of this team IMO.   I hate that the head decision maker isn't a true personnel guy.  But Jay kicking in likely offsets that some.  Jay's laid back, roll with the punches, deals with adversity without being ruffled by it -- seems almost the perfect counter balance to any craziness that happens.  I just wonder if the dominos all come tumbling down, if you remove him from the process.  I suspect they might. 

 

I wasn't a big fan of the Gruden hiring initially, but he has grown on me.  I feel his scheme works, and the props he gets for evaluating talent is a big plus. And as i mentioned above, injuries resulted in a lost season last year.  If our schedule and inexperience result in another mediocre season, I hope jay survives it, because I feel it would be a mistake to start from scratch.  The teams with sustained success have continuity at the top, so I hope they don't just clean house because that's what's expected after not making the playoffs a few years in a row.  If gruden loses the locker room or his scheme seems to be solved by opponents, then sure fire away, but I hope he is given a fair shake if the 2018 redskins hit obstacles that we all know are possible. 

[KillBill26]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/athlonsports.com/nfl/philadelphia-eagles-2017-team-preview-and-prediction%3famp

 

To go with my posts from above, no one was giving the eagles credit until they won.  But the roster that people viewed as fourth best in our division is the same roster that won the super bowl.  And it's essentially the same roster that will  be predicted to go deep into the playoffs this year.  Same reason why sports illustrated predictions are basically a carbon copy of last year's standings.  People only get recognized for assembling a talented roster when you win, not as you are steadily building the roster.

 

I like how the article cited a porous defense and second tier free agent signings.  Now that same defense and those same second tier free agent signings have a lot more shine.  

[Darth Tater]

How can we ever know at a given point?  When Jerrah bought the Cowboys, he was pretty much thought of a lot like Snyder from 1989 to about half way through 1991 (though many stopped laughing a bit earlier). When the Cowboys won the SB after the 1992 season, no one was laughing at Jerrah anymore. I would say he is still probably a bit like Dan (actually Dan is a bit like Jerrah) except he has more football knowledge (he did spend much of his youth surrounded by some of football's best future coaches and talent pickers). Even if we won a couple of SB with Dan as owner and pretty much the current staff, this would not be proof that Dan has become a competent or matured as an owner.

[goskins10]

54 minutes ago, KillBill26 said:

Just like I mentioned in my previous post, I feel a team like the eagles won because of a collection of above average players across different position groups, and I don't feel that roster had elite superstars.  I feel the Redskins are building a strong core where we can expect to have sustained success beginning in the next year or two, and the core of those teams is already on our roster. But no one will get their recognition until they actually win.  

 

I think we agree on most things, I just have more optimism that the core we have in place is stronger than you believe it to be. And you may very well be correct, this would not be the first time the Redskins have let me down.  But for now, I am so pumped for the upcoming season and seeing how everything progresses and comes together.  As I've mentioned before, I feel our schedule and inexperience are two significant obstacles this upcoming season, but I think the potential is already there.

 

Actually I have not said how I feel about our roster. I do not mean that to be snarky, just that we were not having he discussion. I have been focusing on the FO structure and their performance over time. 

The eagles are an anomaly. Even if a team has not had that one or two truly dominant players they have been dominant in at least one phase of the game. I know this will sound like sour grapes, but I am pretty sure the eagles thing was as much luck and timing as anything. They had an awful lot of things for right for them at just the right time. Also, a weak schedule did not hurt. Wentz made some key plays but overall he was mostly average. Don't get me wrong, even when the ball bounces your way you have to take advantage and they did. Hats off to them. But I do not see it as sustainable. We will see. If they make the POs again then I will believe them. 

 

As for us, things just never go that way. Even when opportunities present themselves we tend to cough up a fur ball. But I do see some light. They were smart enough to take J Allen last year. This year the addressed major needs and really played the Guice thing well - and I will say that even if he turns out to be a bust.

 

And I like a lot of things about this roster. The key for me is the same for you. They need to continue developing guys, we need to stay healthier than in the past, and the new guys need to have some impact. 

 

Outside of the obvious mishandling of Kirk - which was set in motion well before this off-season, my only real criticism of this off season is not being more aggressive on LG. But to be fair - that is not huge deal - not to me anyway. You can't fix everyone at once and they have to be careful of the CAP so they can resign some of the key players whose contracts are coming up. 

 

Having said that, nice drafts and average records are not the goal. Get to the POs a few seasons in a row. At least make a run or two. So far it's the odd flash of success and then nothing. Is that better than totally sucking every year? Sure. But it's not worth an attaboy. Sorry, not just yet. 

[Skinsinparadise]

46 minutes ago, KillBill26 said:

Great post, I agree with you on most points.  I completely agree with a three year time frame to turn a team around. 

 

Thanks.  Yeah I see three years as plenty reasonable.

 

46 minutes ago, KillBill26 said:

 However, as far as front office guys evaluating the roster, I think you do have to take injuries into consideration.  For instance, it would be silly to overhaul a talented roster that got hit with injury bug and cut ties with good football players.  So while last year was an injury ravaged season, I think our roster was in better shape than the previous year.  And I believe this year's roster will be better than last.

 

I agree on defense.  I think the 2017 team was a weaker roster than 2016 on offense.   And I agree this roster is better.  But I also think we have to take a leap of faith about the roster, too.  I don't think its an accident that just about every draft geek who did their first 2019 mocks gave the Redskins a top 10 pick next year.  The national perspective is we have a weak roster let alone a growing contender.  Now, I think the national guys are wrong.  But I was thinking about why that perception persists and I think a lot of that has to do about the lack of elite players on the roster and the lack of above average units aside from the passing game in recent years.  We don't really have players on this team that carry much in national NFL conversation. And no one really talks about any of our units being elite.   Hopefully that changes.

 

I also think too much has been made of the Raider victory last year.  Yeah at the time the Raiders were thought of as a Super Bowl threat.  But they ended up being a 6-10 team that was "meh".  I am mentioning that game because I recall most of the giddiness about the team (including from me) was at its peak after that game.  Somewhat like the GB win in 2016.  The temporary feeling of giddiness I recall well.  I am just going to be more cautious about it this time.

 

53 minutes ago, KillBill26 said:

 

As far as quick turnaround in our division, was any of the success sustained?  The Giants benefitted from having no injuries and made the playoffs, then regressed to the second worst team in the league.  The cowboys did well when dak was a rookie, but once teams got some film on him, they were average. The eagles have the best shot at sustained success, and time will tell if they achieve it, and the reason for that segues into your next talking point.  I think the reason the eagles had such a good season was a high number of B+ guys across position groups on the roster.  Did they have an a+ guy that single handedly dominated games?  I don't believe so.  They won with Nick frickin foles.  But they had a nice core and good balance, which I believe the skins are starting to achieve.

 

 

 

When have we sustained success though?  By comparison all three of the NFC East teams are the Patriots compared to the Redskins during Dan's era.   All three of those teams in Dan's era alone (let alone 26 years) have had FOURTEEN seasons of 11 plus wins.  We have has zero.  That's astounding.   The Giants injuries were comparable to ours and that team is heavily dependent on Beckham so they fell apart.  By early indications, most NFL pundits seem to think they are better than the Redskins heading in 2018.  Will see.   As for the Eagles they are loaded everywhere -- and yeah Fletcher Cox is an A plus player who dominates games.  We should know that from our games against them alone.  Jenkins is borderline that good, too.  They had 4 All Pro Players last season.  Maybe they don't have a ton of elite players but unlike the Redskins they are good everywhere.  Their running game is good.  Special teams is good.  Defense is good.  

 

As for Dallas, I wish they were done but they are an entirely different team when Elliot plays.   We trade down with Dallas and take Trent Murphy, they take D. Lawrence with that pick.  That transaction is almost a perfect illustration of my point. 

 

1 hour ago, KillBill26 said:

 

And I certainly don't believe the skins have the best front office and the promised land is inevitable. But I feel they are heading in the right direction, and if they keep steadily improving their roster, we will eventually be one of those teams with sustained success, with the core being players that are already on the roster.  Let's say we have good luck on the injury front, and several key players progress like we hope them to.  Reflecting the improved balance and depth on our roster, everyone's game will be elevated due to the increased talent around them, take a look at the number of players that I wouldn't be shocked to see being a pro bowler in 2018:. A smith, Reed, t Will, scherff, Moses, allen, kerrigan, zbrown, and Norman.  Do you feel any of those guys dont have a chance of being a pro bowl caliber player next year? Maybe even guice, crowder, payne, p smith, and swearinger too.  And then wouldn't our roster be on par with the eagles?  No elite superstar, but a lot of talent, depth, and balance. 

 

To me it depends on the definition of sustainable success.  For me if they keep to this pace -- they got little shot at a Superbowl but they can certainly be competitive.   Bring a pro-bowler and an elite player is two totally different dynamics for me.  I already said they are good at finding the good-very good players.  That's all you typically need to be to reach a pro-bowl eventually. Morgan Moses is a good player.  The Redskins are good at finding the Morgan Moses types.  And that's good.   But lets see them find a Norwell, Bobby Wagner, Harrison Smith, L. Bell, etc. 

 

The Redskins are the one team who haven't had an All Pro Player if i recall in decades.  Who among those players do I think is an All Pro next year?  None of them.  Maybe Trent?    I am such a Guice homer at the moment -- maybe I'll pick him. 

 

1 hour ago, KillBill26 said:

 

My whole point is I think Snyder and the front office deserve some credit because I feel the progress we have made building the roster has improved the last several offseasons, and I am optimistic (maybe too optimistic, wouldn't be the first time, and we can agree to disagree there) it will "click" and all come together in the next year or two.  

 

My praise for Dan is tempered by him having Bruce in charge.  So tough for me to give him a big pat on the back.  But as I've said on this thread, I am nicer to Dan than many of the FO critics who see him as a hopeless cause.   The way I take Dan is they decided to upgrade their kitchen with better and healthier ingredients.  They have some good sous chefs.  My problem is the head chef is same old same old as for Dan.  If he didn't have a politician/pal running the kitchen, I'd put a much nicer face on the operation.  That's why i am delighted every time I read that the plan might be to put Kyle Smith in charge.  If they do that than all is forgiven for me.  I want a high end football guy (preferably with a scouting background) running that operation.  If they had that, I'd give them every benefit of the doubt.  Without it, i don't give them the benefit of the doubt.   But again I don't hate what they are doing.  I see its as so so operation and the college drafting being the best part of the vehicle.

 

1 hour ago, KillBill26 said:

But those players were the same players before they won, but they only got recognition for being a talented collection of players once they won.  Just like skins players won't get their pro bowls, and Snyder won't get credit as an owner, until they win.  But just like the eagles going into last year, the talent is there, we just need some breaks and for it to click, and then everyone will say wow where did all this talent come from, when it has been steadily added all along. 

 

I think its deeper than that.  But thanks for harping on the Eagles because you bring up another thought that I've mentioned in another threads but failed to do here.  That is, lets see if we can build a well rounded roster.  When I think of the Eagles, you got multiple units who are very good.  Our special teams have stunk mostly for years.  Our defenses has mostly stunk for years.  Our running game has been bad in recent years.  The Eagles are typically good on those fronts and certainly were last year. 

 

Our team has been relatively one dimensional.  We've had a good QB.  Good player caller.  Good O line protection.  Good passing game play makers until last season.  I am not saying the rest of the roster can't emerge.  I just need to see it first before i elevated all three units from being wretched to being really good just like that.

 

But good discussion.  Good points, etc.  I think our main disagreement if there is one is you are banking in what your mind is the team's potential.  For me, I've been there and done that where I am a bit jaded to go on that ride.  But I am not pessimistic either.  I am agnostic -- wait and see.  If pushed to one side of this, I'd err to the optimism side.  I am above all a fan and enjoy basking in the hype.   

 

I am waiting to see the movie this time with no built in expectations with a slight bent towards optimism. 

[KillBill26]

25 minutes ago, Darth Tater said:

 Even if we won a couple of SB with Dan as owner and pretty much the current staff, this would not be proof that Dan has become a competent or matured as an owner.

 

My response to this thread has been looking at Snyder as an owner and that influence with the on the field product.  Nothing to do with his limitations as a person or how he has poorly handled things like game day experience for fans.  So if they win a couple super bowls in the near future, I believe it will be largely attributed to him not meddling, staying out of drafting / signing / playing time decisions, and I personally would 100% give him credit for changing his ways, and allowing football people to build a championship roster.

 

I'm guessing you are taking other things into consideration, and I know being an owner is more than the roster, and yeah in that regard I agree with you, I don't know if there is any hope for Dan Snyder the human being to be considered mature or competent. He seems too greedy and childish for that.  

[KillBill26]

7 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

But good discussion.  Good points, etc.  I think our main disagreement if there is one is you are banking in what your mind is the team's potential.  For me, I've been there and done that where I am a bit jaded to go on that ride.  But I am not pessimistic either.  I am agnostic -- wait and see.  If pushed to one side of this, I'd err to the optimism side.  I am above all a fan and enjoy basking in the hype.   

 

I am waiting to see the movie this time with no built in expectations with a slight bent towards optimism. 

 

Yes, the Redskins have definitely been disappointing time and time again, maybe Im too stubborn to learn my lesson.  

 

This roster just feels different to me.  But come January, I could be like Rob Schneider in The Waterboy "oh crap, we suck again!!"

[Skinsinparadise]

13 minutes ago, KillBill26 said:

 

Yes, the Redskins have definitely been disappointing time and time again, maybe Im too stubborn to learn my lesson.  

 

This roster just feels different to me.  But come January, I could be like Rob Schneider in The Waterboy "oh crap, we suck again!!"

 

 I got no issue with the ride you are on.  I can relate to it.  I am just off it this time at least in this moment in time.  But I've not gone in the opposite direction.  I am cautiously optimistic.  I am just not fully buying in until I see it play out.  Knowing me as the season approaches and I start reading how such and such player is burning up camp -- I bet I'll give my typical optimistic prediction on the prediction thread. 

 

If I had to pick my main reason for some pessimism for me is every year there seems to be a new rap for why this time the defense will do a turnaround.   The national pundit types seem to react to all of that with a yawn and don't buy in -- I keep saying those guys are crazy and the improvement is coming but they typically end up right about that unit. 

 

So when I see the same dance again by some of the draft geeks I respect like Brugler who actually think the Redskins will actually be worse this season from last season -- it catches my eye.  It's not that this time I am buying into the pessimism -- its that I no longer feel justified to make fun of the doubters on this count because they've been vindicated over and over again as to assessing the team's defensive unit.    Our special teams hasn't really been good in a long time and we just got rid of arguably our best player on that unit. 

 

For me for this team to elevate -- 3 things have to happen

 

A. Guice is the star I think he is.

B.  Jordan Reed is healthy

C. Payne becomes the missing ingredient nose to shore up the run defense

 

Of all of those scenarios.  I am optimistic about A.   Pessimistic about B. Unsure about C. 

 

 

 

[The Hangman- C_Hanburger]

19 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 I got no issue with the ride you are on.  I can relate to it.  I am just off it this time at least in this moment in time.  But I've not gone in the opposite direction.  I am cautiously optimistic.  I am just not fully buying in until I see it play out.  Knowing me as the season approaches and I start reading how such and such player is burning up camp -- I bet I'll give my typical optimistic prediction on the prediction thread. 

 

If I had to pick my main reason for some pessimism for me is every year there seems to be a new rap for why this time the defense will do a turnaround.   The national pundit types seem to react to all of that with a yawn and don't buy in -- I keep saying those guys are crazy and the improvement is coming but they typically end up right about that unit. 

 

So when I see the same dance again by some of the draft geeks I respect like Brugler who actually think the Redskins will actually be worse this season from last season -- it catches my eye.  It's not that this time I am buying into the pessimism -- its that I no longer feel justified to make fun of the doubters on this count because they've been vindicated over and over again as to assessing the team's defensive unit.    Our special teams hasn't really been good in a long time and we just got rid of arguably our best player on that unit. 

 

For me for this team to elevate -- 3 things have to happen

 

A. Guice is the star I think he is.

B.  Jordan Reed is healthy

C. Payne becomes the missing ingredient nose to shore up the run defense

 

Of all of those scenarios.  I am optimistic about A.   Pessimistic about B. Unsure about C. 

 

 

 

Alex WON'T throw INT's in the Red Zone. That is enough for me to be optimistic. Giving the D a point margin and time to catch a breath for a change. I know those INT's sucked the LIFE outa me so I can't imagine what the defense was thinking each time we went into the Red Zone

[Darrell Green Fan]

On 5/26/2018 at 5:46 PM, joeken24 said:

You mentioned the word Facts....and they are?

 

If you're alluding to the record, you can say the same for a number of teams in the NFL. There are only 4 maybe five teams in the NFL that have had real consistent success over the past 20 years (Patriots, Steelers, add your other two or three). But that's the game of football. Its a game that takes place on the field. There's injuries, luck and heartache.

 

But I'm really curious about the facts that lead you to believe Dan Snyder is this bad guy. You don't know him yourself, do you? I would assume not. Fact is, I don't know him either. But again, I refuse to allow narratives to alter my own common sense. For me, common sense says this: narratives are not facts; facts are proven - simple as that. Ya see, common sense is fairly simple. Narratives, on the other hand, is extremely (pun intended) complicated. The word complicated is fairly close to the word chaos. Chaos is fairly close to insane or extreme. 

 

Just provide some real facts is all I'm asking. Show me a video of him doing something heinous. Let me hear a audio of him saying he hates this area and wants his team to lose every ****ing game. Show me a news clip quoting Dan Snyder himself saying **** the Redskins, hehehe (in his best Brain impression while Bruce "Pinky" Allen stands in the background). 

Oh I get, you're talking about bad football decisions. Picking bad players and stuff like that, right? OK, I get it. But I'll say this.....bad decisions means you're making one. It means you're a leader and not a follower. Bad decision are only considered bad after they've been made. Think back to the splash FA signings over the years. Just about everyone of those signings blew this forum up with positive feedback about the upcoming season. When it didn't work out, the sheep came out to pasture yelling baaahh hate, baaahh hate. Its the haters that are critical of decisions after the fact. To me, those are the bad guys. But then I thought to myself, haters really would never have the ca hones to make those decisions, they're sheep.

Facts

 

Such a terrible argument.   I didn't know Al Capone personally, I cannot provide video proof, but like everyone else I knows that he was a bad guy.  If you would like to ignore all the accounts of Snyder's poor behavior, and there are too many to list and from countless different sources, and assume they are all lying as you lobby that Daniel Snyder is not a bad guy knock yourself out.  But don't be surprised when you are called out for it.  Me?  I'll take your advice and use COMMON SENSE and assume every single person who relayed these strories was not lying because there is no reason for every single one of them to lie. You never met Vladimire Lenin, you can't supply video proof of Lenin slaughtering any of the millions of people he is responsible for killing.   Does that mean all the accounts of Lenin and his "Red Terror" are to be dismissed as Fake News?  So unless you are prepared to argue that a dictator like Lenin is misunderstood and gets a bad rap you are just as much of a "sheep" as everyone else  for believing the countless reports of his behavior.

 

As for his football decisions it's nonsense to claim we were only critical of them years later.  Many of us thought it was a mistake at the time to fire Marty and we were disgusted at how he treated Norv Turner.  Oh right, guess Norv decided to lie about being hung out to dry for hours by Snyder as he waited to learn his fate.   I watched in horror as the league laughed at us for the clumsy way they decided to hire a totally unqualified Jim Zorn.  I want crazy when they signed Haynesworth, asking when is he ever going to learn his lesson?  We watched lost season after lost season go by with Snyder calling the shots as he retained a bufoon in Vinny Cerato.  We had plenty to say about that at the time.  That was not revisionist histroy as you claim, not even close.

 

Finally there is a whole lot of territory between the elite teams such as New England and a team that was literally a laughing stock for nearly two decades. It's idiotic for you to claim the Steelers is where I set the bar.  Never said that, never implied that. But it's a FACT that the Redskins have been one of the worst teams in the league under his tenure. You are what your record says you are and that record is 132-171-1 with exactly 2 playoff wins in 19 seasons.  And you want to blame it on bad luck.  Child please.

 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, The Hangman- C_Hanburger said:

Alex WON'T throw INT's in the Red Zone. That is enough for me to be optimistic. Giving the D a point margin and time to catch a breath for a change. I know those INT's sucked the LIFE outa me so I can't imagine what the defense was thinking each time we went into the Red Zone

 

I guess we can ask the defenders about the 3 times they had to do it.  If I were Kirk while they were at it, I'd hit back with what does it take for you guys to hold a lead -- do you guys always give up of points right before the halves -- what's up with that?   And then I'd go can you guys stop a running back for a change so I can get back on the field and run some plays. 

 

I like Alex Smith.  But i agree with what Cooley said the other day, Kirk carried the team on his back for much of last year.  So I am not blaming Kirk for the shortcomings of this defense which has been running now for about 10 years.   Alex in recent years hasn't had hot numbers in the red zone.   But yeah he is one of the best in the NFL at avoiding INTs.  I agree with that part. 

 

I am tired of banking it on the QB.  I'd like to see an Eagles style multiple units are a key part of the success.  Defense.  Running game.  Special teams.  They were one of the worst run stopping teams in the league last year -- Kirk had zero to do with that.  So hopefully, they fixed it with drafting Payne.  Will see.

 

Red Zone stats for those curious

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2017/redzone-passing.htm  

[bowhunter]

43 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

 

Red Zone stats for those curious

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2017/redzone-passing.htm  

Those stats take on so many different  meanings when sorted by varying criteria. For instance, Comp% inside the 10 makes KC look completely inadequate, while he shines in other categories..

Thanks for providing those .

[goskins10]

48 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I guess we can ask the defenders about the 3 times they had to do it.  If I were Kirk while they were at it, I'd hit back with what does it take for you guys to hold a lead -- do you guys always give up of points right before the halves -- what's up with that?   And then I'd go can you guys stop a running back for a change so I can get back on the field and run some plays. 

 

I like Alex Smith.  But i agree with what Cooley said the other day, Kirk carried the team on his back for much of last year.  So I am not blaming Kirk for the shortcomings of this defense which has been running now for about 10 years.   Alex in recent years hasn't had hot numbers in the red zone.   But yeah he is one of the best in the NFL at avoiding INTs.  I agree with that part. 

 

I am tired of banking it on the QB.  I'd like to see an Eagles style multiple units are a key part of the success.  Defense.  Running game.  Special teams.  They were one of the worst run stopping teams in the league last year -- Kirk had zero to do with that.  So hopefully, they fixed it with drafting Payne.  Will see.

 

Red Zone stats for those curious

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2017/redzone-passing.htm  

 

In general, I agree the D was much more a cause of the losses than the off. The NO game comes to mind. 

 

However, there is a point to made that the Ds last minute points are a bit skewed. They are credited with giving up 80 pts in the last two minutes of each of the halves. However, 21 of those are directly due to the off and another 7 the off gave the other team he ball at the 13 yard line. I get pts are pts. But they were most likely giving up 3 no matter. So I gave the D 4 pts and the off 3. 

 

That means the D actually only gave up 56 pts where the off gave up 24 pts. When the offense gives up 30% of the defensive pts to end halves that's not good. That does not even count the late ints that didn't result in pts but did stop drives. 

 

You know I am a Kirk Cousins fan. I believe some of that was due to him trying to too hard. But there is a legitimate argument to be made that as much as he helped the team, he also had some really bad TOs and the worst of times. Of course the argument is probably that he was behind a makeshift line. 31 line combinations is not a QBs best friend.

 

It will be interesting to see how Alex does. A lot of questions will be answered this year. 

[Skinsinparadise]

23 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

That means the D actually only gave up 56 pts where the off gave up 24 pts. When the offense gives up 30% of the defensive pts to end halves that's not good. That does not even count the late ints that didn't result in pts but did stop drives. 

 

 

To simplify my point. And this isn't directed your way, I am just explaining my take on the defense.  This defense has been mostly bad since Shanny took over through now.  I'd love to blame the offense for it.  But IMO its all on the D.  I've been going through every game via coaches tape in recent weeks and freezing and isolating plays and it isn't giving me a warm and fuzzy feeling.  That goes double if you watch them defend the run. And Kirk doesn't run through my head even for a split second when I watch it.  I've put up some of those clips on a thread.

 

23 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

You know I am a Kirk Cousins fan. I believe some of that was due to him trying to too hard. But there is a legitimate argument to be made that as much as he helped the team, he also had some really bad TOs and the worst of times. Of course the argument is probably that he was behind a makeshift line. 31 line combinations is not a QBs best friend.

 

It will be interesting to see how Alex does. A lot of questions will be answered this year. 

 

Yeah Kirk had some untimely INTs. The rest of my point isn't directed your way.   Minny isn't a great team because they are dumb and can't judge talent well.  There is a reason why they made Kirk the highest paid QB in the league at least for a timing being.    I was just reading an article today on ESPN today about expectations of Kirk having a career season in Minny this year. Here it is if you are curious:  http://www.espn.com/blog/minnesota-vikings/post/_/id/26401/why-kirk-cousins-is-primed-for-a-career-season-with-vikings

 

I am over Kirk.  And, I like Alex.  But I see it as a lateral move.  And if anything its a downgrade for just one reason -- Alex's age.  And in defense of Alex, I don't like the idea of depending on him carrying the team.  I think its unfair to burden a QB that way.  I don't think you are going to be a winner if you put it mostly on the QB.  You need some other units clicking, too.   I think with Paul Richardson, hopefully a healthy Jordan Reed and Derrius Guice we will see more success than last year.  Will see.  

 

 

[goskins10]

Just now, Skinsinparadise said:

 

To simplify my point.  This defense has been mostly bad since Shanny took over through now.  I'd love to blame the offense for it.  But IMO its all on the D.  I've been going through every game via coaches tape in recent weeks and freezing and isolating plays and it isn't giving me a warm and fuzzy feeling.  That goes double if you watch them defend the run. And Kirk doesn't run through my head even for a split second when I watch it.  I've put up some of those clips on a thread.

 

 

Yeah Kirk had some untimely INTs. The rest I've my point isn't directed your way.   Minny isn't a great team because they are dumb and can't judge talent well.  There is a reason why they made Kirk the highest paid QB in the league at least for a timing being.    I was just reading an article today on ESPN today about expectations of Kirk having a career season in Minny this year. Here it is if you are curious:  http://www.espn.com/blog/minnesota-vikings/post/_/id/26401/why-kirk-cousins-is-primed-for-a-career-season-with-vikings

 

I am over Kirk.  And, I like Alex.  But I see it as a lateral move.  And if anything its a downgrade for just one reason -- Alex's age.  And in defense of Alex, I don't like the idea of depending on him carrying the team.  I think its unfair to burden a QB that way.  I don't think you are going to be a winner if you put it mostly on the QB.  You need some other units clicking, too.   I think with Paul Richardson, hopefully a healthy Jordan Reed and Derrius Guice we will see more success than last year.  Will see.  

 

 

 

As I said, overall the D was putrid and was much more a cause of the loses. But I did find those numbers interesting. I too see Alex a sideways move. He does a few things better but then so does Kirk. 

 

I would like to see STs rebound. They were actually pretty good in 2015 and 2016 (please, before people start going nuts, look at the data - .6th in 2015 and 11th in 2016). Last year was a big step back. Fumbles, a few long returns, punting was off. I am hoping Greg Stroman can take on the return duties. That will let Crowder go back to work on his receiving. I think that kept him from taking another step forward - one I think he has in him. Maybe some of the new guys are better on teams. 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, bowhunter said:

Those stats take on so many different  meanings when sorted by varying criteria. For instance, Comp% inside the 10 makes KC look completely inadequate, while he shines in other categories..

Thanks for providing those .

 

I am going to use your post to launch my own point but it isn't directed at you.   My point and maybe its a hard one to make -- i am not looking for Alex Smith to come here and save the day where he is all things that Kirk was not.  If you note some of the criticisms on Alex brought to us directly by Chief fans (their points made as gleefully as some of the people here who didn't care for Kirk) to this board and some people who covered Alex -- they think he doesn't take enough risks, isn't hot in the red zone, isn't clutch, and needs all things working right around him to be successful. Sound familiar? 

 

Personally I think those criticisms come off overly harsh.   I am just not the type to downgrade QBs for needing strong supporting casts.  I think they all need them.   Wins and loses aren't all reflection of QB play, etc.  I've watched every Alex game I could.  And just about every interview I can find about him.  I like him but I don't see him as a Tom Brady/Aaron Rodgers type who is just going to take this team by storm.   I think he's a cool/classy guy and a good QB. 

 

 IMO if people think our defense and special teams and running game can all stink again -- but we will overcome all because of Alex Smith.     I think that's a loser mindset.  Even Tom Brady needs another unit to help him along. I also think its unfair to Alex.  He has had mostly good supporting casts in KC.  And whenever I say that some seem to think that's a dig at Alex.  But its not even a little dig at Alex.  I think Alex will do whatever he can to make this team a winner.  But he needs help.  And that's not a shot at Alex.  That's about the rest of the roster and what I perceive it takes to be a winner.  I love the idea of having a good QB but they all need help.  heck even the great Aaron Rodgers has complained and pleaded a year back to get a better supporting cast. 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

6 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

As I said, overall the D was putrid and was much more a cause of the loses. But I did find those numbers interesting. I too see Alex a sideways move. He does a few things better but then so does Kirk. 

 

I would like to see STs rebound. They were actually pretty good in 2015 and 2016 (please, before people start going nuts, look at the data - .6th in 2015 and 11th in 2016). Last year was a big step back. Fumbles, a few long returns, punting was off. I am hoping Greg Stroman can take on the return duties. That will let Crowder go back to work on his receiving. I think that kept him from taking another step forward - one I think he has in him. Maybe some of the new guys are better on teams. 

 

 

 

Yeah Crowder was a train wreck returning kicks.  I hope Stroman replaces him.  For me on the defense side of the ball, I think they can turn it around but I am burnt out on banking on it going down.  I've been fooled too many times in the past.  So I am waiting for the movie on it before putting in my review in advance. 

[joeken24]

On 5/27/2018 at 5:56 PM, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Yes, as in eviscerated your entire stance.  

 

As for your second question, no - I don’t have first hand experience in dealing with Dan nor do I have recorded conversations of him being a POS.

 

Convenient though, that you constantly wear the cape for the guy, yet now that you’ve been presented with facts supporting that he’s a POS “you don’t care about Dan the person”.  

 

Do you care about Dan the person?

My point was not to always follow the crowd, like some of you tend to do.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

16 minutes ago, joeken24 said:

Do you care about Dan the person?

My point was not to always follow the crowd, like some of you tend to do.

Feel free to not care about Dan the person and praise his ability to make a lot of bad decisions and attribute that to being a leader.

 

But this whole schtick where everyone is a sheep for believing the very long list of Dan’s shortcomings, failures, etc. and you’re on some higher level of understanding is just not a really good look for you.

 

Sometimes it’s better just to take your L and move on.

[Morneblade]

I'm not really sure why anyone would think Dan is getting decent at this. Bruce Allen isn't good, and he's the guy in charge, basically. And when I say that, he's the guy that is going to make hiring decisions, ext. I thought he might be a good PR guy when he got here, to go along with being good with the cap and having  working knowledge of what being a "Redskin" is all about.

 

I was right about the cap, mostly wrong about PR and I'm not convinced about being a "Redskin". He's the top man, and he quite honestly is not good enough. Dan wants someone to be his buddy. I want a guy that can get the right people in Redskins Park to make the team the best it can be. I don't give a rats ass if I wan to go play racquetball with the dude. Heck, I don't even have to like the guy, but I need to respect his ability as a manager to get the right people.

 

But there are a host of other things Dan can directly effect in a positive way, and he has not done it.

 

Let's be blunt. The facilities that we have a Redskins park are not good. Fed Ex has a terrible field. These are the kind of things, that all you really have to do is throw some money at it, and it's gets fixed. You don't have to outsmart other teams, you just hire a company to give you a really good field, build a indoor facility (not a silly bubble) like Division 1 Colleges have, and call it a day. Hire a firm to give you a state of the art weight room. I mean, this isn't even hard. Listen around to who has the "best stuff" according to a lot of informed people. Do the same thing. Derp. And yet, it hasn't been done, and there is no talk of if being done. Oh, they'll talk about a new stadium (and have someone else, like, the tax payers) pay for it, but not work on things that can make the team better, and be safer for the players.

 

This is not good ownership. And it isn't like Dan's not making any money.

[zoony]

1 hour ago, Morneblade said:

Let's be blunt. The facilities that we have a Redskins park are not good. Fed Ex has a terrible field. These are the kind of things, that all you really have to do is throw some money at it, and it's gets fixed. You don't have to outsmart other teams, you just hire a company to give you a really good field, build a indoor facility (not a silly bubble) like Division 1 Colleges have, and call it a day. Hire a firm to give you a state of the art weight room. I mean, this isn't even hard. Listen around to who has the "best stuff" according to a lot of informed people. Do the same thing. Derp. And yet, it hasn't been done, and there is no talk of if being done. Oh, they'll talk about a new stadium (and have someone else, like, the tax payers) pay for it, but not work on things that can make the team better, and be safer for the players.

 

Dan wants to win though, man!

[Wyvern]

Snyder hasn't matured beyond acknowledging the fact his interference in personnel matters usually turns out badly.  He's backed off there.

 

He still tolerates a dysfunctional structure for his front office, especially since he started the structure.

 

...Most importantly, he neglected building up his team training logistics and facility.  And the physical plant conditions of FedEx are an embarrassment to the franchise.  That's 100% on Dan Snyder!!!

[TSO]

@KillBill26 @goskins10 @Skinsinparadise 

 

Just wanted to say awesome job, fellas. Your discussion here on the last two pages or so of this thread is exactly what we love to see on ES. 

 

Nuanced positions being detailed, everyone seemingly listening and actually reading through the other’s thoughts, no one misrepresenting the other’s views (at least not purposely), etc...

 

Just excellent stuff. Thank you.  

[bedlamVR]

1 hour ago, Wyvern said:

 

...Most importantly, he neglected building up his team training logistics and facility.  And the physical plant conditions of FedEx are an embarrassment to the franchise.  That's 100% on Dan Snyder!!!

 

I think you have a good point here . These are issues where you can spend any amount of money and yet we always seem to be lacking . One thing in the OTAs that stuck out was we were not practicing outside because the fields do not drain well ... the turf at FedEX is annually referred to as a joke . There is no reason why we could not rip the surface up and replace it with a state of the art artificial one . The only slightly mitigating point is JKC stadium was a terrible design in the first place ... but you know it’s been a while ... 

 

@Skinsinparadise on the roster - I do see your point . There is no one unit that jumps out at you - there is no one that you have to game plan for but the team is no push over and even with all the injuries there was no quit in the team ( I think that was the difference between us and the Giants- they quit by mid season and were fighting themselves rather than everyone else) 

 

But most of the narrative about the Skins in the 80s and 90s was exactly the same . The justification for the omission of Art Monk from the HOF was he was not a guy anyone would game plan against ...it was argued monk should be in the Hall of very good ... not the hall of fame . Mann an Manley are not talked of in the same regard as White , Taylor or Banks and it is an often touted fact that Gibbs was able to win three super bowls with three different QBs and three different RBs 

 

am I saying the skins now are like the Gibbs 80s teams - maybe not but there are some commonality  - I would also say the NFCE is back to its historic best . I see the eagles as the class of the NFC - the giants will have a bounce back season and the cowboys are always dangerous . I can see the East sending 3 to the playoffs again - 

 

I know we will be portrayed as a terrible ‘dysfunctional’  team and discounted in any playoff talk in July/August but I think we have depth and resilience which will make us relevant in December ... . I also think the combination of Payne and Allen will give us the strongest internal presence on the line we have had since I can remember ....