Next Day Thread: Redskins vs. Giants

[dballer]

44 minutes ago, megared said:

 

Because next year is largely inconsequential.  No one is going to come here and fix this overnight.  That line of thinking is why we've been sold the close narrative for so long.  If a new GM wants to keep Gruden in the last year of his contract, and evaluate players, I wouldn't have a problem with it.  

 

 

But technically he can coach next season...coaches' contracts expire all the time.  It's the tenured, proven coaches that rarely face that scenario.  

 

 

So your plan into the future is to double down on a roster construction strategy that was largely dependent on grabbing players who dropped in the draft due to injury?  Guice and Love have proven NOTHING.  Reed will probably be gone next season.  Davis is in the last year of his contract.  Our receivers are nothing to write home about, other than McClaurin...and our O-line is terrible...and it's probably about to lose its best player (RG).   

 

What has all of that talent on the D translated to?   A historically bad unit?  What about this defense (other than names of good college players) gives you confidence that it'll ever be good?     Never thought I'd be able positively reminisce on Jim Haslett...but here we are.  

 

THIS year is inconsequential. THIS year is being thrown away. Why go ahead and throw away next year as well? That is absurd. 

 

Technically they could just extend him again and again and he would never be a lame duck? I don't see your point, considering he is absolutely a lame duck right now. 

 

By the way, If you bring in a GM that decides to keep Jay Gruden around for another year...You brought in the wrong GM and we are screwed for another 5-7 years.

 

The future does not have to include wiping the roster clean. There are good players to build on. That's not how it works. You don't to start over as an expansion team. That is the beauty of the NFL. You simply start getting better players to add to however many decent players you already have...

 

 

[ntotoro]

12 minutes ago, Vilandil Tasardur said:

O'Connell is in his first year as offensive coordinator. In his illustrious four games as an OC, he's produced a terrible offense.

 

Assuming he's actually having any say. The plays still look like the badly-time, slowly forming plays Norval Gruden has always called.

[Chachie]

I started Daniel Jones in my fantasy football league yesterday. I thought he'd have a better day than he did but that's irrelevant. The point was that I knew he had a fantastic match-up against a completely lost defense. I also rooted for him to score as many points as he could rack up. I guess my logic was that our offense might score enough to win due to New York's defense being equally as bad. Anyway, yesterday was the first football sunday ever that I didn't put all my spirit into the Redskins. They stink.

[dballer]

10 minutes ago, Vilandil Tasardur said:

Yeah, I just don't think I agree. 

 

Firing Bruce will make us all feel better, but Kyle Smith can't DO anything in the next 6 months. General Managers don't (generally) act during the season. At this point firing Bruce and promoting Kyle Smith is a wash; they're both going to sit there and watch the implosion. Neither one of them is going to make it better or worse, and there won't be any "imploding" differently. 

 

O'Connell is in his first year as offensive coordinator. In his illustrious four games as an OC, he's produced a terrible offense. And nothing about promoting him will make his job easier. He's still going to have to choose between a game manager playing like turd or a rookie that isn't close to being ready. Firing Gruden today makes everyone feel better right up until this poor O'Connell kid has to try to figure out how to do everything he was ALREADY doing while also trying to be head coach against Bill Belllichick. It's career suicide. If you fire Gruden you fire him for Callahan who at least has experience running a team and won't implode.

 

But again, for every coach you fire you're asking the rest to pull double duty for 3/4s of a season. That's a huge deal, and not one that makes for anyone getting better. If you're serious about using the next 12 games to see what individual players can do then you want the most consistency possible. Gruden gives you that. He just does. 

 

If you've been watching you'll see Gruden on the sidelines still calling the plays. That is part of the problem, and he doesn't seem to want to relinquish it. @RandyHolt just described it perfectly. How much is KOC actually doing right now? This stuff isn't groundbreaking. Bad teams fire their coaches. Other coaches step up. The wheel keeps turning. I don't believe Jay is putting the guys in the best position to evaluate them. Why would he change that now? Has he ever? He is a system guy, and he is only good at his system.

 

Again, do you think we will get worse? I mean, we are 0-4 with the worst point differential in the league right now? How much worse will it get? So keeping Bruce around because it doesn't matter for another 6 months is a good thing? Keeping Gruden because, well what else can we do? They both should have been gone after last season. They are past date. The sooner the better. You can start coming up with a plan going forward. Keeping them just to keep status quo is is a loser mentality, for a loser team. You have assistant coaches on the team that have a TON of experience. They can help bridge the gap. 

 

I dont know if it will get better, but it wont get worse. We are already the worst. 

[Vilandil Tasardur]

9 minutes ago, ntotoro said:

 

Assuming he's actually having any say. The plays still look like the badly-time, slowly forming plays Norval Gruden has always called.

"Assuming he's actually having any say"? That makes even less sense then. If he's having a say, then he's just as culpable for the suck. Alternatively, he's being ignored. 

 

So you're basically advocating for promoting the 22 year old intern because they can't be any worse. 

[ntotoro]

Just now, Vilandil Tasardur said:

"Assuming he's actually having any say"? That makes even less sense then. If he's having a say, then he's just as culpable for the suck. Alternatively, he's being ignored. 

 

So you're basically advocating for promoting the 22 year old intern because they can't be any worse. 

 

I didn't say any such thing. Be careful what you say. What I did  suggest is that it's possible O'Connell isn't having any say in the playcalling. One thing we've seen from Gruden is a steadfast stubbornness, right or wrong (usually wrong) and the playcalling we're seeing looks exactly the same way it has for six+ seasons.

[Vilandil Tasardur]

2 minutes ago, dballer said:

 

If you've been watching you'll see Gruden on the sidelines still calling the plays. That is part of the problem, and he doesn't seem to want to relinquish it. @RandyHolt just described it perfectly. How much is KOC actually doing right now? This stuff isn't groundbreaking. Bad teams fire their coaches. Other coaches step up. The wheel keeps turning. I don't believe Jay is putting the guys in the best position to evaluate them. Why would he change that now? Has he ever? He is a system guy, and he is only good at his system.

 

Again, do you think we will get worse? I mean, we are 0-4 with the worst point differential in the league right now? How much worse will it get? So keeping Bruce around because it doesn't matter for another 6 months is a good thing? Keeping Gruden because, well what else can we do? They both should have been gone after last season. They are past date. The sooner the better. You can start coming up with a plan going forward. Keeping them just to keep status quo is is a loser mentality, for a loser team. You have assistant coaches on the team that have a TON of experience. They can help bridge the gap. 

 

I dont know if it will get better, but it wont get worse. We are already the worst. 

This I can understand, and possibly even get behind. But that's where a real organization steps back and has a vision. Is your intention to try to win more games this year? I guess, if it is, I can understand why one might fire Gruden. But again, I don't think I'd bother until after week 9, because I'd want to give the new team an entire bye week to actually try to shake things up. 

 

Me personally? I don't think "tumultuous change" is the right environment for evaluating players. I don't think you get anything from that. I watched the bears game. I couldn't evaluate Keenum because Kalil Mack took the game over. I think you learn more about players from consistency, at least this early in the season. 

[dballer]

Just now, Vilandil Tasardur said:

This I can understand, and possibly even get behind. But that's where a real organization steps back and has a vision. Is your intention to try to win more games this year? I guess, if it is, I can understand why one might fire Gruden. But again, I don't think I'd bother until after week 9, because I'd want to give the new team an entire bye week to actually try to shake things up. 

 

Me personally? I don't think "tumultuous change" is the right environment for evaluating players. I don't think you get anything from that. I watched the bears game. I couldn't evaluate Keenum because Kalil Mack took the game over. I think you learn more about players from consistency, at least this early in the season. 

 

I understand your point. And I don't know if I am right or not. But you kind of make my point...we cant evaluate them right NOW. The season is spiraling, I don't see it getting better. I don't see games being won, and I don't see an environment that allows us to evaluate players. All I see is a catastrophe of a season. And, I believe as things continue, other problems will begin popping up that will be toxic. Jay and the FO are already supposedly bumping heads, it's only going to get worse. I would rather see the relationship end now before that happens. 

[Vilandil Tasardur]

1 minute ago, ntotoro said:

 

I didn't say any such thing. Be careful what you say. What I did  suggest is that it's possible O'Connell isn't having any say in the playcalling. One thing we've seen from Gruden is a steadfast stubbornness, right or wrong (usually wrong) and the playcalling we're seeing looks exactly the same way it has for six+ seasons.

Fair enough. My apologies. I read implication where it wasn't explicitly stated. 

 

My overall point though is that we have no evidence of O'Connel being anything of note. He got promoted to OC largely because he was the QB coach when we lost Cavanaugh, who in turn was the QB coach when we lost McVay. I don't think we know anything about O'Connel and I don't think the best time for 35 year old coaches with 1 year of coordinator experience to try their hand at being a HC is in the middle of a train wreck season with assistants they didn't pick. 

[London Kev]

If no one is getting fired this week, then at the very least I would hand play calling duties to O'Connell. I don't know if he would be an improvement, but he couldn't be any worse. Maybe he could then be better assessed regarding a position as interim HC.

 

On defense, I don't know, let Ryan take over, or the guy that sells hot dogs outside the stadium, or hold a raffle here on ES. Any option would be an improvement over Haslett, Barry, Manusky.

[Vilandil Tasardur]

1 minute ago, dballer said:

 

I understand your point. And I don't know if I am right or not. But you kind of make my point...we cant evaluate them right NOW. The season is spiraling, I don't see it getting better. I don't see games being won, and I don't see an environment that allows us to evaluate players. All I see is a catastrophe of a season. And, I believe as things continue, other problems will begin popping up that will be toxic. Jay and the FO are already supposedly bumping heads, it's only going to get worse. I would rather see the relationship end now before that happens. 

I think we can agree on a lot of that. Here's an interesting question for you that I think is relevant to our current situation:

 

Do you think it makes a difference at all if we had fired Jim Zorn 4 or 8 games into 2009? Do you think we learn more about our players? Do you think Shanahan does a better job the following year? Do you think it helps Bruce/Shanny in their draft room? Do you think it placates the fans in a way that has meaningful off the field benefits? 

 

I could be convinced that the biggest reason to fire Gruden is to make the fans shut up and provide Haskins a "get out of jail free" card. Right now, after every loss and bad performance, he's going to be scrutinized under a microscope. But with an interim head coach I think he'll be given a much longer leash in the media and by the fans even if only by proxy. Gruden is under a lot of pressure to not suck, and that pressure trickles down to Haskins whether we intend it to or not. 

[megared]

25 minutes ago, dballer said:

 

THIS year is inconsequential. THIS year is being thrown away. Why go ahead and throw away next year as well? That is absurd. 

 

Technically they could just extend him again and again and he would never be a lame duck? I don't see your point, considering he is absolutely a lame duck right now. 

 

By the way, If you bring in a GM that decides to keep Jay Gruden around for another year...You brought in the wrong GM and we are screwed for another 5-7 years.

 

The future does not have to include wiping the roster clean. There are good players to build on. That's not how it works. You don't to start over as an expansion team. That is the beauty of the NFL. You simply start getting better players to add to however many decent players you already have...

 

 

 

They don't need to extend him.  Assuming Snyder is disgusted with the result, the first person to be axed should be Allen.   And that new guy should have carte blanche to build the team however he wants.  If he decides that he'll keep Jay next season, and start rebuilding the roster in his vision, theoretically it'd make it a more attractive destination for coaches and players.  At which point, he can do exactly what we know he should do, and can Jay.  But if it takes another year, and we're doing it methodically, I have no issues.  

 

My point was, having a good process to arrive at the right answer, is more important than just doing the right thing, especially for us.    Not having a process is the reason seemingly good decisions, backfire.  It's also why we can't view a series of decisions as the execution of any longer term strategy.     

 

Do you really think the difference between this team being competitive or not is the coach?  This roster needs to be overhauled.  I don't see any universe in which this team is a playoff team next season.  We'll be relying on guys that are either green or held together by duct tape and glue.  

[TD_washingtonredskins]

1 hour ago, justice98 said:

I just cant explain this defense.  There werent as horrendous yesterday as they had been, except on 3rd down still. But 17 points and 4 turnovers, you'll normally live with that though.   

 

But generally, they are performing significantly worse across the board, and I think they're at least as talented than a year ago.  I would not argue they're less talented there overall.  Maybe in a couple spots, but it should even out.

 

So how do we explain this?  Why did they fall off a cliff?  Every unit on that side is awful.  

 

Well...

 

The secondary got weaker against the pass, we are starting a journeyman and a late-round pick at ILB, and our OLB are less-proven. The DL has been a little surprising, but just because guys like Cole Holcomb are a good story, doesn't mean that we've improved when they claim the starting job. 

[bakedtater1]

I went elk hunting with my dad today and had a blast!!..didn't get anything but got to see him call in a satellite bull...the heard tricked us though..while that bull came through the other bulls and cows went up and around through an area we were just at..so they pulled one over on us today..but I had fun seeing him call that bull in...what redskins game?

[Mr. Sinister]

2 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

 

@Mr. Sinister remember when you hinted you think Jay is sabotaging his way out of here? I'm ready agree with you

 

I mean I have no other rational explanation for his behavior at this point...

[757SeanTaylor21]

[hatchetwound]

4 hours ago, SemperFi Skins said:

I don't get the whole "Dolphins did it the right way" thing... They lost core players who were on rookie deals and also first round picks. It's a complete wash besides the extra first for Tunsil. 

 

They didn't trade aging players for first round picks. If we were to somehow finally trade TW, and maybe Kerrigan and/or Norman, we are in a much better position. Recoup that second rounder, finish in the top 5 picks, and we have the tools for a rebuild with our current core.

I get what they are doing.... you just need to look at it from a different angle.

 

When teams make a run, such as the seattle team a few years back, its built off of a core group of young talent.  Miami looked around and said "yeah, we are way more than a few pieces away, so we need to start over with a new core".  Those young players that are still on a rookie deal would no longer be on that deal, so they would be too expensive to keep.  BUT that rookie deal adds value and leverage.  So now they trade away those pieces PLUS gain premium picks do to their lousy record and now they have a shot at building that core over the next two years.

 

Its kind of like that thought exercise I did a while back, I'll try to find it, where I suggested we hit the reset button.  Trade a lot of our vets for picks.  Trade our current, middle of the pack, value picks for even better picks in 2020 (I provided examples of teams trading a pick one year and receiving a pick a round better the following year).  Yeah, we would suck this year but who cares.... WE SUCK ANYWAY.

 

Sorry, end rant... just been a frustrating weekend of football.  I'm a little emotional.

[dballer]

2 hours ago, Vilandil Tasardur said:

I think we can agree on a lot of that. Here's an interesting question for you that I think is relevant to our current situation:

 

Do you think it makes a difference at all if we had fired Jim Zorn 4 or 8 games into 2009? Do you think we learn more about our players? Do you think Shanahan does a better job the following year? Do you think it helps Bruce/Shanny in their draft room? Do you think it placates the fans in a way that has meaningful off the field benefits? 

 

I could be convinced that the biggest reason to fire Gruden is to make the fans shut up and provide Haskins a "get out of jail free" card. Right now, after every loss and bad performance, he's going to be scrutinized under a microscope. But with an interim head coach I think he'll be given a much longer leash in the media and by the fans even if only by proxy. Gruden is under a lot of pressure to not suck, and that pressure trickles down to Haskins whether we intend it to or not. 

 

Good question. Only difference with Zorn, is that we have our hopeful franchise qb on the roster. And I do believe Gruden could be detrimental to his development. I just dont think developing a raw QB is in Gruden's wheelhouse. 

 

I think firing Shanny early could have helped. That situation got so ugly...I would avoid dragging the inevitable out just to keep that from happening. 

 

But yes, I think your last point may be the most important. Firing Gruden will say "well, season over, we screwed up, we will try again next year." That gives Haskins the ability to play without feeling the pressure to win. Which may be the best thing for him. 

[KDawg]

4 minutes ago, dballer said:

 

Good question. Only difference with Zorn, is that we have our hopeful franchise qb on the roster. And I do believe Gruden could be detrimental to his development. I just dont think developing a raw QB is in Gruden's wheelhouse. 

 

 

I wouldn't be too sure of that. If Haskins doesn't come out this year and light the world on fire and (this is a very, very large if. Like Antartican [sp? Is that the proper term]) a new regime comes in, there's nothing saying that the Skins don't attempt to acquire a new QB. And honestly, I don't think we should be upset by the decision regardless. A new regime deserves to pick their own groceries. And it MAY be Haskins. Or it may not be. But I'm not sure we have our quarterback of the future based on roster uncertainty moving forward. And if the current regime stays and Haskins is forced on a coach, then we're already in a hole.

 

I'm fine with Haskins being the guy... As long as the new GM/HC decide that for themselves.

 

Now, to actually get a new GM...

[max21]

I have been so disappointed in Landon Collins so far this year, I was so hyped we when got him. Atleast Dunbar decided to make a couple of plays 

[dballer]

2 hours ago, megared said:

 

They don't need to extend him.  Assuming Snyder is disgusted with the result, the first person to be axed should be Allen.   And that new guy should have carte blanche to build the team however he wants.  If he decides that he'll keep Jay next season, and start rebuilding the roster in his vision, theoretically it'd make it a more attractive destination for coaches and players.  At which point, he can do exactly what we know he should do, and can Jay.  But if it takes another year, and we're doing it methodically, I have no issues.  

 

My point was, having a good process to arrive at the right answer, is more important than just doing the right thing, especially for us.    Not having a process is the reason seemingly good decisions, backfire.  It's also why we can't view a series of decisions as the execution of any longer term strategy.     

 

Do you really think the difference between this team being competitive or not is the coach?  This roster needs to be overhauled.  I don't see any universe in which this team is a playoff team next season.  We'll be relying on guys that are either green or held together by duct tape and glue.  

 

I could see this team being a playoff team in 2 years. If Haskins pans out. 

 

Yes, we need a new GM and a new legitimate process. We also need to fire Jay. We need to overhaul the FO and coaching staff more than the roster. Talent, even on a team like ours, can be flipped in a year, definitely two. Again, we have some solid pieces. It doesn't have to be an entire overhaul. But this coaching staff is lost now. There is no redeeming it as it currently stands. No reason to continue on with it.

 

Next season, with the new coach, and new GM, is the season you show growth, 7-9, 8-8...competitive hard fought games. Then the following season you take a step forward. In theory. Of course Dan will probably hire the wrong guy and blah blah...doesn't matter. That is how it COULD be done. 

 

I don't understand how needing better players and a better GM is mutually exclusive to needing to fire Jay/Manusky. 

 

 

7 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

I wouldn't be too sure of that. If Haskins doesn't come out this year and light the world on fire and (this is a very, very large if. Like Antartican [sp? Is that the proper term]) a new regime comes in, there's nothing saying that the Skins don't attempt to acquire a new QB. And honestly, I don't think we should be upset by the decision regardless. A new regime deserves to pick their own groceries. And it MAY be Haskins. Or it may not be. But I'm not sure we have our quarterback of the future based on roster uncertainty moving forward. And if the current regime stays and Haskins is forced on a coach, then we're already in a hole.

 

I'm fine with Haskins being the guy... As long as the new GM/HC decide that for themselves.

 

Now, to actually get a new GM...

 

Oh for sure. 100% in on that. Which is also why I want Haskins to play the rest of the year so the new regime has film to help make that decision!

[ExoDus84]

1 hour ago, 757SeanTaylor21 said:

skins crying jordan pic

 

I've had this as my profile pic since Alex went down last year. Welcome to the club

[megared]

5 minutes ago, dballer said:

I could see this team being a playoff team in 2 years. If Haskins pans out. 

 

Yes, we need a new GM and a new legitimate process. We also need to fire Jay. We need to overhaul the FO and coaching staff more than the roster. Talent, even on a team like ours, can be flipped in a year, definitely two. Again, we have some solid pieces. It doesn't have to be an entire overhaul. But this coaching staff is lost now. There is no redeeming it as it currently stands. No reason to continue on with it.

 

Next season, with the new coach, and new GM, is the season you show growth, 7-9, 8-8...competitive hard fought games. Then the following season you take a step forward. In theory. Of course Dan will probably hire the wrong guy and blah blah...doesn't matter. That is how it COULD be done. 

 

I don't understand how needing better players and a better GM is mutually exclusive to needing to fire Jay/Manusky. 

 

I'm not seeing it.  We still have to shed expensive contracts, which will open up more holes in the roster.   And we're down a 2nd rounder this upcoming draft. 

 

How has the 'not an entire overhaul' been working out for us lately?  That's exactly why we find ourselves here.  Were all the 7 win seasons, missed playoffs, noncompetitive efforts against elite teams, really enough for you to be so afraid of losing a couple more games?  

 

If Bruce is gone, I'm all for firing Jay, if that's what the new guy wants to do.  But nobody is coming in, in one off season and fixing everything.  If that guy wants Jay as a placeholder, while he fixes the roster, at this point, I'd respect it more than doing things, just cause you feel like it's what should be done.  

 

This team is largely noncompetitive.  And you aren't going to attract top flight talent coaching wise with one potential play maker on your offense and a QB that needs to be developed.   

 

At this point, I want only decisions that can easily be reversed in the case of a FO overhaul.  

[dyst]

Send Kerrigan or Sweat to the Broncos. They just lost Chubb.

[ExoDus84]

Saw a very Redskins stat today.

 

We only have 199 yards rushing through 4 games. Only 8 teams since 1940 have had fewer than 200 yards rushing through the first 4 weeks.

 

We are the chosen one.