Ron Rivera to be next Redskins HC (According to CSN Post-game Show)

[Voice_of_Reason]

2 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

That being said, Dan has shown little to no idea how to structure an organization and just might hand it to him anyway... and it might be too enticing for him to turn down to his own detriment. 😕 

Or he might get it and do the smart thing and delegate it to somebody who should have it.  

 

He shouldn’t have final roster say. Though the reporting indicates he’s going to have it to some extent through the draft. 

 

I have a gut gut feeling this is going to work better than what we’ve here before.  I don’t know why.  I hope I’m not Charlie Brown with the football.  

[TSO]

Just now, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

I do like the idea of hiring the coach first and finding the GM to work with him after.  

 

It's also 12:45 am, I'm not sure why I feel that way.

You meant don’t, right? 😛 

 

Well, I don’t.  

 

I don’t generally like the emphasis Dan has placed on the HC position here. They’re overburdened and overwhelmed and it doesn’t flow well organizationally with the other roles meant to support it. 

But if Rivera understands the importance of someone who is an expert at talent evaluation having final say, then that’s big for me and I don’t mind it as much. 

[zCommander]

3 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

I do like the idea of hiring the coach first and finding the GM to work with him after.  

 

It's also 12:45 am, I'm not sure why I feel that way.

 

Because that is what B. Mitch said too and so did S. Moss on Redskins OT show...lol

[mistertim]

7 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

Whoever is interviewing better not be told any kind of nonsense like "We need to make it work with Haskins"   I am still neutral on Haskins. The "too early to say either way" camp, but I also know that any NFL caliber coach is going to see so much on film that I would ever comprehend.  

 

What if Ron Rivera says there is no future for Haskins as an NFL QB during his interview?

 

I know these are all extreme scenarios, but my biggest wish for the next group of hires is not necessarily that they be a big name, or have 20 years of experience, but that they are allowed to do their jobs and partner with the new GM to build/coach the team the way they see fit without the owner deciding he wants to draft folks based on a few college highlights packages. 

 

How much input would Rivera really have on Haskins though, if asked? I mean the guy is an NFL head coach so he's probably forgotten more about football than I know, but he's a defensive guy so he could probably watch Haskins and give his general opinion but he's likely not going to be really working with Haskins as far as developing him. I don't think he'd be the right guy to come in and give a verdict on Haskins and I doubt they'd say to a defensive coach "hey, you have to turn this QB into a star". They'd probably say that the coaches liked what they saw out of him as far as progress as the season went on and would like a good offensive coaching staff to try and keep developing him. If Rivera things that's KOC after talking with him, great. If not, then he brings in someone he think would do a better job.

[TSO]

5 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Or he might get it and do the smart thing and delegate it to somebody who should have it.  

 

He shouldn’t have final roster say. Though the reporting indicates he’s going to have it to some extent through the draft. 

 

I have a gut gut feeling this is going to work better than what we’ve here before.  I don’t know why.  I hope I’m not Charlie Brown with the football.  

See my last post. 
 

We’ll find out soon. I know I won’t be deluded by any smoke and mirrors and I’ll be suspicious of it all for some time. It’s what Dan has done. Hopefully we get a clear organizational hierarchy and we hear all the right things. But it’ll just be a start. 

[NewCliche21]

2 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

See my last post. 
 

We’ll find out soon. I know I won’t be deluded by any smoke and mirrors and I’ll be suspicious of it all for some time. It’s what Dan has done. Hopefully we get a clear organizational hierarchy and we hear all the right things. But it’ll just be a start. 

 

I think the litmus test is the same as it's always been and for 20 years has failed:  Lombardis.  Anything short of winning a Lombardi was the wrong choice.

 

Until we're not playing next weekend due to having the No. 1 seed locked up instead of the number 2 pick, I won't give Snyder an inch.

[NoCalMike]

When Callahan gets canned, any chance he is willing to return as O-line coach (assuming no one wants to hire him as HC and the new HC would want him?) I am not a fan of Callahan the HC but he can coach the O-line with the best of 'em.  That is his bread & butter. 

[CovingtonCommander]

3 hours ago, PigskinPhat said:

Really, Rivera could do nothing with Newton, what’s he gonna do with Haskins?

 

Haskins will develop more and more into a passer. Newton has never been a qb imo who can win a game with his arm. His legs were his game and in crunch moments he couldn’t handle the pressure.

[NoCalMike]

I am by no means anti-Rivera, but it seems like Snyder always seems to get tunnel-vision about a specific coach, GM, or player where once he takes a liking to them as a candidate, it has to be that person and he has to get them under contract ASAP.

 

No issue with Rivera being a candidate for the job, but considering it appears the franchise is ready to start all over again with a total restructure......is it really necessary to go out and hire the very first guy you interview? 

[RWJ]

3 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

When Callahan gets canned, any chance he is willing to return as O-line coach (assuming no one wants to hire him as HC and the new HC would want him?) I am not a fan of Callahan the HC but he can coach the O-line with the best of 'em.  That is his bread & butter. 

Big issues is that your replaced by another HC and you come back as OL coach.  Doesn't happen often if ever.

[Thinking Skins]

2 hours ago, Art said:

Rivera is not a "great" innovator.   He hasn't produced consistent teams.   His side of the ball hasn't been dominating all that often and has been bad somewhat often.   But he has produced acceptably well, has good experience, a great reputation, and is a respectable get in this world if he's ours.   He's won NFL coach of the year MORE than once.  I like that he runs a 4-3.   He has won games in the playoffs even.  I will consider it nearly perfect if he keeps KOC and gives Haskins and the offense time to gel while he puts the bad 3-4 pieces into a 4-3.   This isn't a splashy move.   But it is an interesting one in that Rivera will be in demand.

 

This is my fear with him, and I'm thinking more about the coodinator than Rivera himself. Sure we may do a 4-3 scheme now, but will it be a heavy zone scheme? Will he use players like Allen, Payne, Ioannidis, Sweat, etc. Its not like we have a great inventory of young CBs but I do question if Dunbar and Monroe would be better as man cover guys instead of zone. But as a head coach is he only going to install "his" schemes or (assuming the improbable and Chase Young stays at OSU) we draft Okudah as the draft's top lock down man guy (is that what he is?), would we not use him to his strengths? 

 

I really wonder about our LBs because I think thats where we have the most variance. We have a strength in our DL and a weakness in our secondary, but our LBs have some talent but also could be busts. Foster we don't know much about. Holcomb coulrd be a good run guy but we don't know much more than that. SDH has instincts but it doesn't seem like the coaching staff trusts him much. JHC we know can cover TEs but was supposed to be improved at stopping the run, instead he was inactive most of the year, and Bostic may not be back but also is middle of the pack. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Art]

24 minutes ago, Springfield said:

Your take is very optimistic @Art.  I don’t view the coaching job as a very desirable situation.  On offense, the only player who has shown that they are likely an all star candidate is Terry McLaurin.  Haskins is a project and may pan out, but it’s too early to say.  Same with the rest of the rookies.

 

We need to rebuild the offensive line and the defense is inconsistent (something that Rivera would likely shape up, but not a given).  Of course there’s also Snyder.  The aimless rudder of a ghost ship, traveling to nowhere.

 

Not ideal if you ask me.  But, maybe Rivera wants a challenge.

 

Actually, I'm not overly optimistic.   But Haskins showed enough clear growth as he got more comfortable to have a chance to be an answer.   He may not be.   Guice showed enough pop and promise to be an answer.   He may not be.   McLaurin showed frighteningly good route skills, ball skills and maturity but he also might not be a good pro.   The point is the Redskins, unlike pretty much any other team, has the POSSIBILITY that all three key offensive spots are filled by players on their rookie deals who COULD be an answer.   If they are, the person with the job wins a lot in the next few years.   If they are not, they are not and the person won't get demolished for it as they are inherited.   It's attractive all around.   As for rebuilding the offensive line, I'm not sure I agree.   We have to bring our best lineman back, Flowers.   We probably will re-sign Scherff.  And don't be surprised with Bruce gone Trent comes back.   And defensive personnel is quite interesting for a 4-3, with or without Young.

 

22 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

Art, I'll have what you're having.    Were you there when Norv told him that?

 

Jokes aside, I agree...there are SOME things to like here, yes there are rookie contracts at key positions.  But let's rewind to where we were weeks ago when Gruden was fired and we were all calling this a dumpster fire, who'd want to come here, who'd want to work for Dan, etc.  All of a sudden Haskins flashed, the season is over, we've got a #2 pick and this is a great opportunity?  Nah, not buying it.  How many times have we been here?  What's next, the introductory press conference with the new coach standing behind the podium with three dusty ass Lombardi trophies in front of him and mentions of "a great tradition, a great history...." etc?

 

It's like the calendar hits January and Redskins fans think their team is the prom queen...every.  Single.  Year.  Meanwhile we trash this organization hard from the first lackluster preseason showing all the way up to the last loss of a season, another season where the team sleepwalked through the final week.  And now in an instant, this is a hot opportunity?  This is an attractive job?  

 

So, I have a few old contacts, many gone from the team, but many who were there when Norv was there and who are friends with Norv and have relayed to me Rivera has asked Norv's view and Norv flatly said Snyder is a good owner in that he'll give what he's asked.   But he isn't that wonderful if he does that and it doesn't work out.   Which is pretty much an exact quote from Gibbs and Beathard with Cooke who Snyder continues to try to model himself after.   Look up Gibbs cackling about Cooke telling him, "You better be right."   As for the job being attractive, no, it wasn't an instant thing.   

A year ago at this time it was an atrocious job.   Smith was an albatross.   The team wanted Manusky gone, but couldn't force Gruden to make him gone, because Gruden was, sadly, the best option to coach the team in that condition.   Simply acquiring the draft picks didn't make it an attractive job either.   It became more and more attractive as Haskins went from complete dolt to clearly promising.   And as McLaurin built on what he had.   And when Guice showed so much pop.   Suddenly a team devoid in the skill positions had people who could be there.   Based on what they showed.   It became better largely when Haskins clearly started to not suck.   Not to say he won't still suck, but he did stop sucking a bit :).   It became very attractive because of those three largely and Sims sneaking in maybe.   And the defense, for a defensive coach, is 10 to 15 spots better just by them calling the plays.   

 

20 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

I haven’t seen this quote.  Is it published anywhere?

It would be. 

 

But i think the plan seems to be to keep KOC for Haskins continuity. 

No, and it won't be and I agree.   I really want KOC to stay to keep the growth with Haskins.   
 

9 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

Interesting, I hadn't really considered that. I wonder if Norv and Dan have a good relationship. I know Troy Aikman was so mad at Dan when he fired Norv, thinking he wasn't given a chance. But most of us Skins fans thought the opposite, that Norv was given too many chances but most of us were tired of his all offense and no defense teams. 

Right.   People are funny.   People think Rivera who has TONS of options didn't both look out at all of them before him AND internally to his friends on his staff to determine if he wanted to consider Washington.   The very fact Norv was here and was with Rivera there and Rivera is coming here speaks volumes.   Not that those who don't get that will ever notice though :).

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

8 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

You meant don’t, right? 😛 

 

Well, I don’t.  

 

I don’t generally like the emphasis Dan has placed on the HC position here. They’re overburdened and overwhelmed and it doesn’t flow well organizationally with the other roles meant to support it. 

But if Rivera understands the importance of someone who is an expert at talent evaluation having final say, then that’s big for me and I don’t mind it as much. 

 

Well, I don't generally like Dan letting guys like Bruce and Vinny C. stay in the front office longer than it takes my dog to drag his ass across the driveway.  So we can agree that Dan sucks at everything, but IMO if you've got dunderheads like those two in the front office it doesn't really matter who the HC is.  

 

So maybe, just maybe, this is a change.  Maybe you get the HC first, a guy who can set the tone...and then find the FO guy with his assistance.  Maybe getting a guy like Rivera first attracts a better FO candidate.  Who knows.

 

 

7 minutes ago, zskins said:

 

Because that is what B. Mitch said too and so did S. Moss on Redskins OT show...lol

 

Well I like those two.  B-Mitch gets a bad rap on here as his "get off my lawn, back in my day we were so much tougher" routine gets old but he's not always wrong.

[88Comrade2000]

Rivera will be gone in 4 years.

[TSO]

2 minutes ago, NewCliche21 said:

 

I think the litmus test is the same as it's always been and for 20 years has failed:  Lombardis.  Anything short of winning a Lombardi was the wrong choice.

 

Until we're not playing next weekend due to having the No. 1 seed locked up instead of the number 2 pick, I won't give Snyder an inch.

I’m with you, but I wouldn’t go that far. I just want organizational competence that allows everyone within it to thrive. I want the team to be known for its environment being conducive to success, where we consistently have coaches, scouts and players doing well and, even if they leave, we replace them with relative ease since we understand how to allow people to grow and place them in their proper roles. 
 

I’m tired of the villains and scapegoats. I’m tired of good football people coming here and eventually leaving as shells of themselves where, instead of growth, we see their strengths diminish and weaknesses highlighted increasingly as time goes by (outside of a few who are fortunately shielded by others from the top brass). Only for them to become the target of fan ire because, yeah, they look and act like idiots at that point. Surprise surprise.  
 

I could go on and on about this, you know that, lol. But I’ll just leave it at that.

[NoCalMike]

1 minute ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

This is my fear with him, and I'm thinking more about the coodinator than Rivera himself. Sure we may do a 4-3 scheme now, but will it be a heavy zone scheme?

 

Honestly I don't think zone coverage was the primary issue.  It was the lack of pass rush that exposed the zone coverage.  Zone only works effectively if you are pressuring the QB into rushing throws before the WR/TE's can find the soft spot in zone coverage.   The secondary are covering areas of the field instead of the player, with the hope that the QB has to throw the ball too soon or that their timing is disrupted somehow.  When the pass rush doesn't create that issue, then the secondary is basically left out to dry.  I also think Man-to-Man coverage is very risky when you have a young inexperienced secondary.  

[madden lot]

32 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

It's like the calendar hits January and Redskins fans think their team is the prom queen...every.  Single.  Year.  Meanwhile we trash this organization hard from the first lackluster preseason showing all the way up to the last loss of a season, another season where the team sleepwalked through the final week.  And now in an instant, this is a hot opportunity?  This is an attractive job?  

Yea

[TSO]

1 minute ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

So maybe, just maybe, this is a change.  Maybe you get the HC first, a guy who can set the tone...and then find the FO guy with his assistance.  Maybe getting a guy like Rivera first attracts a better FO candidate.  Who knows.

Yeah, like I said, I’m with you on that. It’s unorthodox, of course, but maybe it works out. That Rivera quote about personnel was lovely to see. He might be the one to inspire that... it’s just unfortunate if it’s not Dan himself implementing it. We’ll see.  

[Art]

4 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

This is my fear with him, and I'm thinking more about the coodinator than Rivera himself. Sure we may do a 4-3 scheme now, but will it be a heavy zone scheme? Will he use players like Allen, Payne, Ioannidis, Sweat, etc. Its not like we have a great inventory of young CBs but I do question if Dunbar and Monroe would be better as man cover guys instead of zone. But as a head coach is he only going to install "his" schemes or (assuming the improbable and Chase Young stays at OSU) we draft Okudah as the draft's top lock down man guy (is that what he is?), would we not use him to his strengths? 

 

I really wonder about our LBs because I think thats where we have the most variance. We have a strength in our DL and a weakness in our secondary, but our LBs have some talent but also could be busts. Foster we don't know much about. Holcomb coulrd be a good run guy but we don't know much more than that. SDH has instincts but it doesn't seem like the coaching staff trusts him much. JHC we know can cover TEs but was supposed to be improved at stopping the run, instead he was inactive most of the year, and Bostic may not be back but also is middle of the pack. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As mentioned by Mike, zone is good if you have pressure up front.   If we happened to have Young, Sweat, Kerrigan (unlikely) at defensive end, Allen, Matty I. and Payne on the inside, if you can't generate pressure you never will.   And if you are, with a zone behind it, you start making plays.   Now, like you, I prefer picking a man and covering that man and being done with it, but the zone doesn't scare me as much if we have four guys like that up front in positions they should be and, importantly, if Sweat and Kerrigan NEVER, ever, ever, ever, ever cover anyone ever again.

Linebacker is interesting.   I'm not a huge fan of Bostic.   Foster may not be ready and wasn't exactly great at weakside.   Still, you have potential here with Foster in the middle and Holcomb/Anderson at SSLB and Hamilton at weakside (or a draft pick).   In any case, you have at least 6 players in your front 7 in their best positions just by moving to the 4-3.   Right now you have precisely 0.   And you go from VERY slow to very fast simply by having defensive ends with those traits and Allen goes from a sluggish end to a quick tackle.   ETC.

 

[zCommander]

1 minute ago, NoCalMike said:

I am by no means anti-Rivera, but it seems like Snyder always seems to get tunnel-vision about a specific coach, GM, or player where once he takes a liking to them as a candidate, it has to be that person and he has to get them under contract ASAP.

 

No issue with Rivera being a candidate for the job, but considering it appears the franchise is ready to start all over again with a total restructure......is it really necessary to go out and hire the very first guy you interview? 

 

But what is out there right now and would waiting be better than Ron? Any asst. coaches on these playoffs teams that would want to be the HC for the Redskins that you would like to have?

[LetMeSeeYourWarFace21]

1 hour ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

I'm good with Riverboat Ron..............

 

 

 

 

Sigh.........For the love of God, please tell me I'm not going to have hear this stupid azz name for the duration of this dudes tenure here............I'm already tired of it......

 

Anyway, how is he as an in game coach? Is he good at making adjustments throughout the game (halftime adjustments)? Is he good at time management, and making good decisions? Is he a coach that tweaks the plays to fit his players strengths, or does he try to force squares into circles and refuse to adjust? You know, all the stuff that is supposed to be coaching common sense, but aint always common. Specifically for some of our recent HC's. 

[wilco_holland]

What I like about Ron:

- He doesn't coached scared 

- Been part of good D's 

- Looks to be good culture CEO type of coach 

- Coached some successful teams 

 

What I don't like: 

- Qeustion his ability to take D to the next level on his own (feel like his good Ds where result of either great players or great DC) 

- We don't weaken an other team 

- If we win our O-coordinator will be HC asap and we have nothing behind him. 

[NoCalMike]

5 minutes ago, zskins said:

 

But what is out there right now and would waiting be better than Ron? Any asst. coaches on these playoffs teams that would want to be the HC for the Redskins that you would like to have?

 

I have no idea, but just for an example.  The 49ers went out and hired John Lynch as their GM.  It seemed weird at the time, no?  Obviously Lynch must have blown them away during the interview.  I seriously doubt the 49ers front office had the opinion of "We must get John Lynch hired tomorrow, make it happen NOW!"  It is the fact that he came in, prepared for the interview, impressed the brass and got hired.

 

With Snyder, it always seems like the decision is made before all of that process, and then they figure out the rest of it after the fact. 

[Murphs56]

Switch to a 4-3 and let Sweat & Young do what they do best 

[CovingtonCommander]

Rivera was the coach I wanted. He will command respect and get the most out of the players. Better days are ahead. HTTR!!!