OC - Scott Turner incoming

[Thinking Skins]

On 1/7/2020 at 8:51 AM, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I hear you.  I am not discounting your take here.  I am just saying if they are getting you angry about it, they probably ironically like it since that's what some of these guys are trying to do.  The worst thing for a radio show is people being bored -- so love-hate is what they want. 

 

I far from love all their takes.   I do have a soft spot for them for one reason which is they arguably where the biggest Bruce bashers on talk radio.  I thought their Bruce anniversary show was a classic.

 

I know Danny wasn't a big Jay guy and he talked about how he got blocked by Jay's son on twitter.  Grant was cooler about Jay but didn't love him.  they both really love Rivera so i think they've been mostly positive of late. 

 

But yeah I get anyone getting annoyed at some of their takes.  Like Sheehan when they have an opinion they push it like its the truth. 

 

 

I get this and its why I give a lot of radio personalities a lot of rope. But there's a line between just getting mad and being annoying. Like, I'll contrast the Junkies with Grant and Danny. The Junkies are hella skeptical on most things including the Bruce Bashing (and remember I was a fan of Bruce early on post 2014), but I liked it because it was generally grounded in EB's homerism which I could always relate to. Grant and Danny seem so negative for so many ridiculous reasons. I remember bashing them on air for how they handled the D. Jackson signing, basically calling him a thug based on the one news story, and they never backtracked off it and instead doubled down on it with their shows questioning why he would pass on a bonus and had segments on how stupid he was.

 

But that's nothing compared to the Kirk love and post Kirk hate. Even with all the above, this was probably my second favorite show (behind Al Galdi) up until the 6-2 run last year. We all knew that the team wasn't a SB contender and that they were winning ugly but we were in the midst of a 6-2 run and being in first place in the division and they were having segments ridiculing Jay and Smith and just being overly negative and basically assholes. I don't know what the segments consisted of because I grew so irritated what I would change the channel. I said I'd rather listen to Doc or Brian than them and thats where I still am. 

 

With regards to Sheehan, he's good and informative but hella boring. Without Cooley as a personality where is the show? I like him because he covers topics and has passion but I wish he was more controversial. Its interesting because Brian is most of the time too passionate and least informative. I could say the same for Doc but Galdi balances him nicely. Scott Lynn doesn't do that for Brian. But he needs somebody like a Fred Smoot to make it an easier listen. 

[NoCalMike]

Grant & Danny's Kirk love/obsession was the equivalent of an abused partner falling hard for the first dude she dates that doesn't hit her, but is rather mediocre himself. (No, Kirk isn't mediocre, just used the word for the analysis).    I never had an issue with them being Pro-Kirk verus what had come before, or even over Alex Smith, but they were acting as if someone of Kirk Cousins's caliber would never come along onto the team in the future.   

[RemoveSnyder]

2 hours ago, RandyHolt said:

#29 Scott Turner DB? No relation.

 

Bring back Starter brand. I liked the way those jerseys were cut and aligned.

[skinsmania123]

7 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Some have a negative connotation of a HC hiring people they are comfortable with because of the Tampa connections from the past.    But by and large, I get it.  Yeah I don't love passing over a Wade Phillips for Joe Berry.  But we haven't seen those types of moves at least not, yet. 

 

Keim and Sheehan are talking about this some right now on 980.  They are saying this feels much different from even Shanahan who did keep some stalwarts at Redskins Park, etc.  Rivera wants to clean house.  I don't think its because all these people stink, some might, but I can understand he wants to wipe out the status quo there and start fresh.  It would make sense it would want to start fresh with people he already knows and trusts. 

I get what your saying.  RR has had a more success with his choices then say the Tampa contingent.  The biggest head scratcher for me during the Gruden tenure was passing over Wade Phillips.  You know he  might have made him look better I am going to say.

 

I think cleaning house sort of says, I fall upon the weight of my decisions for better or worse.  

 

 

[RemoveSnyder]

2 hours ago, KDawg said:

Worth noting, Turner's usage of McCaffrey opens the door for a Chris Thompson/Bryce Love feature back role.

 

I mean, who wouldn't use McCaffrey? If you had McCaffrey on your team you'd be riding him all the way to the New York state championship and beyond. 55 touches a game. 

 

But to pivot off that, if I were in Turner's place, that would be all the more reason to find that one player who could legitimately be all those three backs you mentioned above in one guy. A guy that doesn't come off the field, equally good between the hedges as he is out of the backfield. 

 

Dare I let loose my admiration for Cam Akers, but ... I do like his game. I would easily call him a 3 down back.

 

Personally I think he's going to be an even better pro than what he was at FSU. Just having a legit line in front of him, that alone, will uptick the bulk production. He's already great at yards after contact, love his spin moves, admire his balance and jump cuts. An excellent prospect, but you put downfield blocking from TEs and WRs, a la Art Monk 20/30 yards downfield on a DB, then you've got homeruns from Green Akers. 

 

Per Love/Thompson, I think they'll role with just one of those two, not both, whoever is healthiest. They're somewhat redundant. 

[Skinsinparadise]

34 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

I get this and its why I give a lot of radio personalities a lot of rope. But there's a line between just getting mad and being annoying. Like, I'll contrast the Junkies with Grant and Danny. The Junkies are hella skeptical on most things including the Bruce Bashing (and remember I was a fan of Bruce early on post 2014), but I liked it because it was generally grounded in EB's homerism which I could always relate to. Grant and Danny seem so negative for so many ridiculous reasons. I remember bashing them on air for how they handled the D. Jackson signing, basically calling him a thug based on the one news story, and they never backtracked off it and instead doubled down on it with their shows questioning why he would pass on a bonus and had segments on how stupid he was.

 

I give them a lot of rope, too.  And if they are annoying you can just turn them off.   They are catering to an audience and they won't grab everyone. 

 

Heck I've been cynical as heck about Bruce-Dan and the operation yet i enjoy watching Larry Michael.  And I know others can't stand him.  It's whatever hits you or not.  I notice some love Cooley when he takes a homer opinion (which is most of the time) but get really upset at him when he occasionally gets critical.  So I presume people impose some expectation that Cooley should always be positive or something like that.  The same drill exists on other personalities.  There are no rights or wrongs, its just our own opinions and desires imposed on whatever we listen to.  So it's going to hit people in different ways.  Not saying you suggest otherwise. 

 

I live in South Florida and we go in my view a bunch of boring sports talk shows.    When I lived in NY when I went to undergrad, sports talk radio was almost all about baseball.  So I think the DMV has some good shows in contrast if you like football talk.  

 

Many sports TV shows like to paint things one way or another and take hard positions.  Pick a side Brady or Manning?   Is this event good or bad?  Keep him or fire him?  Jerry Jones evil or great owner, etc.  And I think even on some threads you'll see takes like this where its not easy to take a position where let's say you are 80% sold on something.  Because then some people will then pick apart the 20% and try to define you that way.  You are either all in or all out.  

 

 I think the media somewhat breeds that type of approach on a number of subjects because I think most find it more entertaining to have hot takes where you got to pick one side or another and plenty of that has been filtered on talk radio.  Sheehan is my favorite.   I don't agree with him on everything but I do think he has plenty of nuance in his opinions.  Grant says he does and on some issues he indeed takes some nuanced position but he often comes in hard.  I don't mind him though because I find him entertaining.  I've listened to plenty of sports talk radio around the country and sadly a lot of it I find boring and unlistenable. 

 

So I enjoy anyone that I find entertaining whether I agree with them or not.  For me that would be Sheehan, Grant-Danny, Chad Dukes.  As for the spot duty radio guys, I like Russell and Hoffman.    Galdi is OK but I don't find him that compelling, ditto the Junkies.  I like Doc and Smoot in small doses, I have to be in the mood to listen to them.  I work from home so I listen to these guys a lot -- I sadly probably listen to more talk radio than do anything else outside of work.  😀

Edited January 8, 2020 by Skinsinparadise

[RemoveSnyder]

6 hours ago, Llevron said:

I havent had the opportunity to put my own team together in my professional life yet, though im getting closer to that.

 

Surround yourself with your enemies to keep a close eye on them. Then slowly pick each one off, one by one. 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[veteranskinsfan]

I just started listening to Sheehan again.  He is about 50% right and often 50% wrong.   I will listen to Doc and Galdi after a Skins loss just to hear

Doc lose his temper.  Have never listened to Grant-Danny or Chad Dukes.  Before work this morning turned on the Junkies and they were o.k.

Philly has two good sports radio stations.  Sometimes listen to one NY sports radio station.  Lived in Northern California for ten years and had

one really good sports station- KNBR.   I have several sports radio apps on my iphone.   I do not listen to Brian Mitchell show on 980.

[AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy]

20 hours ago, Monk4thaHALL said:

I want a nickname that kicks in the door and shouts "I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass. And I'm all out of bubblegum."

 

Cornbread Turner.

 

[NoCalMike]

I used to like Chad Dukes when he had Lavar as a co-host.  When there was someone with him to bounce ideas off of and check him from time to time.  Once he went solo, he just has this weird "because I have a radio show, it means I am smarter than you" attitude from time to time.  He comes off as a wannabe shock jock that just happens to have been hired to do a sports show. 

 

As far as the new OC.  I really think that one area they need to focus on is designing routes and play concepts around delivering the ball to players on the move.  One reason why Brady and Manning were so successful with the short passing game, or more specifically the short passing game in a WCO, is because they got the ball to players who didn't have to stop to catch the ball, they always seem to be running and not having to break their stride.  The difference between throwing the ball in front of them, where even a half yard of space between themselves and the defender could be the difference in a 3 yard gain, and 15 yard gain.    

Edited January 8, 2020 by NoCalMike

[Llevron]

43 minutes ago, Monk4thaHALL said:

 

Surround yourself with your enemies to keep a close eye on them. Then slowly pick each one off, one by one. 

 

Sounds good! 

 

Unrelated but important.....you wanna job? Great benefits and wonderful accidental death and dismemberment plan. 

[Jumbo]

5 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

Sounds good! 

 

Unrelated but important.....you wanna job? Great benefits and wonderful accidental death and dismemberment plan. 

 

 

also unrelated---do you offer coverage for intentional death and dismemberment?

 

asking for a friend

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

Edited January 8, 2020 by Skinsinparadise

[Springfield]

I think this is shaping up to be a great rerun of Shanahan

[Xameil]

51 minutes ago, veteranskinsfan said:

I just started listening to Sheehan again.  He is about 50% right and often 50% wrong.   

 

 

 

[joeken24]

There has to be a bit of nepotism in this cut throat industry. If the head coach is not familiar with his staff, he sets himself up for sabotage.  Of course he can fire the coach but who wants to take their team through the drama? Not to mention the possibility that the clandestine coach is not feeding his players bull****. I good with a all in approach and you don't get that by hiring strangers.

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, Springfield said:

I think this is shaping up to be a great rerun of Shanahan

 

Kyle had some hype as the Texans coordinator.  But that was more controversial then since he came working for his dad. 

 

Scott just has a famous dad but at least thus far his dad is not coming here.    I didn't love Joe Banner's take on him (he worked with him before) which is that he's OK but nothing hot -- in his view he's not inventive or some brilliant offensive guru.  Granted that's just one dude's opinion.  Ditto Steve Smith.

 

Some here are making a big deal about Rivera not retaining O'Connell.  As for whether he wanted out or Rivera wanted him out  (we got Breer saying Rivera was the one who wanted Scott over O'Connell versus 3 local beat guys saying they heard O'Connell wanted out), he's gone nonetheless so I don't think it matters.  And its clear that even if its Rivera who wanted his guys that's how he rolls it seems on almost everything so that's not a verdict on those leaving.  A Carolina reporter doubled down that Rivera is big on sticking with his guys -- not just coaches but players. 

 

The irony is all the same stuff that a few are piling on to O'Connell apply to Scott Turner, too.   His experience isn't vast.  In his short sample size calling plays, his stats are atrocious.  And the owner gave the dude 4 games to showcase himself (as Tepper said at the time) yet he let him go and hasn't let all the offensive staff guys go.

 

And I am not saying I am down on Scott Turner for any of those reasons.  To me he's an open slate.   Let's see what he can do.  I am open to the dude being a stud.  And I don't care about a small sample size -- context to me matters.   I just find it ironic that some of the things that O'Connell is being hit here on by some applies almost identically apples to apples to Turner.  

Edited January 8, 2020 by Skinsinparadise

[Mr. Sinister]

20 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

 

I dont know what's funnier, that this dude said this and was serious, or that because he was good at football, people are gonna take it and run with it.

[Skinsinparadise]

2 minutes ago, Mr. Sinister said:

 

I dont know what's funnier, that this dude said this and was serious, or that because he was good at football, people are gonna take it and run with it.

 

I presume he knows Scot to make that comment but I haven't heard if he elaborated.   The ping pong table I think though weakens his point.  It makes it feel like a grudge. 

[DoneMessedUp]

29 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

Breaking news: Steve Smith is a bitter and talks ****. More at 11....

[RemoveSnyder]

1 hour ago, Springfield said:

I think this is shaping up to be a great rerun of Shanahan

 

I have some serious trepidation too. 

[HigSkin]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Kyle had some hype as the Texans coordinator.  But that was more controversial then since he came working for his dad. 

 

Scott just has a famous dad but at least thus far his dad is not coming here.    I didn't love Joe Banner's take on him (he worked with him before) which is that he's OK but nothing hot -- in his view he's not inventive or some brilliant offensive guru.  Granted that's just one dude's opinion.  Ditto Steve Smith.

 

Some here are making a big deal about Rivera not retaining O'Connell.  As for whether he wanted out or Rivera wanted him out  (we got Breer saying Rivera was the one who wanted Scott over O'Connell versus 3 local beat guys saying they heard O'Connell wanted out), he's gone nonetheless so I don't think it matters.  And its clear that even if its Rivera who wanted his guys that's how he rolls it seems on almost everything so that's not a verdict on those leaving.  A Carolina reporter doubled down that Rivera is big on sticking with his guys -- not just coaches but players. 

 

The irony is all the same stuff that a few are piling on to O'Connell apply to Scott Turner, too.   He's experience isn't vast.  In his short sample size calling plays, his stats are atrocious.  And the owner gave the dude 4 games to showcase himself (as Tepper said at the time) yet he let him go and hasn't let all the offensive staff guys go.

 

And I am not saying I am down on Scott Turner for any of those reasons.  To me he's an open slate.   Let's see what he can do.  I am open to the dude being a stud.  And I don't care about a small sample size -- context to me matters.   I just find it ironic that some of the things that O'Connell is being hit here on by some applies almost identically apples to apples to Turner.  

 

It's all good until it's not good.  LOL

 

Maybe this is the first step to what the team needs in order to create stability and success in the org.  I was hoping for some innovation in offensive production but again, maybe what we need is an decent disiplined offense that doesn't make mistakes and top 10 defense.  I keep hearing on national sports media programs how most of the top playoff teams play good defense and have highly rated run offenses with a few shots taken downfield so maybe there is something to what looks like RR's plan.

Edited January 8, 2020 by HigSkin

[Jumbo]

20 minutes ago, Monk4thaHALL said:

 

I have some serious trepidation too. 

 

 

yeah, as far as early forecasting, after my more positive vibe of the first couple days it's back to an objective look at the new guard and won't believe much in "promise" until i see it on the field over the course of a season

[joeken24]

So here's the thing with the Scott Turner hire (as far as I see it):

 

Retaining KOC would have been based on a narrative and not production. I think everyone looked at McVay and created this fear factor about letting young coaches go.

 

I believe KOC was simply in the right place at the right time. The narrative for the young guys coming out of the Redskins' organization (to include Kyle Smith) is that they are the best and brightest the NFL has to offer. The list is nice. I suppose it all started with lil Shanny. Then it was McVay and now Matt LaFeur (who btw is good friends with Shanny who brought Matt to the Redskins to coach RGIII and Kirk). So the obvious person to follow down that path would be KOC (??). He's been groomed to coach somewhere based on his other young predecessors, right? They're all doing a great job in their new found positions as head coaches. But IMO, I don't think Kevin is going to make it down that path. At least not in the new future. Fact is, he hasn't won and his offense hasn't shown to be productive. Also, I have yet to hear a player (other than Dwayne) speak about O'Connell in a way that leads me to believe he can be a leader of men. But more importantly, its a copy cat league. And I'm sensing a shift in the narrative among teams (besides the Panthers who have a new owner that is probably going to learn the heard way like Danny) that head coaching experience is important. Many including myself thought Danny was going to be hiring the bright shiny toy (Urban) to bring synergy to the Redskins' brand. He went with experience. The cowgirls went with experience. We'll see what the Browns do, but the Freddie Kitchen experience will probably make them gun shy about bringing in new meat. From my view, only the teams with new ownership and/or a new progressive GM with authority bring in new inexperienced coaches. So if there's a team out there with those parameters, maybe there's a place for O'Connell to gain the title. But right now, the NFL seems to shifting away from the young talent.