Spurrier takes not-so-subtle jab at Skins front office this evening

[Ignatius J.]

I'll give you one way in which this team is a lot better than last years.

Our record next year will be better than this years.

If you listen carefully to art's arguments you will see why the above statement is not only non-trivial but also a huge step in the right direction. After last year, we had nothing to build on. This year we do.

This team is better than last year because it will improve.

-DB

[Art]

Originally posted by Even Madder

What you don't seem understand is that you can agree that it was the worst idea in the world to keep Wuerffel and AT THE SAME TIME understand that when the FO intervened and cut him it was undercutting Spurrier -- and a public humiliation.

If Spurrier decides to start Gardner at QB this week, so be it -- Snyder and Cerrato should keep their mouths shut. It's Spurrier's job, his decision. Same with the Wuerffel thing -- Snyder is paying him millions, and one of the reasons is because he's an offensive guru (supposedly). So why the hell wouldn't you let him pick his backup, 3rd-string QB?

Again, I think Wuerffel was a rag-armed sack machine who had a much better chance of winning the Miss America pageant than a football game. But when Snyder cut him just to make sure Spurrier couldn't yank Ramsey, that's meddling. That's highly offensive meddling, because QBs are Spurrier's thing. I don't know how anyone could objectively look at that situation and not conclude that Spurrier was undercut.

The problem with the front office isn't just the dumb things they do, like undercutting Spurrier with Wuerffel, which creates an unnecessary rift between coaches and management (and ultimately proved to be a completely retarded move that blew up in their faces). The problem is the things they don't do, like find anyone who can rush the passer. Of course, problems like that are compounded by truly awful coaching.

Ultimately, the front office and head coach deserve each other -- they've been equally inept this year. The players also have some egg on their faces -- even though they had holes in the roster and poor game preparation, they still had chances to make plays and didn't. It's us fans who got screwed.

EM,

If Spurrier decides to start Gardner this week at QB, I agree, Snyder and Cerrato should stay out of it. You're right, that right now, it's Spurrier's job to put players out there in the position he needs or wants to. But, that's a different thing than during the preseason when you are forming a roster.

When you are forming a roster the job is of the personnel people to shape it in the best way possible. Input from the coaching staff is desirable. You'd even like to see us defer to the coaching staff in areas of HIS specialty for certain. At the time the front office let Wuerffel go, it was the JOB of the front office to help finalize the roster. Once the season starts the front office has to fill spots for injury and prepare for next year, leaving roster decisions to the coach.

Again, though, I'll say if not keeping Wuerffel was so troubling to Spurrier that it has caused his entire offensive system to look like he mailed the game plan to the opposition ahead of time for MUCH of the year, then I'm glad we cut Wuerffel as I'm happy to find out Spurrier's tender sensitivities now rather than later after we've invest Norv-time in him.

The front office gave Spurrier the people he needed to improve his offense for certain. He's failed. Even more than Edwards showing his inexperience this year, that has to be a disturbing trend. Spurrier actually had a better looking, more emerging offense to end last year than he does now and the talent now is at least as good as it was then.

Perhaps my biggest issue with this season is that you could get excited about things last year and you can't this year. Last year's team was a Top 10 offense over the last six games. In games Ramsey played a lot we were a Top 10 offense too. You could SEE how it could be emerging. Even early this year it seemed like we were on to something. And then the door slammed SHUT. Teams got a serious book on Spurrier and he's been unable to overcome it unless we play a team too arrogant and dumb to adjust. See Rhodes.

To me, this is the most distressing part of the year.

[Larry Brown #43]

Originally posted by DrunkenBoxer

I know you don't believe that.

seriously, think about it. If it was a forgone conclusion, why hasn't the deal been done?

-DB

I'll sum it up this way. I believe Danny and Vinny are a unit. They have become so close to one another through their raquetball games and so forth...and let's face it...Snyder has finally found a buddy who can actually stand to be in the same room with him.

So, in an effort to give their little unholy alliance an air of legitimacy, Snyder drops the word to the Post that he and Vinny are "negotiating an extension." It's a vehicle to get gullable Redskins fans to believe that there is actually some accountability and legitimacy to this ridiculous front office arrangement.

It may sound far-fetched, but think about it. Snyder goes through employees like he goes through toilet paper. Yet for some reason, his buddy Vinny always manages to hold on to his job. Ah, but Vinny was fired once before, right? Yes, but Marty's decision...and part of the reason Marty was fired. And by the time Danny had stepped away from the podium after announcing Marty's dismissal, Danny's friend Vinny was back in the fold.

When you really strip away the layers and look at what's going on here, it's pretty scary. I say this because I live and die with the Skins, and I see what is happening to the organization. It's killing me.

[Art]

Originally posted by Even Madder

What plan?

Seriously, it looked totally opportunistic and haphazard to me. Grabbed Coles -- good move. Grabbed Thomas -- nice. Cut Big Daddy in training camp and then scrambled to sign every warm fat body at the buffet -- dumb move with mindbogglingly dumb timing. Let your player-of-the-year at a "need" position depart via FA -- questionable move. Cut Stephen Davis, Pro Bowl RB, and replaced him with a committee of nobodies -- tough decision. Cut Watson over coach's objections -- questionable. Drafted a WR in the 2nd despite a logjam at WR -- odd. Paid first-round money for an unproven safety based on one good game -- questionable. Signed only Rob Johnson (Rob Johnson?!?) to backup Ramsey -- bizarre.

This is a plan?

By the way, the results of your "betterment" are in: 5-11. Last year weren't they 7-9? How is this betterment?

EM,

We didn't let our player-of-the-year at a "need" position depart via FA. Saying it as you have makes it sound like we didn't offer him a very large contract. Clearly Gardener was part of our plan. But the plan also required the contract come in at a price we could fit within what we were implementing otherwise.

That Gardener was able to get the dream contract elsewhere is great. We see how that's working out, just confirming how wise we were to stick to our guns in the first place. There was absolutely nothing odd about taking Jacobs in the second. We don't have a logjam at receiver. We don't even have what can really be considered a legitimate No. 3 receiver yet.

Jacobs was, by almost every account, a first round prospect. He was clearly the highest rated player on our board and MOST boards when we came up. Not only NFL team boards, but every draft board WE as fans have access too. And, that's part of the plan during the draft to go with the best player available -- though as I understand it, since it was our "first" pick we could have gone need too.

We went into the offseason needing help at receiver, offensive guard, running back for Spurrier's system, safety, tight end and defensive line. We did everything this offseason save defensive line and tight end. And, we have 21 of 22 starters who are either under contract or under our control entering this offseason. Subtract Smith and it's 20 of 22. This team is building something it hasn't had in some time.

I hope we blow up a little bit of it -- along the defensive line -- and focus on improving there in the offseason. But, the plan the last two years has been very clear. Get younger. Build a foundation for the future. Fill needs over the course of a few years, backfilling where you've made mistakes.

It's a coherent and clear direction that is difficult NOT to get excited about if it can be held together and utilized appropriately on the field.

[Even Madder]

At the time the front office let Wuerffel go, it was the JOB of the front office to help finalize the roster.

Actually, no. Not at all. On most teams, the front office has lots of input into which players go to camp, but the coaches ultimately decide who makes the team. At that point it's based entirely on what the coach saw in practice and in preseason games, not on FO evaluations. In organizations where there's a good relationship between the coach and front office, the FO may have some input, especially when there are salary cap considerations, potential trade scenarios, or taxi squad possibilities, but the FO does not make final cuts.

In most NFL organizations, coaches decide who makes the roster. It's actually the position coaches who make the first decision, but it's ultimately the head coach who pulls the trigger.

You cannot possibly seriously argue that the FO was just helping to "finalize the roster", as you put it. They cut Wuerffel because they were scared that Spurrier would play him. There was no "helping" there at all.

[Art]

Originally posted by DrunkenBoxer

I'll give you one way in which this team is a lot better than last years.

Our record next year will be better than this years.

If you listen carefully to art's arguments you will see why the above statement is not only non-trivial but also a huge step in the right direction. After last year, we had nothing to build on. This year we do.

This team is better than last year because it will improve.

-DB

DB,

I don't agree with this statement at all.

After last offseason we had a lot to build on. Changes and improvements were coming. But we could clearly see the direction here was moving the right way. Ramsey alone seemed to improve the offense. Imaging him behind a better line with better receivers even in his second year was a hell of a thing to project and hope for.

The defense was not good much of last year, but came on tremendously strong. It ended the year as many of us hoped it would have been used ALL year. It was aggressive, gap-shooting and fixated on stopping something. Players actually used words to describe the defense as selling out to stop the run. Breathtaking. Edwards saw that and you hoped he'd use some of that this year. He hasn't.

This year we have better players and players who are a much better fit than we had to end last year, but the entire roster is going in the wrong direction. Hell, last year we could say if we only had a mildly competent kicker we could have been in the playoffs. This year we have a VERY competent kicker and are still losing.

The problems and direction now are MUCH more troubling than last year. It was easy to see hope for this year and next before this year started. It's very hard to see the same for next year now.

[chiefhogskin48]

Again, the front office situation is far from ideal. We all know this. But I don't see how any amount of talent could make a pitifully coached team like Spurrier's Redskins into a good team. We can't keep falling into the trap that we're only a few players away from a good team.. We say that every offseason! And lo and behold, no improvement.

The problem in 2003 is not that our talent base declined from the previous year; it's that the coaching actually got worse from 2002, with the departure of Marvin Lewis. It's amateur hour on the Redskins coaching staff, and everyone in the league knows it (including our own players).

[Art]

Originally posted by Even Madder

Actually, no. Not at all. On most teams, the front office has lots of input into which players go to camp, but the coaches ultimately decide who makes the team. At that point it's based entirely on what the coach saw in practice and in preseason games, not on FO evaluations. In organizations where there's a good relationship between the coach and front office, the FO may have some input, especially when there are salary cap considerations, potential trade scenarios, or taxi squad possibilities, but the FO does not make final cuts.

In most NFL organizations, coaches decide who makes the roster. It's actually the position coaches who make the first decision, but it's ultimately the head coach who pulls the trigger.

You cannot possibly seriously argue that the FO was just helping to "finalize the roster", as you put it. They cut Wuerffel because they were scared that Spurrier would play him. There was no "helping" there at all.

Actually, no. Not at all, EM.

Most teams don't leave final rosters to the coaching staff alone. Almost every team utilizes the personnel people as well. Some teams do leave this simply to the coaching staff, to be sure. But it's hardly the norm. Deciding who makes the team is generally a combination debate. It was here under Gibbs and Beathard. The difference was that Cooke would almost always agree with Gibbs on the decisions where they wouldn't agree on the grounds that Gibbs had to coach the guys.

I'd like to see Snyder do more of that where there is a serious disagreement with Spurrier and Cerrato. So, yeah, I can argue that the front office was helping finalize the roster by wanting Wuerffel gone. Spurrier wanted him here. What I'd have done is the same thing Cooke did to Gibbs in such cases. Side with the coach and smile and say, "You'd better know what you're doing." .

[Ignatius J.]

Larry,

I'm not going to say that what you are presenting is impossible. But it reads a lot like a conspiracy theory. The negotiations are just a front? Why? Who needs a front?

If danny and vinny are a unit, why did snyder try to replace him?

Or was that just another conspiracy theory? (to be fair, neither hire was to replace cerato, both hires were for the position of GM. Cerato could have been retained by the GM or fired, still, a GM breaks that unit, so I think my argument stands)

I do believe that snyder has a high opinion of cerato, I just don't think there is any evidence that snyder has not considered hiring a real GM now or at any point in his entire tenure with the redskins.

-DB

[Lavarleap56]

Ill go with you on this one DB . I think it speaks volumes that Danny has not signed Vinny to a extension as of yet and it was reported to be coming earlier in the year.

[Art]

DB,

To further your point, when Snyder brought Cerrato back, it wasn't as the head man in charge. He was second fiddle to Mendes. Cerrato's energy and plan for the future clearly won Snyder over and Cerrato is largely the key force behind much of what we did this past offseason. But it's hard to say Snyder is eternally married to Cerrato considering we've somewhat repeatedly heard of GM-sort possibilities and that Cerrato has only really been the HEAD man for one offseason and even then it was not in title as Mendes was still around during the moves this year.

[Even Madder]

we have 21 of 22 starters who are either under contract or under our control entering this offseason

Uh-huh. Gee, great, we've got Flemister and Bruce Smith under contract. How nice. Seriously, I expect about 30-50% roster turnover this offseason. You're painting a very misleading picture.

But I agree that this is a young, talented roster -- but it's almost in spite of the FO instead of because of the FO. Remember, this is the same FO that shopped Ramsey around as trade bait a year ago, and Smoot around this year. Imagine if they'd succeeded! They also started a 40-year-old at DE just because they thought it would be a good marketing ploy for him to get the sack record.

Your story about Gardener is funny. Gardener left in what, February? So everyone knew there was a hole to fill. Six months later, they still hadn't filled the hole, and they cut their other DT. This is not a plan. You can argue in hindsight that losing Gardener and Big Daddy was a good thing, but you can't argue that it was planful.

The front office has no plan. This year they'll scramble to build a pass-rushing DL, probably by replacing 3 of 4 guys on the DL. That was never part of the plan. It's just like last year with the OL -- they stick one finger in the dyke and the water comes pouring out somewhere else.

[Larry Brown #43]

Originally posted by lavarleap56

Ill go with you on this one DB . I think it speaks volumes that Danny has not signed Vinny to a extension as of yet and it was reported to be coming earlier in the year.

Do we even know when Vinny's contract expires? Perhaps when the contract expires, Snyder will do the next best thing and decide he no longer requires the input of a so-called personnel man, and place himself solely in charge of football operations. Nothing would surprise me at this point.

But I do think it's more likely that Cerrato's contract will simply be extended. Any legit GM would request that Snyder step back and give up control -- something Snyder is very unlikely to do. Unless we reach the depths that Dallas reached prior to Parcells coming on board. Let's not forget -- when Snyder took over the Redskins he pointed to Jerry Jones as an owner he admired and wanted to emulate. :doh:

[Ignatius J.]

I don't begrudge an owner saying he'd like to bring three super bowls in a row to DC, that's for sure.

-DB

[Larry Brown #43]

Originally posted by Even Madder

It's just like last year with the OL -- they stick one finger in the dyke and the water comes pouring out somewhere else.

Wow. I kid you not--I was talking to a friend about the Skins on the phone this evening and I used this exact same analogy with him.

[Larry Brown #43]

Originally posted by DrunkenBoxer

I don't begrudge an owner saying he'd like to bring three super bowls in a row to DC, that's for sure.

-DB

Unfortunately I think he was referring more to the "I'm in charge here" version of Jones.

[Ignatius J.]

but didn't that jones bring three trophies to dallas?

[Larry Brown #43]

Originally posted by DrunkenBoxer

but didn't that jones bring three trophies to dallas?

The "I'm in charge" Jerry Jones fired the coach/GM who constructed three Super Bowl teams because he didn't want anyone else to get credit for the Super Bowls. So he took over football operations, hired a series of laughable head coaches, and finally upon hitting near-Cincinnati levels of humiliation he stepped back and hired a legit coach/GM.

My point is, Snyder's admiration probably stemmed in large part from Jones' taking over Dallas' football operations, when you consider the timing of Snyder's remark. That assessment bears itself out when you look at how Snyder is handling things here. Long story short -- Snyder is taking the worst lessons Jones taught us, and is trying his hand at the same game (and failing at it).

[Ignatius J.]

nevermind, i don't think this conversation is going anywhere.

can you at least see now why I was upset over the post that started this whole thread?

-DB

[NoCalMike]

Well winning is something that isn't going to happen if the head coach and guys upstairs are not on the same page.

[Skinster]

Why is that we always want to point the fingers at people!!!

Sum up the season... hell thats easy!!

O-line play in the first 1/2 of the season was.. well i dont have the words!!

One of the youngest QB's to start in the NFL..

Countless new players all over the field...

Rob Johnson as your Backup....then drop him mid season and hire one off the street... and if i must say the street guy is playing damm good except one game!

We have running backs that had never proved anything to anyone in the NFL until this year...Then we trade Watson who is one of the best Pass catching RB's we had not to mention a great blitz blocker!!! DUMB MISTAKE!!!

First time Defensive coordinator...

I can keep going but i'll stop here.

.....................................................................

We need to relax a bit... We have many players to build on.

If we had a Lewis type defensive coordinator... this year would look alot better than it is!!

Ramsey will be what we want him to be because our O-Line is comming together!!! With time this offence works... i see it with my own eyes on game film we have WR's getting open.. Ramsey just never had the time to get a read on the field!! Gardner needs to go to HOW DO I CATCH THE DAMNN BALL SCHOOL!!! :laugh:

We should have kept Weurfull as second Qb he would have helped Ramsey in more ways then not!!

We need a new Def. Cord., some changes to the D-line, punter, and Kellen Winslow!! and ohh yeah my two front teeth!! :laugh:

Skinster!!!!

Skin 4 Life

[Even Madder]

Deciding who makes the team is generally a combination debate. It was here under Gibbs and Beathard. The difference was that Cooke would almost always agree with Gibbs on the decisions where they wouldn't agree on the grounds that Gibbs had to coach the guys.

You've just proven my point: in a real organization, you don't override the coach on final roster spots. Bobby helped assemble the training camp roster, but Joe picked the players on his 56. No question about it. Can you think of one single instance in their entire time together -- which was not always agreeable -- where Beathard cut someone that Joe wanted during final roster cuts? Bobby often got his man in the draft (or traded the picks as he saw fit), but Joe owned the 56-man roster.

There is a combination debate, but the FO input centers around the financial implications and other outside factors, not the ability of the player to perform. The coach, and the coach alone, decides if the player can get it done on the field. The coach and his assistants, after all, is the one who's been coaching them through camp.

Answer me this: when have you seen the front office cut a player during final roster cuts over the coach's objections in any organization other than the Skins? I can't think of any.

[bubba9497]

Answer me this: when have you seen the front office cut a player during final roster cuts over the coach's objections in any organization other than the Skins? I can't think of any.

Well (for what it is worth) Peter King said in MMQB the reason for McKay leaving Tampa was the friction between him and Gruden on personell matters. The last straw being Darrel Russell. Gruden wanted to bring him in, and McKay refused. King pretty much ripped McKay in general though.

But usually the Coach wins out.

[Even Madder]

That's not the same situation at all. The GM should have lots of input on players brought to the team -- even veto authority, if he's good -- and the player's reputation and off-the-field conduct do matter. If Wuerffel was a child molester and Cerrato came in and said, "We can't have that kind of scumbag on the team," Spurrier would have to respect that. But that's not what happened.

But if a guy is in camp, and the coach wants to keep him on the 56 man roster, he keeps him.

Imagine if McKay tried to tell Gruden who to cut... that would be an interesting conversation.

[Ax]

As I remember it, Beathard left because of a rift between he and Gibbs. In general, Gibbs wanted to keep the older players who had won for him, and Beathard wanted to go younger. It was Gibbs who wanted Desmond Howard over Beathards objections. Cooke sided with Gibbs and Bobby soon departed.

The "I'm in charge" Jerry Jones fired the coach/GM who constructed three Super Bowl teams because he didn't want anyone else to get credit for the Super Bowls. So he took over football operations, hired a series of laughable head coaches, and finally upon hitting near-Cincinnati levels of humiliation he stepped back and hired a legit coach/GM.

FYI- Jerry Jones is STILL the GM of the Cowhumpers. And even this coach/GM you speak of (Jones was GM then too) said ole Plastic Face was instrumental in ALL of the drafts that put that team together. Why was it that this coach/GM you speak of never came close again in Miami.

As far as our situation goes, I think after the season ends, Spurrier is gonna be more assertive with Snyder about what he wants. It is Spurrier after all who has been butchered in the press almost daily. And unlike Snyder, he is required by the NFL to give certain weekly press conferences. I don't think anybody is as frustrated about this season as the coach is. Nobody.

We'll see.