Doubts/Questions

[Hauss]

Everytime I rationalize about Marty coming back with some changes to the offense--I have doubts about him. Based on these questions. Why didn't he go after Dilfer when he could? Wouldn't our offense been much better off with an involved Westbook and Thrash and Centers? Marty was analyst for 2 years--didn't he see how we went to the playoffs behind Davis primarily, backed by a passing game. Why did it take him 5 games to relalize that Davis was still on the team? Did marty look at any game film from the previous seasons? Why did he let Russ Grimm go? Why was it determined that our go to receiver would be someone who had never caught a pass in a pro game? Why did Marty not pursue Al Saunders for OC after the Rams dropped any compensation claims or go with Bruce Coslet? ( Because he knew what Jimmy Raye would do?). Why did we have such problems picking up blitzes? When we had 3 meaningful home games-why couldn't we win one when it meant something? Why wasn't Kijana Carter used more in the passing game coming out of the back field? Marty is known to have disciplined teams--why did we have so many penalties--especially the ones on offense-the majority of which took place before the ball was snapped. I think those questions are just a sample.If Snyder doesn't land Spurrier and a qualified GM-then I am back to my rationalization-that Marty with some changes to the offense would be my next choice. I will still have my doubts-but I think any changes beyond those will hurt the team.

[bulldog]

for a first year head coach Marty has made some good moves and some bad moves. If he had been a first-timer as HC I would chalk up the rough first 6-8 months here as being part of the learning curve. I thought that way about Joe Gibbs in 1981. I felt that way about Norv during 1994 as well.

But for a veteran coach who has commanded the kind of contract and far-reaching authority that Marty did, this first year I think has been largely a disappointment.

Not because we didn't go to the Super Bowl. I really didn't expect that kind of season.

But Marty seemed very slow to act on a number of fronts where trouble was brewing and I think the hallmark of a successful coach is one who is able to anticipate and head off potential problems and risks that can derail his program.

My list of disappointments:

1. The decision at quarterback. Jeff George had won one playoff game in a 10 year career and had been on 4 other teams for short and usually tempestuous periods. Evaluating this situation realistically you would have to say that the only way you go with George and take the risk is to run an offense best suited to his skills and inclinations and see what effect an improved supporting cast has on him. To run an offense unsuited to his style of play, given his personality, and expected that situation to work out for both him and the team was foolhardy and short-sighted.

2. The tensions in training camp. It was obvious from the Kansas City preseason game on that there was something wrong with this team. That 20-0 loss to a team that won 6 games last year and was itself going through a transition to a new regime should have been a wakeup call to Marty. Instead we sat through 3 more lackluster effort games and entered the regular season with a team that was not together. This was commented on by everyone from John Riggins to John Clayton to Doc Walker, etc.....people who both loved and loathed the Redskins. Why didn't Marty feel the need to address this situation before the team's chances of making the playoffs in the regular season were almost gone? Pride? Stubbornness?

3. The decision to hire familiar faces rather than the most qualified for the staff and front office. While there is no doubt that a HC wants people on his staff that will show him loyalty you have to strike a balance between that and having a staff of individuals who have the necessary experience and drive to help you succeed. Hiring his son as quarterbacks coach and taking a pass on other qualified candidates for the offensive coordinator, offensive line and defensive coordinator positions only reinforced the feeling that were inheriting a "mafia" of sorts, except with red "KC Chiefs" bags rather than fedoras.

4. The refusal to let the offensive coaches call their own game plan. While the Redskins offense sputtered the entire season and was limited by the play of the quarterback, it is apparent that the team did not get the maximum productivity out of all the players on that unit. And this I attribute to Marty both based on what players have said about "working within the limits of what they were told" and based on the fact Jimmy Raye ran a more varied and wide open offense in KC the past two years before rejoining Marty. Among the particular items here: the failure to key on the running of Davis until the fourth or fifth week of the season, the delay in getting Michael Westbrook involved in the offensive flow which has only happened in the last 4-5 weeks, the delay in getting other players such as KiJana Carter, Zeron Flemister and Kevin Lockett more involved, as well as the style of playcalling which has lead to hesitation and a reluctance to take enough risk to pick up critical first downs and make plays to break games open.

These are the things that have caused me to label this first year as at least a mild disappointment.

The record whether it is 7-9 or 8-8 does not tell the entire story of what has gone on here. We have had a roller-coaster ride of emotions and performance from this team from the start. The 0-5 start to the 7 or 8 win finish reminds me in some ways of the 1996 ride from 7-1 to 9-7 and the 1998 journey from 0-7 to 6-10.

What concerns me about bringing Marty back is that the 7-3 or 8-3 finish is no more a gauge of this team than the 0-5 start.

So that with an offense still limited by Marty's meddling and personnel moves on that side of the ball, we are still looking at an 8-8 or 9-7 type team next season as well. Although we may see a more consistent team that goes 4-4 or 5-3 to start rather than 0-5.

I agree with John Riggins when he says that Dan Snyder needs to sit down and ask himself whether he envisions the Redskins ever making it to a Super Bowl with Marty as the man in charge. If the answer is yes, he should remain patient and ignore the pleas for change, as fans are usually clamoring for changes after 7-9 or 8-8 in any event.

But if sitting there, he says to himself this is going to continue to be a middling team at 7-9 to perhaps 10-6 and Marty has not or will not change those aspects of his coaching style that limited him with the Browns and Chiefs (as Vermeil DID finally do in St. Louis), then he should fire Marty now and not spend the next couple of years treading water with a coach he really doesn't have faith in.

[kleese]

Right on bulldog!

"What concerns me about Marty is that the 7-4 or 8-3 finish is no more a gauge of this team than the 0-5 start."

Perfect.

Yes, the finish has been nice, but you can't just ignore the start.

The 0-5 start was probably a 0 on a scale of 1 to 10. The 5-0 run was probably a 10. That averages out to a 5. Average. In school, you'd get a "C" for something like that.

So, IMO, all Marty did with the 5-0 run was clean the 0-5 slate. He got back to where he started. At 5-5 he had done neither a good job or a bad job, IMO.

So here we were at 5-5 playing a home game against Dallas. A game we should win.

But we get rolled-- big time.

Tied at 7 the Cowboys face a critical play in their own territory with momentum on their side-- they pitch the ball to MICHEL WILEY and he scampers all the way down to our 10 yard line-- game, set, match. Why? Oh, we only have 10 men on the field-- that just can't happen.

People say we can't win because of Tony Banks. I grant you that fact in terms of the Super Bowl or even winning the NFC East, but beating Dallas at home? We can't win with Tony Banks, but the Cowboys can beat us with Quincy Carter at the helm?

So, at 5-6 IMO, Marty was performing somewhere on a C- level for the season. The Arizona win was nice and set up a big game AT HOME with Philly. And what happened?

We TOTALLY dominate the game early-- -could clearly have put the Eagles away or at least on the ropes, but STUPID penalties, MISSED KICKS, INANILITY TO SCORE IN THE RED ZONE (with awful play calls), etc... rear their ugly heads. Then, we're 100% fooled on a trick play for a TD. It was as if Norv never left.

We even get another shot at redeeming the season somewhat against the Bears AT HOME, but we lose that one too after holding a lead late and not being able to score from the 1 yard line on three tries.

After that, who really cares about the last two games? We saw what happened when the pressure was on this year.

Whether we go 7-9 or 8-8 I'm giving Marty a 4 out of 10 for the season. I will say that if there isn't a super replacement out there, then Marty deserves a shot to fully establish this as "his team" but as bulldog said, if we think we have a chance to land a guy that just might be "special" then we need to do it.....now.

[88Comrade2000]

One thing guys. What happens if Marty is gone but Steve Spurrier goes elsewhere.

Then what? Unless Dan has Steve signed; why would he even try to force Dan out?

If Marty is forced out and Steve goes elsewhere; then you tell me what quality coach will come here?

Unless Dan Snyder has Steve Spurrier already signed; then Marty should be brought back. Marty still has the final say in personal matters even with a GM; so that shouldn't be a problem.

This franchise is at a crossroads. Dan blows it here and the franchise is ruined.

[hail2skins]

Hey, we always have Pepper to step up to the plate.

[bulldog]

there isn't a dearth of capable talent in the NFL in terms of coaching candidates. what there is a dearth of big-name, all-the-fans-know-him kind of candidate who has 3 Super Bowl rings already on his fingers.

that isn't the same thing. This franchise is not ruined if Marty is let go.

the key to the Redskins development is the hiring of a quality GM. That person will be able to wade through the capable assistants in the NFL that have the skills to be a good HC and take the next step.

And if we start at the GM position and work down then you will see an organization that flows together.

The GM hires and gets along with the Head Coach. The Head Coach then hires QUALIFIED assistants in some cases based on input from the GM.

The GM reports to the owner and explains what direction he and the Coach are taking in certain areas of the team, development wise. The Coach is able to concentrate on getting the players read to play.

That sounds to me like an organization that WORKS and has the capability of being very successful.

So, the departure of Marty to me doesn't mean this team is in trouble.

In fact, it may mean a brighter future.

At least it will end the dysfunctional nature of what we see going on now.