Sally J.'s latest is spot on

I don't think that JC is the anti-christ, that's a bit of a stretch but I don't think that he is a franchise QB either.

There are QBs that aren't "franchise QBs" but they still win Superbowls. Trent Dilfer, Gannon, etc. And there are franchise QB's that never win a Superbowl.

It takes a team to win the superbowl. If everyone plays well and as a solid team. then that's when we will succed. can have the best Qb in the world. If we dont have the right coaching system and players and FO to set him up to succeed he will fail also. That's what people fail to realize.

There are QBs that aren't "franchise QBs" but they still win Superbowls. Trent Dilfer, Gannon, etc. And there are franchise QB's that never win a Superbowl.

It takes a team to win the superbowl. If everyone plays well and as a solid team. then that's when we will succed. can have the best Qb in the world. If we dont have the right coaching system and players and FO to set him up to succeed he will fail also. That's what people fail to realize.

I agree, Gibbs won 2 of his 3 super bowls w/guys that simply fit his system (Theisman in his best years, was a legit pro-bowler). I know that was some time ago, but at present I would argue that over half of the teams in the nfl have starting qb's that have or are playing at pro bowl levels. Any of those guys can win a super bowl if they are on a pretty good, yet not even great, team. I don't know if I'd say JC is better than half the starters in the nfl, but I think he can lead this team all the way if the O line is rebuilt w/talent & youth & the d plays like it used to under GW.

Of course it's "the culture."

Debating how Holmgren might work with Shanahan, or Cowher, or any other proven coach is beside the point as long as Snyder reserves the right to make or veto personnel decisions. I suspect that none of these guys will work for Snyder for just that reason. You also can bet that, if any such proven football coach accepts an offer in Washington, he will have sold his soul for big money.

Danny must go, or the disease will just keep festering.

I'm sorry and I REALLY tried to be objective when reading that, but seriously, that just sounds absolutely stupid. So basically by your logic, you're rooting for the Steeler's management? Who gives a crap about the players or the coaches, it's the owner that I root for? Not only that, why not the Patriots? Why not any other team that looks like it "has" a plan? Is it because the Steelers won the Super Bowl last year?

Honestly, if you say that the ultimate goal of the NFL is the win the Super Bowl, then you might say the Steelers along with a lot of other teams over that span have been mired in mediocrity playoff-wise. The Patriots are really the only team who seem to fit your "bill". It's easy to be like, "Awesome! We won again." But in my opinion it would be ALMOST as maddening to be a fan of the Chargers or the Colts. While both are consistently good, they both don't do well in the playoffs (with the exception of the Colts Super Bowl year).

Your argument just sounds ridiculous. It's like you just want to be a front-runner like every other half-hearted Skins fan.

I might not be speaking for the entire fan base, but believe me when I say that we will NOT miss you at all.

No, Malcolm, I'm not rooting for the Steelers' management. Let me try again.

The Steelers have had three coaches over the last thirty-eight years. They've had a consistent policy of building through the draft with a concentration on offensive and defensive lines, then skill offensive players, linebackers, and defensive backs. They usually have winning seasons. When they don't, they don't panic and lunge after some savior free agent, wasting multiple draft picks in the process. Over time, that builds team cohesiveness, or, if you like, a positive culture. Management, players, and fans are on the same page, working together. They aren't at the mercy of a single megalomaniac and his pet toady.

To call for this kind of management is not being a "front-runner." As I said, I support the Nationals. But too many Redskins' fans seem to be the kind of idiots who, finding themselves in a deep hole, just keep digging.

Sorry if any of the words were too long for you.

Stubblefield, amazingly enough, wasn't a Snyder/Cerrato decision either.

Oh, and puck Fittsburgh ...

Basically after the '91 season the team has been stuck in mediocrity... there were plenty of poor decisions made before Danny got here.

To call for this kind of management is not being a "front-runner." As I said, I support the Nationals. But too many Redskins' fans seem to be the kind of idiots who, finding themselves in a deep hole, just keep digging.

Sorry if any of the words were too long for you.This is a Skins board, you're a Steeler fan. Why are you posting here? I think SS said it was steelernation.com. Have at it. There's too many idiot fans here for a smart guy like you anyway.

No, Malcolm, I'm not rooting for the Steelers' management. Let me try again.

The Steelers have had three coaches over the last thirty-eight years. They've had a consistent policy of building through the draft with a concentration on offensive and defensive lines, then skill offensive players, linebackers, and defensive backs. They usually have winning seasons. When they don't, they don't panic and lunge after some savior free agent, wasting multiple draft picks in the process. Over time, that builds team cohesiveness, or, if you like, a positive culture. Management, players, and fans are on the same page, working together. They aren't at the mercy of a single megalomaniac and his pet toady.

To call for this kind of management is not being a "front-runner." As I said, I support the Nationals. But too many Redskins' fans seem to be the kind of idiots who, finding themselves in a deep hole, just keep digging.

Sorry if any of the words were too long for you.

If you were previously a fan, then there is really no excuse. Maybe if you just started liking football and get a chub over well-run organizations, I MIGHT see some validity.

I'm always going to be a fan of the team first. Sure, the owner is part of the team, but there are plenty of other people that I truly root for. I'm not a Snyder fan myself, but because he doesn't run the team the way I like, I'm not going to change my loyalty.

Sounds like a really lame excuse to change.

Basically after the '91 season the team has been stuck in mediocrity... there were plenty of poor decisions made before Danny got here.

true, and the r. petibon year (93-4) was maybe the worst season in modern franchise history.

You sound like Michael Wilbon, which is a compliment btw. Wilbon et al (including Sally) have often said the "culture" of the organization is dysfunctional. That's something that becomes really tough for someone on the outside to debate, but there have been plenty of signs to indicate that's true.

Only speaking from my personal experience, there has been since the days of John Kent Cooke (and I don't really know the Gibbs 2.0 years too well) a lack of harmony within the organization. I would say it was ultra competitive in there and no one really had much fun, and the trust levels could be alarmingly low.

The culture needs to be feng shui'd

I think Dan Snyder has a number of redeeming qualities. Snyder can be quite generous, very good to players who are in his good graces, and almost eager to open up his wallet to give our team quality players. Moreover, I think he's gets unfairly blamed for a lot of our on-field struggles.

However, let's face it, Snyder is not a "football guru" and he should not routinely and unilaterally determine which players we target in the draft and in the offseason. That's why it's so troubling to hear from George Michael that Snyder is doing just that. Apparently, he's learned a lot over the past 10 years, but he hasn't learned enough to realize to leave those kinds of decisions to the head coach and Vinny Cerrato.