Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room > NFL Draft Central


How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan

NFL Draft Central


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-30-2012, 06:36 PM   #31
Gamebreaker
 
tryfuhl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Waldorf, MD
Age: 30
Posts: 12,514
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan

It has seemed like we drafted better later in the draft.. when guys like Campbell and Brown's suggestions were being taken into consideration because they weren't sexy enough picks for Vinny to be concerned with.
tryfuhl is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 01-30-2012, 06:40 PM   #32
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan

Quote:
Originally Posted by NC_Skins View Post
I see Tripp is on his Shanahan hate horse again.


Giddy up!!
You didn't even read what I wrote, you just assumed this. And I'm glad to see I'm making an impact on your life.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2012, 06:47 PM   #33
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRedskin View Post
It's not that I was waiting for you to rip Campbell. I was waiting to hear how Cerrato wasn't really all that bad and that Shanahan is just doing the same thing.

It's the same guys. I am no insider and even I had heard how the Skins scouts were a solid to good group as scouts go. From Campbell's statements, however, it seems to me that the lines of communication are much better between Shanahan and the scouts than it ever was between Cerrato and the scouts. Again, I am just a simple minded fan, but, better communication seems like a good thing.
Meh. People get weak in the knees when you compare Shanahan and Cerrato.

I just want to make it clear I don't have anything bad to say about the clear lines of communication between GM/Coach and personnel department. I don't really think it's notable though, and am anticipating the fact that I don't think it's newsworthy being construed as being negative. To be quite frank about it, when Cerrato was in charge, you just kind of assumed that there was open communication with the coaching staff and personnel department because it's kind of shocking that you could have drafted as much talent as Vinny did without that communication. That people in any organization would feel marginalized is a fact of life, but that high ranking people would be among the marginalized would never even have crossed my mind.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2012, 06:55 PM   #34
Living Legend
 
Ruhskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 16,060
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan

While it is good to see improvements, none of this will matter until all of this work results in wins for the franchise. I am glad to see the direction the team seems to be heading towards, and things are much better since the days of Cerrato. Still, MS has made a number of questionable calls running the franchise, and he started it all by doing the very thing that represented the flaw that was the previous front office: giving up picks for a washed up pro bowler.

I am not necessarily agreeing with GTripp, but in a way I understand where he is coming from.
__________________
R.I.P. #21

New words created on The Warpath:
Rewalsr - Somretimes - Fualt - Jersesy - Itiot - Composetory
Afeard - Storgn - Empliment - Gaissn - Saftys - Minnisota
Faviort - Hatter - Phsyched - Foof - Heloing - Brutual
Stroried

"Give an opinion and move on. Your life doesn't depend on winning the internet." -FRPLG
Ruhskins is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2012, 07:07 PM   #35
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirtbag59 View Post
So if I'm reading this right it was never really that the scouts under Vinny were bad, but rather they were being held back by Vinny's emphasis on certain positions and giving up draft picks way to easily.

Anyway this article pretty much seals it. The front office is dedicated to building through the draft and building a team much like the Steelers and Patriots. I doubt they trade up for a QB come April.
None of what I am going to write is meant to be a defense of Vinny Cerrato.

But remember how in history we are taught that the people who get to write history are the victors/people in power?

If in three years we're reading very well written insider pieces on how much of an organizational disaster Mike Shanahan was and how he limited Raheem Morris and Chris Forester from helping players reach their true potential and how much better of a person and football coach Jon Gruden is, just remember that the history is written by the people in power, and typically at the expense of the disposed.

And if we're not, I am quite happy that Mike Shanahan against all odds got this team to the playoffs.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2012, 07:50 PM   #36
MVP
 
NC_Skins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 10,776
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
You didn't even read what I wrote, you just assumed this. And I'm glad to see I'm making an impact on your life.
I read what you said.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
At the end of the day, they've pretty much been the same guys for the last five years or so. If they're a good front office now, then they were a good front office before.

No impact on my life except a good laugh every now and then. Keep up the good work. :cheeky-sm
__________________
"So let me get this straight. We have the event of the year on TV with millions watching around the world... and people want a punt, pass, and kick competition to be the halftime entertainment?? Folks, don't quit your day jobs."- Matty
NC_Skins is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2012, 10:02 PM   #37
The Starter
 
KI Skins Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: MD Eastern Shore
Posts: 2,242
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
None of what I am going to write is meant to be a defense of Vinny Cerrato.

But remember how in history we are taught that the people who get to write history are the victors/people in power?

If in three years we're reading very well written insider pieces on how much of an organizational disaster Mike Shanahan was and how he limited Raheem Morris and Chris Forester from helping players reach their true potential and how much better of a person and football coach Jon Gruden is, just remember that the history is written by the people in power, and typically at the expense of the disposed.

And if we're not, I am quite happy that Mike Shanahan against all odds got this team to the playoffs.
True. For example, if the Native Americans had won the Indian Wars our team sure as hell wouldn't be named the Redskins.

But history hasn't been unkind to Vinny. He had his chance and he failed.

IMO, Mike Shanahan has used essentially the same scouting staff that Vinny had to achieve better results than Vinny did. For example, all of the Redskins' 2011 draftees, except Jenkins (who was on IR), were active for at least one game in the 2011-2012 season. That's eleven players. Vinny never did anything like that. The Skins also signed a good group of Free Agents in 2011.

I realize that wins and losses are the ultimate proof of competence for a pro football executive and that Mike Shanahan's teams haven't yet won as much as Vinny's teams did. Nevertheless, I believe that, with the personnel we had when MS took over, we were not talented or deep enough to contend. I also believe that we needed to get younger, as a team. MS is currently working to fix these problems which he inherited from Vinny.

With another productive FA period and draft this year, I'm hoping we can start winning and become contenders for years to come.

Last edited by KI Skins Fan; 01-30-2012 at 10:03 PM.
KI Skins Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2012, 10:53 PM   #38
RG Glee
 
Schneed10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 35
Posts: 8,303
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
I am young enough to favor a patient approach, but far too old to believe that what I'm seeing on the field is a poor representation of what I can expect to see on the field in the future.

If Shanahan strings back to back top level draft classes together, I think there will start to be some legitimate evidence to support the voices who believe he will get this thing turned around. I don't think anyone things 2012 is a super bowl or bust year.

But when you look back at 2011 and see the average win percentage of the 16 opponents picking in the top ten range between .505 and .531, and then the Redskins sitting at sixth overall at .470, and lost 11 games against that, and finished with the worst point differential by any Redskins team since 2003 despite playing a schedule of losing teams, its just another year of failed expectations on the ledger. More of the same isn't going to right the ship, they need a different approach.
One of the numerous problems with your line of thinking is that you're tying consistently poor results, as you aptly and correctly describe, with a consistent approach, which is just wrong.

The approach to the draft has changed drastically. Look at the sheer number of draft picks selected last April. Under Cerrato the Redskins were lucky if they made 12 picks over the course of two years.

Yes the Redskins lost games this year, but there's no denying the influx of young talent on the roster. Vinny brought us some terrible picks; Devin Thomas and Malcolm Kelly to name just a few. But it was the picks that weren't made that dragged us into the dregs; he ignored the trenches. Shanahan's first pick as Redskins' boss addressed that, but with so few quality linemen on the team it's no wonder it's taking the team a while.

The primary reason the team was so crappy this year was the quarterback position. We all know this. But that has NOTHING to do with the Redskins' approach in the draft. Last year they were wise not to reach for a QB who didn't have Franchise Solution written all over him, instead trading down and adding depth.

Their approach was to find a QB and build depth at every position through the draft. They didn't find the QB, so they built depth. The approach is sound, they'll go through the same process this year: find the QB, build more depth. Stating that approach needs to change seems to ignore the last 10 years of recent Redskins history.

Last edited by Schneed10; 01-30-2012 at 10:54 PM.
Schneed10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2012, 10:55 PM   #39
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,678
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan

I'd take out the 12 picks over two years line because it's Cerratto did actually make several picks the two years he was in charge.

Otherwise, I agree.
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2012, 11:24 PM   #40
RG Glee
 
Schneed10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 35
Posts: 8,303
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
I'd take out the 12 picks over two years line because it's Cerratto did actually make several picks the two years he was in charge.

Otherwise, I agree.
Granted, he did trade down and acquire those 2nd rounders, in particular. Too bad on two out of the three (Thomas, Kelly) he didn't listen to Scott Campbell.
Schneed10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 12:26 AM   #41
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schneed10 View Post
One of the numerous problems with your line of thinking is that you're tying consistently poor results, as you aptly and correctly describe, with a consistent approach, which is just wrong.

The approach to the draft has changed drastically. Look at the sheer number of draft picks selected last April. Under Cerrato the Redskins were lucky if they made 12 picks over the course of two years.

Yes the Redskins lost games this year, but there's no denying the influx of young talent on the roster. Vinny brought us some terrible picks; Devin Thomas and Malcolm Kelly to name just a few. But it was the picks that weren't made that dragged us into the dregs; he ignored the trenches. Shanahan's first pick as Redskins' boss addressed that, but with so few quality linemen on the team it's no wonder it's taking the team a while.

The primary reason the team was so crappy this year was the quarterback position. We all know this. But that has NOTHING to do with the Redskins' approach in the draft. Last year they were wise not to reach for a QB who didn't have Franchise Solution written all over him, instead trading down and adding depth.

Their approach was to find a QB and build depth at every position through the draft. They didn't find the QB, so they built depth. The approach is sound, they'll go through the same process this year: find the QB, build more depth. Stating that approach needs to change seems to ignore the last 10 years of recent Redskins history.
There's a reason that I feel I am right and many others are wrong, but it may just be an empty feeling because I'm doing such a poor job stating my case. So I'll try again.

I was not intending to assert a consistent approach because my argument only relies on the recognition of unchanging results. The people who disagree with the argument I am *attempting* to make necessarily must believe that the Redskins have enjoyed improved results in the last two years in the influx of quality talent as well as the on field product. If you are in agreement with that, then we're on the same page. If you recognize that the on field product hasn't improved, but believe that the roster behind the performance has actually improved, then we are in partial agreement.

With that said, there are very critical elements of the approach that have remained consistent. We still have a tendency to trade draft picks for middling veterans (McNabb in April 2010, Jammal Brown in June 2010, Hightower in July 2011). I do think they are less careless with picks, but saying the Redskins have a newfound emphasis in the draft isn't entirely accurate. Are the days of trading second rounders for Jason Taylor over? Probably. I don't think that ends the player evaluation issue or the tendency to trade picks for middling veterans, but it is a start.

I'm not sure what the greater meaning of having 12 picks in a single draft is. It seemed to me like a simple function of being willing to trade down in the first round and then again in the second round. Is that a re-emphasis in the draft? If so, what do we call the 2008 Redskins draft when the Redskins traded down there? The Redskins didn't actually pick up any picks in that trade down which certainly suggests that the guy who executed the trade may have been trading for the sake of trading, instead of team building. But it seems to me that drawing a line between between Shanahan's moves in 2011 and Cerrato's moves in 2008 is simply trying to put a label on what was functionally the same intent.

Now if we want to argue who was more effective in their execution, there is no contest. Vinny turned his first three picks into a guy who is a punt gunner for the Giants, a guy who played three seasons and is out of the league because of health, and a four and a half star tight end for a team that already had Cooley. That's a below expectation return. I feel much more confident in Kerrigan/Jenkins/Hankerson to pay off than I did on draft day with Thomas/Davis/Kelly. And ask anyone you want: I had those three career paths pegged from day one.

The other thing is I think if you compare the roster in Feburary 2009 to the current one, you'd find them to be pretty similar. The biggest difference is that the Feb. 2009 one had limited depth, aging stars, and a couple of recent first round draft picks. The current one has (in Shanahan's own words) limited depth, a couple of recent first round picks, and no stars. Basically, any better position we are in now relies on the strength of the 2011 free agent class: guys like Cofield, Bowen, Chester, and Wilson. If you like all of those guys, then we almost certainly have a better roster now than in Feb. 2009. If you're taking a wait and see approach on all of those guys, than we're really at the same place we were in Feb. 2009.

It really comes down to how you rate Shanahan's acquisitions to date. If you're like NC_Skins, and pickups from the CFL make you scream "I LOVE THIS GUY" at the top of your metaphorical lungs, then yeah, our roster is better now. If you're thoroughly dumbfounded by most of the personnel moves Shanahan makes (beyond the draft because like I said before, if he can string a second good draft to the 2011 one, we're in good shape depth-wise) then I don't see enough differences in the processes of the new front office to support the idea that things are completely different now.

I am not denying the new-ness of the procedural stuff, I think we should be skeptical of how valuable it is though until the results turn around.

As always, I'm hedging somewhat as not to look totally foolish if the team starts 6-0 in mid October, but want to be on record saying that anything leading to a good season in 2012 would be a departure from the process that have led us to the last two years.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 01:19 AM   #42
Living Legend
 
That Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Springfield, VA
Age: 31
Posts: 16,278
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan

hey, G, two quick things

first, as you know, draft results tend to lag 2-3 years, and I think if we kept the other pieces the same, our first 3 picks would show vast improvement this year.

second, without a good QB, it's all moot. failing to find a QB better than rex after this many seasons is a HUGE strike against this FO. If the QB is the most important spot to fill, and you've decide to go after priorities 6-10 instead, guess what? that's a major failing. You can talk about finding the right QB all day, I don't want to hear it - I WANT TO SEE IT.

If they whiff again and end up with another terrible record, it's going to be a real tough sell that these are the right people to run this thing and that they're NFL competent.

I liked the draft, I liked the mid level FAs, but that rex grossman was the best they could do is horrible.
__________________
Who says shameless self promotion is stupid? oh yeah, that was me... Click For Tunes!
That Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 01:40 AM   #43
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan

Quote:
Originally Posted by That Guy View Post
hey, G, two quick things

first, as you know, draft results tend to lag 2-3 years, and I think if we kept the other pieces the same, our first 3 picks would show vast improvement this year.

second, without a good QB, it's all moot. failing to find a QB better than rex after this many seasons is a HUGE strike against this FO. If the QB is the most important spot to fill, and you've decide to go after priorities 6-10 instead, guess what? that's a major failing. You can talk about finding the right QB all day, I don't want to hear it - I WANT TO SEE IT.

If they whiff again and end up with another terrible record, it's going to be a real tough sell that these are the right people to run this thing and that they're NFL competent.

I liked the draft, I liked the mid level FAs, but that rex grossman was the best they could do is horrible.
I feel like I've been slower and more patient than most to criticize the quarterback situation. I, like you, think a lot of defenses for heading into season two with Rex Grossman and John Beck somehow after spending a second and fourth round pick to shore up the position are just complete bunk.

I have in the past advocated for putting the QB situation on the back burner while you build the rest of the team. I think, clearly, the Redskins haven't done a good job overall building the rest of the team up in the last two years but like you said, another good draft and things will probably get better in time. You can't just assume this upcoming draft class will fix all the wrongs of the last two years, but it certainly could.

In a lot of ways, the success of the 2011 draft is going to hinge on the 2012 draft. If we bomb in the 2012 draft, lose, and Shanahan gets fired, the next coach isn't going to come in saying things like he feels getting Jarvis Jenkins back is like having a top ten draft pick. I really like Hankerson, but he's going to have to prove the first round grade I gave him on the field this year. If he doesn't, there's no guarantee he'll get another chance in 2013.

I will never tire of talking about the future of the Washington Redskins. What I am tired of is people telling me things are different now. Just stop talking. Show me. Bring evidence or don't waste the time.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 02:09 AM   #44
Registered User
 
The Goat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,662
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schneed10 View Post
I'm sorry Tripp but I have to really rip you for saying it's the same front office, because that makes no sense. Is it the same scouting group, sure. But when people refer to the "front office", they are referring to the person(s) who are ultimately making the player acquisition decisions.

Scouting departments are front office support people, not decision makers. They evaluate the talent. They evaluated it for Cerrato and now the evaluate the talent for Shanahan. But that's a huge delineation.

Shanahan, his son, and Haslett are defining and communicating the type of players they are looking for, while Campbell and his team go find them. In the past, Campbell and his team would go find them, and Vinny would end up picking whoever he thought would work best for Zorn.

But Vinny and Zorn weren't communicating, and it's clear in this article that Campbell was saying he wasn't getting much in the way of direction from the decision makers at the top. So it's no wonder Vinny went with the BPA strategy when he was in charge - the communication was so poor between coach, GM, and scouts that he didn't even adequately grasp what the team needed.

Scouts are only as good as the decision makers they support. You can provide all the quality analysis in the world, but if the decision makers can't communicate well enough to put the analysis to good use, then shitty decisions get made.

I think with the way Shanahan is making better use of Campbell's abilities, it bodes well for improved drafting and team composition going forward.
It takes a tedious massaging of logic to say solid process is there without solid results. We know it's a different process now. Nobody, period, "knows" it's a better process.

Our current status is still early in the rebuilding process. Arguably, it's no further along than the day Mike became coach. It appears we're still searching for a quality, dependable left tackle. The WR corp is still unimpressive. The defensive secondary still underperforms.

Similarities between prior to Mike v now...solid defensive front seven. Top TE talent. Low-threat passing game.

Biggest difference between then and now: a QB who can manage most games and win a couple/few over a season.

So to recap: our defense is not quite as good as before Mike but basically the same; our passing attack is still pretty harmless; our running game is marginally better; but most importantly we threw out Jason Campbell and didn't do anything whatsoever at QB for two full seasons.

If Mike and Kyle "find" their QB now we'll never know how close they were to total failure. If they don't find their QB now we'll be about 5-11 again, and the process argument should be long over.

Last edited by The Goat; 01-31-2012 at 02:11 AM.
The Goat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2012, 05:47 AM   #45
Living Legend
 
That Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Springfield, VA
Age: 31
Posts: 16,278
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan

what's really silly is how much better we'd be with jason campbell and carlos rogers vs rex and d hall. well, campbell may just be a lateral move, but he has a lot less "oh ..ish" moments.
__________________
Who says shameless self promotion is stupid? oh yeah, that was me... Click For Tunes!
That Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.40560 seconds with 10 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25