Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

Did anyone else notice during the press conference that Dan Snyder all but conclusively stated, "We are not hiring a GM"? Danny said that he is happy with the current M.O., i.e., Danny, Vinny and the coaching staff making personnel decisions.

I don't think teams can win only if they have a GM, but I'm afraid of what will happen without Gibbs around. Daniel supposedly worshipped Gibbs and deferred to him on most, if not all, personnel matters. Now that Gibbs is gone, I wonder whether Danny is going to re-assert his voice in personnel decisions.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM?
 

With Gibbs gone, the Redskins will still need a Team President...unless the next Head Coach assumes that role as well. No FO changes leads me to believe, Snyder has all but handpicked the successor...whether he's started the process or not.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM?
 

This would be a perfect opportunity to bring in a GM. The one person that I wouldn't mind seeing Snyder open up the wallet for is NE personnel guy Scott Pioli. Too bad that it will NEVER happen.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM?
 

yeah it didn't sound like snyder wants to hire a GM.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM?
 

I am sure I will get slammed for saying this... but I would love to see Casserley back. He left our team in great shape, with Brad Johnson as our QB, and the 2nd & 3rd pick in the draft and still got Champ Bailey in the deal the year before that gave us the second top pick.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM?
 

Casserly would not be a bad choice in my mind...he was also vindicated with the mario williams draft pick this year...

i agree with everyone else, we need a GM

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

The worst part is everytime someone doesnt like a personnel move, The first thing they are going to say " it's Snyder overriding the coaches decision".

I got frustrated hearing "Gibbs called that play" or "Saunders Calle dthat play" this year. :(

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM?
 

[quote=BDBohnzie;404690]With Gibbs gone, the Redskins will still need a Team President...unless the next Head Coach assumes that role as well. No FO changes leads me to believe, Snyder has all but handpicked the successor...whether he's started the process or not.[/quote]

There was no Team Prez per se when JOe got here in 04, so I would guess that it will go back to the way it was w/Dan, Vinny & the head coach working as a committee on personel. Only now, Gibbs will be an advisor, who knows how much he'll advise.

Even when Gibbs was Team Pres. no one really knew who exactly did what, other than that Snyder always did contract negotiations.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

I don't think we necessarily need a GM, but in the absence of knowing that Gibbs' replacement will be a guy Danny will defer to and trust, I'd prefer one.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

Good point here. Not hiring a GM was the one definitive point I took from the whole thing. Snyder sees himself as the Owner/G.M. in my opinion. He wants to have his say.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

What an ego. Snyder needs to bring in a professional......an NFL GM with a proven track record to run the Skins.


Dear Mr. Snyder
You have a Billion Dollar Football Franchise. I would not entrust it to two guys that one guy (you Mr. Snyder) is not a very experienced football man and another (Cerratto) that [B]has not had any sustained or consistent success at any point in his career[/B]. I would get the best money can buy and you Mr Snyder have alot of it. Why are you keeping Mr. Cerratto? I don't get it. Why do you accept having a mediocre performing team on the field and a mediocre performing FO?

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM?
 

[QUOTE=BrunellMVP?;404698]Casserly would not be a bad choice in my mind...he was also vindicated with the mario williams draft pick this year...

i agree with everyone else, we need a GM[/QUOTE]

mario williams was only one pick in an excellent draft for the texans. i'd love to see casserly return.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;404686]Did anyone else notice during the press conference that Dan Snyder all but conclusively stated, "We are not hiring a GM"? Danny said that he is happy with the current M.O., i.e., Danny, Vinny and the coaching staff making personnel decisions.

I don't think teams can win only if they have a GM, but I'm afraid of what will happen without Gibbs around. Daniel supposedly worshipped Gibbs and deferred to him on most, if not all, personnel matters. Now that Gibbs is gone, I wonder whether Danny is going to re-assert his voice in personnel decisions.[/quote]

Hopefully the Danny has realized over the past four years that the team is better suited having a football guy make football decisions. I really hope he sets his ego aside on this and gets someone other than himself and Vinny to pull the trigger on personnel stuff. But I doubt it.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

Danny said it aint broke so it doesnt need fixed. Damn but he's a slow learner. This will be an 8-8 organization (more or less) until they hire a GM.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

[quote=Defensewins;404727]....Why do you accept having a mediocre performing team on the field and a mediocre performing FO?[/quote]
The mediocre FO is what causes a mediocre team on the field. Without Gibbs at the helm and no GM, we will lose the progress Gibbs brought and be back to mediocrity.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

[B]"I think Joe and I feel very, very comfortable over the last four years that it's been working in terms of the front office," Snyder said, "and I'm a believer that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. [I]We've done a pretty good job there[/I]." [/B]

Lord have mercy.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

They have done okay without one. Face it, there is a 99% chance that a GM will not be hired here so we just have to accept it for how it is. Besides, where is the GM cheat code that gives you extra wins and surefire personell decision if you hire a GM ? I'm still trying to find that one. GM's hit and miss just like Danny, Vinny, and whoever the coach is will. Maybe more than the next guy but if the hits are more than the misses I can live with it. If there are more misses then I'll still live with it. I just don't understand the notion that the Skins will forever be mediocre until they hire a GM. They'll be mediocre until they start winning more games. Also, hiring a GM is much like hiring a coach, or signing a player, you don't know what's going to happen until it does. I wonder, if there was a GM here would Jansen have been healthy ? Would Randy Thomas not have gotten injured twice ? Don't know, maybe he would have sprinkled his magic GM dust on them and healed them. When a GM is hired we can all celebrate but, we all know that it's not likely to happen. Live with it.

Then again, we are all entitled to the arguements and debates that get us throught the day.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

I think a lot will depend on who the new coach is, and I'm assuming that coach will be involved with personnel in a similar capacity as Gibbs was.

I know this has been talked about here over and over. Some feel that we desperately need a GM, personally I don't see it being a major issue as long as Snyder and Cerrato aren't left as the only people involved in the process. If they go back to running things themselves we're in trouble. But as long as the coaches are involved, which I assume they will, and this recent emphasis on drafting well and spending more wisely on free agents holds true, I don't have a big problem with it.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;405087]I think a lot will depend on who the new coach is, and I'm assuming that coach will be involved with personnel in a similar capacity as Gibbs was.

I know this has been talked about here over and over. Some feel that we desperately need a GM, personally I don't see it being a major issue as long as Snyder and Cerrato aren't left as the only people involved in the process. If they go back to running things themselves we're in trouble. But as long as the coaches are involved, which I assume they will, and this recent emphasis on drafting well and spending more wisely on free agents holds true, I don't have a big problem with it.[/QUOTE]

I was fine with the fact that our franchise didn't have a GM when Gibbs was around since I knew that Danny would defer to Gibbs on personnel issues. Now that Gibbs is gone I am afraid of what Danny will do.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

[quote=Beemnseven;405013][B]"I think Joe and I feel very, very comfortable over the last four years that it's been working in terms of the front office," Snyder said, "and I'm a believer that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. [I]We've done a pretty good job there[/I]." [/B]

Lord have mercy.[/quote]

I kind of laughed when he said that. 31-36 and one playoff win over the last 4 years isn't broke, but I wouldn't call it working either.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

[quote=MonkFan4Life;405014]I just don't understand the notion that the Skins will forever be mediocre until they hire a GM. They'll be mediocre until they start winning more games. [/quote]
Winning on the field starts in the front office. Just look at the personnel decisions made before Gibbs came back. You can't consistently win without making good personnel decisions. How do you build a quality car, house, or electronics product...not by using inferior parts. How can you field a winning team without good players and the team's salary cap management being done properly.

Here's an analogy from gambling on football games from John Patrick that applies: "When betting games you will not be able to handicap the outcome of 50 % of the games due to factors you can't handicap, so you must be accurate on the other 50%. So if you bet 100 games you will automatically win 25 and lose 25 due to circumstances outside of your control. The other 50 will be won or lost on your evaluation of the game. Of the 50 you can control, if you evaluate 35 correctly you now have won 60 games and are "in the black".

Same concept with a GM. If you have a good GM he will make the correct decisions hopefully 70+% of the time, an average one will be 50% and a poor one 35%. If you take into account things you can't control, injuries, unreasonable contract demands, unpredictable free agent money being spent, with a good GM at the end of the day you should have better than average players and a better than average coaching staff. If that's the case, that "better than average" coaching staff should be able to coach "better than average" players into a .600 winning percentage. Over time that averages out to 10-6 or 9-7 every year.

If you look at teams that have had multiple years of success you can usually look to a good GM behind it. Bobby Bethard (Skins 80s), Bill Polian (Bills late 80s - early 90s, also Carolina mid 90s, Indy - current), Ron Wolf (80s Raiders, 90s Packers), Scott Piloli (New England). Bill Walsh oversaw the 80s-early 90s 49ers, I'm not sure if he had a GM but he is certainly an exception.

Another key reason to have a GM is that the Head Coach is focused on "win now". A GM is focused a bit more on the long term success of the franchise. With the salary cap and free agency, drafting well and developing in-house talent are much more critical than in the pre-cap era. Poor decisions in these areas now can cripple a team for years. Look at the mess we were in when Gibbs came back in 2004.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

[QUOTE=Slingin Sammy 33;405190] Bill Walsh oversaw the 80s-early 90s 49ers, I'm not sure if he had a GM but he is certainly an exception.
[/QUOTE]

John McVay was the GM

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;405096]I was fine with the fact that our franchise didn't have a GM when Gibbs was around since I knew that Danny would defer to Gibbs on personnel issues. Now that Gibbs is gone I am afraid of what Danny will do.[/quote]Good personnel decisions are the single most critical factor in determining who wins and loses in the NFL. You absolutely can not be a top flight team if you decide that your key financial investments should be Adam Archuleta and Brandon Lloyd.

With that said, I see no reason why Dan Snyder should be unable to learn how to correctly evaluate talent. Evaluating talent in the NFL is hardly rocket science, it's just that there are a ton of misconceptions about how you can go about it. A monkey could be taught to make correct personnel decisions if he had a good enough teacher, so I'm confident that if Snyder wanted to he could become a good football guy.

The question is whether or not he trusts himself to learn from past mistakes, or if he would rather find someone to do the job for him.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

[QUOTE=MonkFan4Life;405014]They have done okay without one. Face it, there is a 99% chance that a GM will not be hired here so we just have to accept it for how it is. [B]Besides, where is the GM cheat code that gives you extra wins and surefire personell decision if you hire a GM ? I'm still trying to find that one.[/B] GM's hit and miss just like Danny, Vinny, and whoever the coach is will. Maybe more than the next guy but if the hits are more than the misses I can live with it. If there are more misses then I'll still live with it. I just don't understand the notion that the Skins will forever be mediocre until they hire a GM. They'll be mediocre until they start winning more games. Also, hiring a GM is much like hiring a coach, or signing a player, you don't know what's going to happen until it does. [B]I wonder, if there was a GM here would Jansen have been healthy ? Would Randy Thomas not have gotten injured twice ? Don't know, maybe he would have sprinkled his magic GM dust on them and healed them. [/B]When a GM is hired we can all celebrate but, we all know that it's not likely to happen. Live with it.

Then again, we are all entitled to the arguements and debates that get us throught the day.[/QUOTE]

The group whose teams have amassed a 51-64 record with one playoff win over seven seasons is "okay" to you?

As to the first bolded statement, in no way am I predicting that with the simple addition of a GM, the wins will instantaneously come. All I'm saying is that we've seen the track record of Snyder/Cerrato -- a few hits, but mainly misses, and a losing record since they've been at the helm. I just think it's time someone else took over player-personnel decisions.

Does a GM have magic healing powers? I think you know the answer to that one. Would a competent GM have noticed the weakness of an aging offensive line and taken the appropriate steps to prepare and build up young, capable replacements? Or are you "okay" with the current crowd who casually tossed away a 3rd and a 4th for a running back who took less than 50 carries and is no longer with the team?

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

You're assuming a GM wouldn't make the mistake of a bad trade. Look for all intents and purposes we have a GM, a three-headed GM (two now). No one has the title of GM per se, and if some GM came along whose to say the team philosophy would change?

Also, I think people really underestimate the work we've done to build depth and develop players across the board.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

[quote=SmootSmack;405255]You're assuming a GM wouldn't make the mistake of a bad trade. [B]Look for all intents and purposes we have a GM, a three-headed GM (two now).[/B] No one has the title of GM per se, and if some GM came along whose to say the team philosophy would change?

Also, I think people really underestimate the work we've done to build depth and develop players across the board.[/quote]
However of those three, one is Snyder - brilliant businessman & executive but no football playing, coaching or scouting experience, Cerrato - average to poor track record, and Gibbs - the other two followed what he said and "worked the numbers". I'm sure we have some quality folks in the scouting and personnel departments but all were following Gibbs' direction. We all know Gibbs was the driving force behind the successes we've had with talent over the last four years.

Unless Snyder is going to lay major personnel responsibility on the new coach (not a good idea IMO) a GM is needed. Let's say GW is the new coach, he is not ready for a coach/GM role and God helps us if Snyder & Cerrato are left to their own devices, we saw how that worked out. I believe if we get back to the structure JKC had with Bethard and Gibbs we will continue on the success Gibbs has started.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

From what I've heard Gibbs is expected to have a pretty big say still in the decision making process.

Anyhow, assuming Gregg Williams becomes heads coach here is how I would shake things out:

Snyder: owner and CEO (until I round up some more money, I'm not quite ready to buy the team from him)

Vinny Cerrato: Bump him up to a Executive VP role. He's not going anywhere so we probably shouldn't consider that option. I don't think VC does the horrible job everyone else does. But I would give him more of a hands-off big picture role now

Scott Campbell: I would move him up to Director of Player Personnel, meaning he would jump over Louis Riddick. But I think Campbell has earned the opportunity to have a bigger role. As Director of Pro Personnel he's been instrumental in bringing guys like Griffin, Washington, Springs. You can say well all it took was Snyder writing the check but Campbell led the charge to make sure the right people were given the checks. More impressive to me though has been his work in charge of the college scouting team the past three years. Guys like Taylor and Landry probably aren't surprises but then you've got guys like Golston, Montgomery, Doughty, Heyer, Blades, Buzbee. True there are no garauntees and he has missed (Newberry, Jordan Palmer) but overall I think he has done a job good heading both the college and the pro scouting teams.

Anyhow, I would keep it in house and bump Scott Campbell up to a position where he is heavily involved in the overall say of the final roster.

Gregg Williams: Let him just focus on being head coach this year. Make sure he's part of the personnel selection process but don't give him (for now at least) any official front office position.

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

[quote=SmootSmack;405330]Snyder: owner and CEO (until I round up some more money, I'm not quite ready to buy the team from him)....

Anyhow, I would keep it in house and bump Scott Campbell up to a position where he is heavily involved in the overall say of the final roster...[/quote]
Sounds good to me, if your take on Campbell is correct maybe we have the next Polian or Pioli in house. When you get close on buying Snyder out let me know and I'll come up with the last few hundred mil :laughing-

Re: Redskins Unlikely to Hire GM
 

Danny Boy owns the team and as long as he does he will be a hands-on owner. Deal with it...

When he hired his boyhood idol, Joe Gibbs, to come in and save the franchise from the Steve Spurrier miasma, Danny Boy said that Joe Gibbs would be in charge of "all-things-football." Two things are wrong with that:

1. It wasn't true.

2. Joe Gibbs isn't really the person you want to be in in charge of "all-things-football". Gibbs' successes in the 80s were built on the wisdom and the trading/drafting acumen of Bobby Beathard in the absence of a salary cap. That's what happened here; any other version of that success is revisionist history.

When Gibbs let it be known that Snyder was the guy who settled the disputes that could not be resolved between him and others in the organization, it was patently clear to anyone paying attention that Gibbs was not in charge of "all-things-football". If he were, there would never have been any unresolved football issues; his would have been the final say.

So, if Danny Boy could not cede authority to his boyhood idol, it isn't gonna happen for the next guy or the guy after that or the guiy after ...

And Vinny C. - aka Vinny Boombatz - is a confidante of Danny Boy. He's here and he ain't leaving town so pencil him into any processes or structures that you may want to conjure up for the Redskins. Here's the problem: Vinny C. has more bad judgments about players than he does good judgments. And he has the hands-on boss' ear and the hands-on boss makes lots of the final calls.

So, hang on for more ups and downs and changes of directions with this organization. In fact, maybe calling it an "organization" is the biggest mistake because it seems to spend so much time randomly changing its collective mind and its direction. Maybe we sould really call it a "chaos"?

There won't be a real and functioning GM here any time soon. Deal with it...