building for a superbowl?
 

I have a question for everyone on this site, "What direction do you think we are headed in? Do you think we will have the pieces to win the super bowl in the next few years?'
My personal answer to that question is no way in hell. I feel like we are building our team to compete for the playoffs, not the superbowl. We simply have too many holes, and more will develop as our already old team gets even older. We do not have enough ammo to fill those holes in the next few years with our limited amount of draft picks. I guess this whole thread is really a reaction to the McNabb trade. I feel that you should only trade the number 35 overall pick and a third rounder for a 34 year old veteran when that 34 year old veteran will be the missing piece to your superbowl run. I do not believe we are close to a superbowl run, and trading away such keys to our future is ludicrous in my mind. Will McNabb significantly improve our team over the next few years? Yes without a doubt. But we simply do not have the pieces to make a run for the superbowl in the near future, and I feel like trading away future young talent is also trading away the chances of a superbowl for an even longer time. As excited as I am to see our teams improvement next year, I still strongly disapprove of our mentality of trading away the potential for future greatness to remain in mediocrity in the present.

And on a separate note, the eagles I feel made a brilliant move by trading within the division. Their key players are all young, Kolb, Jackson, Maclin, Celic, McCoy. I feel like they are looking toward the future in that trade because they know the trade will cripple us in the long run, while their young talent has time to develop, and they will bring in even more young talent. I do not feel like the Eagles care as much as this season as they do the a few seasons down the road. They know they do not currently have the pieces to truly make a superbowl run, and are trying to assemble the pieces to make one in the future. (I know I will hear alot of disagreement on this thought)

Last thing I wanted to say. In my mind, Shanahan is a great coach, but is TERRIBLE at assembling a roster. His best seasons were teams that he inherited. I feel like he historically has made numerous terrible trades (i.e. jarvis moss), has done a very poor job drafting future talent, and has done a poor job of signing the right free agents (and giving them alot of money, i.e Daniel Grahm). The talent that was on the Broncos team when McDaniels inherited it is a joke in my mind (specifically the defense). There were so many great holes on that team that in my mind they could have possibly had the worst talent in the NFL.

Sorry if I rambled a bit, but I've had to get these things off my chest, please share your thoughts on what I said.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

Lets just see how some of our younger guys play this season... and see how the rest of the off season pans out...
No offense but I really think u wasted ur time here

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

I honestly don't think the eagles will be in that great of a shape...Kolb will really have to show up for them to have the same kind of offense. Westbrook is out, Desean Jackson was great because of McNabb and Kolb hasn't played any meaningful time.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

[quote=skinster;686549]I have a question for everyone on this site, "What direction do you think we are headed in? Do you think we will have the pieces to win the super bowl in the next few years?'
.[/quote]

Isn't that what the goal is for everyteam?

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

[quote=rbanerjee23;686551]Desean Jackson was great because of McNabb.[/quote]

I'd love to know how you work that one out. :smashfrea

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

[quote=davy;686554]I'd love to know how you work that one out. :smashfrea[/quote]

It's not far fetched. In fact it's frequently accepted that 9 times out of 10 the QB make the receiver not the other way around. We saw Randy Moss, thought to be the best reciever in the game miss a 1,000 yards in Oakland, Sydney Rice was a bust before Farve came in, and Vincent Jackson would likely be hanging on a string at this point had it not been for him catching passes from Rivers. You can also look at how the Saints have seemingly random guys constantly stepping up (for example Marquis Colston as a rookie). Wes Welker was average without Brady.

In fact there are only a few receivers in the game today that are capable of producing with average QB play. Those guys are currently Andre Johnson, Calvin Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald, Steve Smith, Brandon Marshall, and Roddy White. Guys like Randy Moss and T.O used to be in this category.

The thing with Desean Jackson is you have to ask yourself how his career would have shaped up had we drafted him instead of Philly. To me Jackson is a very good receiver but without a good QB you would likely never know that.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

[quote=skinster;686549]I have a question for everyone on this site, "What direction do you think we are headed in? Do you think we will have the pieces to win the super bowl in the next few years?'
My personal answer to that question is no way in hell. I feel like we are building our team to compete for the playoffs, not the superbowl. We simply have too many holes, and more will develop as our already old team gets even older. We do not have enough ammo to fill those holes in the next few years with our limited amount of draft picks. I guess this whole thread is really a reaction to the McNabb trade. I feel that you should only trade the number 35 overall pick and a third rounder for a 34 year old veteran when that 34 year old veteran will be the missing piece to your superbowl run. I do not believe we are close to a superbowl run, and trading away such keys to our future is ludicrous in my mind. Will McNabb significantly improve our team over the next few years? Yes without a doubt. But we simply do not have the pieces to make a run for the superbowl in the near future, and I feel like trading away future young talent is also trading away the chances of a superbowl for an even longer time. As excited as I am to see our teams improvement next year, I still strongly disapprove of our mentality of trading away the potential for future greatness to remain in mediocrity in the present.

And on a separate note, the eagles I feel made a brilliant move by trading within the division. Their key players are all young, Kolb, Jackson, Maclin, Celic, McCoy. I feel like they are looking toward the future in that trade because they know the trade will cripple us in the long run, while their young talent has time to develop, and they will bring in even more young talent. I do not feel like the Eagles care as much as this season as they do the a few seasons down the road. They know they do not currently have the pieces to truly make a superbowl run, and are trying to assemble the pieces to make one in the future. (I know I will hear alot of disagreement on this thought)

Last thing I wanted to say. In my mind, Shanahan is a great coach, but is TERRIBLE at assembling a roster. His best seasons were teams that he inherited. I feel like he historically has made numerous terrible trades (i.e. jarvis moss), has done a very poor job drafting future talent, and has done a poor job of signing the right free agents (and giving them alot of money, i.e Daniel Grahm). The talent that was on the Broncos team when McDaniels inherited it is a joke in my mind (specifically the defense). There were so many great holes on that team that in my mind they could have possibly had the worst talent in the NFL.

Sorry if I rambled a bit, but I've had to get these things off my chest, please share your thoughts on what I said.[/quote]

Wow skinster. You must have been in a pissy mood when you wrote that.

Denver was middle of the pack at worst when Shanahan was shown the door. To say that they had "the worst talent in the NFL" would be quite a stretch. If you're right, and we're building a playoff team, then that's the first step and it says this team is headed in the right direction.

Let's wait to see how the rest of the offseason works out. There's still the draft, still some trades to be made and we haven't seen the last new addition to the team. Super Bowl teams aren't built in a matter or 2 or 3 months.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;686556]It's not far fetched. In fact it's frequently accepted that 9 times out of 10 the QB make the receiver not the other way around. We saw Randy Moss, thought to be the best reciever in the game miss a 1,000 yards in Oakland, Sydney Rice was a bust before Farve came in, and Vincent Jackson would likely be hanging on a string at this point had it not been for him catching passes from Rivers. You can also look at how the Saints have seemingly random guys constantly stepping up (for example Marquis Colston as a rookie). Wes Welker was average without Brady.

In fact there are only a few receivers in the game today that are capable of producing with average QB play. Those guys are currently Andre Johnson, Calvin Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald, Steve Smith, Brandon Marshall, and Roddy White. Guys like Randy Moss and T.O used to be in this category.

The thing with Desean Jackson is you have to ask yourself how his career would have shaped up had we drafted him instead of Philly. To me Jackson is a very good receiver but without a good QB you would likely never know that.[/quote]

All valid points but he did have over 100yds receiving both games that Kolb started and he didn't get a lot of help from Mcnabb while returning punts or running reverses.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

The poster makes some excellent points, the results of which demonstrate why the Eagles have maintained long term success within the division and our course of action has been the reverse. They continue to infuse the team with young talent and develop it. There's nothing to develop when you build with older players, when they're done the only alternative is to procure more older players.

As to building for a super-bowl......I'm convinced Shanahan came here to win, he's void of a thirty year plan. So, with a GM and HC both embracing "the future is now " doctrine, I would say the team is currently being constructed towards making that the ultimate goal in a short period of time.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

[quote=Longtimefan;686564]The poster makes some excellent points, the results of which demonstrate why the Eagles have maintained long term success within the division and our course of action has been the reverse. They continue to infuse the team with young talent and develop it. There's nothing to develop when you build with older players, when they're done the only alternative is to procure more older players.

As to building for a super-bowl......I'm convinced Shanahan came here to win, he's void of a thirty year plan. So, with a GM and HC both embracing "the future is now " doctrine, I would say the team is currently being constructed towards making that the ultimate goal in a short period of time.[/quote]


Len Pasquarelli basically [URL="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=5058639"]said[/URL] the same thing just after the trade for Donovan McNabb:

[quote]Owner Dan Snyder has failed before in trying to buy a title. He might employ a new general manager and a new coach, but they appear to have fallen for the same ill-advised approach that derailed their predecessors . . . The Redskins ... would prefer to buy talent rather than take the time to develop it.[/quote]

I've been thinking about this, because for a long time I've wanted to see this organization build from a foundation of young, promising players, stockpile draft picks, and essentially tough it out for a season or two while the young guys learn even if it means sucking it up with some losing seasons.

Clearly though, Shanahan and Allen don't see it that way. But then I thought, who really does anymore? When was the last time you saw a team truly blow everything up, start from scratch ? The Colts with Peyton Manning come to mind, back in 1998. They had an awful season in '97, wound up with the first overall pick, but put together a long term winner with Polian built mainly with draft picks and had a long, slow climb to the top.

I just don't think you see that anymore. The Saints brought in a free agent QB in Drew Brees that got them to pinnacle, and the Cards had to do the same thing with Kurt Warner. With free agency, and now especially with the end of the salary cap, nobody seems to want to wait for two to three seasons for a slow, plodding build-up to championship status.

When you stop and think about it, we're doing what just about everyone else is trying to do, the only difference is that we haven't been successful.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

[quote=Beemnseven;686566]Len Pasquarelli basically [URL="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=5058639"]said[/URL] the same thing just after the trade for Donovan McNabb:



I've been thinking about this, because for a long time I've wanted to see this organization build from a foundation of young, promising players, stockpile draft picks, and essentially tough it out for a season or two while the young guys learn even if it means sucking it up with some losing seasons.

Clearly though, Shanahan and Allen don't see it that way. But then I thought, who really does anymore? When was the last time you saw a team truly blow everything up, start from scratch ? The Colts with Peyton Manning come to mind, back in 1998. They had an awful season in '97, wound up with the first overall pick, but put together a long term winner with Polian built mainly with draft picks and had a long, slow climb to the top.

I just don't think you see that anymore. The Saints brought in a free agent QB in Drew Brees that got them to pinnacle, and the Cards had to do the same thing with Kurt Warner. With free agency, and now especially with the end of the salary cap, nobody seems to want to wait for two to three seasons for a slow, plodding build-up to championship status.

When you stop and think about it, we're doing what just about everyone else is trying to do, the only difference is that we haven't been successful.[/quote]

I agree......and to prove your point, most coaches in the game today only get a short period of time to develop their young players and win simultaneously. Coaches that are in a position where the pressuse is on to win or be gone feel the need to gravitate towards the older player in hopes of producing immediate results.

It always helps to have that established QB like in the Eagles case. Reid and McNabb have been together from the beginning, having that foundation has made it easier for them to year after year continue to add good young talent to an already productive nucleus.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

i for one am excited regarding this move. We bring in a QB that wins games, that brings that winning feeling into the locker room. Guy that has played in meaningful games year in and year out. Building for superbowl? who cares! We haven't won shit in 10 years. wouldn't it be great to go to the playoffs every year...compete for 10 - 11 wins every year?? Not that this is a guarentee but the guy wins games. As far as building, i think we still have the opportunity to get younger and stronger. Adding a 33 year old QB doesn't change that. We have young WR, young TE, Oline is getting younger with the drafting of Olineman(hopefully) Our D is getting younger with Haynesworth, Orakpo, McIntosh. the corners are young the safeties are young. I think we have made some good moves this offseason. and usually I am the biggest hater on here. I think McNabb has 3 to 4 very good years left. This offense is capable of putting up 35 points a game next year. My worry is the D switching to a new scheme may hurt us a little, but we still have ballers on that side of the ball. I honestly think this is going to be a great year for us Skins fans!!!

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

I just heard a rumor on the radio that part (not sure how much of a part) of their reasoning for trading McNabb to the skins was to discourage them from drafting Bradford if he were to be available at 4. They said that the Eagles don't want to face him for the next 10 yrs. Another typical stretch rumor leading up to the draft. On a side note, I read that they are going to implode the old Cowboys stadium soon. I'd love for them to sell of the opportunity to press the switch the bring that place to the ground!

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

They actually auctioned off the button pushing responsibility
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/nfl/news/story?id=4786874&campaign=rss&source=NFLHeadlines]Kraft Foods to sponsor demolition of Texas Stadium - ESPN Dallas[/url]

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

I believe that what you are seeing from the front office and coaching staff is a direction the team wants to go in. Sure, they might not have the youth or talent that we want them to have but success is not usually immediate. We do have the next two or three years to see how the team pans out. We got to see two years of Cerrato & Zorn and we all can see the hugh strategy differences immediately from them to the current admin. It's too early to be talking superbowl but I like the drive, determination and focus this entire team has in the making.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;686572]They actually auctioned off the button pushing responsibility
[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/nfl/news/story?id=4786874&campaign=rss&source=NFLHeadlines]Kraft Foods to sponsor demolition of Texas Stadium - ESPN Dallas[/url][/quote]

Watch the implosion live on ESPN3.com Sunday morning from 7-9am

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

I think that the moves that Shanahan and Allen are making this year are to win now and in the future. What's the one position that teams struggle the most to get 'right'? The QB position. With the McNabb trade we have immediately (and dramatically IMO) improved that position for hopefully the next 3-4 years. Perhaps that could have been done with a draft pick as well but at least some people thought that was done twice already in the past 10 years with the Ramsey and Campbell picks. The risk/reward on McNabb is far less than on a drafted QB.

The other moves they've made, adding depth to the backfield, signing Hicks to a 3 year deal, extending M. Williams to a 3 year deal, bringing in Buchanon, signing Ke'Moataue (or whatever), etc. are all moves to win and build depth at positions. They are not going to be able to change a stale, poorly constructed 4-12 roster overnight-especially with the restrictions on free agents this year.

I get the whole notion of 'stockpiling draft picks' but it takes a couple of things in order to do that. We need to have players that are desirable in a trade that we can move without suffering an impact on the roster. For all of the geniuses who want to trade Cooley, what happens if Davis pops a hamstring week 2? Then what? For everyone who is saying trade Landry and Moss, are you that comfortable with Chris Horton and Marko Mitchell? Those same fans will be bitching up a storm come October when we're sitting at 2-5 and those players are thriving elsewhere.

The same goes for trading down in the draft. There's a simple reason why that seldom, if ever happens anymore. No team wants to be on the hook for top 5 guaranteed money unless they are targeting a very specific player like the Jets with Sanchez last year and they didn't get a ransom of picks.

Teams like the Eagles and Pats didn't stock up by depleting their roster of impact players, they used players that fit a role well for them but they had depth enough to absorb the loss. Those teams also were not stuck in a position of drafting for need with every pick, they had a talented enough roster that they could afford to not take a player at a position because they had a gaping hole, which is a position that we've found ourselves in for more than a decade and quite frankly most teams are in as well.

Sorry for the long post, but to answer the OP question, yes, I believe we are building for a Super Bowl but not THIS Super Bowl.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

[quote=Paintrain;686582]I think that the moves that Shanahan and Allen are making this year are to win now and in the future. What's the one position that teams struggle the most to get 'right'? The QB position. With the McNabb trade we have immediately (and dramatically IMO) improved that position for hopefully the next 3-4 years. Perhaps that could have been done with a draft pick as well but at least some people thought that was done twice already in the past 10 years with the Ramsey and Campbell picks. The risk/reward on McNabb is far less than on a drafted QB.

The other moves they've made, adding depth to the backfield, signing Hicks to a 3 year deal, extending M. Williams to a 3 year deal, bringing in Buchanon, signing Ke'Moataue (or whatever), etc. are all moves to win and build depth at positions. They are not going to be able to change a stale, poorly constructed 4-12 roster overnight-especially with the restrictions on free agents this year.

I get the whole notion of 'stockpiling draft picks' but it takes a couple of things in order to do that. We need to have players that are desirable in a trade that we can move without suffering an impact on the roster. For all of the geniuses who want to trade Cooley, what happens if Davis pops a hamstring week 2? Then what? For everyone who is saying trade Landry and Moss, are you that comfortable with Chris Horton and Marko Mitchell? Those same fans will be bitching up a storm come October when we're sitting at 2-5 and those players are thriving elsewhere.

The same goes for trading down in the draft. There's a simple reason why that seldom, if ever happens anymore. No team wants to be on the hook for top 5 guaranteed money unless they are targeting a very specific player like the Jets with Sanchez last year and they didn't get a ransom of picks.

Teams like the Eagles and Pats didn't stock up by depleting their roster of impact players, they used players that fit a role well for them but they had depth enough to absorb the loss. Those teams also were not stuck in a position of drafting for need with every pick, they had a talented enough roster that they could afford to not take a player at a position because they had a gaping hole, which is a position that we've found ourselves in for more than a decade and quite frankly most teams are in as well.

Sorry for the long post, but to answer the OP question, yes, I believe we are building for a Super Bowl but not THIS Super Bowl.[/quote]
+
DAMN.........I was JUST preparing to post the same thing! good post

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

[quote=Paintrain;686582]I think that the moves that Shanahan and Allen are making this year are to win now and in the future. What's the one position that teams struggle the most to get 'right'? The QB position. With the McNabb trade we have immediately (and dramatically IMO) improved that position for hopefully the next 3-4 years. Perhaps that could have been done with a draft pick as well but at least some people thought that was done twice already in the past 10 years with the Ramsey and Campbell picks. The risk/reward on McNabb is far less than on a drafted QB.

The other moves they've made, adding depth to the backfield, signing Hicks to a 3 year deal, extending M. Williams to a 3 year deal, bringing in Buchanon, signing Ke'Moataue (or whatever), etc. are all moves to win and build depth at positions. They are not going to be able to change a stale, poorly constructed 4-12 roster overnight-especially with the restrictions on free agents this year.

I get the whole notion of 'stockpiling draft picks' but it takes a couple of things in order to do that. We need to have players that are desirable in a trade that we can move without suffering an impact on the roster. [B] For all of the geniuses who want to trade Cooley, what happens if Davis pops a hamstring week 2? [/B]Then what? For everyone who is saying trade Landry and Moss, are you that comfortable with Chris Horton and Marko Mitchell? Those same fans will be bitching up a storm come October when we're sitting at 2-5 and those players are thriving elsewhere.

The same goes for trading down in the draft. There's a simple reason why that seldom, if ever happens anymore. No team wants to be on the hook for top 5 guaranteed money unless they are targeting a very specific player like the Jets with Sanchez last year and they didn't get a ransom of picks.

Teams like the Eagles and Pats didn't stock up by depleting their roster of impact players, they used players that fit a role well for them but they had depth enough to absorb the loss. Those teams also were not stuck in a position of drafting for need with every pick, they had a talented enough roster that they could afford to not take a player at a position because they had a gaping hole, which is a position that we've found ourselves in for more than a decade and quite frankly most teams are in as well.

Sorry for the long post, but to answer the OP question, yes, I believe we are building for a Super Bowl but not THIS Super Bowl.[/quote]

Guess that means me ... :rolleyes:

If anyone pops a hamstring, snaps their Achilles, tears an ACL, it harms the team, there's nothing you can do about it. You could say the same for the Eagles if Kolb tears his rotator cuff in Week 3 of preseason.

Trading away marquee players in exchange for gobbling up multiple draft picks obviously has its drawbacks. That's the biggest risk you're taking if you go that route, but injuries can still happen regardless.

The crux of the issue here is whether you rely on young, unproven, but inexpensive players with anticipated potential or do you cast those aside for proven veterans. Looks like we're opting for the latter, and I'm willing to put more trust in Shanahan and Allen to do that rather than Vinny Cerrato.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

If a team makes it to the playoffs, they have a good shot at the SB. Just look at the Cardinals a few years back for an example. Everyone thought they were just a playoff team but not a super bowl caliber team and they were a game winning drive away from the ring.

Also, McNabb is still a very capable QB. I believe the Eagles made a terrible mistake by not only pissing him off but trading him to a team that plays them twice. He might say it's just another game but that's press conference speak. He wants to prove to them that he's still got it

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

I do nt think taht it is far fetched to have our team buliy as a perennial contender within the next 2-3 years. Having an established QB will help us accelerate the learning curve for our young receivers, OL (the one's we will be drafting), and our heir apparent at QB(?).

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

I honestly don't remember being this EXCITED before any season in a long time. The move to get McNabb was amazing on our part.. The guy is still a top 10 QB and is Hungry to win a SB.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

[quote=Beemnseven;686595]Guess that means me ... :rolleyes:

If anyone pops a hamstring, snaps their Achilles, tears an ACL, it harms the team, there's nothing you can do about it. You could say the same for the Eagles if Kolb tears his rotator cuff in Week 3 of preseason.

Trading away marquee players in exchange for gobbling up multiple draft picks obviously has its drawbacks. That's the biggest risk you're taking if you go that route, but injuries can still happen regardless.

The crux of the issue here is whether you rely on young, unproven, but inexpensive players with anticipated potential or do you cast those aside for proven veterans. Looks like we're opting for the latter, and I'm willing to put more trust in Shanahan and Allen to do that rather than Vinny Cerrato.[/quote]

Of course, injuries can happen at any turn but TE is the one position we have legitimate depth, by which I mean if one player goes out there is NO dropoff in production from that position and you want to eliminate that depth? Hell, if we were 3 deep and saw great potential out of our 3rd TE then sure, let's look at it but do you remember what happened last season when we were starting our 4th RG of the season, our 3rd LT of the season and our 4th RB? We don't have the luxury of trading one of the best young players on our team for a hope of a couple of college kids. That's just foolish if you ask me.

Honestly, on the open market, what would Cooley get us? Maybe a mid 2nd round pick? He's not elite enough to garner a bounty of picks, certainly not the value to build a team around.

Which 'young inexpensive players with anticipated potential' have we 'cast aside' for proven veterans? Quinton Ganther?

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

Skinster, I don't mean to be a jerk but that was a long arse rant. :)

I can't say I honestly read the whole thing but from other peoples answers I'm agreeing with them.

#1- Be happy knowing Cerrato is out.
#2- We have an awsome GM now or atleast an upgrade.
#3- We have a boni fide HC again.

Shanahan alwasy has had one of the top offenses in the league if not the #1. We will be good soon enough. No different then Gibbs but Gibbs problem was he had too many cooks and everyone had a different phylosophy. Shanahan has been allowed to bring in a GM he likes or the GM has been allowed to bring in a HC he likes not sure which came first other then to say Allen was hired first. All the coach's will be on the same page.

My only issue now is defense. I'm not sold on Haslett. He has not done anything special. Now Haslett has talented players. He takes over a defense that was top 5. I'm expecting a drop off because of a new scheme but it needs to return quickly.

Are we SB contenders? Hell I've been in rebuild mode up until we picked up McNabb. Now it looks like they think they could make a run at the playoffs or more. They know better then me but I'd still prefer rebuild. You can't get rid of all the aged players in one yr and fix this mess. So if they each yr pick up younger talent to start taking over then I'm fine with their idea of rebuild.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

Paintrain I agree with you on the whole not throwing away all our impact players for picks only to have the ones left get injured and we have no depth.

but do we need 2 pass catching TE's. It has been reported that Shanahan only utilized 1 pass catching and 1 blocking TE. It might be interesting to see how they are utilized though.

Same with Landry. We have Landry who I believe is an awsome SS but not that great at FS. but we also have Doughty, and Horton. Doughty is just as good at SS and Horton might be even better. We could afford to trade one. I would have said Doughty but his name is not flashy so we won't get great value like we would have to Landry.

Then there is the issue of Carter. If he's on page to give it a try then good. But if he's not the proto typical LB/DE in this scheme we might as well trade him for mid round picks.

QB is another position. I feel like Tampa now. We have:

McNabb
Campbell
Grossman
Brennan
Bartel

Bartel is probably a non issue. He's fodder unless he shines for some reason. K.Shanahan has mentioned he likes Colt but what OC is going to say "na I don't like him" if he's on their team? Hopefully we can get decent value for JC. Maybe get our second rounder back. That would leave:

McNabb and Grossman, who have both been to a SB and lost. Both are eager to win.
Brennan, who might turn out to be great in this system.
Bartel, who is simply camp fodder.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

I think we are expecting more of the same. Not true! My expectations are low and mental defenses are high. Kind of like the first year Tom Brady took over in N.E. What do think of that!?

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

[quote=SBXVII;686626]Paintrain I agree with you on the whole not throwing away all our impact players for picks only to have the ones left get injured and we have no depth.

but do we need 2 pass catching TE's. It has been reported that Shanahan only utilized 1 pass catching and 1 blocking TE. It might be interesting to see how they are utilized though.

Same with Landry. We have Landry who I believe is an awsome SS but not that great at FS. but we also have Doughty, and Horton. Doughty is just as good at SS and Horton might be even better. We could afford to trade one. I would have said Doughty but his name is not flashy so we won't get great value like we would have to Landry.

Then there is the issue of Carter. If he's on page to give it a try then good. But if he's not the proto typical LB/DE in this scheme we might as well trade him for mid round picks.

QB is another position. I feel like Tampa now. We have:

McNabb
Campbell
Grossman
Brennan
Bartel

Bartel is probably a non issue. He's fodder unless he shines for some reason. K.Shanahan has mentioned he likes Colt but what OC is going to say "na I don't like him" if he's on their team? Hopefully we can get decent value for JC. Maybe get our second rounder back. That would leave:

McNabb and Grossman, who have both been to a SB and lost. Both are eager to win.
Brennan, who might turn out to be great in this system.
Bartel, who is simply camp fodder.[/quote]
I'd rather see what Shanny does with 2 pass catching TE before saying that he can't utilize both of them. If we move anyone young, I'd be more ok with Landry just because he hasn't lived up to his promise and appears to be a faster Roy Williams with the same coverage and tackling angle liabilities but without the impact plays. Carter is a bad fit so if we can get a 3rd for him I'd be fine with that as well, Chris Wilson can fill his LB role.

The QB situation will work itself out. The only way we get a 2nd for Campbell is if there is a late run at the end of the 1st for QB (Clausen, Tebow, McCoy) and some team like the Bills is stuck without someone who holds that round value. Other than that, we're lucky to get a high 4th for him.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

[quote=Paintrain;686582]I think that the moves that Shanahan and Allen are making this year are to win now and in the future. What's the one position that teams struggle the most to get 'right'? The QB position. With the McNabb trade we have immediately (and dramatically IMO) improved that position for hopefully the next 3-4 years. Perhaps that could have been done with a draft pick as well but at least some people thought that was done twice already in the past 10 years with the Ramsey and Campbell picks. The risk/reward on McNabb is far less than on a drafted QB.

The other moves they've made, adding depth to the backfield, signing Hicks to a 3 year deal, extending M. Williams to a 3 year deal, bringing in Buchanon, signing Ke'Moataue (or whatever), etc. are all moves to win and build depth at positions. They are not going to be able to change a stale, poorly constructed 4-12 roster overnight-especially with the restrictions on free agents this year.

I get the whole notion of 'stockpiling draft picks' but it takes a couple of things in order to do that. We need to have players that are desirable in a trade that we can move without suffering an impact on the roster. For all of the geniuses who want to trade Cooley, what happens if Davis pops a hamstring week 2? Then what? For everyone who is saying trade Landry and Moss, are you that comfortable with Chris Horton and Marko Mitchell? Those same fans will be bitching up a storm come October when we're sitting at 2-5 and those players are thriving elsewhere.

The same goes for trading down in the draft. There's a simple reason why that seldom, if ever happens anymore. No team wants to be on the hook for top 5 guaranteed money unless they are targeting a very specific player like the Jets with Sanchez last year and they didn't get a ransom of picks.

Teams like the Eagles and Pats didn't stock up by depleting their roster of impact players, they used players that fit a role well for them but they had depth enough to absorb the loss. Those teams also were not stuck in a position of drafting for need with every pick, they had a talented enough roster that they could afford to not take a player at a position because they had a gaping hole, which is a position that we've found ourselves in for more than a decade and quite frankly most teams are in as well.

Sorry for the long post, but to answer the OP question, yes, I believe we are building for a Super Bowl but not THIS Super Bowl.[/quote]

I get what you are saying about having talent now while building towards the future, and as a matter of principal I agree with you, but I feel that this situation does not apply to our team right now due to what I feel to be too many holes on our roster. My deal isn't that we have alot of holes now (which I do feel that we do), but is that in a couple years we will have significantly more holes due to the age of our team. A few players that we expect to currently have an impact (fletcher, rabach, carter, moss, daniels, all our RBs, etc) in reality probably will be somewhat irrelevant a couple yers down the road, and I do not see that we have the means to replace these players within the next few years. On top of that we are not accounting for the players we might lose (i.e.Rogers), and the players that play might just slip (i.e Hall...at 30 some quick CBs just lose their speed and cant make up for it). I do not want to bank on free agency to replace these guys, we do not know who will be available or what the cap situation will be. I also do not think that McNabb will be able to carry us in a couple of years; but I do think he will be good enough (like Elway was in his SB years) to win it for us IF we have the necessary talent around him, which I feel like we will not have.
And for the record, I still think that Shannahan is a great coach, just not great with personnel decisions.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

Here is another view. Look at the cowboys the last few years. Would you say that they had the same issues with holes on their team. Infact, they were stacked with great players (better than ours?) and can't make it to or through the playoffs. Winning comes down to talent, brains, ability but goes nowhere without heart. I hope our team is loaded with heart and passion. That's just me.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

I see us making a few trades on draft day to get some of those picks back...but only time will tell. Regardless of how you feel about the McNabb trade ( I like it ) we do still need to get younger across the entire team. I think that's something we all can agree on. But I believe in Shanaman's logic and I think he will be good for us...eventually I believe he will hand over the reigns to his son...kyyyyyllllleeeeeeeeeeeeee to take over.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

I will say no way.
But it is insane to say untill we see how the team performs in the preseason...most say preseason doesn't predict the future....but it sure does if you take a look at how the first team performed....last year I had high hopes too...until I saw the preseason, they looked worse...I predicted 6-10 when everyone else was the typical 9-7 area.
Lets wait until we see live bullets....but to suggest one player and a new coaching staff can take a team from 4-12 in a year is crazy....if it happened, it would be one of the most incredible feats in NFL history.

Without seeing the team play...I am hoping for a .500 team. Playoffs will have to wait until next year...but I will hold out any guess until after game 3 of preseason.

You guys have got to stop drinking the kool aid!

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

[quote=Beemnseven;686566]Len Pasquarelli basically [URL="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=5058639"]said[/URL] the same thing just after the trade for Donovan McNabb:



[/quote]

All I want to say about developing young talent in the way that Pasquarelli wants teams to do is this, look at Minnesota. Minnesota has tons of young talent but it was worth a huge pile of sh*t with Tavarus Jackson under center. Thats what you get when you try to develop young talent that should not have been drafted anyhow...

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

Oh, ask Oakland how there young talent at QB is developing...

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

[quote=Paintrain;686615]Of course, injuries can happen at any turn but TE is the one position we have legitimate depth, by which I mean if one player goes out there is NO dropoff in production from that position and you want to eliminate that depth? Hell, if we were 3 deep and saw great potential out of our 3rd TE then sure, let's look at it but do you remember what happened last season when we were starting our 4th RG of the season, our 3rd LT of the season and our 4th RB? We don't have the luxury of trading one of the best young players on our team for a hope of a couple of college kids. That's just foolish if you ask me.

Honestly, on the open market, what would Cooley get us? Maybe a mid 2nd round pick? He's not elite enough to garner a bounty of picks, certainly not the value to build a team around.

Which 'young inexpensive players with anticipated potential' have we 'cast aside' for proven veterans? Quinton Ganther?[/quote]

No, no I'm not saying we [U]have[/U] cast aside young players with lots of potential; I'm saying that is often the choice which has to be made -- letting go of draft picks, (which would be the young, inexpensive players) in favor of free agent veterans. George Allen Sr. was famous for this.

In a way, tight end is one of those positions that you can get later in the draft, perhaps through undrafted free agency and incorporate in your offense without seeing much of a dropoff. Especially if the offense you run isn't so heavily reliant on TEs. Ideally, you want your wide receivers getting most of the catches and the yardage. I can't really say for sure how heavily involved the TE is in Shanahan's offense. But if Cooley makes up a significant facet of his scheme, then Cooley's not going anywhere and this conversation is moot.

Maybe someone with more time than I have can go back and look at Shanny's offense and see about what percentage his tight ends actually caught the ball. For instance, if wideouts made up anywhere from 60 to 70% of the passes caught, leaving 30 to 40% split between tight ends and running backs, then you might say that TEs aren't as vital to his offensive attack.

The other big thing you have to consider is whether incredible depth at tight end is more important that quality offensive linemen. If you had to choose between two really good TEs or some starting O-linemen, I'd choose the O-linemen.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

There is no need to slam the reset button with the current roster and "blow it up". Unless you can tell me that there will certainly be an Alexander Ovechkin at any position in the future drafts, the current strategy works better than the "BLOW IT UP!!!!" method. Fill up the roster with still-effective yet expendable and CHEAP veteran stopgaps while infusing talent via the draft in the future. McNabb makes sense because one, he's a scheme-fit, two, he's got experience in the WCO, and three, he's not done just yet.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

The OP seems to neglects some facts while stating that Shanahan is a terrible talent evaluator AND INHERITED great teams.

Elway never won a Superbowl until Shanny came there, and Shanny did not win a Superbowl his first year. It was TWO years later, so he had to build the pieces like offensive line and running back.

He also was the one who drafted Cutler. So he knows talent when he sees it.

He also jumped at the chance to grab McNabb, a Pro Bowl QB. Not a bad move for someone who cannot evaluate talent.

I totally disagree with you on your thoughts about Shanahan.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

[quote=Beemnseven;686679]No, no I'm not saying we [U]have[/U] cast aside young players with lots of potential; I'm saying that is often the choice which has to be made -- letting go of draft picks, (which would be the young, inexpensive players) in favor of free agent veterans. George Allen Sr. was famous for this.

In a way, tight end is one of those positions that you can get later in the draft, perhaps through undrafted free agency and incorporate in your offense without seeing much of a dropoff. Especially if the offense you run isn't so heavily reliant on TEs. Ideally, you want your wide receivers getting most of the catches and the yardage. [B][I]I can't really say for sure how heavily involved the TE is in Shanahan's offense.[/I][/B] But if Cooley makes up a significant facet of his scheme, then Cooley's not going anywhere and this conversation is moot.

Maybe someone with more time than I have can go back and look at Shanny's offense and see about what percentage his tight ends actually caught the ball. For instance, if wideouts made up anywhere from 60 to 70% of the passes caught, leaving 30 to 40% split between tight ends and running backs, then you might say that TEs aren't as vital to his offensive attack.

[B][I]The other big thing you have to consider is whether incredible depth at tight end is more important that quality offensive linemen. If you had to choose between two really good TEs or some starting O-linemen, I'd choose the O-linemen.[/I][/B][/quote]

Shannon Sharpe is going to the Pro Bowl one day as a result of Shanny's offense so yeah, I'd say it's TE friendly..

Why does everything that has to do with OL have to be an either or scenario? Is there a rule we can't have 2 really good TE AND quality starting and backup offensive linemen?

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

[quote=Paintrain;686743]Shannon Sharpe is going to the [B]Pro Bowl [/B]one day as a result of Shanny's offense so yeah, I'd say it's TE friendly..

Why does everything that has to do with OL have to be an either or scenario? Is there a rule we can't have 2 really good TE AND quality starting and backup offensive linemen?[/quote]

I think you ment Hall of Fame. Yes we are building for a SB.

HTTR.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

I absolutely believe we are on the right track. I think it is very possible to make the playoffs this year, and win a Super Bowl in 3 years. Now admittedly, I am counting on McNabb and Portis/Johnson/Parker to elevate everyone around them. But our receiving corps could be one of the league's best with Shanahan and McNabb. Our defense is still solid, and we have enough vets who should be hungry for success to buy-in to the program and exceed expectations. I feel confident they will address the remaining holes, and have a strong team in 2010 and beyond.

Re: building for a superbowl?
 

Of course we're building for a Super Bowl, maybe not this year, but in the near future.