Warpath

Warpath (http://www.thewarpath.net/forum.php)
-   Redskins Locker Room (http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-locker-room/)
-   -   Top Corner or Star Back: Bailey Makes It Clear (http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-locker-room/1484-top-corner-star-back-bailey-makes.html)

SmootSmack 06-09-2004 01:33 AM

Top Corner or Star Back: Bailey Makes It Clear
 
At first I was going to put this in the News Wire forum but thought this article might be good for some discussion:

[url]http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/story/7403302[/url]

itvnetop 06-09-2004 01:44 AM

I think the trade was good for both teams- it addressed weaknesses both had... considering we were gonna lose champ anyway, it's a coup that we were able to nab portis.

Redskins8588 06-09-2004 04:19 AM

I agree that it was a good trade for both teams, but if corner is such a needed position, then why didn't Denver give us Portis and there 2nd round pick?

MTK 06-09-2004 09:56 AM

How about we wait til the end of the season to see which player had the bigger impact before we judge this trade.

I think the trade will work out fine for both teams.

cpayne5 06-09-2004 10:05 AM

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]I think the trade will work out fine for both teams.[/QUOTE]

Couldn't agree more.

Norman_Einstein 06-09-2004 10:25 AM

"I think Champ is the best corner in the game," said one NFC personnel director. "But I'd go with the running back. I think you can control the game with a good back. Joe Gibbs will do that in Washington with Portis. So I give the edge to the back."

A running back can control the game because he has the ball. All you have to do is not throw towards the shutdown corner, and you have taken him out of the game (granted that is the objective)...but the bottom line is that Champ would have walked anyway. So if we said no to Denver about the 2nd round pick, they would have just got him via F/A. And we would have gotten nothing.

skins009 06-09-2004 11:16 AM

I still think it was a stupid trade on our part. A great cover corner is much harder to find than a good running back. Plus we throw in a second rounder which just makes the trade that much more stupid. We could have gotten a quality d-linemen with that pick.

Dave Butz Baby! 06-09-2004 11:30 AM

I disagree with the assessment that we "threw in" a second round pick. It sees to me that we essentially traded a second round for Portis. Bailey had one foot out the door. When we franchised him, there was no indication whatsoever from him that he would ever sign the tender or play a single down this season for us. There were grumblings that he was more than willing to ignore the tender and sit out the year to reemerge next year as a free agent.

To get Portis for a second round pick plus a player who more than likely would not have ever played another down for us again (and I don't care who it is at that point) is a coup. Especially a player who did not want to be here anymore.

We got the best of that trade, hands down.

RedskinRat 06-09-2004 01:01 PM

Agree with Dave Butz, he was gone regardless so they salvaged the best deal possible. I think that we'll see him struggle in Denver.

Portis will thrive in DC and everyone will forget about the 2nd round pick.

SmootSmack 06-09-2004 02:18 PM

Wasn't the second round pick necessary to make the salaries work? Anyway, no knock on Champ but in the grand scheme of things I think we did ok. We got a stud running back, replaced Champ with Shawn Springs (let's see if he can revert to the Springs of a couple of years ago) and besides Springs won't have to do as much as Champ had to if the rest of the defense steps up, which I think they will.

Don't want to be a conspiracy theorist here, but I might go so far as to say if not for Dan Snyder, people wouldn't be so quick to judge this trade. But it's another way to attack him for being too hasty.

Only time will tell what happens. I think the Broncos will love having Champ there but we won't be shedding any tears of sadness here in DC, only in tears of joy when Gibbs is holding the Lombardi trophy in February.

bedlamVR 06-10-2004 06:03 AM

The other thing is our secondary has been boosted by the selection of Taylor. There may be aslight drop off but Baily is not going to be a huge noticable diffierence. Look at the Eagles they have dropped both starting CB's so just how much is a CB worth?

joecrisp 06-10-2004 07:30 AM

[QUOTE=smootsmack]Wasn't the second round pick necessary to make the salaries work?[/QUOTE]
That was definitely part of it. Bailey had no contract, and it was going to take beaucoup bucks to sign him. Portis, on the other hand, had a very reasonable contract. Now, of course, Snyder signed Portis to a more lucrative deal after the fact, but that had no bearing on the deal he had to make with Denver to acquire Portis in the first place.

[QUOTE=smootsmack]Don't want to be a conspiracy theorist here, but I might go so far as to say if not for Dan Snyder, people wouldn't be so quick to judge this trade. But it's another way to attack him for being too hasty.[/QUOTE]
I don't think that's such a far-fetched theory, my friend. The Snyder Haters love to point to this deal as proof positive that Snyder has his head up his ass.

I think Dave Butz Baby made a great point: Snyder didn't [i]throw in[/i] a second rounder just to be "splashy" or "stupid"-- he gave up what was necessary to acquire a RB of Portis' caliber. I can't stress this enough-- Bailey was [i]not[/i] going to re-sign with Washington or play another down for the Redskins. He was, for all intents and purposes, no longer a Redskin the moment the Skins slapped the franchise tag on him. Nobody was going to surrender two first round picks for him, and the Skins couldn't afford to pay him the franchise tender anyway.

When you combine the money factor with the fact that Bailey would have walked anyway, it's clear the Redskins had to give up [i]something[/i] in order to acquire Portis. Considering Portis was originally a second rounder, and has proven himself to be a first-round talent, I don't think giving up a second rounder for him is overpaying.

MTK 06-10-2004 09:30 AM

Bottom line is Snyder did what he had to do to get the deal done. I highly doubt he tossed Bailey and the 2nd rounder on the bargaining table right off the bat.

On paper maybe we gave up a little too much. But does anyone seriously regret the deal? Would anyone have not made the deal if you were in Snyder's shoes?

You have a disgruntled star CB who wants out and he already turned down a fair offer and future negotiations do not look promising. You have a new head coach who loves to run the football and one of the top young RB's in the league is being dangled in front of you. What would you have done differently?

It was a ballsy deal that alot of owners/GM's would not have made.

Big C 06-10-2004 10:27 AM

last year was not bailey's best year either. i remember him getting beat on several occasions for big plays.Portis is 21/22, has alrady made the pro bowl. We got the upper hand on this deal.

memphisskin 06-10-2004 11:44 AM

I think it's a bit misleading to say you can find a running back easier than a cover corner. I think that the top corners usually pan out better than the top running backs, probably because there is less hype. I think Fred Smoot has turned out much better than say Willie Green up in Cleveland. It's not cut and dry, and for what we are trying to do here in DC, Portis will have more effect on our team this year than Bailey would. As much as I would love to have Bailey, I remember the Tom Knight era, the simple truth is that while Denver has a system they believe they can just plug anyone into (talk about hubris) we don't have to hope here in DC. We have a back in Portis who has run for 1500 yds and scored 15 tds to begin his career. I can't wait to see Portis running wild for us.

JoeRedskin 06-10-2004 02:06 PM

I think you can't just compare it positionally cb v. rb.

The league is filled with average running backs who can be quality starters and get the job done. In such cases, the RB's team can still be successful if other parts make up for the lack of a premier (top 5) back (New England anyone??). On the other hand, if your best cornerback is only average, he will be toasted fairly regularly. In such cases, the lack of a GOOD (say top 25%) corner can really set a team back.

BUT, if we are talking a top 5 player at each position, I think it is a no-brainer take the running back EVERY time. If you have a game breaker (like Portis) at RB, the defense is going to have to crowd down and put the ENTIRE secondary in one-on-one's. In those cases, your entire secondary better be well above average because, if not, the weak link will be exploited and won't get help. So your "shut down" corner takes out my number one receiver every play - fine, I got three other guys on every play to throw to and NONE of them are defended by a shut-down cover guy. Almost by definition, someone will be open and that premier corner will be chasing some other defenders' man into the endzone. The ONLY drawback is, as Champ pointed out, CB's generally last much longer than RB's (but, if the back is TRULY special, e.g. Emmitt, Walter, Riggins, etc. you will get 8-10 quality years).

With players of Champ's and Clinton's quality, Clinton is by far the bigger difference maker.

Prisco is a nimwit who loves to bring the hate for Danny Boy.

rickmmrr 06-10-2004 03:51 PM

Champ mentioned how organized and togetter Denver is compared to the Redskins. It's too bad he didn't stick around for the second coming of Joe Gibbs.

After hearing the players comments from the last 2 mini camps it's already a completely different redskins organization.

memphisskin 06-10-2004 05:27 PM

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]Bottom line is Snyder did what he had to do to get the deal done. I highly doubt he tossed Bailey and the 2nd rounder on the bargaining table right off the bat.

On paper maybe we gave up a little too much. But does anyone seriously regret the deal? Would anyone have not made the deal if you were in Snyder's shoes?

You have a disgruntled star CB who wants out and he already turned down a fair offer and future negotiations do not look promising. You have a new head coach who loves to run the football and one of the top young RB's in the league is being dangled in front of you. What would you have done differently?

It was a ballsy deal that alot of owners/GM's would not have made.[/QUOTE]

I agree it was ballsy, but I would not have made the deal on those terms. I would have been patient, we had Champ franchised and didn't have to move him so soon. I think if we had a real GM then we could have gotten Portis without throwing in the pick. I agree that it looks like the pick is no big deal right now, but what about 2 yrs from now when this team has to be dismantled and we don't have any young talent because we kept trading away our picks for players that we can no longer afford?

I love the Skins as much as anyone, and I don't doubt that Danny's heart is in the right place but he's about as fickle as a fourteen yr old girl. He loves Norv, no he doesn't, he loves Schottenheimer, no he doesn't cuz he really loves Spurrier, but actually he really loves Gibbs. I love the Gibbs move but Danny's "plan" is to just throw money around and hope something sticks. I think Danny would be the best owner in all of sports if he just admitted what he doesn't know, which is football. So please put me in the Danny basher pile and let's get it on!

MTK 06-10-2004 08:45 PM

Danny throws the $$ around but he also seems to have a pretty good grip on how to manage and plan around the cap, where is this "cap hell" we've been hearing about for years now?? Yeah I know Marty stepped in for one season and helped ease some of the cap burden but Snyder has been running the show since '00 now, that one season wasn't a cure all.

Snyder didn't get filthy rich by being stupid.

SKINSnCANES 06-10-2004 09:09 PM

Snyder makes more money with the Skins than any other team in the leauge, and by a good margin. We have freaking commericals during the game on teh jumbo trons, and wehre isnt their advertising?? Id rather have an owner that spends the money to try and win then the guy that wants to have 20 million in cap room each year and try to win with no names. (besides, for all us madden fans Snyder is the man at getting talent on the team)

azskinsfan2 06-10-2004 09:32 PM

I really think we came out the best in this deal. I hated to lose Champ but Springs is coming in wanting to show that he can replace Champ so he'll go all out. Smoot is on the other side so we should be set at CB. We had no running game last year and Portis will definitely correct that, especially with the O'line looking so good now. I think Champ will regret changing teams when he did. Coach Gibbs and his staff will get us back to the Super Bowl. I don't see Denver getting there anytime soon!!!!

memphisskin 06-11-2004 11:36 AM

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]Danny throws the $$ around but he also seems to have a pretty good grip on how to manage and plan around the cap, where is this "cap hell" we've been hearing about for years now?? Yeah I know Marty stepped in for one season and helped ease some of the cap burden but Snyder has been running the show since '00 now, that one season wasn't a cure all.

Snyder didn't get filthy rich by being stupid.[/QUOTE]

You cannot run from the salaray cap and you cannot give away $7 million dollar signing bonuses like souvenir pens. You've got LaVar, Portis, Brunell, Coles, Randy Thomas, Trotter, Springs, Washington, Jansen, Griffin, Taylor is coming up. Didn't someone post the salary cap numbers for the Skins somewhere, you can't keep deferring money to everyone because at some point it all comes due. What Snyder is banking on is that he can win a SB before that happens, because at some point he'll have to cut most of these guys.

I love having an owner that will go out and get players, but every offseason it's us throwing dollars at free agents like Michael Irvin in Scores.

Please don't use the words Snyder and "plan and manage" in the same sentence. He is a very shrewd businessman, witness how profitable he's made the franchise, and he does pump that money into the team rather than his pockets, but I'm a football fan and there has been little rhyme or reason to any of his moves since 2000. If there was, why have we had five coaches in five seasons? What kind of plan is that?

MTK 06-11-2004 11:53 AM

Do you think Danny and Vinny have no idea what they are doing with the cap? Do you think they don't understand the financial implications in the upcoming years?? I mean c'mon let's get serious, they're not running this franchise blind.

Every team has to deal with the cap and every team runs into trouble from time to time, the Skins are no exception. But to say that the Skins are any worse off than anybody else just isn't true. Despite the claim that the Skins are headed into 'cap hell', I find it funny that every offseason there are a handful of teams in much worse shape than we are.

Seems to me that someone in the FO must have an idea of what's going on.

Big C 06-11-2004 11:55 AM

would you rather have the cardinals owner where he doesnt give a damn? or a guy who at least wants to see his team win. i give snyder credit for wanting to win, and i understand ppl want him more hands off, but he is doing what he thinks is best for the team to win, i guarauntee hed take a super bowl over making 2 times the expected profit in a year

memphisskin 06-11-2004 12:42 PM

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]Do you think Danny and Vinny have no idea what they are doing with the cap? Do you think they don't understand the financial implications in the upcoming years?? I mean c'mon let's get serious, they're not running this franchise blind.


Seems to me that someone in the FO must have an idea of what's going on.[/QUOTE]

Not to me. We are the jokes of the NFL, the Summer Super Bowl winners four years running. Look at where we were when Snyder took over, in the playoffs and last year we were 5-11 and lucky to be that. And who is left from that team, just four seasons ago? Jansen? And the sad part is that if we win a SB or not, in three years it'll be the same story. And our FO has a plan? I'm not going to pretend that VC and DS know what they are doing because it's quite obvious that they don't. What else can explain the downward slope we've taken on the field? You can say they've had plans, but not a plan. If they win a SB, DS will grab the trophy and go Frank Sinatra on us, singning "I did it my way!"

I see a FO that doesn't have a clue. I see the 49ers all over again, only without all the success, at least so far. I love Gibbs coming back, I love Portis, I love Coles and I think Randy Thomas was a great pickup, but four moves in five years? That's a FO that knows what it's doing?

MTK 06-11-2004 12:47 PM

I'm talking strictly about the cap and the FO's management of it, I'm not talking about their plan in regard to coaches, players, etc.

memphisskin 06-11-2004 02:27 PM

OK, and you're right, today we're about 4 mil under the cap and the FO has a plan to win the SB in three years and break up the team. Great plan, if it works, but um if it doesn't is it worth it?

SKINSnCANES 06-11-2004 02:30 PM

well part of the plan now is for Gibbs to instil what it means to be a true, or core redskins. So that in three years everyone is more than willing to redo their contract so they can stay a redskins. Kinda a scandal but id do it to play under Gibbs.

MTK 06-11-2004 03:05 PM

If it doesn't work then oh well, at least they gave it a good shot. Then it's back to the drawing board to give it another go, just like every other team does.

joecrisp 06-11-2004 03:37 PM

The Skins were losers for six years before Snyder took over. The fact that they went to the playoffs in '99 is more a reflection of the fact that Snyder lit a fire under Turner's ass than any kind of indication that things were actually headed in the right direction prior to Snyder's purchase of the team. This team was listless and directionless prior to Snyder's purchase. After Snyder bought the team, there still didn't seem to be a clear plan, other than throwing a lot of money at aging, big-name veterans. Snyder made a fool of himself by taking a devil-may-care attitude towards the salary cap, and he will probably never shake the "careless spender" label.

While on the surface it may appear that Snyder hasn't learned anything, and he will never change, his tactics have been refined somewhat since that nightmare 2000 spending spree. He still spends lots of money on free agents, but more often than not, he spends that money on younger players with upside. Yes, there have been disasters, but every team has them. Despite what the Snyder-bashing members of the media would have you believe, the Redskins are not the only team that has had their share of free agency busts.

And I wouldn't be so quick to write-off the second Gibbs era as another "three-year plan". The Redskins might not be as bad off versus the future cap as some might think. Yes, there are some deals that will need to be re-done-- there always will be. And once again, name me a team that doesn't have to re-work players' contracts to stay under the cap. But the fact is, the salary cap is set to increase considerably when the new TV deal is signed sometime in January-February of 2005, and that will likely give the Redskins the breathing room they need to avoid making major roster changes three years from now. Sure, there might be a few overpaid players cut like there are every year, but more than likely, the "core Redskin" players-- the players worth keeping-- will be with this team through Gibbs' entire tenure, if not longer.

Dave Butz Baby! 06-11-2004 03:43 PM

Once again our man JoeCrisp throws logic and realism into the debate.

For which I am glad! Gives me a chance to make a cheesy comment about it and get one post closer to being Post-Blue_Beanie!

C'mon.. 26 more to go....

;)

saden1 06-11-2004 03:44 PM

"You can say what you want, but turn on the film and watch me," he said. "You will see you have a cornerback who can cover any receiver on any team. You call it what you want. It's all about production. Am I the best corner? Yeah. I'm consistent. I don't think there's one thing about me that stands out. I can tackle, I can cover one-on-one better than anyone else. I think I am the best."


Someone has become cocky. In all the years he has been here in Washington I have never heard Champ speak like this. More power to you Champ.

SmootSmack 06-11-2004 03:56 PM

Check out Pasquarelli's column today on "dead money" players and you can see that many teams have salary issues

[url]http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=1820043[/url]

memphisskin 06-11-2004 06:00 PM

[QUOTE=joecrisp]The Skins were losers for six years before Snyder took over. The fact that they went to the playoffs in '99 is more a reflection of the fact that Snyder lit a fire under Turner's ass than any kind of indication that things were actually headed in the right direction prior to Snyder's purchase of the team. This team was listless and directionless prior to Snyder's purchase. After Snyder bought the team, there still didn't seem to be a clear plan, other than throwing a lot of money at aging, big-name veterans. Snyder made a fool of himself by taking a devil-may-care attitude towards the salary cap, and he will probably never shake the "careless spender" label.

While on the surface it may appear that Snyder hasn't learned anything, and he will never change, his tactics have been refined somewhat since that nightmare 2000 spending spree. He still spends lots of money on free agents, but more often than not, he spends that money on younger players with upside. Yes, there have been disasters, but every team has them. Despite what the Snyder-bashing members of the media would have you believe, the Redskins are not the only team that has had their share of free agency busts.

[/QUOTE]

First, '99 Snyder was pretty much hands off, he didn't start lighting fires until 2000 and look how well that panned out. We may have been losers for six years before Snyder but we've been losers for five years with him too so he does not escape blame.

In today's NFL you cannot spend recklessly with no repercussions. Sorry if this is a news flash, but it's going to cost us some very popular and productive players in the near future. Every team has had some busts, but not the $7 mil busts that we've had year after year after year. And it's frustrating, because every year I believe, even more so this year, only to get my heart broken in the fall.

I'm just saying that Snyder has announced every friggin move as "his move", and every year we've slid further and further away from contention. We were 5-11 and while some of it was Spurrier's fault, who hired him? Who fired Norv, and who placed Norv in a situation in which he was virtually guaranteed to fail. Snyder is a great owner, at times, but he's also impatient, impetuous, and not completely innocent of the trouble the Skins are currently in.

SmootSmack 06-11-2004 06:35 PM

Snyder shouldn't be absolved of blame entirely for the past several years of the Redskins, but you can't deny that his approach has changed for the better. Until the Redskins win a Super Bowl or at least make the playoffs, Snyder will not be forgiven for the 2000 debacle and maybe not even then. And that's a shame. Clearly that was a team that was built for the moment and not for the future. Imagine though, how different it would have been if Davis hadn't fumbled in the end zone against the Cardinals and the Skins hadn't missed an extra point in that game. Or if Eddie Murray hadn't missed potential game winning field goals in back to back games against division opponents? Anyhow, since then Snyder has continued to spend money, but he's done it primarily on rising stars like Coles, Portis, and Washington or to lock up key Redskins like Arrington and Jansen. And there shouldn't be many more missed extra points with John Hall around.

As for the coaches, everyone kept saying Snyder had to go and get a football guy to run things. So he got Marty. Unfortunately, Schottenheimer alienated some key Redskins (i.e. Darrell Green) and had to go. And as for Spurrier, let's not act like we were the only team going after Spurrier. The Bucs and I believe the Saints were after him as well.

Now it's come full circle back to Gibbs. To me that is a huge sign that Snyder isn't about getting the credit but about winning. How many of you really believe that anybody would give any credit to Snyder if the Redskins win the Super Bowl?

joecrisp 06-11-2004 07:25 PM

I didn't say Snyder is free of any blame for the past five years-- he's learned some very hard lessons in that time, and most of them are his own fault. I'm just saying that the team he purchased wasn't exactly the model of success and consistency. Turner knew that new ownership would spell the end of the road for him unless he produced a playoff-caliber team, and Snyder permitted him to prove he could do that. After the '99 playoff season, many around the league suspected that the Skins were only a few key players away from being Super Bowl contenders, so Snyder tried to go out and buy those few pieces to complete Turner's championship puzzle. Keep in mind, there were a lot of people-- not just Skins fans-- that projected the Skins would indeed win the Super Bowl in 2000, after Snyder went on his now infamous and record-setting spending spree. When things started to go sour, Snyder was clearly upset that his enormous investment wasn't paying off in the win column, and he had a right to be. Turner's team-- much like Spurrier's future Redskins team-- lacked discipline and accountability, and that was ultimately their downfall. That was Norv Turner's prerogative.

So what does Snyder do? He hires one of the most discipline-oriented coaches in the league, hoping that Schottenheimer would instill the discipline and work ethic that Turner's team had lacked. He gave Schottenheimer the power and latitude that he had been criticized for denying to Turner. The vets chafed under Marty's iron-fisted approach, and Schottenheimer's unimaginitive gameplans put fans to sleep. That was Marty Schottenheimer's prerogative.

Spurrier makes himself available, and Snyder seizes the opportunity to hire one of college football's most legendary and creative offensive minds. Spurrier says he just wants to coach football, and leave the personnel decisions to the Front Office. One problem-- the team had been built around Schottenheimer's 3-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust philosophy. So the next year, Snyder goes out and obtains the weapons Spurrier needs to run his high-flying offense, using some very creative, if unorthodox, methods to do so. Spurrier fails-- due to a lack of team discipline, an inexperienced coaching staff, poor gameplanning, and even poorer execution on the field. Spurrier concedes his own failure, and walks away. That was Steve Spurrier's prerogative.

Finally, the moment all Redskins fans-- including Dan Snyder-- had been waiting 12 years for: Joe Gibbs decides it's time to coach the Redskins again. Snyder not only makes him the highest paid coach in the history of the league-- he also names him Team President, and gives him final say on all personnel decisions. Snyder gives Gibbs the carte blanche to pay whatever salaries are necessary to obtain the most experienced and knowledgeable assistant coaches available. Gibbs' staff assembles a wish-list of free agents and trade targets, and Snyder promptly goes out and gets them. Not once does Snyder claim ownership of any of the acquisitions as "his moves". Gibbs makes it clear to all who will listen that whatever decisions are made are made "as a team"-- Gibbs and the coaching staff huddling with Cerrato and the scouting staff, evaluating the talent available, and subsequently handing the prioritized shopping list to Snyder.

One potential problem: doom and gloom has been forecast for the Skins in terms of the future cap situation. Supposedly, Snyder-- a self-made multi-millionaire-- isn't smart enough to figure out that backloaded contracts eventually lead to future salary cap woes. Supposedly, he will have to dismantle Gibbs' Redskins after three years. Of course, that theory assumes that the salary cap continues to increase at a constant rate-- which would not accomodate contract structures whose inflation exceeds that rate. In reality, the salary cap is set to expand by an unprecedented margin when the new television contracts are negotiated next year. Will this provide enough cushion to completely negate the inflation of the contracts Snyder has recently signed? Maybe not-- but it will certainly leave the Skins in much better shape than many casual observers expect. If there's one thing Dan Snyder is not, it's a casual observer. Perhaps that's not such a bad thing after all.

memphisskin 06-14-2004 12:26 PM

Joe, I respect your opinon of Snyder but I have one as well.

I think the '00 team would have been better served if Snyder didn't undermine training camp by turning it into a moneymaking enterprise under the guise of "bringing it to the fans." It was what it was, a way for Snyder to make money. It wasn't particularly profitable, and it completely trashed our season by placing even more focus on Norv who was noticeably uncomfortable in the spotlight. So out goes Norv and his undisciplined ways, but were those ways so undisciplined when we were a botched field goal from the NFC championship? Let's agree to disagree on Norv.

So in the press conference announcing Schottenheimer Dan Snyder says "This is my stamp on the Washington Redskins." Schottenheimer immediately turns off Bruce Smith with Oklahoma drills and then dresses down the most popular Skin by telling him his technique stinks. I guess Snyder is the only one with intelligence, because Schottenheimer could not possibly know what he was doing. I agree the DG thing was classless, but was he right? Could Schottenheimer possibly have a motive of telling his two young cornerbacks that they could not follow DG's style because it was predicated on his rare speed and closing ability? Just a thought, and Schottenheimer didn't have to endear himself to anyone because A) he's the coach and B) he's the "owner's guy". Well Jeff George soon proves that he's not the answer, ducking an invisible rush and showing no heart so MS has to put in Tony Banks who's fresh off being cut in Dallas. There can be no passing game because Banks barely knows the plays, so everything is shrunk in half and Davis becomes the focal point. We go 8-8, finishing strong when the team stops fighting the coach and buys into his system.

Spurrier is Spurrier, he begins his NFL tenure by saying that he's going to do things his way. This is music to Snyder's ears because this is exactly what he's been doing since he bought the team. However, SS also begins by ridiculing the work ethic of Jim Haslett, which should have been the signal to all Skins fans that this wasn't going to work out. While Gibbs placed a cot in his office, SS placed his golf clubs. By suggesting that he could outsmart rather than outwork the other coaches, SS placed a bullseye on his back that every hard working coach would go out of their way to nail. And Snyder couldn't gauge this in his exhaustive interview process? But this was his guy.

So now Snyder brings in Gibbs. A great move, a bit unimaginative, but a great move because Gibbs won't just outsmart you, he'll outwork you too. Gibbs brought those four SB trips and three trophies, and if Vermeil and Parcells can come back and be successful then so can Gibbs.

There is no gloom and doom regarding the Skins cap future. There is but one fact. When you sign free agents to big money deals with big signing bonuses, at some point that money has to show up. It's already beginning to show up, witness Arrington's new deal last year to bring down his cap number and the unsuccessful attempt to get Samuels to renegotiate. Now I applaud Snyder's business sense and these revenue streams allow him the cash flow to constantly give out these large signing bonuses. But the new tv contract might not be as large as you think. But I saw what happened in Dallas and San Francisco and the fact is it will happen here in Washington. The gloom and doom that the journalists predict, Snyder and Cerrato have said that it is coming here as well. It is Snyder who has said that this team has a three year window, probably two now.

Can this team compete for a championship, I surely hope so because I'm starving for a competitive team. Can this FO do what other's have not been able to, and beat the salary cap, well that I'm not so sure about.

Hogskin 06-14-2004 01:03 PM

Excellent post, Joe. I agree 100%. And I would add that the doom-and-gloomers (Sportsline's Prisco, a couple other writers, and some of the folks here), are greatly underestimating Snyder's team. The same warning comments were made about 2-3 years down the road after his FIRST massive round of free agent signings. Well that time has come and gone, and he is still signing like crazy. And will be 2-3 years from now. Several of the contracts will be renegotiated. And the guys that balk at that (like Bailey did) will be used to bring in other top talent. There are 3-4 owners in the NFL that have figured out this mode of operating in the cap structure. We Redskin fans are very fortunate that Snyder is one of them.

Defensewins 06-14-2004 02:31 PM

[QUOTE=Hogskin]...... There are 3-4 owners in the NFL that have figured out this mode of operating in the cap structure. We Redskin fans are very fortunate that Snyder is one of them.[/QUOTE]

Hogskin
I have to respectfully disagree with you.
Would that be '3-4 owners including Snyder' that have figured out how to spend a ton of money and field a losing team? Because that is the NFL Owners model Snyder has created. Other than one season we were in the playoffs under coach Norv, the Redskins have been frustratingly bad. I do not feel lucky since Snyder has taken over as owner.
I would describe Snyder's owner/management style as trial by error.
First he tries to buy a championship and fails. So he then tries a more toned down system of spending valuable draft picks on restricted FA's. The jury is still out on that one.....

I think the N.E. Patriots have created a better model for an NFL owner to follow. They have won two of the last three Super bowls by spending cautiously. They continue to stock pile their team with more and more talent through the NFL draft. They also purchase free agents but they go the cheap free agent route.
They get inexpensive FA's, which is opposite of Snyder's philosophy.

Man, did this thread get off topic!

Hogskin 06-14-2004 03:06 PM

[QUOTE=Defensewins]Would that be '3-4 owners including Snyder' that have figured out how to spend a ton of money and field a losing team? Because that is the NFL Owners model Snyder has created.[/QUOTE]

Defense, I'm sure disappointed to see how down you are on our team and the entire organization. I think Snyder is an excellent owner. Please, if you are going to quote me in the future, do not totally twist the meaning of my words. I specifically referred to Snyder's command of the NFL cap system. Obviously, you have joined with the uninformed group of writers who do not understand the cap strategy employed by the Redskins, Patriots, Broncos, and maybe one or two others. It works, as you will see. Current evidence is the "wild spending" going on this year after the "experts" predicted 3-4 years ago we would be in "cap hell" in 2-3 years.

Now, I did not say I liked everything Dan Snyder has done. Obviously, it has not yet worked. But his biggest (BY FAR) mistake was in selecting head coaches - first sticking with a proven below-average head coach in Turner, then with Marty, while trying to bring some discipline, then with an extremely disappointing attempt with a proven college winner. No, he has not done well in that department, UNTIL NOW. No one is accusing him of blowing it with his latest coaching choice. And even many experts over the past few seasons felt the player signings were very positive.

SO, bottom line - I'm damn glad to have Snyder as an owner. And from posts in other threads, I believe the great majority of guys on this site agree. You will be joining us when he brings us the SB win after this or next season. ALL of the fair weather fans will return to the fold then...


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:00 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.

Page generated in 0.03216 seconds with 8 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