Re: The Shanaplan Gets Accelerated
 

I don't understand this thread. The "Shanaplan" if there was/is one has been derailed because of the QB situation. Hell I just read a long sports article on Yahoo sports discussing this. The plan is "hoping to hell" Beck is a diamond in the rough, or we try and pick a franchise QB next year.

If we're focusing more on the offense (in this thread) I would say the most important dynamic right now is whether this group is developing an identity. Some argue Kyle's scheme will work when we get the right pieces, whenever it happens. I think waiting around to draft the right fit QB and WRs is absurd. Fit the scheme to the roster or get the eff out.

Re: The Shanaplan Gets Accelerated
 

[quote=The Goat;852822]I don't understand this thread. The "Shanaplan" if there was/is one has been derailed because of the QB situation. Hell I just read a long sports article on Yahoo sports discussing this. The plan is "hoping to hell" Beck is a diamond in the rough, or we try and pick a franchise QB next year.

If we're focusing more on the offense (in this thread) I would say the most important dynamic right now is whether this group is developing an identity. Some argue Kyle's scheme will work when we get the right pieces, whenever it happens. [B] I think waiting around to draft the right fit QB and WRs is absurd. Fit the scheme to the roster or get the eff out.[/B][/quote]

Great point, but I do think there is a method to the madness. I do see the implementation of a scheme going on here. I think there is certainly a lack of playmakers on offense, but, if you look at the strides the defense has made between last and this year, I believe that a similar process is taking place. It's the NFL though, and not a lab. In other words, it's not an exact science.

Re: The Shanaplan Gets Accelerated
 

[quote=Paintrain;852663]After the 2010 debacle that was McNabb/Haynesworth, etc. it was pretty clear that the Shanahan era was going to be a longer evolution. Last offseason was primarily built around remaking the defense to be younger, faster and stronger while trying to get by on offense with minor improvements thru the draft. Now however we are going to see what the team has at key offensive positions..

QB-Beck has basically 3/4 of a season to determine his future as a Redskin and our decision in the 1st round of the 2012 draft. Best case is that he develops into a slightly above average QB that's capable of putting up good numbers and leading the team to a some wins (a la Matt Schaub) or he becomes a career backup, maybe holding the position for 2012 while a rookie learns behind him.

RB-I'm somewhat surprised that Royster wasn't added from the PS with Hightower going down but I think Tim may have been one and done anyways as a Redskin. Now, Torrain and Helu will get more time and we can either see if they are a legit one two punch or if either of them distinguishes himself as the feature back.

WR-While Moss signed a 3 year deal when the lockout ended, he may have one more year after this one as a serviceable WR. With his injury and the continued mediocrity of Armstrong & Stallworth, Niles Paul and Hankerson have a chance to make an impact and show an indication if they can be reliable options in the passing game. Come week 12-17, if they are not active and in the rotation on a consistent basis, that's cause for concern.

OL-I don't think Erik Cook was ever supposed to be more than a depth player but with him being the starting center for the foreseeable future, Shanny and Forester can determine if he is a quality backup, potential starter or just someone else on the 53.

I am by no means throwing in the towel and saying 'play the kids' but by circumstance we should have a much better read on the near term future state of our team in the coming weeks and months.[/quote]


Well said...

Why do you think Hightower was "one-and-done" even before the injury? I never got that sense...

What happens if after weeks 12-17 that Paul and Hankerson show that they have mediocrity written all over them? [Don't know about Paul but that sure looks like the right label for Hankerson as of this moment...]

Re: The Shanaplan Gets Accelerated
 

[quote=The Goat;852822]I don't understand this thread. The "Shanaplan" if there was/is one has been derailed because of the QB situation. Hell I just read a long sports article on Yahoo sports discussing this. The plan is "hoping to hell" Beck is a diamond in the rough, or we try and pick a franchise QB next year.

If we're focusing more on the offense (in this thread) I would say the most important dynamic right now is whether this group is developing an identity. Some argue Kyle's scheme will work when we get the right pieces, whenever it happens. I think waiting around to draft the right fit QB and WRs is absurd. Fit the scheme to the roster or get the eff out.[/quote]

There is no need to "hope" John Beck is our franchise QB. If he fails, then Shanahan will leave him as the stopgap or backup until he finds his next Jay Cutler.

It's not Kyle's scheme that's necessarily a misfit, it's more the play selection syntax.

Re: The Shanaplan Gets Accelerated
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;852831]There is no need to "hope" John Beck is our franchise QB. If he fails, then Shanahan will leave him as the stopgap or backup until he finds his next Jay Cutler.

It's not Kyle's scheme that's necessarily a misfit, it's more the play selection syntax.[/quote]

I need an explanation here...

It is Kyle's scheme and Kyle's offensive game planning and Kyle's play calling. Are you saying that Kyle devises a great game plan/scheme and then screws up his great scheme with mediocre play calling?

If that is the case then he is a lot worse than merely an incompetent boob who got his job only because his Daddy is the boss...

Re: The Shanaplan Gets Accelerated
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;852833]I need an explanation here...

It is Kyle's scheme and Kyle's offensive game planning and Kyle's play calling. Are you saying that Kyle devises a great game plan/scheme and then screws up his great scheme with mediocre play calling?

If that is the case then he is a lot worse than merely an incompetent boob who got his job only because his Daddy is the boss...[/quote]

The scheme are the plays they have in their arsenal. Kyle's scheme is bad if plays are poorly designed regardless of the result. I doubt that is the case since every QB in his system has never had trouble going on pace for 4000 yards.

But Kyle seems to be uncomfortable in conforming to what Daddy wishes. He prefers passing over running, and when he tries to commit to the run, it's always a stretch variant and the syntax is often run-run-pass punt.

Re: The Shanaplan Gets Accelerated
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;852829]Well said...

Why do you think Hightower was "one-and-done" even before the injury? I never got that sense...

What happens if after weeks 12-17 that Paul and Hankerson show that they have mediocrity written all over them? [Don't know about Paul but that sure looks like the right label for Hankerson as of this moment...][/quote]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti Hightower by any stretch but I think the way Shanahan churns backs until he finds the 'one' made it likely that Hightower wasn't a long term solution. He brings a strong presence to the locker room and a good mix of power and speed plus he's great in pass pro but he didn't show in the regular season as well as he did in preseason. He could be back and I'm sure welcomed but with this being a contract year, it sucks he got hurt.

If Paul and Hankerson don't 'flash' as the season goes on it makes sense that we will be trying harder to get a veteran playmaker via trade or free agency and/or drafting a WR in the top 2 rounds next year. I think an NFL team can get by with a decent WR corp if there is one guy that defenses have to account for. Right now, it appears we don't have that guy on the roster but if one of them becomes that guy then we can allocate early resources elsewhere. They don't have to become stars, one of them needs to just show they can be a threat to defenses on a weekly basis.

[quote=The Goat]I don't understand this thread.[B] The "Shanaplan" if there was/is one has been derailed because of the QB situation.[/B] Hell I just read a long sports article on Yahoo sports discussing this. The plan is "hoping to hell" Beck is a diamond in the rough, or we try and pick a franchise QB next year.

If we're focusing more on the offense (in this thread) I would say the most important dynamic right now is whether this group is developing an identity. Some argue Kyle's scheme will work when we get the right pieces, whenever it happens. I think waiting around to draft the right fit QB and WRs is absurd. Fit the scheme to the roster or get the eff out.[/quote]
I disagree. The Shanaplan was to build a TEAM for the long term, not a 2 year fix.. The defense is about 70% built to the way he wants it. I'm sure he wants another strong MLB (McIntosh is playing well but isn't a difference maker), a deeper secondary and a thumper at DE. It's clear the 2011 plan was fix the defense and see what Rex/Beck can do at QB.

Now, the 2012 plan has to focus on the offense in order to truly compete in 2013 (year 4 of his contract). There was one perfect fit QB in the 2011 draft, that was Newton. There was one perfect fit QB in the 2010 draft, that was Bradford. We didn't have a chance for either so rather than try the veteran route again or reach for a QB they didn't like, they rolled with what they had. Low cost, no risk, all potential reward. Now, if Beck turns out to be mediocre, there are no assets invested long term and full focus can be given to the position.

I am firmly in the camp that Kyle's scheme will work with the right pieces. So much so that I'm convinced he will eventually be Mike's successor-but that's another thread. If Hankerson or Paul turns into the playmaking WR they need then that's one big piece. If not, expect a ton of resources to be focused next offseason on the passing game.

Re: The Shanaplan Gets Accelerated
 

[quote=calia;852799]For all the talk that the Redskins cannot turn things around in a year (and that we need more like four), while I might be inclined to think a year is unrealistic, four seems indulgent. [B]Look at the vastly improved Lions, Bills, and Raiders this season (heck, even the Bengals look decent). Granted, all three have been drafting a few players upon which to build a foundation for a few years, but so have we (e.g., Orakpo, Williams, Davis) -- just not enough of them. But these are each franchises that have been bottom dwellers for a long, long time. Why can't we seem to climb out of the cellar for anything other than a brief period when Gibbs II was here (for 2 of the 4 years)?[/B]

I think part is the competition of the NFC East. While the teams may not be the forces they were in teh 1980s and 1990s, it's still a smashmouth division and the Giants, Eagles, and Cowboys have each had better success than we have had. Part is clearly a decade of Cerrato -- whom I dislike perhaps more than Randy White, Michael Irvin, and some of my other favorite Cowboys to hate. Cerrato did more damage to us than any opposing team, player or coach ever did. But even this doesn't seem to explain why it is that our team has been just so flat out disappointing since about 1992.

I really, really hope BA and MS can turn it around. And maybe these young guys stepping up and playing well will be the first real signs of it.[/quote]

Truly? It's because we hadn't sucked enough.. Staying the 4-7 win range for the past 5 years has put us just outside of striking distance for a Suh, Megatron or a top QB. We needed a good old fashioned 1-15 stinker to get one of them.

I know it's unpopular to say this but I've said it before. Gibbs II set this franchise back a LONG time. The decisions made during that era and the resulting decisions from it (examples: not re-signing Smoot therefore having to draft Rogers instead of Ware, trading for Brunell instead of playing it out one season with Ramsey then trading picks for Campbell and as a result not trying to sign Brees, etc, etc, etc) are what pushed us to the edge, Vinny launched us over the cliff. The fact we went to the playoffs twice under him is a testament to what an amazing coach and leader he is but his personnel skills are a molten pile of feces.

Re: The Shanaplan Gets Accelerated
 

[quote=Paintrain;852993]Truly? It's because we hadn't sucked enough.. Staying the 4-7 win range for the past 5 years has put us just outside of striking distance for a Suh, Megatron or a top QB. We needed a good old fashioned 1-15 stinker to get one of them.

I know it's unpopular to say this but I've said it before. Gibbs II set this franchise back a LONG time. The decisions made during that era and the resulting decisions from it (examples: not re-signing Smoot therefore having to draft Rogers instead of Ware, trading for Brunell instead of playing it out one season with Ramsey then trading picks for Campbell and as a result not trying to sign Brees, etc, etc, etc) are what pushed us to the edge, Vinny launched us over the cliff. The fact we went to the playoffs twice under him is a testament to what an amazing coach and leader he is but his personnel skills are a molten pile of feces.[/quote]Franchises are only set back as long as they keep on doing stupid moves. Any franchise can turn it around in 3 years if they draft well and use FA judiciously, even that team that picked JaMarcus Russell. We are in year 1 of finally waking up and smelling the smelling salts. Had we woken up earlier, the turnaround would have already occured.

Re: The Shanaplan Gets Accelerated
 

I think we have players that will step up. Autsin and Armstrong need to trust them. I agree with others let's use Banks as WR sometimes.

All hail zero coverage.