My evaluation of Shanahan starts now

JoeRedskin · 09-04-2012, 12:56 PM

Shanahan told Danny it would take 5 years to reboot the franchise. I am pretty much in agreement with that concept. I don't give Shanahan a "pass" for his first two years but I, as Matty said, sometimes you gotta step back. He gutted his original roster and completely changed the franchise's approach to roster building. Along the way, quality players have been let go and other acquisitions have not lived up to expectations. At the same time, I believe that the foundation for long term winning may have been laid.

For me, this is the year for Shanahan to really show "the step forward". I am hopeful that it is. Between our schedule, division and rookie QB, however, I think double digit wins would be too much to ask. 8-8, 9-7, on the other hand seems attainable.

44 goes 50 gut · 09-04-2012, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 30gut

Lol, you mad huh?
Your perception of the events around Jason Campbell are skewed beyond belief.

-HTTR

Last I'll say on the matter because no one else wants to read an off topic derail about Campbell: I know its hard for Campbell fans to admit they were wrong but He's a backup in a league where Kolb and Skelton are competing for a starting spot.

If that doesn't clue you I don't know what else to say...

mredskins · 09-04-2012, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 44 goes 50 gut

Last I'll say on the matter because no one else wants to read an off topic derail about Campbell: I know its hard for Campbell fans to admit they were wrong but He's a backup in a league where Kolb and Skelton are competing for a starting spot.

If that doesn't clue you I don't know what else to say...

That is really not a fair statement CHI has a better QB situation then AZ. I am fairly positive JC would start over Kolb and/or Skelton if he played on AZ.

JoeRedskin · 09-04-2012, 03:02 PM

Campbell will never be more than a mediocre QB - whether as a starter or back-up. IMHO - Shanny saw that pretty quickly and hoped for better with McNabb. Unfortunately, McNabb turned out to be not even mediocre which set us back substantially. Shanallen should have recognized it but didn't. Regardless, we would still need a QB coming into this draft. Bottom line, whatever took us to getting a guy like RG3, I am incredibly happy where we have ended it up.

Past failed QB's are like former girlfriends you break it off with - you had some laughs, you learn some stuff, and maybe keep some pleasant memories, but, ultimately, when the right one comes along, you just don't care about them.

RGIII is here. I just don't care about those who went before.

NYCskinfan82 · 09-04-2012, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Campbell will never be more than a mediocre QB - whether as a starter or back-up. IMHO - Shanny saw that pretty quickly and hoped for better with McNabb. Unfortunately, McNabb turned out to be not even mediocre which set us back substantially. Shanallen should have recognized it but didn't. Regardless, we would still need a QB coming into this draft. Bottom line, whatever took us to getting a guy like RG3, I am incredibly happy where we have ended it up.

Past failed QB's are like former girlfriends you break it off with - you had some laughs, you learn some stuff, and maybe keep some pleasant memories, but, ultimately, when the right one comes along, you just don't care about them.

RGIII is here. I just don't care about those who went before.

Well said.

30gut · 09-04-2012, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 44 goes 50 gut

Last I'll say on the matter because no one else wants to read an off topic derail about Campbell.

Then don't belly aching over him, lol

HailGreen28 · 09-04-2012, 05:15 PM

So are we going to the regular season with one fullback?

los panda · 09-04-2012, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

So are we going to the regular season with one fullback?

you bet your boots we are.

did we keep a backup for sellers?

NYCskinfan82 · 09-04-2012, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

So are we going to the regular season with one fullback?

If I had to guess, I figure they will put Paul there occasionally.

SmootSmack · 09-04-2012, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYCskinfan82

If I had to guess, I figure they will put Paul there occasionally.

Royster

NYCskinfan82 · 09-04-2012, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Royster

Thx ment Royster keys on keyboard keep sticking.

mbedner3420 · 09-04-2012, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYCskinfan82

Thx ment Royster keys on keyboard keep sticking.

Hahaha I've got to remember to use that line from now on.

HailGreen28 · 09-04-2012, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbedner3420

Hahaha I've got to remember to use that line from now on.

Cheers to NYCSkinfan - That line reminds me of this dialogue:

Dr. Horrible (trying to please Penny): I wanna do great things, you know? I wanna be an achiever, like Bad Horse.

Penny (shocked): The Thoroughbred of Sin?

Dr. Horrible: I meant Ghandi.

GTripp0012 · 09-04-2012, 09:55 PM

I'm rejecting the "worst roster ever" argument because Shanahan thought he was inheriting a winning, though underachieving team when he took the job. He could have taken a lot of different jobs that weren't the Redskins, but ultimately, his best chance for a quick turnaround was in the wake of Zorn's blunder. Obviously, if he we were as far away as people are claiming we were, he would have at least interviewed for the Buffalo or Seattle jobs. There was simply more immediate upside here. That's why he took the job in the first place.

I also don't see how it matters that pretty much no one from the 2009 team is in the league today, because contrary to popular belief, Mike Shanahan was not looking for the roster that would put him in the best position to win in 2012. That obviously wouldn't have been the Redskins, but the pieces for the quick turnaround (Fletcher, Haynesworth, Landry, Rogers, Cooley, Portis, Moss) were in place, otherwise, why the heck go after McNabb? The idea that the Redskins were expected to return to the playoffs in 2010 is the only reasonable way to view this.

We all picked the Redskins to go to the playoffs in the McNabb year. John Clayton picked the Redskins to go to the playoffs then. I did as well. It's 100% hindsight to claim Shanahan inherited the worst roster ever. Too many knowledgable people thought Zorn's roster + Shanahan's coaching and player acquisition = playoffs. It wasn't the former part of the equation we all had wrong. It was the latter.

If we keep proper context, you can't explain the last two years as being a result of Vinny's ineptitude, because he's been gone too long (although it's obvious he was never helping things).

SmootSmack · 09-04-2012, 09:58 PM

He did interview with the Bills

09-04-2012, 12:56 PM	#91
JoeRedskin Contains football related knowledge Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Second Star On The Right Age: 50 Posts: 7,214	Re: My evaluation of Shanahan starts now Shanahan told Danny it would take 5 years to reboot the franchise. I am pretty much in agreement with that concept. I don't give Shanahan a "pass" for his first two years but I, as Matty said, sometimes you gotta step back. He gutted his original roster and completely changed the franchise's approach to roster building. Along the way, quality players have been let go and other acquisitions have not lived up to expectations. At the same time, I believe that the foundation for long term winning may have been laid. For me, this is the year for Shanahan to really show "the step forward". I am hopeful that it is. Between our schedule, division and rookie QB, however, I think double digit wins would be too much to ask. 8-8, 9-7, on the other hand seems attainable. __________________ My Little Pony: Friendship is magic? or ... a repressive matriarchal society where individuals' roles are defined by their immutable physical characteristics and governance is reserved for those who demonstrate the genetic purity of the pony master race?

09-04-2012, 03:02 PM	#94
JoeRedskin Contains football related knowledge Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Second Star On The Right Age: 50 Posts: 7,214	Re: My evaluation of Shanahan starts now Campbell will never be more than a mediocre QB - whether as a starter or back-up. IMHO - Shanny saw that pretty quickly and hoped for better with McNabb. Unfortunately, McNabb turned out to be not even mediocre which set us back substantially. Shanallen should have recognized it but didn't. Regardless, we would still need a QB coming into this draft. Bottom line, whatever took us to getting a guy like RG3, I am incredibly happy where we have ended it up. Past failed QB's are like former girlfriends you break it off with - you had some laughs, you learn some stuff, and maybe keep some pleasant memories, but, ultimately, when the right one comes along, you just don't care about them. RGIII is here. I just don't care about those who went before. __________________ My Little Pony: Friendship is magic? or ... a repressive matriarchal society where individuals' roles are defined by their immutable physical characteristics and governance is reserved for those who demonstrate the genetic purity of the pony master race?

09-04-2012, 05:15 PM	#97
HailGreen28 The Starter Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,704	Re: My evaluation of Shanahan starts now So are we going to the regular season with one fullback?

09-04-2012, 09:55 PM	#104
GTripp0012 Living Legend Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Grand Rapids, MI Age: 25 Posts: 15,152	Re: My evaluation of Shanahan starts now I'm rejecting the "worst roster ever" argument because Shanahan thought he was inheriting a winning, though underachieving team when he took the job. He could have taken a lot of different jobs that weren't the Redskins, but ultimately, his best chance for a quick turnaround was in the wake of Zorn's blunder. Obviously, if he we were as far away as people are claiming we were, he would have at least interviewed for the Buffalo or Seattle jobs. There was simply more immediate upside here. That's why he took the job in the first place. I also don't see how it matters that pretty much no one from the 2009 team is in the league today, because contrary to popular belief, Mike Shanahan was not looking for the roster that would put him in the best position to win in 2012. That obviously wouldn't have been the Redskins, but the pieces for the quick turnaround (Fletcher, Haynesworth, Landry, Rogers, Cooley, Portis, Moss) were in place, otherwise, why the heck go after McNabb? The idea that the Redskins were expected to return to the playoffs in 2010 is the only reasonable way to view this. We all picked the Redskins to go to the playoffs in the McNabb year. John Clayton picked the Redskins to go to the playoffs then. I did as well. It's 100% hindsight to claim Shanahan inherited the worst roster ever. Too many knowledgable people thought Zorn's roster + Shanahan's coaching and player acquisition = playoffs. It wasn't the former part of the equation we all had wrong. It was the latter. If we keep proper context, you can't explain the last two years as being a result of Vinny's ineptitude, because he's been gone too long (although it's obvious he was never helping things). __________________ Shanahan: “The bad thing is he's [Sav Rocca] probably our best offensive weapon and that’s not good.”

09-04-2012, 09:58 PM	#105
SmootSmack The Bluths Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 43,215	Re: My evaluation of Shanahan starts now He did interview with the Bills __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

My evaluation of Shanahan starts now

Redskins Locker Room