Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012
This is a textbook exercise in excuse making.
When the Lions were 2-10 last year, I don't think a whole lot of people thought that the Lions weren't on the right track. I think Schwartz was starting to get some heat for short term results, but people knew the team was better and they knew that even with the QB out, the Lions were still making positive strides week to week.
I don't know if the Lions are going to make the playoffs in year three, but they already have results. Mike Shanahan has accomplished nothing here in a year and a half. And the idea that Detroit was in better shape three years ago than the Redskins were two years ago is just not accurate.
I think most NFL coaches would be doing a better job here. When you consider just how far the Redskins have fallen short of expectations, I think that's pretty difficult to argue against.
|
And you cannot deny that Schwartz has had more to work with in the form of a top-five, elite WR who was in place before he got there -- Shanahan didn't. Schwartz has more drafts and more high draft picks -- Shanahan hasn't. Schwartz has had three years to re-build his team -- Shanahan has had one and a half years. It's a complete fallacy to say that Shanahan has had the same tools and the same time that Jim Schwartz has had to rebuild their respective teams.
It is not difficult in the least to make the case that Detroit was on the right track with an emphasis on the draft, a competent general manager who manuevered to get high selections in the drafts to give Jim Schwartz a chance. Shanahan inherited a team that was built with aging, expensive free agents or outright castoffs that other teams had set out on the street corner.
You call it excuse-making, I call it laying out the facts.