Quote:
Originally Posted by Paintrain
So here we sit 10 games into another lost season, one that started with what turns out to be false hope. Injuries and overall crappy play have been the signatures of what we've seen and calls for the coach's head have predictably started. I was thinking over the past two weeks about how bad our overall roster is and it's been pointed out that Shanny has turned over about 70% of the roster he inherited from Zorn/Vinny so this is 'his team/his fault'. CLKSM-5400170
Food for thought on the Shanaplan as I see it:
1. 2010 season-Shanny 'went for it' by going after McNabb but otherwise, started the season with pretty much the same core roster and starters. Think about our starting offense on opening day last year outside of T. Williams and McNabb. Portis, Sellers, Rabach, Dockery, Cooley, Moss were all returning. The change to the 3-4 was questionable but necessary for the long term. This was a way to gauge what he had, who fit-who didn't and to see how big of a project was ahead of him or see if he could win with what was here. The 2010 draft class contributed starters in Trent Williams, Perry Riley and Adam Carriker (via trade) and depth players in Terrence Austin and Brandon Banks (RFA) plus Erik Cook who is on the roster but showed in his brief action he's probably not an NFL player.
2. 2011 offseason-this was a complete bust as a result of the lockout. At the beginning of the season it seemed that the loss of OTA's and the offseason wasn't a big deal but as we got into the depth of the roster we saw a dramatic dropoff. The gap between raw talent and coached skill was huge. We also saw the slow development of rookies like Hankerson and Paul where a full offseason would have made an impact. However, as noted in a separate thread, our draft class has given us at least 7 players (Kerrigan, Jenkins, Hankerson, Helu, Paul, Hurt, Neild) who will likely contribute in 2012 and beyond. In two years, we've added 10-12 players via the draft who should be valuable through their rookie contracts.
In addition, with a whole offseason, I think the Beck experiment would have never happened. I think another veteran QB would have been brought in to truly compete for the starting job and Beck-mania never would have gotten off the ground.
3. 2011 season-Let's be real, this season sucks. A good start, a hard crash down to reality. Reality as I see it is that we still have one of the worst rosters in the league, probably bottom 2 or 3 from a talent perspective. I've stated that no more than 6 of our 22 starters could start for a competitive NFL team. That being said, we are making progress. This is our first season of truly 'rebuilding'. Last year was trying to win with what was here + a vet QB. This year is playing young players to see who develops and who is not a piece to work with going forward. For the rest of the season we will continue to see young players get experience and players who won't be here getting phased out. Positives are the play of Kerrigan, Jenkins in the preseason, Helu, Paul and Neild. Hankerson showed the light starting to come on before his injury. Our 2010 rookies have played decently, none have fallen off from their prior season performance which is a positive.
4. 2012 offseason-This is where the work begins to take shape. Our strategy should be clear. Get a QB, get a playmaking WR, build depth on the OL, get a CB. The great thing about Beck/Rex is that we aren't tied to either one of them. Same goes for most positions that need to be upgraded. The only veteran WR we are tied to is Moss. Our opening day starting OL wasn't elite but they were good enough. I don't think we have 5 INT from our entire secondary so that needs to be a focus as well.
The future is brighter than the present and a far cry from our past. Thoughts?
|
I (genuinely) admire the optimism you have for this franchise in its current state! Optimism is a great attitude for life in general...I have it...but I can't for the franchise.
Every major decision Mike, or Mike and/or BA, or Mike and/or BA and/or Kyle, made has set this team further and further back. Why was switching to the 3-4 defense necessary for the future? Is your argument saying only 3-4 defenses are elite? I don't buy that. Regardless, the opportunity cost of blowing up the defense has proven enormous. This fact is corroberated every time someone on the board acknowledges our offense is terrible and terribly deficient of talent i.e. we spend the last two off-seasons spending more than half our picks/FAs on defense.
...and the bottom line is our defense still isn't as good as it was before the switch. I think there's a stong argument to be made we'd still be a better 4-3 defense, especially based on our front 7, because we still don't have the NT required to make the 3-4 dominant. Soooooo we can say Mike and/or whoever decided to force the system w/o the most important piece in place. We can also say it will still require at least a few more major investments in the defense to "finish" it so to speak. NT. FS. CB (maybe two). Prior to the switch we really just needed a FS and maybe another CB. So again I say we're still better suited in the 4-3 because it eliminates the need for a dominant NT, which will require a high draft pick (think BJ Raji or Suh) or a bigtime FA signing.
Next we can talk about Mike's decisions on QBs. I don't have the energy to keep going over it though lol. Bottom line he's utterly wasted two critical years through 4 terrible moves (Jason, McNabb, Rex, Beck). We don't have a QB of the future or a vet QB to help mentor the guy of the future (please don't mention Rex here). Meanwhile several of the QBs he passed on, both solid vets and draft picks, are doing far better than either goofball on our roster.
Finally, Mike and this coaching staff has lost the team. Last Sunday against a division rival was the only real show of emotion we've seen from more than a couple/few players in months. Shit, the winless Colts play with more passion, as do the Dolphins and Browns.
Add all that to the week to week stupidity in play-calling, roster decisions (like running Torain instead of Helu) and game and clock management. This just isn't a serious franchise. I don't think it's the players. It's the leadership.