![]() |
|
Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#31 |
Gamebreaker
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Waldorf, MD
Age: 42
Posts: 12,514
|
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan
It has seemed like we drafted better later in the draft.. when guys like Campbell and Brown's suggestions were being taken into consideration because they weren't sexy enough picks for Vinny to be concerned with.
__________________
http://www.twitter.com/RedskinsRT |
![]() |
![]() |
Advertisements |
![]() |
#32 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 37
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan
You didn't even read what I wrote, you just assumed this. And I'm glad to see I'm making an impact on your life.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#33 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 37
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan
Quote:
I just want to make it clear I don't have anything bad to say about the clear lines of communication between GM/Coach and personnel department. I don't really think it's notable though, and am anticipating the fact that I don't think it's newsworthy being construed as being negative. To be quite frank about it, when Cerrato was in charge, you just kind of assumed that there was open communication with the coaching staff and personnel department because it's kind of shocking that you could have drafted as much talent as Vinny did without that communication. That people in any organization would feel marginalized is a fact of life, but that high ranking people would be among the marginalized would never even have crossed my mind.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#34 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 22,378
|
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan
While it is good to see improvements, none of this will matter until all of this work results in wins for the franchise. I am glad to see the direction the team seems to be heading towards, and things are much better since the days of Cerrato. Still, MS has made a number of questionable calls running the franchise, and he started it all by doing the very thing that represented the flaw that was the previous front office: giving up picks for a washed up pro bowler.
I am not necessarily agreeing with GTripp, but in a way I understand where he is coming from.
__________________
R.I.P. #21 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#35 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 37
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan
Quote:
But remember how in history we are taught that the people who get to write history are the victors/people in power? If in three years we're reading very well written insider pieces on how much of an organizational disaster Mike Shanahan was and how he limited Raheem Morris and Chris Forester from helping players reach their true potential and how much better of a person and football coach Jon Gruden is, just remember that the history is written by the people in power, and typically at the expense of the disposed. And if we're not, I am quite happy that Mike Shanahan against all odds got this team to the playoffs.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#36 | ||
Gamebreaker
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 14,587
|
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan
Quote:
Quote:
No impact on my life except a good laugh every now and then. Keep up the good work. :cheeky-sm
__________________
"So let me get this straight. We have the event of the year on TV with millions watching around the world... and people want a punt, pass, and kick competition to be the halftime entertainment?? Folks, don't quit your day jobs."- Matty |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#37 | |
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Jacksonville, Forida
Posts: 6,412
|
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan
Quote:
But history hasn't been unkind to Vinny. He had his chance and he failed. IMO, Mike Shanahan has used essentially the same scouting staff that Vinny had to achieve better results than Vinny did. For example, all of the Redskins' 2011 draftees, except Jenkins (who was on IR), were active for at least one game in the 2011-2012 season. That's eleven players. Vinny never did anything like that. The Skins also signed a good group of Free Agents in 2011. I realize that wins and losses are the ultimate proof of competence for a pro football executive and that Mike Shanahan's teams haven't yet won as much as Vinny's teams did. Nevertheless, I believe that, with the personnel we had when MS took over, we were not talented or deep enough to contend. I also believe that we needed to get younger, as a team. MS is currently working to fix these problems which he inherited from Vinny. With another productive FA period and draft this year, I'm hoping we can start winning and become contenders for years to come. Last edited by KI Skins Fan; 01-30-2012 at 10:03 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#38 | |
A Dude
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 46
Posts: 12,458
|
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan
Quote:
The approach to the draft has changed drastically. Look at the sheer number of draft picks selected last April. Under Cerrato the Redskins were lucky if they made 12 picks over the course of two years. Yes the Redskins lost games this year, but there's no denying the influx of young talent on the roster. Vinny brought us some terrible picks; Devin Thomas and Malcolm Kelly to name just a few. But it was the picks that weren't made that dragged us into the dregs; he ignored the trenches. Shanahan's first pick as Redskins' boss addressed that, but with so few quality linemen on the team it's no wonder it's taking the team a while. The primary reason the team was so crappy this year was the quarterback position. We all know this. But that has NOTHING to do with the Redskins' approach in the draft. Last year they were wise not to reach for a QB who didn't have Franchise Solution written all over him, instead trading down and adding depth. Their approach was to find a QB and build depth at every position through the draft. They didn't find the QB, so they built depth. The approach is sound, they'll go through the same process this year: find the QB, build more depth. Stating that approach needs to change seems to ignore the last 10 years of recent Redskins history.
__________________
God made certain people to play football. He was one of them. Last edited by Schneed10; 01-30-2012 at 10:54 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#39 |
Uncle Phil
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,256
|
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan
I'd take out the 12 picks over two years line because it's Cerratto did actually make several picks the two years he was in charge.
Otherwise, I agree.
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#40 |
A Dude
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 46
Posts: 12,458
|
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan
Granted, he did trade down and acquire those 2nd rounders, in particular. Too bad on two out of the three (Thomas, Kelly) he didn't listen to Scott Campbell.
__________________
God made certain people to play football. He was one of them. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#41 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 37
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan
Quote:
I was not intending to assert a consistent approach because my argument only relies on the recognition of unchanging results. The people who disagree with the argument I am *attempting* to make necessarily must believe that the Redskins have enjoyed improved results in the last two years in the influx of quality talent as well as the on field product. If you are in agreement with that, then we're on the same page. If you recognize that the on field product hasn't improved, but believe that the roster behind the performance has actually improved, then we are in partial agreement. With that said, there are very critical elements of the approach that have remained consistent. We still have a tendency to trade draft picks for middling veterans (McNabb in April 2010, Jammal Brown in June 2010, Hightower in July 2011). I do think they are less careless with picks, but saying the Redskins have a newfound emphasis in the draft isn't entirely accurate. Are the days of trading second rounders for Jason Taylor over? Probably. I don't think that ends the player evaluation issue or the tendency to trade picks for middling veterans, but it is a start. I'm not sure what the greater meaning of having 12 picks in a single draft is. It seemed to me like a simple function of being willing to trade down in the first round and then again in the second round. Is that a re-emphasis in the draft? If so, what do we call the 2008 Redskins draft when the Redskins traded down there? The Redskins didn't actually pick up any picks in that trade down which certainly suggests that the guy who executed the trade may have been trading for the sake of trading, instead of team building. But it seems to me that drawing a line between between Shanahan's moves in 2011 and Cerrato's moves in 2008 is simply trying to put a label on what was functionally the same intent. Now if we want to argue who was more effective in their execution, there is no contest. Vinny turned his first three picks into a guy who is a punt gunner for the Giants, a guy who played three seasons and is out of the league because of health, and a four and a half star tight end for a team that already had Cooley. That's a below expectation return. I feel much more confident in Kerrigan/Jenkins/Hankerson to pay off than I did on draft day with Thomas/Davis/Kelly. And ask anyone you want: I had those three career paths pegged from day one. The other thing is I think if you compare the roster in Feburary 2009 to the current one, you'd find them to be pretty similar. The biggest difference is that the Feb. 2009 one had limited depth, aging stars, and a couple of recent first round draft picks. The current one has (in Shanahan's own words) limited depth, a couple of recent first round picks, and no stars. Basically, any better position we are in now relies on the strength of the 2011 free agent class: guys like Cofield, Bowen, Chester, and Wilson. If you like all of those guys, then we almost certainly have a better roster now than in Feb. 2009. If you're taking a wait and see approach on all of those guys, than we're really at the same place we were in Feb. 2009. It really comes down to how you rate Shanahan's acquisitions to date. If you're like NC_Skins, and pickups from the CFL make you scream "I LOVE THIS GUY" at the top of your metaphorical lungs, then yeah, our roster is better now. If you're thoroughly dumbfounded by most of the personnel moves Shanahan makes (beyond the draft because like I said before, if he can string a second good draft to the 2011 one, we're in good shape depth-wise) then I don't see enough differences in the processes of the new front office to support the idea that things are completely different now. I am not denying the new-ness of the procedural stuff, I think we should be skeptical of how valuable it is though until the results turn around. As always, I'm hedging somewhat as not to look totally foolish if the team starts 6-0 in mid October, but want to be on record saying that anything leading to a good season in 2012 would be a departure from the process that have led us to the last two years.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#42 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: VA
Age: 42
Posts: 17,620
|
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan
hey, G, two quick things
first, as you know, draft results tend to lag 2-3 years, and I think if we kept the other pieces the same, our first 3 picks would show vast improvement this year. second, without a good QB, it's all moot. failing to find a QB better than rex after this many seasons is a HUGE strike against this FO. If the QB is the most important spot to fill, and you've decide to go after priorities 6-10 instead, guess what? that's a major failing. You can talk about finding the right QB all day, I don't want to hear it - I WANT TO SEE IT. If they whiff again and end up with another terrible record, it's going to be a real tough sell that these are the right people to run this thing and that they're NFL competent. I liked the draft, I liked the mid level FAs, but that rex grossman was the best they could do is horrible. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#43 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 37
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan
Quote:
I have in the past advocated for putting the QB situation on the back burner while you build the rest of the team. I think, clearly, the Redskins haven't done a good job overall building the rest of the team up in the last two years but like you said, another good draft and things will probably get better in time. You can't just assume this upcoming draft class will fix all the wrongs of the last two years, but it certainly could. In a lot of ways, the success of the 2011 draft is going to hinge on the 2012 draft. If we bomb in the 2012 draft, lose, and Shanahan gets fired, the next coach isn't going to come in saying things like he feels getting Jarvis Jenkins back is like having a top ten draft pick. I really like Hankerson, but he's going to have to prove the first round grade I gave him on the field this year. If he doesn't, there's no guarantee he'll get another chance in 2013. I will never tire of talking about the future of the Washington Redskins. What I am tired of is people telling me things are different now. Just stop talking. Show me. Bring evidence or don't waste the time.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#44 | |
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,662
|
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan
Quote:
Our current status is still early in the rebuilding process. Arguably, it's no further along than the day Mike became coach. It appears we're still searching for a quality, dependable left tackle. The WR corp is still unimpressive. The defensive secondary still underperforms. Similarities between prior to Mike v now...solid defensive front seven. Top TE talent. Low-threat passing game. Biggest difference between then and now: a QB who can manage most games and win a couple/few over a season. So to recap: our defense is not quite as good as before Mike but basically the same; our passing attack is still pretty harmless; our running game is marginally better; but most importantly we threw out Jason Campbell and didn't do anything whatsoever at QB for two full seasons. If Mike and Kyle "find" their QB now we'll never know how close they were to total failure. If they don't find their QB now we'll be about 5-11 again, and the process argument should be long over.
__________________
24-34 Last edited by The Goat; 01-31-2012 at 02:11 AM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#45 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: VA
Age: 42
Posts: 17,620
|
Re: How Scouting College Players Has Evolved Under Shanahan
what's really silly is how much better we'd be with jason campbell and carlos rogers vs rex and d hall. well, campbell may just be a lateral move, but he has a lot less "oh ..ish" moments.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|