Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Lotus

But to give Shanny a pass and say that he had no chance to acquire a decent QB is simply not true.

My only qualm with this is some of the options you think are better, may not have been better on our squad. You can say they were better, but there is no way to really know. Had he brought in those other options and it not panned out (aka..mcnabb) would you have praised him for it? Probably not.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

I admit that. I try my best not to, and I've toned it down a bit in the football section at least. Lately though, I think I'm about to burst a blood vessel for all the calls to fire Shanny.


I apologize to Skinsfan and Lotus. I misdirected some fan anger onto them unjustly.

Fair enough. No problem.

BTW I have spoken AGAINST firing Shanny right now.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

I'm for some consistency and some cultural change. I think Mike has brought us a long way from where we were and has done 5 times the job that Gibbs 2.0 did. (that's solely my opinion) The records might not show it right now, but wait till the playing field becomes equal and then judge.

As much as I am a Gibbs fan I think we are doing better with MS as well only because he's keeping his system in place and allowing the players to have time to get better in it/develope. Gibbs freaked out and brought in Al Saunders which I think the team would have been better off with out him.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by Lotus

I'm not expecting overnight results. I have many, many posts here which counsel patience. In fact, I'd like to point out that the Lions had a pretty grim season a year ago because they were rebuilding and starting inexperienced players. Now they are competitive. Likewise we are having a grim season and starting many inexperienced players. Perhaps it will pay off for us next year, too.

But to give Shanny a pass and say that he had no chance to acquire a decent QB is simply not true.

True, he had a chance. But then the question becomes, was that chance worth taking? Once you commit to a QB, you're stuck with that commitment for 2-3 years and you'll pass up future QBs in these subsequent draft classes.

[skinsfaninok]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Yes I do, and it's not to the whole fan base. It's the ones that Chris Cooley talked about in his interview on the FAN. It seems we are so impatient and want instant success. We overvalue our players (cooley for a 1st and 3rd amirite?). We want to change coaches at the drop of a dime. We want to bring in all the big money free agents we can. We want to blast Dan Snyder and Vinny Cerrato for doing the exact same thing we are crying for.


I'm for some consistency and some cultural change. I think Mike has brought us a long way from where we were and has done 5 times the job that Gibbs 2.0 did. (that's solely my opinion) The records might not show it right now, but wait till the playing field becomes equal and then judge.

I agree thats why I'm waiting on this team to get MS's players then we will be ready

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Actually, Matt Stafford's supporting cast was pretty bad. Millen left the cupboard almost completely bare. But he was a good enough prospect for the Lions to take.

There is no set formula as to which part of the roster gets addressed first. It depends primarily on the quality of the prospects. Sometimes QB gets taken first because he grades out so well. Other times, a different position gets addressed because a prospect at that position grades out well.

Which is kinda the point I'm making. I think the QB they would have wanted was not available so they took BPA at a position of need. I can't blame them for that. Under Cerrato we would have seen BPA overall when in reality you do that when your team is pretty much set not when you have glaring holes all over the place.

and again your right there is no formula some teams pick a QB and develope a team around him, some teams get the supporting cast set then go out and pick a QB who will have support to help him on the field.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by Lotus

I'm not expecting overnight results. I have many, many posts here which counsel patience. In fact, I'd like to point out that the Lions had a pretty grim season a year ago because they were rebuilding and starting inexperienced players. Now they are competitive. Likewise we are having a grim season and starting many inexperienced players. Perhaps it will pay off for us next year, too.

But to give Shanny a pass and say that he had no chance to acquire a decent QB is simply not true.

From a fans perspective your right. But what we fans don't know is what QB did the team feel they would go after if available? was that QB available when it came for their pick? were they willing to settle for one of the other QB's on the list? my example is when I mentioned Dalton people here said I was crazy and pretty much said he wouldn't be worth drafting until round 4 or 5. When I pointed out that the pre draft magazines had him listed as a 2nd/3rd rounder people here laughed at me more. Then Cinci took him in the 2nd round and he's played if not 2nd round material then better.

I'm not tooting my horn, I'm trying to say that perhaps the coaches looked at some of the remaining QB's like you guys did and instead of waisting a draft pick decided to go after the next BPA at a position of need for the team. Kerrigan was available so they took him to replace Carter, Jenkins was available so they took him to replace AH.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

I'm for some consistency and some cultural change. I think Mike has brought us a long way from where we were and has done 5 times the job that Gibbs 2.0 did. (that's solely my opinion) The records might not show it right now, but wait till the playing field becomes equal and then judge.

I don't see how the playing field for MS is more difficult than what Gibbs walked into after Spurrier. Gibbs made the playoffs in 2 of 4 years. Gibbs' teams rose to the occassion late in the season with 4 & 5 game win streaks to make those playoff runs.

Gibbs' big mistakes during his tenure were relying too much on personnel decisons from Al Saunders (ARE) and Greg Williams (Arch) and that he over-valued Campbell. But Gibbs did a HoF job turning the franchise around from where it was. I'll always wonder what could've been if the ST tragedy hadn't happened.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

True, he had a chance. But then the question becomes, was that chance worth taking? Once you commit to a QB, you're stuck with that commitment for 2-3 years and you'll pass up future QBs in these subsequent draft classes.

This is definitely true for high picks. But we still could have taken a developmental prospect lower.

And, although the positive value of what we actually did in the draft is clear, part of me still wonders how things might be different now and into the future if we had taken Ponder instead. Certainly he was overvalued pick-wise in the moment by the Vikes, but if he turns out to be a really good one, he'll end up being worth their 12th - or our 10th - pick.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

From a fans perspective your right. But what we fans don't know is what QB did the team feel they would go after if available? was that QB available when it came for their pick? were they willing to settle for one of the other QB's on the list? my example is when I mentioned Dalton people here said I was crazy and pretty much said he wouldn't be worth drafting until round 4 or 5. When I pointed out that the pre draft magazines had him listed as a 2nd/3rd rounder people here laughed at me more. Then Cinci took him in the 2nd round and he's played if not 2nd round material then better.

I'm not tooting my horn, I'm trying to say that perhaps the coaches looked at some of the remaining QB's like you guys did and instead of waisting a draft pick decided to go after the next BPA at a position of need for the team. Kerrigan was available so they took him to replace Carter, Jenkins was available so they took him to replace AH.

Good points.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Lotus

This is definitely true for high picks. But we still could have taken a developmental prospect lower.

And, although the positive value of what we actually did in the draft is clear, part of me still wonders how things might be different now and into the future if we had taken Ponder instead. Certainly he was overvalued pick-wise in the moment by the Vikes, but if he turns out to be a really good one, he'll end up being worth their 12th - or our 10th - pick.

I'm not sure Ponder was overvalued, many people expected him to go top 15. But what's kind of not discussed is that the Redskins didn't trade down with the intent of passing on Ponder. They knew the Jaguars liked Gabbert so they passed on him by trading down (and with Jacksonville), but they took a gamble that maybe, just maybe, Ponder would fall to them and they could add picks and get Ponder.

I'm not saying Ponder was the choice over Kerrigan had both been there at 16, that I don't know. But they didn't trade down with the intent of adding Kerrigan. They traded down with the intent of adding picks.

They knew the only team that might take Ponder between 10 and 16 was the Vikings. And in fact the Vikings were seriously considering Kerrigan.

Of course, all this would have been moot had Locker been there at 10.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Which is kinda the point I'm making. I think the QB they would have wanted was not available so they took BPA at a position of need. I can't blame them for that. Under Cerrato we would have seen BPA overall when in reality you do that when your team is pretty much set not when you have glaring holes all over the place.

and again your right there is no formula some teams pick a QB and develope a team around him, some teams get the supporting cast set then go out and pick a QB who will have support to help him on the field.

The problem with Cerrato was not really BPA, it was his grading system of prospects and willingness to cough up picks in trades. Malcolm Kelly and Thomas were picked to address a need for a threat across Moss.
He was even going to trade up one spot to take Orakpo, which shows how little he valued holding onto picks.

More likely than not, we would not have picked at all in the 2nd or 3rd round with him at the helm. He'd probably do another Jason Taylor trade and we ultimately get close to NOTHING.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'm not sure Ponder was overvalued, many people expected him to go top 15. But what's kind of not discussed is that the Redskins didn't trade down with the intent of passing on Ponder. They knew the Jaguars liked Gabbert so they passed on him by trading down (and with Jacksonville), but they took a gamble that maybe, just maybe, Ponder would fall to them and they could add picks and get Ponder.

I'm not saying Ponder was the choice over Kerrigan had both been there at 16, that I don't know. But they didn't trade down with the intent of adding Kerrigan. They traded down with the intent of adding picks.

They knew the only team that might take Ponder between 10 and 16 was the Vikings. And in fact the Vikings were seriously considering Kerrigan.

Of course, all this would have been moot had Locker been there at 10.

and quite honestly maybe the coaching staff didn't like Ponder as much as we fans did. Maybe Ponder was not even on their radar because maybe they didn't feel he fit the scheme. Just saying.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

I don't see how the playing field for MS is more difficult than what Gibbs walked into after Spurrier. Gibbs made the playoffs in 2 of 4 years. Gibbs' teams rose to the occassion late in the season with 4 & 5 game win streaks to make those playoff runs.

Gibbs' big mistakes during his tenure were relying too much on personnel decisons from Al Saunders (ARE) and Greg Williams (Arch) and that he over-valued Campbell. But Gibbs did a HoF job turning the franchise around from where it was. I'll always wonder what could've been if the ST tragedy hadn't happened.

We made some big trades and FA pickups that helped us in those runs. Moss, Portis, Brunell came in trades. Marcus Washington, Springs, etc came in FA. Our trades have flopped and the FA pickings are slimmer or not worth taking.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

The problem with Cerrato was not really BPA, it was his grading system of prospects and willingness to cough up picks in trades. Malcolm Kelly and Thomas were picked to address a need for a threat across Moss.
He was even going to trade up one spot to take Orakpo, which shows how little he valued holding onto picks.

More likely than not, we would not have picked at all in the 2nd or 3rd round with him at the helm. He'd probably do another Jason Taylor trade and we ultimately get close to NOTHING.

Your right but a ton of other teams passed on them and we took them. I wonder why? Your right I think it was their grading system.