Washington Redskins 2010 season preview (NY Times)

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by InsaneBoost

LOL. I guess it's just safe to say we'll still be bad due to our past decade and what not, but honestly it's just stupid.

Guy acts like these off season changes are really no big deal, come on.

Well let's face it, we're coming off a 4-12 year and we have a lot of new pieces that may or may not work. Like he said, we'll probably be the most improved but we have a lot of work to do to get back to the top. Can it happen? Sure, but to think it may not happen this year isn't unrealistic

[InsaneBoost]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Well let's face it, we're coming off a 4-12 year and we have a lot of new pieces that may or may not work. Like he said, we'll probably be the most improved but we have a lot of work to do to get back to the top. Can it happen? Sure, but to think it may not happen this year isn't unrealistic

I'm just taking it from his attitude. It felt like he acted like Gibbs v2 was a failure. In the goal to win a Super Bowl, yes, but he definitely turned the team around, two playoff appearances with him, don't see how that was really a failure.

I just don't see how it appears he thinks that Shanahan and Allen wont do anything much better for the franchise. Reason I put it that way is because it sounded like he was saying they were only better than Cerrato.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by InsaneBoost

I just don't see how it appears he thinks that Shanahan and Allen wont do anything much better for the franchise. Reason I put it that way is because it sounded like he was saying they were only better than Cerrato.

My personal opinion of ShanAllen aside, the arrogance of our fans to expect the rest of the world to kiss Snyder's feet for pairing two guys who were fired from their previous jobs is truly staggering.

There's plenty of reason to think that it can work here (namely: we have money, and aren't afraid to throw it around), but it's not going to be because we got the two front office guys that every team wanted. Shanahan would have landed somewhere as a head coach, but we were one of two teams (Buffalo) willing to give up input in personnel. Even Detroit is past the archaic, historically unsuccessful idea that you can have a plus personnel man who is also your head coach. At best, this is going to take a very delicate balance between Shanahan and Allen to co-exist and create a front office better than the sum of it's parts, which is essentially a pair of castoffs.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by InsaneBoost

I'm just taking it from his attitude. It felt like he acted like Gibbs v2 was a failure. In the goal to win a Super Bowl, yes, but he definitely turned the team around, two playoff appearances with him, don't see how that was really a failure.

Gibbs II was a failure in terms of building a core that could make it to the Super Bowl. Gibbs did not trust the draft, somehow failed to realize the FA's and traded players also came with a risk of not working out, and "spent" his draft picks with little "frugality", Cerrato was just plain stupid, and Snyder was impatient and not football bright. At least with Shanahan and Allen, they seems to be better at squeezing the juice out of the fruit with their transactions(conditional picks, incentive-laden contract, etc).

Making "just making the playoffs" as some standard of "success" means the embracing of mediocrity because the level of competition in the regular season is nowhere near it is in the playoffs. A few lucky bounces and strength of schedule can mean the difference between 10-6 and 6-10. Besides, look at the teams that took part in the Super Bowl during the years the Gibbs II Skins made the playoffs and you'll see that the teams made it to the Super Bowls had some things that were lacking on the Redskins in those years.