WP article: Time for Gibbs to walk away?

[DieHardSkinsFan777]

Originally Posted by paulskinsfan

I think he's calling for Gibbs to walk away after the season, not now.

That makes NO sense. Why would you do that with 9 games to play...?

Who knows how good it could turn out with that much football left. That's just flat out stupidity.

[70Chip]

I say yes. He should walk away right now in the middle of the season. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by 70Chip

I say yes. He should walk away right now in the middle of the season. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here.

Retire mid-season when you've got a 4-3 record and headed for 5-3? Wow. You can't be a critic of Danny's hasty moves that show no patience. Please say you are joking.

[70Chip]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

Retire mid-season when you've got a 4-3 record and headed for 5-3? Wow. You can't be a critic of Danny's hasty moves that show no patience. Please say you are joking.

Of course I was joking.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by 70Chip

Of course I was joking.

Ahhh, given the general tone of things around here, sarcasm is not so easy to detect.

[redsk1]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I think that's a misperception simply because we follow the team so closely compared to other teams.

I don't know, maybe. However...I don't remember any other team willing to sign Mark Brunell to a long term deal, giving away picks to do so(i believe..) at that point in his career. I could go on and question each FO choice but its common knowledge around the league that our front office/personel dept has made alot of blatant errors. We practically have given our draft away the last few years from mostly poor decisions.

Sure there are some fa busts around the league, but other teams busts aren't the highest paid FA's on the market. At least i can't think of any.

[irish]

Originally Posted by redsk1

I don't know, maybe. However...I don't remember any other team willing to sign Mark Brunell to a long term deal, giving away picks to do so(i believe..) at that point in his career. I could go on and question each FO choice but its common knowledge around the league that our front office/personel dept has made alot of blatant errors. We practically have given our draft away the last few years from mostly poor decisions.

Sure there are some fa busts around the league, but other teams busts aren't the highest paid FA's on the market. At least i can't think of any.

I agree 100%. The Skins have way more FA disappointments than surprises. As for giving away draft picks for nothing, I have been saying that for awhile now. Most successful teams (Steelers, Pats) build a foundation and depth through the draft and get a FA to fill a hole and put the team over the top. The Skins retool every year with FAs and draft to plug holes. Its not working. This organization need a complete change in how they build a lasting winning team not just a one year wonder (which they cant do either).

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by redsk1

I don't know, maybe. However...I don't remember any other team willing to sign Mark Brunell to a long term deal, giving away picks to do so(i believe..) at that point in his career. I could go on and question each FO choice but its common knowledge around the league that our front office/personel dept has made alot of blatant errors. We practically have given our draft away the last few years from mostly poor decisions.

Sure there are some fa busts around the league, but other teams busts aren't the highest paid FA's on the market. At least i can't think of any.

How about Darren Howard and Jevon Kearse? The Eagles fans are about to lynch Kearse, Bang cartoons made a skit about Kearse being a bust, and Howard can't crack the starting lineup. Or how about the 49ers free agent spending spree? How is that working out?

If you create a list of all Redskins free agents since 2001 who got $5M+ in bonus money, our track record is suprisingly good. As for draft picks, the results have been mixed and we've given too many away. But, I don't think the media's perception (i.e., conventional wisdom) of the Redskins front office is exactly 20/20. In discussing the Redskins moves they still talk about 2000. We made some boneheaded moves in 2000, but that was 7 years ago. I had a b----h of a girlfriend 7 years ago, but I've let that go. Apparently, the media has some sort of love/hate affair with us.....they just can't let stuff go.

[bertoskins2]

ex falcons coach Jim Mora with the grooming of Gibbs is a good candidate

[paulskinsfan]

Originally Posted by DieHardSkinsFan777

That makes NO sense. Why would you do that with 9 games to play...?

Who knows how good it could turn out with that much football left. That's just flat out stupidity.

Ok, lets not start calling people stupid, because that in and of itself reeks of ignorance. Calling people "stupid" when there is a legitimate debate about ideas effectively ends thoughtful debate and then the namecalling begins. This happens all the time in politics, but Im not going to say which side does that more in this forum.

Shapiro's point is that the basic coaching/front office flaws he saw in Gibbs first year back are still present today. He therefore believes that the very best this team can do this year is 7-9 or maybe even 8-8. The authors point is that 3 and 1/2 years into Gibbs second era, it was painfully obvious at the NE game that this franchise is no where close to becoming one of the great teams in the NFL. The leadership, in the author's opinion, has failed and it has been given plenty of time to turn this thing around. I would agree, that even if we somehow made the playoffs this year in the pathetic NFC, this team as a whole simply is not moving in the right direction.

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by paulskinsfan

Ok, lets not start calling people stupid, because that in and of itself reeks of ignorance. Calling people "stupid" when there is a legitimate debate about ideas effectively ends thoughtful debate and then the namecalling begins. This happens all the time in politics, but Im not going to say which side does that more in this forum.

Shapiro's point is that the basic coaching/front office flaws he saw in Gibbs first year back are still present today. He therefore believes that the very best this team can do this year is 7-9 or maybe even 8-8. The authors point is that 3 and 1/2 years into Gibbs second era, it was painfully obvious at the NE game that this franchise is no where close to becoming one of the great teams in the NFL. The leadership, in the author's opinion, has failed and it has been given plenty of time to turn this thing around. I would agree, that even if we somehow made the playoffs this year in the pathetic NFC, this team as a whole simply is not moving in the right direction.

I beg to differ, 3.5 years is not enough to turn it around. I don't think that was his point anyway. I think he said that Gibbs doesn't exhibit the same command of the game as a head coach, most notably in his game decisions. I agree w/him on that more than anything.

Gibbs arguably did "turn it around" in 05. He has had to deal w/the mess of spurrier & the signings of that era. He didn't handle some things well in learning the cap, but appears better despite bad moves like loyd.

I certainly feel the franchise is heading in the right direction. Young talented qb, numerous youngsters on D, and some decent playmakers. We have needs of course, but IF this team gets healthy at the right time, we can make a run. I don't understand how you would consider it not moving in the right direction if we make the playoffs this year. That would be 2 times in 4 years. Between Gibbs I & II (93-03), we'd been to the playoffs once (99-00).

[MTK]

Originally Posted by paulskinsfan

Ok, lets not start calling people stupid, because that in and of itself reeks of ignorance. Calling people "stupid" when there is a legitimate debate about ideas effectively ends thoughtful debate and then the namecalling begins. This happens all the time in politics, but Im not going to say which side does that more in this forum.

Shapiro's point is that the basic coaching/front office flaws he saw in Gibbs first year back are still present today. He therefore believes that the very best this team can do this year is 7-9 or maybe even 8-8. The authors point is that 3 and 1/2 years into Gibbs second era, it was painfully obvious at the NE game that this franchise is no where close to becoming one of the great teams in the NFL. The leadership, in the author's opinion, has failed and it has been given plenty of time to turn this thing around. I would agree, that even if we somehow made the playoffs this year in the pathetic NFC, this team as a whole simply is not moving in the right direction.

Wait a sec, he wasn't calling any one individual stupid.

[Daseal]

Freddy, regardless of what you feel is a decent amount of time to turn it around, few head coaches in the NFL more than four years to make their team a contender. It's the way of the NFL now for better or worse.

[redsk1]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

How about Darren Howard and Jevon Kearse? The Eagles fans are about to lynch Kearse, Bang cartoons made a skit about Kearse being a bust, and Howard can't crack the starting lineup. Or how about the 49ers free agent spending spree? How is that working out?

If you create a list of all Redskins free agents since 2001 who got $5M+ in bonus money, our track record is suprisingly good. As for draft picks, the results have been mixed and we've given too many away. But, I don't think the media's perception (i.e., conventional wisdom) of the Redskins front office is exactly 20/20. In discussing the Redskins moves they still talk about 2000. We made some boneheaded moves in 2000, but that was 7 years ago. I had a b----h of a girlfriend 7 years ago, but I've let that go. Apparently, the media has some sort of love/hate affair with us.....they just can't let stuff go.

Agreed that the media still thinks about the FA's of 2000 when talking about the skins...that's unfair. I will point out that that we made AA one of the highest, if not the highest paid safety in the league. I don't know too much about the Kearse signing, but at the time he was top 5 pass rushers in the NFL. Due to injuries his play has diminished. Hindsight would say it's a bad signing but at the time there were alot of teams bidding for his services.

I don't know of too many high paid recievers like B lloyd that only have had 3 or 4 catches for their new team. I can't think of any.

[SouperMeister]

I would argue that the contract extensions at the end of the 2006 season (Sellers and Betts), plus Cooley's recent extension demonstrate that Gibbs and the FO are FINALLY starting to get it from a personnel perspective. Keeping a core group together is a huge key to success in the NFL. As for newer guys, who would argue against the 2007 free agent signings of London Fletcher and Fred Smoot? Even the Pete Kendall trade was a solid one for us. If the FO can address the O-line and perhaps add a pass rushing DE in the draft, we have the makings of a very solid contender for 2008.