Commanders Post at The Warpath - RGIII Named Starter

Commanders Post at The Warpath (http://www.thewarpath.net/forum.php)

- Locker Room Main Forum (http://www.thewarpath.net/forumdisplay.php?f=2)

- - RGIII Named Starter (http://www.thewarpath.net/showthread.php?t=47712)

Re: RGIII Named Starter

i think fanarchist's elitist stance rubs more than one the wrong way

Re: RGIII Named Starter

[quote=Mattyk;917080]Please make it stop.[/quote]

You have the power, He-Man

Re: RGIII Named Starter

The argument of 'who else was the option' is a silly argument.
Of course there were other options besides Beck and Rex via draft/trade/FA but the staff [I][B]chose[/B][/I] to go with them.

There is no way to say for sure if there were "better" options because there is no way to judge.
However what we do [B]know[/B] is that our record and the production from Beck/Rex was near league worst.
So the benchmark for a better solution isn't very high.

I don't see what is so wrong with admitting that the staff made a mistake going with Beck/Rex as opposed to drafting a QB somewhere anywhere in the draft or signing/trading for a FA QB.

Solving the QB problem is good for the franchise regardless if it happens in year 1 or in year 3.
Mike Shanahan and Kyle Shanahan have made mistakes but all coaches and GMs make mistakes.
But, grooming a young franchise QB buys him at [I]least[/I] 2 year imo.
And in those 2 years I have full faith that Mike Shanahan's outstanding coaching ability will mask if not erase the mistakes of Mike Shanahan the GM.

Re: RGIII Named Starter

[quote=Paintrain;917074]Anyways, to unhijack the thread, I'd expect to see some tenets of a no huddle/spread as a part of the offense this year. We may see some more of the smoke screens for 4-6 yards, line up quickly, shotgun draw, then a couple of quick passes before a deep shot. I think Mike and Kyle are drooling at the possibilities.[/quote](Posted earlier)
I got no questions about whether [B]Griffin[/B] can handle the no huddle.
I love talking about the no-huddle in abstract but I don't see how or why people think we would use it more often.
In the past this offense (Mike/Kyle) hasn't been a no huddle offense.
And if we're speaking honestly the performance in 2 minute and hurry has been lacking regardless of the QB (McNabb/Rex).
With McNabb the excuse was he didn't know the offense with Rex there was no excuse. (equipment malfunction?)
I'm sure Kyle will improve with his hurry-up/2 minute offense/playcalling as he gains experience but I think its a hellavu strecth to think we're suddenly going to become a no huddle offense from what we've seen and where we are thus far.
I think its far more likely that they'll work to increase the tempo i.e. get in and out of the huddle quickly, get to the line quickly with time on the playclock etc.

If I were gambling on a team likely to run the type of offense some fans think we'll run (up tempo, no-huddle, with some zone-read, WCO) I would look at the Dolphins.

Re: RGIII Named Starter

[quote=NC_Skins;917057]What good is a cart blanche when you have nobody worth spending it on? Do tell, what moves could he have made his first year seeing the league was bogged down with restricted free agents? Oh, my guess is you conveniently left that fact out of your observation. Also forgot about the whole lockout thing as well I'm sure.

His second year, what QB would you have brought into the fold? The Vince Young that so many people clamored for? Kyle Orton? The guy who was benched for a shitty Tim Tebow? What FA QB would have been better than Rex. Mind you, this would have been a new offense for whatever QB he brought in.

So because he publicly vouched for Grossman and Beck, you hold him to that?... What the **** did you expect him to say man? Uhh, yeah, guys, Rex and Beck are totally garbage, but I have to ride them out until I find something better in the draft this upcoming year. /faceplam

I suggest you study up on coach speak my friend. It'll save you a lot of trouble in the future. Here are the cliff-notes on coach speak. If he says it, and does it. It's true. If he says it, and goes in the opposite direction, he was lying his ass off.

What he said: I personally vouch for Rex and Beck as our starting QB.
What he does: Following year trades historic amount of picks to move up in draft. (he was lying)

What he says: I can't wait to wait to get to work with Jason Campbell.
What he does: Trades Jason Campbell for a future 4th rounder. (he was lying)

I'm not sure what the hell fans were expecting the man to do the previous two years when the options were all but limited to him. The moves he could make, he did.

His one glaring mistake was the McNabb trade. Trying to think you can teach a old dog a new trick, and thinking he could motivate a lazy person was stupid. Instead of keeping with him though as Vinny would have, he traded him and at least got something back for him.[/quote]

So are you saying if Rex, or Beck, respectively, had surpassed everyones wildest expectations, and streaked us into the playoffs last season we would be in the exact same position we are now? We still would have given up the draft picks. We still would have drafted RG3/Tannehill, and that guy would still be the starting QB. Or are you saying Mike knew in the beginning of the season that these guys were doomed to fail, did nothing to correct the problem purposefully, so we would find ourselves in a position where we could potentially move up to choose either Luck, or a Qb who was barely on the radar at the time. You're right about the Jason Campbell thing, obvious lie, but as for the rest I have to believe that situation dictates outcome. And it's very easy to say everything that has happened is according to plan, when your aim is to justify everything retrospectively. So either Mike is clairvoyant in knowing we would find a trade partner that would put him in the perfect position to draft a system oriented guy, or he manipulated the season negatively through his personnel decisions in order to put himself in a position where he could choose a early first round QB.

Staking your reputation on someone versus a coaches vote of confindence are two extremely different dictums in my opinion. He might have endorsed those guys hoping for the best, and planning for the worst, but if we're using hindsight to define our positions I'll say what QB, even being in a new system, wouldn't have been better than Grossman. The only one I'm seeing on the list is Sam Bradford, and he was injured most of the year. So Orton, sure. Young, ok. Ryan Mallett in the mid rounds, let's give him a go. Tavaris Jackson, suit him up. Matt Moore. Tyrod Taylor, throw them in the mix. And for as bad as Tebow was(72.9), he still wasn't as bad as Rex(72.4).

This prevailing theme that all Mike's moves, execpt one, are justified, and were absolutely necessary, leaving us no other alternative, is absurd. And we're just talking QBs.

Re: RGIII Named Starter

i'm saying where is the other 1/3?

Re: RGIII Named Starter

have the nerve to "dude" me and don't come correct

Re: RGIII Named Starter

[quote=los panda;917087]have the nerve to "dude" me and don't come correct[/quote]

They traded for the guy. And gave up a 2nd round pick. For me that's endorsement enough. If you want to take the time to search for Mike's first press conference with McNabb I'm sure you could find something, but I doubt he brought McNabb in to fail.

Re: RGIII Named Starter

[quote=fanarchist;917088]They traded for the guy. And gave up a 2nd round pick. For me that's endorsement enough. If you want to take the time to search for Mike's first press conference with McNabb I'm sure you could find something, but I doubt he brought McNabb in to fail.[/quote]because mike makes all the moves. you got 67% on this test, homie

Re: RGIII Named Starter

[quote=fanarchist;917019]Yes. I agree the franchise has changed coaching staffs far to frequently for my liking too, but the fact that Shanahan's overall record of wins, and losses is worse than those of his most recent predecessors must also be factored into the equation. I understand he said it will take a while to turn this franchise around, that is a fact, but whether he will turn this franchise around in that time period remains to be seen. If he does, and I hope he can, I'm all for it. However if he can't those words are hollow, the effort was fruitless, time was potentially waisted, and the point is moot. I'm not too high on resumes to begin with, but some of the winningest, and most innovative coaches in the league could be considered plucked from the ether, or given a head coaching shot when juxtaposed with a resume as extensive as Shanahans at this point in his career, and have remained with, and built their legacy through a single team. I'm glad that you trust the current regime and respect that you have an opinion on this topic, but based on what they've shown us up to this moment it seems slightly paradoxical, and I refuse to hold anyone to a lower standard if they are skeptical that this regime can deliver us from mediocrity based their production to date.[/quote]

Provided, yes, the Shanahans haven't produced in the win column just yet. No doubt that's where we ultimately need to see improvement. I can go on into detail to justify being patient, but ultimately, when the 'skins don't even win half their games during the season, that patience runs thin. With that said, I do think MS has improved the talent of this team. The team has gotten younger, and keeps getting younger. He has three quality backs (assuming TH makes the team) in the back field, quality receivers, quality tight ends, what hopes to be a franchise elite QB, a pretty darn improved defense....etc...there are a lot of areas in which this team has improved. But anyways, like I said, I'm not going to go into details of justification, but other than to say I'd have to respectfully disagree that if Shanahan can't turn this club around in the five years, that it will all be wasted time. Consider this, the coaches that the 49ers had prior to Harbaugh could not produce wins on the field, but they were pretty good with bringing in and building talent on that team. Harbaugh comes in and nearly took them to the Super Bowl. But, a lot of his talent was already in place, the team just needed the right guy to manage that talent. If Shanahan turns out to not be the guy to turn this club around, it won't be because of his skills in finding the talent, it will be because he couldn't manage the players and use them to their strengths. But, being that he's being very successful at a few places prior to coming to Washington, I don't believe he would have a deficiency in that regard, yet might just simply run out of time when his contract ends.

Re: RGIII Named Starter

[quote=los panda;917081]i think fanarchist's elitist stance rubs more than one the wrong way[/quote]

I think fanarchist is Donovan McNabb. He has the time to troll the boards now.

Re: RGIII Named Starter

[quote=Mattyk;917080]Please make it stop.[/quote]

This. I feel like I lost track of where this went from being fun to being dull.

Re: RGIII Named Starter

[quote=skinsguy;917115]Provided, yes, the Shanahans haven't produced in the win column just yet. No doubt that's where we ultimately need to see improvement. I can go on into detail to justify being patient, but ultimately, when the 'skins don't even win half their games during the season, that patience runs thin. With that said, I do think MS has improved the talent of this team. The team has gotten younger, and keeps getting younger. He has three quality backs (assuming TH makes the team) in the back field, quality receivers, quality tight ends, what hopes to be a franchise elite QB, a pretty darn improved defense....etc...there are a lot of areas in which this team has improved. But anyways, like I said, I'm not going to go into details of justification, but other than to say I'd have to respectfully disagree that if Shanahan can't turn this club around in the five years, that it will all be wasted time. Consider this, the coaches that the 49ers had prior to Harbaugh could not produce wins on the field, but they were pretty good with bringing in and building talent on that team. Harbaugh comes in and nearly took them to the Super Bowl. But, a lot of his talent was already in place, the team just needed the right guy to manage that talent. If Shanahan turns out to not be the guy to turn this club around, it won't be because of his skills in finding the talent, it will be because he couldn't manage the players and use them to their strengths. But, being that he's being very successful at a few places prior to coming to Washington, I don't believe he would have a deficiency in that regard, yet might just simply run out of time when his contract ends.[/quote]

Don't get me wrong man, I'm not saying Mike can't turn this around, and I would like nothing more than to see that happen. I'm just saying up to now he hasn't shown the necessary strides that would warrant him living out his contract. I think this season will be very telling. And your Harbaugh example is a good one. Harbaugh did a great job of tailoring his system to his players strengths. The same could be said of his brother, very similar paradigm for both of those guys. There are still a few questions in my mind as to whether the acquisitions we made this offseason will ultimately be what's best for the team in the long run, but we did hit a brick wall the day before free agency, and for being handcuffed with stolen cap space I believe they've tried to find the most cost effective talent to improve in the areas where they feel it's required. Our secondary could still use a few upgrades, but all in all I think they've done better this offseason in attempting to fill need, than they have in the past. We'll see how it goes.

Re: RGIII Named Starter

As for the no-huddle talk, RGIII will be a Peyton Manning with wheels, braids, and a different hue. :D