Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[quote=724Skinsfan;262288]Whoa, Bill! Keep it light. My intentions were for meant for humorous purposes only. Sorry for any misunderstandings.[/quote]


No problem.

I am giving up the GM issues entirely at this point because most of the posters are sick of it and it is most likley a moot point anyway because Gibbs has stated things are not changing at the Park.

Sorry for any misunderstandings to you guys.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

In short, I'll just say this about the GM issues. If we have the successes we've had over the past three years with player acquisition and talent evaluation, GM or no, I'll be happy. The majority of our picks have panned out. There aren't many teams that can say that.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

There are 32 teams in the league. How many have a GM, or reasonable facimile..........31? How many are truly successful with their GM, talent evaluation, player aquisition? 20%, 15%??????

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[quote=Beemnseven;262259]I've posted this before, but here are a few points that need to be addressed when anyone defends the personnel decision making of Joe Gibbs the Personnel Decision Maker:

--Giving former wideout Darnerian McCants a $2 million bonus a week before he was declared inactive and subsequently released...

--Giving up a 3rd round draft choice for Mark Brunell who was going to be cut by Jacksonville anyway...

--Giving up Champ Bailey [B][I]AND[/I][/B] a 2nd round choice for Clinton Portis...

--Letting go of Antonio Pierce, who's made it his career long vendetta to bring his game of the year performance every time he plays the Redskins...

--Giving up a 3rd and 4th round draft choice, plus a $10 million bonus for Brandon Lloyd who won't come anywhere near his career averages for catches...

--Giving Randle El a $10 million signing bonus when we already had 3 capable kick returners in Thrash, Betts, and Cartwright...

--Giving up a 3rd round choice for T.J. Duckett who won't get more than 50 carries for the season...

--Trading up in the '06 draft for Rocky McIntosh, losing next year's 2nd round choice when he can't even unseat Warrick Holdman or any other of the incompetent buffoons we have playing on defense...

--Adam Archuleta -- do we need an explanation about him?

--The defense is old, needs to be completely overhauled and gutted, and we haven't nearly enough draft picks next year to address a third of the needs on that side of the field.

These are not the moves of a smart front office.[/quote]

Look at the sports page of the Washington Times today. If anyone can post it's a good article.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

I would not have a problem is CC coming back to our front office. Since he has left things have been pretty bad. When he left (if anyone can remember) he set the team up really good. He left it in real good shape. And the Texans problems are not all his fault.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[quote=skinsfan69;262359]I would not have a problem is CC coming back to our front office. Since he has left things have been pretty bad. When he left (if anyone can remember) he set the team up really good. He left it in real good shape. And the Texans problems are not all his fault.[/quote]

So he gets credit for the good things, but no blame for when things haven't worked out??

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=Hog1;262307]There are 32 teams in the league. How many have a GM, or reasonable facimile..........31? How many are truly successful with their GM, talent evaluation, player aquisition? 20%, 15%??????[/QUOTE]

No one denies this. No one ever said it was easy to succeed in this league. Player acquisition is a tricky business, and plain 'ol luck is a large part of it.

The problem we have is, the same strategy is being used over and over again with the same pathetic results. Even since Gibbs' return, the "hits" that front office defenders are so quick to point out have amounted to a 21-25 record!

I don't think anyone assumes that once we have someone in Redskin Park with "General Manager" on his office door the fortunes of this team will magically lead us straight to a Lombardi Trophy. But it's all about what direction you're headed in, and whether you've experienced enough to learn from your past mistakes. I've said this over and over, and I'm growing tired of saying it -- but we know which strategy with regard to player-personnel doesn't work. Getting away from that philosophy -- regardless of the title of the person that changes it -- will signal that this organization is at least on the right track.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

Just curious, what will it say for this current front office if the team makes the playoffs again next year?

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;262368]Just curious, what will it say for this current front office if the team makes the playoffs again next year?[/QUOTE]

2 playoff seasons and 2 losing seasons? I'd call that a mixed bag, inconsistency.

What do you call a 21-25 overall record?

More importantly, what would you call it if Joe Gibbs weren't the head coach and team president?

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

I think we just need gibbs to evaluate talent on his own or not at all. He picked campbell, which seems to be working out, he picked brunell....who DID take us to the playoffs....he didn't pick ARCH. The key is for there to be one final decision maker, not three. With three, you get three different gameplans, three different approaches, three different needs. So Gibbs needs to step up and take full responsibility or lay off completely with personnel.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[quote=Beemnseven;262369]2 playoff seasons and 2 losing seasons? I'd call that a mixed bag, inconsistency.

What do you call a 21-25 overall record?

More importantly, what would you call it if Joe Gibbs weren't the head coach and team president?[/quote]

ok, how about a Super Bowl?

My point is, if the front office is doing such a horrible job now and is the focal point for a lot of the blame, would they receive an equal amount of praise if things turned around? Somehow I doubt it.

I've already said it before, regardless of his name, I am not satisfied with our current situation. Losing is never acceptable however, again regardless of his name, I wouldn't be calling for major changes.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[quote=Beemnseven;262364]No one denies this. No one ever said it was easy to succeed in this league. Player acquisition is a tricky business, and plain 'ol luck is a large part of it.

The problem we have is, the same strategy is being used over and over again with the same pathetic results. Even since Gibbs' return, the "hits" that front office defenders are so quick to point out have amounted to a 21-25 record!

I don't think anyone assumes that once we have someone in Redskin Park with "General Manager" on his office door the fortunes of this team will magically lead us straight to a Lombardi Trophy. But it's all about what direction you're headed in, and whether you've experienced enough to learn from your past mistakes. I've said this over and over, and I'm growing tired of saying it -- but we know which strategy with regard to player-personnel doesn't work. Getting away from that philosophy -- regardless of the title of the person that changes it -- will signal that this organization is at least on the right track.[/quote]

I agree with your post for the most part. All of our aquisitions have not worked out, but many have! I also firmly believe there is more than one way to achieve success. We have taken a tremendous amount of heat for not building throught the draft, conventionally as if that were the only path to the light. Again, look at the number of teams that used this method with NO success. I have no problem with combination of draft and FA. Look at the success rate of, and the difficulty of paying the high first round picks. Maybe it's better to trade down for more picks. The only point I want to make is, pioneering new and inventive ways to succeed is a risk/reward business, regardless of the business your in. I would prefer to lead the pack than to follow. I am totally confident that Joe2 can and will deliver the LONG TERM success we all would like to see.
I would not mind a GM (with winning track record) in the Skins equation. I would want Joe2 to bless the process or scrap it.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

Just for the record (again) so that we all have it down. Who was going to predict the injuries that we've had this year? A totally healthy team has the same talent it had last year. The same team that took us to the playoffs. They'll be back next year, I mean look at the Eagles.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;262373]ok, how about a Super Bowl?

My point is, if the front office is doing such a horrible job now and is the focal point for a lot of the blame, would they receive an equal amount of praise if things turned around? Somehow I doubt it.

I've already said it before, regardless of his name, I am not satisfied with our current situation. Losing is never acceptable however, again regardless of his name, I wouldn't be calling for major changes.[/QUOTE]

Those who defend this front office have to do it with "what ifs" and hypotheticals. The skeptics, those who criticize the current system only have to point to the scoreboard.

This is just a thought, but... the people who blindly and relentlessly defend the upper levels of the franchise who are in charge of personnel -- weren't they the same people who told us that everything would be fine once the exhibition games were over and the regular season started?

I'm not calling for major changes to the coaching staff. I believe the structure is fine just the way it is -- and Saunders WILL pay dividends, it's only a matter of time. And I don't buy into the 'too many cooks in the kitchen' arguement.

I am firmly on the side that says the personnel decision making process needs to be revised. What has to stop is the current system, which resembles a couple of teenagers with a blank check from Daddy Warbucks'.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection;262387]Just for the record (again) so that we all have it down. Who was going to predict the injuries that we've had this year? A totally healthy team has the same talent it had last year. The same team that took us to the playoffs. They'll be back next year, I mean look at the Eagles.[/QUOTE]

We had one starter go down for the year. One. And we still had him for eight games.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

Pierson. Portis. Springs.

One?

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection;262395]Pierson. Portis. Springs.

One?[/QUOTE]

Prioleau is not a starter. We still had Springs for more than half the year, along with Portis.

Let's not blame this season on injuries. That would take us to a whole new level of ignorance.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven;262388]Those who defend this front office have to do it with "what ifs" and hypotheticals. The skeptics, those who criticize the current system only have to point to the scoreboard.

This is just a thought, but... the people who blindly and relentlessly defend the upper levels of the franchise who are in charge of personnel -- weren't they the same people who told us that everything would be fine once the exhibition games were over and the regular season started?

I'm not calling for major changes to the coaching staff. I believe the structure is fine just the way it is -- and Saunders WILL pay dividends, it's only a matter of time. And I don't buy into the 'too many cooks in the kitchen' arguement.

I am firmly on the side that says the personnel decision making process needs to be revised. What has to stop is the current system, which resembles a couple of teenagers with a blank check from Daddy Warbucks'.[/QUOTE]

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Are you saying the coaching staff is fine but it doesn't really matter because they don't have the right players to coach?

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[quote=Beemnseven;262388][B][I]Those who defend this front office have to do it with "what ifs" and hypotheticals. The skeptics, those who criticize the current system only have to point to the scoreboard. [/I][/B]

This is just a thought, but... the people who blindly and relentlessly defend the upper levels of the franchise who are in charge of personnel -- weren't they the same people who told us that everything would be fine once the exhibition games were over and the regular season started?

I'm not calling for major changes to the coaching staff. I believe the structure is fine just the way it is -- and Saunders WILL pay dividends, it's only a matter of time. And I don't buy into the 'too many cooks in the kitchen' arguement.

I am firmly on the side that says the personnel decision making process needs to be revised. What has to stop is the current system, which resembles a couple of teenagers with a blank check from Daddy Warbucks'.[/quote]

I disagree. Gibbs come in, has a rusty period with clock management issues and offensive issues. He still produces a 1300 yard rusher in that system, all the while GW leads the defense to third overall. The next year, with virtually the same team, Gibbs leads the team to a playoff win, two record setting team performances by both Portis and Moss. Both acquisitions of the current administration.

This year is most certainly an "off" year. While football is a team game, it's a lot of great individual efforts that make average teams great. You lose Pierson, Springs and Portis on day one. Springs and Portis are arguably MVPs on their respective sides of the ball. What is it that needs to be changed? Why does everyone have such a problem with how things are run?

After we made these offseason moves, we were all excited to be Super Bowl bound. Is it overspending then?

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[quote=Beemnseven;262400]Prioleau is not a starter. We still had Springs for more than half the year, along with Portis.

Let's not blame this season on injuries. That would take us to a whole new level of ignorance.[/quote]

Yes, Pierson IS a starter. He was scheduled to start alongside Taylor in the opener.

And as for injuries, tell that to Philly last year and this year. How many times did we see Kenny Wright and Adam Archuleta getting burned for touchdowns while covering the teams number one or number two receivers? I'm sure if a GM, Gibbs, Saunders, the turf guy or anyone knew both Springs and Pierson wouldn't be starting, they PROBABLY would have tried to sign a starting corner. Things like that are unforseen, you hope the team can handle it, but most can't.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS;262401]I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Are you saying the coaching staff is fine but it doesn't really matter because they don't have the right players to coach?[/QUOTE]

Based on the past success of Gibbs, Williams, and Saunders, I don't think any deserve to be fired. That's not to say there weren't breakdowns in certain fundamentals of coaching, because obviously there were. For the sake of continuity with regard to offensive and defensive systems and philosophies, I think it's best that the coaching staff remain intact.

I just don't want them in charge of personnel anymore.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[quote=Beemnseven;262400]Prioleau is not a starter. We still had Springs for more than half the year, along with Portis.

Let's not blame this season on injuries. That would take us to a whole new level of ignorance.[/quote]

GW said Prioleau was going to play ahead of AA after his injury.

Salave'a missed time as well.

Also, some players have been playing hurt like Griffin and Jansen.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

So just because we had a banged up Portis for the first half of the season, and a still not quite 100% Springs for the second half, we should just overlook those key injuries in the grand scheme of the season?

I'd say it's very fair to factor injuries in to the final result of the season.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[quote=Beemnseven;262404]Based on the past success of Gibbs, Williams, and Saunders, I don't think any deserve to be fired. That's not to say there weren't breakdowns in certain fundamentals of coaching, because obviously there were. For the sake of continuity with regard to offensive and defensive systems and philosophies, I think it's best that the coaching staff remain intact.

I just don't want them in charge of personnel anymore.[/quote]


I actually wouldn't mind the team letting go of Steve Jackson - Jerry Gray is a better secondary coach and do we really need a seperate safeties coach?

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

So LT gets hurt, I guess it's just too bad, so sad for the Chargers right?

How about the Bengals in the playoffs last year with Palmer?

I think some people want someone who is omniscient rather than a GM.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[quote=Beemnseven;262388]Those who defend this front office have to do it with "what ifs" and hypotheticals. The skeptics, those who criticize the current system only have to point to the scoreboard.

This is just a thought, but... the people who blindly and relentlessly defend the upper levels of the franchise who are in charge of personnel -- weren't they the same people who told us that everything would be fine once the exhibition games were over and the regular season started?

I'm not calling for major changes to the coaching staff. I believe the structure is fine just the way it is -- and Saunders WILL pay dividends, it's only a matter of time. And I don't buy into the 'too many cooks in the kitchen' arguement.

I am firmly on the side that says the personnel decision making process needs to be revised. What has to stop is the current system, which resembles a couple of teenagers with a blank check from Daddy Warbucks'.[/quote]

I'm not blindly following anything, and I'm pretty much done with defending myself on that point. Last year wasn't a what if, remarkable as it may have seemed to some, the personnel that was selected by this front office led this team to 11 wins including the playoffs. It's not crazy to think that it can happen again.

Back to my hypothetical, because that is what we do here on occassion, what if this team goes to the Super Bowl? Will the front office get any credit, or will the team have somehow overcome the totally inept front office??

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

Of course Matty. It's one or the other. Someone has to focus on the negative. Someone will say, "Man, if we had a GM would have been undefeated this year!" This all begs the question of whether or not the team would perform as it has for another coach. THAT'S when I don't question Gibbs. Sure, I'm not a Gibbs apologist by any means, but talk about a guy who can motivate and run a team.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection;262403]Yes, Pierson IS a starter. He was scheduled to start alongside Taylor in the opener.
[/QUOTE]

NO Pierson's [U]NOT[/U] the starter. He wasn't the starter last year. Ryan Clark was, then Arculeta was brought in to replace him. Prioleau was a back-up. Notice also he was injured on a special teams play.

Now, you could make the argument that since Archuleta is an incompetent, inept BUFFOON, Prioleau would have been called upon to start in place of him. But who's fault was that? Could it be the fault of the people who called for Randle El AND Brandon Lloyd when James Thrash and David Patten were riding the pine? Could minor adjustments here and there, say ... taking a corner instead of Rocky McIntosh (who only took 13 games or so before he was ready for significant playing time) have something to do with the fact that there's no one else to turn to in the secondary but Mike Rumph and Ade Frickin' Jimoh?

Or, that we have to depend on Warrick Holdman when Antonio Pierce might have offered a better alternative at linebacker? Noooo. Now Antonio sits in the middle of a pentagram, surrounded by burning candles in a hypnotic trance whenever he gets the chance to play his former team to inflict revenge like the kind the Redskins have never seen!

Oh that's right. I'm thinking of Mike Barrow, not Holdman. How could I have forgotten that brilliant addition?

What else needs to happen before you concede that the way things are set up now don't exactly work?

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

All I need to know is I look at the people we have now, that came from this current group of coaches. We have Portis, Moss, and a number of great defensive starters. You forgot to mention THEM didntcha'?

And yes, Pierson was slated to start because of the strike-out on AA. That happens. GM. No GM.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

Prioleau was scheduled to start week one

[url=http://www.washtimes.com/sports/20061205-114824-6486r.htm]In the NFL, everybody hurts - Sports - The Washington Times, America's Newspaper[/url]

Either way, he was a big loss in terms of flexibility in the secondary.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven;262404]Based on the past success of Gibbs, Williams, and Saunders, I don't think any deserve to be fired. That's not to say there weren't breakdowns in certain fundamentals of coaching, because obviously there were. For the sake of continuity with regard to offensive and defensive systems and philosophies, I think it's best that the coaching staff remain intact.

I just don't want them in charge of personnel anymore.[/QUOTE]

Ok, but I guess what I'm asking is do you think that this coaching staff can coach this team (fully healthy) to the playoffs and beyond in 2007? And if so, what's the problem with the personnel then?

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

Not to...

[CENTER][IMG]http://images.southparkstudios.com/media/images/602/602__image_09.jpg[/IMG][/CENTER]
[LEFT]
...but hiring a GM would only be a ceremonial gesture to placate the critics of the current front office. Whoever the guy would be, he'd only be a "yes" man here.[/LEFT]

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection;262420]All I need to know is I look at the people we have now, that came from this current group of coaches. We have Portis, Moss, and a number of great defensive starters. You forgot to mention THEM didntcha'?

And yes, Pierson was slated to start because of the strike-out on AA. That happens. GM. No GM.[/QUOTE]


And all I need to do is point to the record: 5-9. What sort of ranking do those "great defensive starters" have this year?

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=EEich;262001]Dilfer won the Superbowl... or at least he didn't lose it.
The only thing Shuler won was a congressional seat (complete failure :)).[/QUOTE]

Shuler's gotten filthy rich off real estate here in East Tennessee. He wasn't so hot at QB, but he's running a very successful company.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;262422]Prioleau was scheduled to start week one

[url=http://www.washtimes.com/sports/20061205-114824-6486r.htm]In the NFL, everybody hurts*-*Sports*-*The Washington Times, America's Newspaper[/url]

Either way, he was a big loss in terms of flexibility in the secondary.[/QUOTE]

So Prioleau was slated to start [U]because of injury[/U]. He was not expected to be the starter for the year.

If Betts had snapped his Achilles before Week one, he would not have been a starter that was lost for the year. He was a back-up, slated to start because of injury -- same as Prioleau.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS;262424]Ok, but I guess what I'm asking is do you think that this coaching staff can coach this team (fully healthy) to the playoffs and beyond in 2007? And if so, what's the problem with the personnel then?[/QUOTE]

Again, "what if" ???

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven;262437]Again, "what if" ???[/QUOTE]

???

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[quote=Beemnseven;262433]And all I need to do is point to the record: 5-9. What sort of ranking do those "great defensive starters" have this year?[/quote]

All we need to do is point to key injuries. Whether you like it or not, no GM can plan for it and it can alter the course of an entire season.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[quote=Beemnseven;262436]So Prioleau was slated to start [U]because of injury[/U]. He was not expected to be the starter for the year.

If Betts had snapped his Achilles before Week one, he would not have been a starter that was lost for the year. He was a back-up, slated to start because of injury -- same as Prioleau.[/quote]

Because of injury? Where does the article say that?

[quote]The Redskins have four players on injured reserve: Portis; Prioleau, who was slated to start at safety ahead of Adam Archuleta in Week 1 before injuring his knee on the opening kickoff; kicker John Hall (groin); and tight end Christian Fauria (ankle). [/quote]

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;262451]All we need to do is point to key injuries. Whether you like it or not, no GM can plan for it and it can alter the course of an entire season.[/quote]

Big deal. Portis got hurt. A good GM would have drafted a backup of equal value. Springs was hurt. A good GM would have kept a reserve #1 CB on the bench just in case. Griffin got hurt. A GM would have made sure a run stopper of equal caliber played in his place. A good GM would have forced the new OC to make the team learn his system faster and with less mistakes in a shorter period of time. A good GM would make sure all rookies that he drafts would be able to learn the offense/defense and start immediately. A good GM would make sure our kicker makes every FG. A good GM wrinkles his nose and everything works perfectly. A good GM will never burn his microwave popcorn. A good GM always has just enough cereal left in his box before he totally runs out.