Re: WP article: Time for Gibbs to walk away?
 

[QUOTE=Dlyne8r;372301]Welcome to the site Green1. But, what you suggest is really what has made Gibbs so predictable. 50 Gut, Counter Trey, etc., etc. worked well back in the 80's, but I don't truly believe he's had near as much success running those type formations in his second round.[/QUOTE]

Those plays work to get the skins to the playoffs in 2004. Why not now? If Gibbs walks away why not let him do it his way with control of the offense, and if he can't get to the playoffs then he should walk away. Football is football from the 1980's until now the only difference is the speed and size of the players. Its still executing the plays correctly and being able to block and tackle. You guys are trying to make it so complex and its not. The plays then and and now are basicially the same the only thing different is the formations. Check out the west coast offense. An 1980's offense but almost all of the teams in the NFL run it. Joe Gibbs offense will work with people that can execute it.

Re: WP article: Time for Gibbs to walk away?
 

I think our problem is we're used to free agents being able to make an immediate impact.
[quote]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.[/quote]

While I don't deny what you're saying here (although I think we need a WR too) I think the logic is flawed. We draft rookies, and expect them to come in and be solid starters. As we see, it often takes players a while to develop. Part of building through the draft is being patient with the players that come through. The hate I've seen for Carlos Rogers playing arguable one of the 3 hardest positions in football, has amazed me. It made me realize why we go after free agency, no one wants to let these players develop. If the biggest gripe someone as about a [B]corner back[/B] is their hands, I feel they've done a pretty damn good job, especially since it was his 2nd season.

Re: WP article: Time for Gibbs to walk away?
 

[quote=Daseal;372535]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.[/quote]

point taken, however no team in the nfl has quite the mess that Synder created. When the CBA was about to expire in 06 we were in serious trouble given the dead cap space we had. That's why I think that Gibbs should be evaluated relative to the task he's faced.

That said, Gibbs has done a good job of building for the future IMO & I think this team could be a contender next year. I agree w/Shapiro's assessment of his clock mgmt. & overall game day performance. Gibbs doesn't have the edge he once had, but it might be a matter of him getting it back each year. His teams have developed a pattern the last 3 years of regressing towards the middle of the year, then needing a return to "redskins football" to finish the year strong. This is the 3rd year in a row we've heard the same thing (interesting to note that Gibbs did this in 05 w/out Saunders around) at about the same time.

It may be that Gibbs himself needs that much time into the season to put his foot down. I don't care so long as he can get the team to finish strong, but I'll also admit it's a pattern that can't go on every year.

Re: WP article: Time for Gibbs to walk away?
 

[quote=Daseal;372548] ...
While I don't deny what you're saying here (although I think we need a WR too) I think the logic is flawed. We draft rookies, and expect them to come in and be solid starters. As we see, it often takes players a while to develop. Part of building through the draft is being patient with the players that come through. The hate I've seen for Carlos Rogers playing arguable one of the 3 hardest positions in football, has amazed me. It made me realize why we go after free agency, no one wants to let these players develop. If the biggest gripe someone as about a [B]corner back[/B] is their hands, I feel they've done a pretty damn good job, especially since it was his 2nd season.[/quote]I'd argue that we've done quite well with our first day draft picks, and they have [B]all[/B] become solid starters. I have been a Carlos Rogers defender this season - he was playing well prior to his injury. Other day 1 selections are also starters and doing quite well (Campbell, Taylor, McIntosh, Cooley, and Landry). 2nd day picks Golston and Montgomery have also contributed, while Blades certainly looks like a keeper. I am fine with the FO's recent draft record. I would definitely like to see us do a better job of retaining our picks for future drafts, which seems to be the case after getting burned on Lloyd and Duckett. In a nutshell, I think that Gibbs and the FO finally understand that establishing a stable core is key, and being selective in FA (i.e. Fletcher, Smoot) and drafting well are equally important. A few more offseasons like 2007 will produce a consistent contender IMO.

Re: WP article: Time for Gibbs to walk away?
 

[quote=Daseal;372548]While I don't deny what you're saying here (although I think we need a WR too) I think the logic is flawed. We draft rookies, and expect them to come in and be solid starters. As we see, it often takes players a while to develop. Part of building through the draft is being patient with the players that come through. The hate I've seen for Carlos Rogers playing arguable one of the 3 hardest positions in football, has amazed me. It made me realize why we go after free agency, no one wants to let these players develop. If the biggest gripe someone as about a [B]corner back[/B] is their hands, I feel they've done a pretty damn good job, especially since it was his 2nd season.[/quote]Good point.

Very few draft picks can do anything more than fill a gap in their first season, and those who do tend to be great, albeit few and far between.

We should now be starting to see the return on our 2004 and 2005 drafts. Our first pick in 2005 just went out for the year with a knee injury, so that leaves Taylor, Cooley, and Campbell.

Those three have progressed pretty well to date, but we simply didn't put enough youth in the system to run with it.

Re: WP article: Time for Gibbs to walk away?
 

[QUOTE=Daseal;372548]I think our problem is we're used to free agents being able to make an immediate impact.


While I don't deny what you're saying here (although I think we need a WR too) I think the logic is flawed. We draft rookies, and expect them to come in and be solid starters. As we see, it often takes players a while to develop. Part of building through the draft is being patient with the players that come through. The hate I've seen for Carlos Rogers playing arguable one of the 3 hardest positions in football, has amazed me. It made me realize why we go after free agency, no one wants to let these players develop. If the biggest gripe someone as about a [B]corner back[/B] is their hands, I feel they've done a pretty damn good job, especially since it was his 2nd season.[/QUOTE]


Who exactly are you talking about when you say "We"

Re: WP article: Time for Gibbs to walk away?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;372559]Good point.

Very few draft picks can do anything more than fill a gap in their first season, and those who do tend to be great, albeit few and far between.

We should now be starting to see the return on our 2004 and 2005 drafts. Our first pick in 2005 just went out for the year with a knee injury, [B]so that leaves Taylor, Cooley, and Campbell[/B].

Those three have progressed pretty well to date, but we simply didn't put enough youth in the system to run with it.[/quote]Don't forget McIntosh and Landry - both starting and contributing heavily to the success of the D. They surely beat having Holdman and Archuleta out there.

Re: WP article: Time for Gibbs to walk away?
 

[quote=SouperMeister;372566]Don't forget [B]McIntosh and Landry[/B] - both starting and contributing heavily to the success of the D. They surely beat having Holdman and Archuleta out there.[/quote]Guys who weren't in anyway drafted in 2004 or 2005.