Re: Should Mike Shanahan Be Canonized?
 

First of all, youth movement is an often overrated and misused term. By the standard of the some, how many "young" teams have won Super Bowls or conference championships in the past 10 years? If you're young and competent at key positions, that's the point. Hell, Jacksonville is a young team, but they play like crap. So who gives a shit at the end of the day.

Secondly, the Redskins have been very fortunate with injuries this year. Yes, we've suffered some injuries, but the offensive side of the ball has remained largely -- 98% in tack. On defense, except for Rak and Carriker, we've pretty much fielded all of our starters.

Re: Should Mike Shanahan Be Canonized?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;976760]Well sure, adding key players at key positions through the draft is a major reason why we're enjoying this recent run of success.

I just don't understand why people think that the Redskins getting returns on their draft suddenly makes them unique or young when the numbers say otherwise.[/quote]

It makes people think that we are using youth instead of relying on aged veterans (ie the over the hill gang, or the 2009 Skins) Hence the term youth movement. This isn't a complicated concept, and you sound more like a bitter old man who grudgingly gives ground rather than the guy who would at some points in the past write fairly interesting breakdowns of the games. You are arguing over where the Skins fall in this list:
[quote]1 Rams 25.32
2 Eagles 25.55
3 Browns 25.62
4 Vikings 25.64
5 Packers 25.65
6 Buccaneers 25.69
7 Seahawks 25.77
8 Chiefs 25.8
9 Patriots 25.81
10 Titans 25.85
11 Bengals 25.87
12 Panthers 25.91
13 Dolphins 25.91
14 Cowboys 26
15 Colts 26.02
16 Jaguars 26.06
17 Saints 26.34
18 Raiders 26.38
19 Giants 26.4
20 Ravens 26.4
21 Texans 26.42
22 Broncos 26.47
23 Redskins 26.53
24 Steelers 26.56
25 Bills 26.57
26 49ers 26.64
27 Bears 26.66
28 Cardinals 26.91
29 Lions 26.93
30 Falcons 26.98
31 Chargers 27.15 [/quote]
saying the move up was to be expected. Duh. But a youth movement isn't discussing team age, it's discussing the age of your starters, and how long you can reasonably expect the core to be around. We have a good youthful core, and can reasonably expect to add several in each of the next two drafts (not a first round pick, but 2-7th both years).

Bottomline: To argue or imply no youth movement is a far more shallow analysis than you are capable of.

Re: Should Mike Shanahan Be Canonized?
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;976778]Who's saying we are "unique". We are, at least I am simply crediting MS and BA for adding youth and depth in a manner we haven't seen in the last 15 years at least.

You have consistently criticized both the talent acquisition of MS and the usage of that talent. I simply posit, regardless of how other teams build their roster, I am pleased with MS's roster and his usage of the same.[/quote]I'm very impressed with the last five games and still fairly unimpressed with the big picture, but you knew both of those things already. Either way, they've done a good job with this team, emphasis on the word team.

Re: Should Mike Shanahan Be Canonized?
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;976782]It makes people think that we are using youth instead of relying on aged veterans (ie the over the hill gang, or the 2009 Skins) Hence the term youth movement. This isn't a complicated concept, and you sound more like a bitter old man who grudgingly gives ground rather than the guy who would at some points in the past write fairly interesting breakdowns of the games. You are arguing over where the Skins fall in this list:

saying the move up was to be expected. Duh. But a youth movement isn't discussing team age, [B]it's discussing the age of your starters, and how long you can reasonably expect the core to be around. [/B] We have a good youthful core, and can reasonably expect to add several in each of the next two drafts (not a first round pick, but 2-7th both years).

Bottomline: To argue or imply no youth movement is a far more shallow analysis than you are capable of.[/quote]

I think that is a fair assessment.

Re: Should Mike Shanahan Be Canonized?
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;976782]It makes people think that we are using youth instead of relying on aged veterans (ie the over the hill gang, or the 2009 Skins) Hence the term youth movement. This isn't a complicated concept, and you sound more like a bitter old man who grudgingly gives ground rather than the guy who would at some points in the past write fairly interesting breakdowns of the games. You are arguing over where the Skins fall in this list:

saying the move up was to be expected. Duh. But a youth movement isn't discussing team age, it's discussing the age of your starters, and how long you can reasonably expect the core to be around. We have a good youthful core, and can reasonably expect to add several in each of the next two drafts (not a first round pick, but 2-7th both years).

Bottomline: To argue or imply no youth movement is a far more shallow analysis than you are capable of.[/quote]I always deal in the reality of the situation and if that's going to turn me into a bitter old man, then I can live with that. I know little of this "giving ground" you speak of though. I've been pretty consistent throughout this.

Re: Should Mike Shanahan Be Canonized?
 

[quote=SCRedskinsFan;976675]What's this "win now team" thing? Tough to call a team with a rookie QB, a rookie RB, and a rookie backup QB a "win now team."

Unless, of course Shanahan created the "win now team" sometime during this season. Which surely would be more credit than you've been willing to give the coaches todate. Can't have it both ways...[/quote]

^^I have no idea what any of that meant. Thought it was pretty obvious the Redskins were a "win now" team when we made the trade with St. Louis, no? When you give up three of six picks over a 30 month period for one player and don't have a lot of ammo to use in FA doesn't it say you think you can win with that one player? Year one is a long shot to win it all, but yeah, you're looking to be competitive right away. That's win now to me as opposed to still rebuilding. Clear?

I said 8-8 minimum before the season started, and that was before we saw how unbelievable RG is.

Things are going to get complicated when Fletcher goes though. While Riley has improved markedly those who poo-poo London's impact are mistaken, he's still the QB of the defense and our most important defensive player.

Re: Should Mike Shanahan Be Canonized?
 

I guess you can say it means win now, or you can take it as we had a chance to land a once in a lifetime type of player, a real change the landscape of the franchise type of QB and no price was too steep.

At 22 he's probably going to be here a long time. There's a long term aspect of the move at play too.

Re: Should Mike Shanahan Be Canonized?
 

[quote=donofriose;976716]There is more than just Griffin to the youth movement...
Morris is 24
Orakpo 26
Kerrigan 24
T. Williams 24
Garçon 26

There are other plays like fred davis, riley and jenkins but to say that Griffin is the youth movement in my opinion is not accurate.[/quote]

To me the value of youth is health and maybe endurance (whereas older rosters should have the edge in experience and football IQ), but you don't have that with Orakpo or Garcon. Both already are evidently battling long-term, nagging injuries.

But yeah the rest of those cats and Hankerson and hopefully Jenkins are a solid group of young players.

Re: Should Mike Shanahan Be Canonized?
 

[quote=The Goat;976831]When you give up three of six picks over a 30 month period for one player and don't have a lot of ammo to use in FA doesn't it say you think you can win with that one player?[/quote]

Perhaps. I think an alternate interpretation is that they thought we can't win ever without a good QB and they did what they thought had to be one to get one. Regardless of its short-term impact. I don't believe they've acted in a way that was very clearly a win now or never type proposition.

Re: Should Mike Shanahan Be Canonized?
 

Well...whatever. I want them to win now.

Re: Should Mike Shanahan Be Canonized?
 

[quote=The Goat;976841]Well...whatever. I want them to win now.[/quote]

Yeah me too

Re: Should Mike Shanahan Be Canonized?
 

I'm starting to think haslett deserves to be part of the coach of the year conversation. When has a defensive coordinator done so much with so little?

Re: Should Mike Shanahan Be Canonized?
 

Who wants to canonize Mike now? :yeahright::hitfan:

Time for a new poll

[url]http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-locker-room/50026-should-mike-shanahan-be-fired.html[/url]