Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

As usual, there's a lot of discussion here about how we need a "real GM" and Vinny must go, and the front office is a mess, etc.

But is the main problem the talent we have, or something else?

Vote or Dmek will get all Amish up in this piece. West Siiiide!

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

I'm not a big fan of any of the poll choices.

My view is this, we've got talent. We had more talent than our 5-11 record indicated last year. However, I think the transition to Saunders threw things off track and put us back at square one offensively. The switch to Campbell should have come earlier, but I don't think it would have changed the final result of the season very much. Portis never got on track before being lost for the season and that was a big loss despite the stellar job Betts did in relief. Overall the offense just never got on track and I think there was some grumbling behind the scenes with players wondering why such a drastic change was needed.

Defensively we had some key injuries, guys that underperformed, and a behind the scenes clashing between some players and coaches that probably didn't help out in the morale dept. very much.

I don't think it's a cut and dry issue of personnel vs. coaching as to why we didn't win last year. It was a combo of both, with other issues mixed in as well such as injuries, making the switch to a new offense, switching QBs, and petty drama behind the scenes.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

You're right sir. May I kiss your ring?

Seriously though, in a way it's sort of what I was trying to get at. That it's not so simple and cut and dry as to say we need a General Manager.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

Offense:
I think our team has the talent and the coaching staff to make things happen. We've had a solid running attack (#4 last year) the past few years. What we have lacked is a playmaker at the league's most important position - QB. Moreover, we've had turnover in systems over the past few years.

Defense:
I honestly think our defense is simply aging and was hurt bad last year with injuries to the secondary and at DT.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

why is it my poll? lol

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

I think Matty's pretty close to dead on.

It's not a coaching issue. All coaches make mistakes. We aren't at a disadvantage here.

The reason we are losing is not because the front office hasn't been trying, or because they "don't know how to build a winner", its that we invest big dollars in all the wrong places.

For all their faults though, they've done a great job identifying the issues we have. Better than the average FO in that respect. They have just skimped on their pro scouting responsibilities, IMO.

We are more talented than a 5-11 team as demonstrated by our very unfavorable close game record for a year ago.

This 2007 team will be closer in resemblence to the 2005 team than the 2006 team which is good. The defense will be somewhere inbetween the years and the offense will be the best we've seen it in awhile.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

maybe I'm the ultimate homer, but i agree with Matty. offensively, in coach Saunders second season with a team, his former teams have done very well. i would be big time surprised if our offense isn't top 10 this year, our defense is definitely better then they showed last year. between a rash of injuries, and the front office miscalculations about A.A., Ryan Clark, and Andre carter( to a certain extent) i would be shocked if Greg Williams defense isn't kicking butt like 2005. i think most of us are in agreement that the skins have alot of talent. just keeping it all on the field at once was a major problem last season

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

and smootsmack, im glad you know your role:)

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

Something I have learned in life.

Problems are almost never the result of black and white type reasons.

In an innumerably variable sport like football it really can never come down to one thing or the other. Our lack of success in the past several years is a combo of bad luck, bad decisions, poor play, and bad attitude.

I think everyone in the org should share blame. For whatever reason it seems most of us want to find one or two points of weakness and fix them thinking that will turn it around. It may but we need to realize that we have lots of problems and we just haven't fixed the right ones enough to get it going.

I think every team has problems too, not just us. We just haven't dealt with them as efficiently as other teams.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;290559]I think Matty's pretty close to dead on.

It's not a coaching issue. All coaches make mistakes. We aren't at a disadvantage here.

The reason we are losing is not because the front office hasn't been trying, or because they "don't know how to build a winner", its that we invest big dollars in all the wrong places.

For all their faults though, they've done a great job identifying the issues we have. Better than the average FO in that respect. They have just skimped on their pro scouting responsibilities, IMO.

We are more talented than a 5-11 team as demonstrated by our very unfavorable close game record for a year ago.

This 2007 team will be closer in resemblence to the 2005 team than the 2006 team which is good. The defense will be somewhere inbetween the years and the offense will be the best we've seen it in awhile.[/QUOTE]

I agree. I tend to like the fact that we are going to be so overlooked again just like in 2005. I'd much rather have no expectations. We'll do better that way. I have a totally unrealistically positive feeling about this upcoming season.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

There are a few factors going on. Teams figured out the whole Cover 2/Tampa 2/G-Dub 2 scheme, and it completely threw off Williams. Compile with injuries, and he's trying to completely get a defense up to speed during the season, instead of during training camp.

Saunders brought in a completely new offense. It's been said that it takes at least a year for a new system to gel enough to compete.

The talent is there, player and coach wise. I chose the last option only because I term misuse in the fact that Williams needing to make more adjustments (which he did) and they brought in Saunders, when the offense was doing fine without him.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

On offense I think the talent is there, but the transition to Saunders' system and the overall inexperience of Campbell meant that the team couldn't or didn't play up to their potential. I hope Campbell has better timing with his WRs next season and I hope the running game/offensive line play is up to last year's level because that would make us tough to slow down.

On defense I really have to say that I don't think the overall talent level was very high. There are a couple of good players who were frequently taken out of position because of the many bad players. The amount of missed tackles, missed sacks, and missed turnovers made me sick on a weekly basis.
Our secondary was terrible and I blame that on the fact that we didn't have good depth. Springs played okay when he was healthy and Rogers left a lot to be desired. Rumph, Wright, Jamoh, and whoever else played like crap and I'm glad most of them are gone.

So, I don't know how to fix the team. I don't think we're screwed but I'm not nearly as optimistic as I was last offseason (thank God it's only March). I think our offense will be better just because they've had a whole offseason together. I think the D needs to remember how to tackle and crush the pocket.
That's all for now.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

I think we're trying to fit players around schemes more than we're trying to fit schemes to players.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

Yes, last season went downhill because of unusual and unforeseen circumstances (injuries, new coaching systems, underperforming vets, late-season QB change, etc) and I agree that u can't evaluate a FO's performance based on a single season's outcome. However, Cerrato and the others have repeatedly and gotten things wrong. Many of their high-profile draft picks haven't panned out the way that they should have. On top of that they have traded away picks like they were just afterthoughts and spend lavish sums on players that have ended up not only underperforming but have messed with the teams chemistry. Even the players that we have developed we have let go to FA and trade. I just think that for a great franchise like the washington redskins, its a shame that we expect so little from the FO because we have been trained to overlook their role as a product of the "skins being the skins". For that reason it is time for some change

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

IMO we just don't have the players. Some guys got real old real quick. We have potential on offense but defense needs a major overhaul. Who on our front 7 scares anybody? Smoot and Fletcher will help a little. At least Fletcher knows how to tackle guys and he can provide leadership. But the line is a joke. We can't rush the passer for shit. And can someone in our secondary learn how to wrap up and tackle somebody? Some of our problems on defense comes down to fundamentals.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

[quote=Rajmahal33;290644]Yes, last season went downhill because of unusual and unforeseen circumstances (injuries, new coaching systems, underperforming vets, late-season QB change, etc) and I agree that u can't evaluate a FO's performance based on a single season's outcome. However, Cerrato and the others have repeatedly and gotten things wrong. Many of their high-profile draft picks haven't panned out the way that they should have. On top of that they have traded away picks like they were just afterthoughts and spend lavish sums on players that have ended up not only underperforming but have messed with the teams chemistry. Even the players that we have developed we have let go to FA and trade. I just think that for a great franchise like the washington redskins, its a shame that we expect so little from the FO because we have been trained to overlook their role as a product of the "skins being the skins". For that reason it is time for some change[/quote]

I get so tired of people blaming coaching systems/playbooks. It's a bunch of BS. Our offense sucked in the begining becasue we didn't have a good QB and the line was playing below average. New Orleans got new playbooks on offense and defense. The differnece is they have good players that play well together.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

I agree with the EGO on this one...

Offense has all the talent to be virtually unstoppable

Defense had the right mix in 2005 and then the coaches/ players ego's got in the way and we let some key people go chasing big name free agents.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

I beleive this year we are doing business differently than in the last couple of off seasons, we are making better decisions. I think it has taken a little more time than most expected for Joe to addapt to the new NFL, but I think Joe has a good game plan and he's sticken to it, and it's going to take a team effort all the way across the board to make it work. With that being said if anyone can get it done, he's got my vote.

Excluding a couple of moves I believe we can make in the Draft or FA on the D- line, we have all the tools, including team chemistry to be really good with the players we have on both sides of the ball. Furthermore, I think this year we are in for a real surprise, Joe is going to make a BIG statement, that the game hasn't passed him by.

As far as the GM I'm not against it at all, a smart GM that can get along, working with Joe and the rest of the FO. would be a great move. Free up the coach's time to do what he does best,coach. We all know Joe's time is limited.

I think he wants nothing more than to set our team structure up for long term sucess. Return this GREAT TEAM TO GLORY, then ride off into the Carolina sunset. :)

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

[quote=skinsfan69;290680]I get so tired of people blaming coaching systems/playbooks. It's a bunch of BS. Our offense sucked in the begining becasue we didn't have a good QB and the line was playing below average. New Orleans got new playbooks on offense and defense. The differnece is they have good players that play well together.[/quote]I agree with you, and I disagree. Let me elaborate...

I agree wholeheartedly that the Coaching staff can not be blamed for sustained failure. Good schemes can provide a decisive edge on a single game level, but over the course of the season, NO coach will outscheme all his opponents. If the end of the season rolls around, and a team has on the whole put in a sub par performance, then only the players are to be blamed. The coaching factor will ALWAYS even out over 16 games. Coaches will not be a decisive factor between a 10-6 team, and a 5-11 team.

Early season, the losing was almost exclusively a defensive issue. Through the first half of our season, the only thing this team had going for it was the passing game. Our passing game completely fell off the map once Brunell was replaced by Campbell. This wasn't because Campbell was playing exceptionally poorly, but because our offense missed our "puss-armed" QB coming out and completing 63% week in and week out. Campbell was throwing at a Vick-like 51% through his first five starts and our offense was suffering. We lost a very significant yard and a half per attempt with #17 in. Luckily, Cooley made a gamebreaking play vs. Carolina and the defense held New Orleans quiet, or JC would have been without a win this year.

The line certainly picked up their play in the 2nd half giving Campbell time that Brunell never had, and opening planet sized holes for Ladell Betts that Portis never had. But our power/short yardage running game completely sucked all year, and without Brunell to complete short 3rd down passes, the combination of Campbell's inaccuracies and lack of a short game made us one of the leagues worst teams in third and short.

It was so bad that the 2006 Redskins had a better shot to convert 3rd and 5 than they did to convert 3rd and 2. No lie.

In summary: quit blaming coaching staffs, quit blaming Brunell, fix the defense, and god damn it fix the short yardage running game (get another TE who can block in there).

Lets get er done.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

i really agree with the short yardage problem. its kind of ironic that this was the redskins specialty in coach Gibbs first go round. the skins couldn't convert a short yardage situation last year for sh**. and i am not quite sure why? and i am really puzzled why the wouldn't go to duckett in those situations

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

i agree with THE EGO... al saunders screwed everything up.... and the defense just wasnt playing well at all last year.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

I agree with Matty's and GTripps assessments. The Poll lacks enough choice answers to properly respond imho.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

D. All of the above. Not only is the FO not good at scouting, the team has a coaching staff that's unable to coach and motivate young players. So in turn, they throw too much money at FAs who have played their best football for their former teams. There's a science to building a winning team. It's not plug and play.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

[QUOTE=EXoffender;291034]D. All of the above. Not only is the FO not good at scouting, the team has a coaching staff that's unable to coach and motivate young players. So in turn, they throw too much money at FAs who have played their best football for their former teams. There's a science to building a winning team. It's not plug and play.[/QUOTE]



I'm curious as to just what role our scouting department actually plays in aquiring players, and to what extent their decisions matter. Because our FO is constructed without a GM it's difficult to determine just who is making the decisions. Our biggest problem could be in how many different people have a hand in the selection process. In most well run organizations, the scouting department makes recomendations to the GM, and after a process of evaluation players are chosen.

I agree with Kattyk in that CHANGE seemed to be the greatest obstacle last year. There were far too many differences to adjust too, players, coaches, injury, schemes and just overall poor play and execution on both sides of the ball. I also feel that since we won't be going into the season talking Super Bowl, it may aid in the players concentration and they won't be sidetracked by that culprit of overconfidence.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

Sorry!!! Matty, I'll get it right next time. Sometime I fail to proof read what I type.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

i think the reason we're not winning is cause we have no team chemistry and we have an owner who doent know football,and thinks he can buy a championship.hes like a kid in a cany store.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

[quote=GTripp0012;290996]I agree with you, and I disagree. Let me elaborate...

I agree wholeheartedly that the Coaching staff can not be blamed for sustained failure. Good schemes can provide a decisive edge on a single game level, but over the course of the season, NO coach will outscheme all his opponents. If the end of the season rolls around, and a team has on the whole put in a sub par performance, then only the players are to be blamed. The coaching factor will ALWAYS even out over 16 games. Coaches will not be a decisive factor between a 10-6 team, and a 5-11 team.

Early season, the losing was almost exclusively a defensive issue. Through the first half of our season, the only thing this team had going for it was the passing game. Our passing game completely fell off the map once Brunell was replaced by Campbell. This wasn't because Campbell was playing exceptionally poorly, but because our offense missed our "puss-armed" QB coming out and completing 63% week in and week out. Campbell was throwing at a Vick-like 51% through his first five starts and our offense was suffering. We lost a very significant yard and a half per attempt with #17 in. Luckily, Cooley made a gamebreaking play vs. Carolina and the defense held New Orleans quiet, or JC would have been without a win this year.

The line certainly picked up their play in the 2nd half giving Campbell time that Brunell never had, and opening planet sized holes for Ladell Betts that Portis never had. But our power/short yardage running game completely sucked all year, and without Brunell to complete short 3rd down passes, the combination of Campbell's inaccuracies and lack of a short game made us one of the leagues worst teams in third and short.

It was so bad that the 2006 Redskins had a better shot to convert 3rd and 5 than they did to convert 3rd and 2. No lie.

In summary: quit blaming coaching staffs, quit blaming Brunell, fix the defense, and god damn it fix the short yardage running game (get another TE who can block in there).

Lets get er done.[/quote]


WHuuuuwuwuwuut!!!?

Coaching cannot be blaimed for the sustained failure of a team!? Coaching always evens out over the course of a season?

Um, yeah it can and no it doesn't. That's like one of the craziest things I've ever heard.

"Early season, the losing was almost exclusively a defensive issue. Through the first half of our season, the only thing this team had going for it was the passing game."

So which one was it, a defensive problem or an everthing but the passing game problem? So, while you where watching games you were honestly thinking, "If only the rest of our team could catch up to our passing game?"

"Our passing game completely fell off the map once Brunell was replaced by Campbell. This wasn't because Campbell was playing exceptionally poorly, but because our offense missed our "puss-armed" QB coming out and completing 63% week in and week out. Campbell was throwing at a Vick-like 51% through his first five starts and our offense was suffering. We lost a very significant yard and a half per attempt with #17 in. Luckily, Cooley made a gamebreaking play vs. Carolina and the defense held New Orleans quiet, or JC would have been without a win this year."

Our passing was not dangerous enough to keep defenses honest with Mark Brunell at QB. It became more and more and more obvious as his tenure wore on here. He was saved by the running game two years ago, and he hurt the running game last year. He hurt the offensive line. The gamebreaking play by Cooley is a perfect example. Cooley made that play because JC hit him down the field in stride. And because Jason could go deep and avoid the rush, oposing defenses couldn't stack the box or blitz at will without the fear of getting burned. And by the way, MB's stats from last year lie. He made a lot of those completions when games were out of hand, and yes our defense was terrible.

This kind of leads me to my answer to the original poster. I agree with the guy who said that these problems are not black and white, but are very complex, as are most problems in life.

I would also say that we have a talent issue on this team. And, in fact, the coaching staff, and above all Joe Gibbs, has a HUGE impact on deciding which players we actually keep or go after. So this coaching staff is not ONLY responsible for getting the players we do have to play, and putting them in a position to do so succesfully, but in deciding who those players are. If they know enough about these players to help pick them, then they should also be responsible to know how to USE them. Our players weren't particularly well picked or well used last year, but more than anything, the one position that you [I]have to pick a good player[/I] is at quarterback. Joe Gibbs is responsible for picking Mark Brunell. And it became clear that Mark Brunell was never going to take us very far, so Joe Gibbs is responsible for keeping him in there too long as well. But Gibbs is also responsible for giving up a lot to draft JC. You see, although most problems in life are complex, the simplest part of the problem with the Washington Redskins is at quarterback. We haven't had one who's worth a damn in a long time. Fixing the franchise begins at QB, JC or otherwise.


Sorry my posts are always so damn long.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

[quote=GTripp0012;290996]I agree with you, and I disagree. Let me elaborate...

I agree wholeheartedly that the Coaching staff can not be blamed for sustained failure. Good schemes can provide a decisive edge on a single game level, but over the course of the season, NO coach will outscheme all his opponents. If the end of the season rolls around, and a team has on the whole put in a sub par performance, then only the players are to be blamed. The coaching factor will ALWAYS even out over 16 games. Coaches will not be a decisive factor between a 10-6 team, and a 5-11 team.

Early season, the losing was almost exclusively a defensive issue. Through the first half of our season, the only thing this team had going for it was the passing game. Our passing game completely fell off the map once Brunell was replaced by Campbell. This wasn't because Campbell was playing exceptionally poorly, but because our offense missed our "puss-armed" QB coming out and completing 63% week in and week out. Campbell was throwing at a Vick-like 51% through his first five starts and our offense was suffering. We lost a very significant yard and a half per attempt with #17 in. Luckily, Cooley made a gamebreaking play vs. Carolina and the defense held New Orleans quiet, or JC would have been without a win this year.

The line certainly picked up their play in the 2nd half giving Campbell time that Brunell never had, and opening planet sized holes for Ladell Betts that Portis never had. But our power/short yardage running game completely sucked all year, and without Brunell to complete short 3rd down passes, the combination of Campbell's inaccuracies and lack of a short game made us one of the leagues worst teams in third and short.

It was so bad that the 2006 Redskins had a better shot to convert 3rd and 5 than they did to convert 3rd and 2. No lie.

In summary: quit blaming coaching staffs, quit blaming Brunell, fix the defense, and god damn it fix the short yardage running game (get another TE who can block in there).

Lets get er done.[/quote]

GTripp. I'm not insulting your opinion but our passing game, from the end of 05 and almost all of last year has been well below average. How can you say our passing fell off the map? IT WAS NEVER ON THE MAP w/Brunell. That is why he got benched. Brunell could not even throw for 200 yards in most of his starts. For the life of me I can't believe you think our passing game was good last year w/ Brunell. What games were you watching? The one against the NYG. when Brunell threw for 109 yards? Or was it the one against Phil. when he threw for a buck thirty? Can someone tell me how an NFL QB can only throw for 109 yards? That's just ridicules. I swear all you care about is Brunell's completion % and QB rating. Those stats don't tell the real story! Here is the real story. 3-8 and Brunell throws a 4 yards pass to Cooley and hopes he runs for a 1st down. Sorry but I blame that on the QB for not having the confidence in his arm to throw in downfield. Plus in a lot of games he was getting garbage stats at the end of halfs and when games had already been decided. Like against Indy. Stat line looks good but he didn't play well when the game hadn't been decided yet.

We have the talent on offense becasue now we have a QB who can make all the thows and the offense will not be limited to a dink and dunk passing game. When JC is behind center teams don't stack the line. They respect his arm. Opposing defenses don't respect Brunell's arm and that's why the running game sucked. 11 men were lurking around the line. Now Al S. can open it up more. Of couse JC will have to do his part and work getting better at the short passing game. But the guy didn't get any reps with the first offense until week 9 of his 2nd year. Give the guy a freakin break!

I played HS football many years ago. I was a QB. Ya know what my coach use to tell me? If your gonna play Qb for me you better be tough and you better push the ball down the field cause 1/2 the time the ref is going to call a penalty. I swear to god that's what old John Harvill use to tell me. Well at least Brunell is tough as nails. But somewhere along the line I think the guy lost his confidence to push the ball down the field.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

bad scouting and bad signings hurt. last year's class included two vastly overpaid players (el, carter) and two busts (lloyd, arch), not to mention that whole duckett thing.

It's cool though, I mean, it's not like the draft's ever helped anyone.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

[quote=skinsfan69;291080]GTripp. I'm not insulting your opinion but our passing game, from the end of 05 and almost all of last year has been well below average. How can you say our passing fell off the map? IT WAS NEVER ON THE MAP w/Brunell. That is why he got benched. Brunell could not even throw for 200 yards in most of his starts. For the life of me I can't believe you think our passing game was good last year w/ Brunell. What games were you watching? The one against the NYG. when Brunell threw for 109 yards? Or was it the one against Phil. when he threw for a buck thirty? Can someone tell me how an NFL QB can only throw for 109 yards? That's just ridicules. [U][B]I swear all you care about is Brunell's completion % and QB rating.[/B][/U] Those stats don't tell the real story! Here is the real story. 3-8 and Brunell throws a 4 yards pass to Cooley and hopes he runs for a 1st down. Sorry but I blame that on the QB for not having the confidence in his arm to throw in downfield. Plus in a lot of games he was getting garbage stats at the end of halfs and when games had already been decided. Like against Indy. Stat line looks good but he didn't play well when the game hadn't been decided yet.

We have the talent on offense becasue now we have a QB who can make all the thows and the offense will not be limited to a dink and dunk passing game. When JC is behind center teams don't stack the line. They respect his arm. Opposing defenses don't respect Brunell's arm and that's why the running game sucked. 11 men were lurking around the line. Now Al S. can open it up more. Of couse JC will have to do his part and work getting better at the short passing game. But the guy didn't get any reps with the first offense until week 9 of his 2nd year. Give the guy a freakin break!

I played HS football many years ago. I was a QB. Ya know what my coach use to tell me? If your gonna play Qb for me you better be tough and you better push the ball down the field cause 1/2 the time the ref is going to call a penalty. I swear to god that's what old John Harvill use to tell me. Well at least Brunell is tough as nails. But somewhere along the line I think the guy lost his confidence to push the ball down the field.[/quote]Well, not exactly. The only stats I care about are completion % and yards/attempt. Between them they tell pretty much the whole story. QB rating would be a lot better if they just eliminated INT/att and TD/att, since guys who complete a high percentage also throw more touchdowns and less INTs, which is what matters. INT/att and TD/att are redundant ratio stats IMO.

I also played QB in High School. That was two years ago. I wasn't anything special (to say the least), and our team wasn't that good, but we won half our games. Our offense sucked though, and I feel that if I had completed more passes, we may have won another game or two. But my coach wasn't particularly smart, and only cared about the results no matter what the context of the game was, so that may explain why I get as analytical as I can sometimes.

But one of the great things I love about [URL="http://www.footballoutsiders.com/methods.php"]Football Outsiders' stats[/URL] is that they don't count all yards as equal (they aren't), nor do they worry about factors a player can't control. They just measure successful plays vs unsuccessful plays. If Brunell were to, as you suggest, throw four yards to Cooley on 3-8, and Cooley does not pick up the first, Brunell would be credited with an unsuccessful play. Yet, [URL="http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb.php"]their system likes his 2006 performance [/URL](a lot). This tells me that Brunell was successful FAR more often than he was unsuccessful. So while the situation you suggest certainly happened a few times, you can't discard all the times the guy threw underneath to a wide open player who picked up the first down. It would be hypocritical to blame only the QB for the first scenario and credit only the receiver for the second. And judging by the linked metric, the second scenario probably vastly outweighed the first.

But because of the losing, it does not surprise me in the slightest that the very human memory of most Skins fans remembers every select individual first scenario and only a handful of the second. We were a losing team. Had we won, such as in 2005, people would be remembering the good plays and forgetting the bad. That's just human nature.

[U]In reality, Mark Brunell put together nearly identical years in 2005 and 2006.[/U] He was actually a tad better in 2006 per the stats, but whether or not that is accurate is very debateable. But his 2005 season gets a much better rep than his 2006 simply due to the outcome of the games. Defensively, we sucked donkey balls in 2006. This is why we lost games (well, that and some untimely luck).

But the 2005 offense and the 2006 offense were strikingly similar in total end of season DVOA. (4.1% above league average in 2006 compared to 5.1% above league average in 2005) Santana Moss' drop in production (passing game) was offset by Ladell Betts' giant leap in production (running game). It is my best guess that Moss could have done a little better if Brunell had stayed in at QB. He certainly would have had more receptions. And with a guy like Moss, every reception is a threat to go the distance.

Here's the bottom line. From the day Campbell went in at QB, our offense lost a yard and a half per pass [U]attempt[/U] and 11% completion. [U][B]That is a huge dropoff.[/B][/U] There's no other way to spin it. Our INT's went up and total TD's down. You yourself (Skinsfan69) said that you thought our offensive line play improved under Campbell (I agree). Was it [I]because[/I] of Campbell? Perhaps, but unlikely. Now if you'll remember, our defense didn't exactly get a whole lot better at that point at all. But they did put in two good games, conviently the same number of games we won under Campbell (and yes, it was those two games).

Our offense won us a few games at the beginning of the season. Houston, Jacksonville, and that second Dallas game with the help of some timely good fortune. The two games we won under JC were the two times our D showed up last year.

I do expect that Campbell will improve immensely over the course of next year. I am on record saying that he will be the best QB in the division (better than McNabb, Manning, and Romo) no later than opening day 2008. But he's going to NEED to play better than he did last year. He's got to complete more passes, and get more yards per attempt. He will almost certainly be a better NFL QB than Brunell ever was, but don't make the mistake of believing he's there yet. At this point, he isn't better than Brunell [U][I]is[/I][/U].

I'm not in complete disagreement that our passing game "wasn't on the map" at the beginning of last year, but to me that sounds like a cop out to nullify the loss of 11% completion and 1.5 yards/att. Because a drop in passing production such as that [U]will cost a team games[/U]. Period. We need better QB play than what we got from JC last year.

And I think JC can bring us that improvement.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

Remember, our D just didn't force any turnovers last year. It's just wasn't part of our game. So with consistenly crappy field position, that explains the drop in points from 2005 to 2006. The offenses on the whole weren't much different. But the 2006 team was starting every drive from their own 20, and that probably was the No. 1 contributer to the decrease in overall pts from 2005.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

[quote=TenandSix:Unacceptable;291079]WHuuuuwuwuwuut!!!?

Coaching cannot be blaimed for the sustained failure of a team!? Coaching always evens out over the course of a season?

Um, yeah it can and no it doesn't. That's like one of the craziest things I've ever heard.

"Early season, the losing was almost exclusively a defensive issue. Through the first half of our season, the only thing this team had going for it was the passing game."

So which one was it, a defensive problem or an everthing but the passing game problem? So, while you where watching games you were honestly thinking, "If only the rest of our team could catch up to our passing game?"

"Our passing game completely fell off the map once Brunell was replaced by Campbell. This wasn't because Campbell was playing exceptionally poorly, but because our offense missed our "puss-armed" QB coming out and completing 63% week in and week out. Campbell was throwing at a Vick-like 51% through his first five starts and our offense was suffering. We lost a very significant yard and a half per attempt with #17 in. Luckily, Cooley made a gamebreaking play vs. Carolina and the defense held New Orleans quiet, or JC would have been without a win this year."

Our passing was not dangerous enough to keep defenses honest with Mark Brunell at QB. It became more and more and more obvious as his tenure wore on here. He was saved by the running game two years ago, and he hurt the running game last year. He hurt the offensive line. The gamebreaking play by Cooley is a perfect example. Cooley made that play because JC hit him down the field in stride. And because Jason could go deep and avoid the rush, oposing defenses couldn't stack the box or blitz at will without the fear of getting burned. And by the way, MB's stats from last year lie. He made a lot of those completions when games were out of hand, and yes our defense was terrible.

This kind of leads me to my answer to the original poster. I agree with the guy who said that these problems are not black and white, but are very complex, as are most problems in life.

I would also say that we have a talent issue on this team. And, in fact, the coaching staff, and above all Joe Gibbs, has a HUGE impact on deciding which players we actually keep or go after. So this coaching staff is not ONLY responsible for getting the players we do have to play, and putting them in a position to do so succesfully, but in deciding who those players are. If they know enough about these players to help pick them, then they should also be responsible to know how to USE them. Our players weren't particularly well picked or well used last year, but more than anything, the one position that you [I]have to pick a good player[/I] is at quarterback. Joe Gibbs is responsible for picking Mark Brunell. And it became clear that Mark Brunell was never going to take us very far, so Joe Gibbs is responsible for keeping him in there too long as well. But Gibbs is also responsible for giving up a lot to draft JC. You see, although most problems in life are complex, the simplest part of the problem with the Washington Redskins is at quarterback. We haven't had one who's worth a damn in a long time. Fixing the franchise begins at QB, JC or otherwise.


Sorry my posts are always so damn long.[/quote]Nah, I enjoy responding to well elaborated posts. Both you and Skinsfan69 have reasonable arguments. I just disagree. I'll do my best to explain while keeping it concise.

Sustained failure is something I would define as a string of losing seasons, or in our case a string of losing with a winning season thrown in there. I find it an unreasonable position to say that we have only had one winning season since 1999 solely due to poor coaching. Rather we've had a very varible coaching staff ranging from the good (Gibbs) to the bad (Spurrier) to the incomplete (Schottenheimer). We have not had the talent to compete consistenly with the rest of the league. Doesn't matter who the coach is. A bad coach will not sustain losing if he has a good roster. He may cost his team a game here and there, but over the course of a season, or many seasons, coaching is ultimately a smaller factor than most give it credit for being. Bad coaches don't always lose and good coaches don't always win. Good coaches do a better job of playing their best players for the situation and bad coaches do not. But if the bad coach has a better team than the good coach, he's going to win more times than not.

[quote]So which one was it, a defensive problem or an everthing but the passing game problem? So, while you where watching games you were honestly thinking, "If only the rest of our team could catch up to our passing game?"[/quote]Well, the running game was weak early on. It did correct itself in the late season with Ladell Betts of all people running the ball. I wasn't thinking anything of the sort. Defense and offense are two seperate entities. The passing game certainly had it's flaws. But when it came to the end of the day, the offense was usually holding up its end of the bargain, it was keeping us in the game. This continued throughout the season with more of an emphasis on the running game with Campbell at QB.

[quote]Our passing was not dangerous enough to keep defenses honest with Mark Brunell at QB. It became more and more and more obvious as his tenure wore on here. He was saved by the running game two years ago, and he hurt the running game last year. He hurt the offensive line. The gamebreaking play by Cooley is a perfect example. Cooley made that play because JC hit him down the field in stride. And because Jason could go deep and avoid the rush, oposing defenses couldn't stack the box or blitz at will without the fear of getting burned. And by the way, MB's stats from last year lie. He made a lot of those completions when games were out of hand, and yes our defense was terrible.
[/quote]I don't know why so many people think that Brunell and Co. weren't keeping defenses honest. Seems like its an undefendable notion designed to discredit otherwise sound production. Brunell threw damn near 7 yards an attempt last year. Either he was downfield passing more than we thought, or defenses were staying very honest and allowing 7 yard completions off delay check downs. It can't be both ways. [U]If 11 guys are really at the LOS, check downs don't become 7 yard successful plays[/U]. This is an inconsistency in the "Brunell can't get it done" logic.

There is zero evidence to make me think we were defended differently than every other team in the league last year with Brunell. Brunell attacked an inconsistency in the soft zone that defenses in the NFL play. [U]Peyton Manning attacked the Bears defense in the exact same way Brunell had been beating defenses this year on the games biggest stage[/U]. It's okay to move the ball with short controlled throws. Really it is.

Additionally, Brunell also had considerable success hitting Lloyd on that fade route in single coverage. That's a "deep" throw, is it not?

Teams could have defended the Redskins more aggressively if they wanted to last year, but theres no reason to think Brunell wouldn't have beaten them deep if they did. Brunell didn't take a lot of deep shots because he didnt need to. Pure and simple.

[quote]
I would also say that we have a talent issue on this team. And, in fact, the coaching staff, and above all Joe Gibbs, has a HUGE impact on deciding which players we actually keep or go after. So this coaching staff is not ONLY responsible for getting the players we do have to play, and putting them in a position to do so succesfully, but in deciding who those players are. If they know enough about these players to help pick them, then they should also be responsible to know how to USE them. Our players weren't particularly well picked or well used last year, but more than anything, the one position that you [I]have to pick a good player[/I] is at quarterback. Joe Gibbs is responsible for picking Mark Brunell. And it became clear that Mark Brunell was never going to take us very far, so Joe Gibbs is responsible for keeping him in there too long as well. But Gibbs is also responsible for giving up a lot to draft JC. You see, although most problems in life are complex, the simplest part of the problem with the Washington Redskins is at quarterback. We haven't had one who's worth a damn in a long time. Fixing the franchise begins at QB, JC or otherwise.[/quote]Yeah, but the duties of a coach and the duties of a GM aren't similar. If we don't have the talent to compete, that's not a coaching issue. It's a managerial error made by people who also happen to coach. There's a big difference.

I don't think Brunell was kept in too long. Gibbs was trying to win games. With our defense, we couldn't have expected it to happen. But as a coach, his duty is to play to win the game. It's very clear to see that Campbell in 2006 didn't give us our best chance to win games. I mean, we got to see him play. He was learning on the job. He did not do better than Brunell did. That's quite clear. It's good that JC got out there to get some experience. It should speed his development up a little bit. But it may have cost us some games, Tampa Bay, Philadelphia, and Atlanta were games were poor QB play contributed a major part to the loss.

But even if we had won all 3, we still would have lost the tiebreaker to New York, so its certainly a plus that JC got to play.

You can't EVER fault a coach for playing his best players. I think it would have been a questionable decision had we played Brunell all 16 games, even after we were out of the playoff race, but certainly defenseable. You play to win the game.

Good post, BTW. I bet most of america would agree with you. I'm just addressing what I believe to be inconsistencies with reality.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

Coaches play to win. In essence, they are "win now" entities and that is completely understandable. That, along with the fact that we have not gotten consistent above average QB play for well over a decade, (MB definitley included), are some of the main problems with our team. Joe Gibbs and the coaching staff help the pro scouts and Vinny Cerrato decide who can help us win. The problem I see, and people outside and inside Redskins' Land have been commenting on it for a number of years, is that who is responsible for setting the long term goals of this team? We consistanly overlook long term decisions for the team by making choices in the name of "win now". Honestly, even though most fans are praising our offseason, the Baker and Smoot signings scream of this. Hey, I understand that Joe came back to save the franchise, but because he got lured in to thinking he could do it through FA and not the draft, Redskins are gonna have even more hell to pay down the road. Now, for the Joe II era at least, we don't have time for the draft.

Also, have you ever noticed that everytime we have a high draft pick since Heath Shuler we for whatever reason are not looking at QB. It is really frustrating. You get high draft picks because your team sucks, simple as that. If I took over the Skins, the first thing I would do is make sure we have a QB who is going to truly give us a "best chance to win", year in and year out. That's why picking up players like Brad Johnson, Jeff George, and MB really sucks to me, and those are the best one's we've had around. They make you think you have a fighting chance with them, and you do. But they won't really take you there unless the perfect storm happens around them like it did for Dilfer in Baltimore, and Johnson in TB. And were are they now? The Ravens have another aging guy in McNair. TB has the so so prospect of Chris Simms and now Jeff Garcia. If you don't fix the QB situation right, it comes back to haunt you year after year, and in order to "win now" you end up taking expensive flyers on these aging pros. QB is a constant problem for us, and always will be until we find someone who can give us a legitimate "best chance to win". If it's not Campbell, I hope we don't turn to another guy like Mark Brunell. Yeah, we might get lucky with a guy like that for a season or two, but where is that gonna put us long term?

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

Wasup Skins Fans....When you lose especially with all the money spent last year everything is magnified 10 fold. This team has talent but it took on too many things (new offense,new players,etc.) and never gave itself an opportunity because they were'nt settled in to the scheme or which players worked well in that scheme. Campbell had no time in with the first team or the offense, Portis was hurt, the Defense had injuries across the board.The front office seems to be more detailed and prudent this year and heres hoping that a deal comes about that helps us add some depth to both the OL & DL and we also need at least one more solid DB but we are by no means as bad as it looked last season and even though there are some me first guys on this team there are also some good players with a lot of pride who cant wait to make up for what happend last year.............HAIL TO THE REDSKINS.......:goodjob:

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

[quote=Mattyk72;290551]I'm not a big fan of any of the poll choices.

My view is this, we've got talent. We had more talent than our 5-11 record indicated last year. However, I think the transition to Saunders threw things off track and put us back at square one offensively. The switch to Campbell should have come earlier, but I don't think it would have changed the final result of the season very much. Portis never got on track before being lost for the season and that was a big loss despite the stellar job Betts did in relief. Overall the offense just never got on track and I think there was some grumbling behind the scenes with players wondering why such a drastic change was needed.

Defensively we had some key injuries, guys that underperformed, and a behind the scenes clashing between some players and coaches that probably didn't help out in the morale dept. very much.

I don't think it's a cut and dry issue of personnel vs. coaching as to why we didn't win last year. It was a combo of both, with other issues mixed in as well such as injuries, making the switch to a new offense, switching QBs, and petty drama behind the scenes.[/quote]


We were 5-11 b/c our Defense sucked hard! One of the worst Redskin defenses to ever take the field statistically speaking. That is a head scratcher b/c most of the players were on the top 5 and top 10 defenses from the past two years. Our offense scored enough points and held the ball long enough to make the playoffs if our defense created anything or stopped anyone ever. We were # 3 ranked rushing offense last year.

Definately not the talent. GW should be help accountable. AA was his move and he let Walt Harris and others get away. Also seemed like GW lost confidence in his game calling along the way. He needs a MAJOR bounce back year for us to make the playoffs, like we have the talent to do!

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

It was essentially we had a well-oiled machine until some vital cogs of that machine were changed and removed.

Equate last year's team to a very fast car. Sure, it's great and consistent when the entire car is running to it's top potential. But say you take the same car, put a transmission that wasn't made for it in the car (Archuleta) and have the car only running on half the cylinders (missing Springs) and you still have basically the same car without nearly the same effectiveness.

Sure, it's a team sport, but when important pieces of the puzzle are missing or hurt, it's going to make a HUGE difference in how the team performs.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

[quote=TenandSix:Unacceptable;291217]Coaches play to win. In essence, they are "win now" entities and that is completely understandable. That, along with the fact that we have not gotten consistent above average QB play for well over a decade, (MB definitley included), are some of the main problems with our team. Joe Gibbs and the coaching staff help the pro scouts and Vinny Cerrato decide who can help us win. The problem I see, and people outside and inside Redskins' Land have been commenting on it for a number of years, is that who is responsible for setting the long term goals of this team? We consistanly overlook long term decisions for the team by making choices in the name of "win now". Honestly, even though most fans are praising our offseason, the Baker and Smoot signings scream of this. Hey, I understand that Joe came back to save the franchise, but because he got lured in to thinking he could do it through FA and not the draft, Redskins are gonna have even more hell to pay down the road. Now, for the Joe II era at least, we don't have time for the draft.

Also, have you ever noticed that everytime we have a high draft pick since Heath Shuler we for whatever reason are not looking at QB. It is really frustrating. You get high draft picks because your team sucks, simple as that. If I took over the Skins, the first thing I would do is make sure we have a QB who is going to truly give us a "best chance to win", year in and year out. That's why picking up players like Brad Johnson, Jeff George, and MB really sucks to me, and those are the best one's we've had around. They make you think you have a fighting chance with them, and you do. But they won't really take you there unless the perfect storm happens around them like it did for Dilfer in Baltimore, and Johnson in TB. And were are they now? The Ravens have another aging guy in McNair. TB has the so so prospect of Chris Simms and now Jeff Garcia. If you don't fix the QB situation right, it comes back to haunt you year after year, and in order to "win now" you end up taking expensive flyers on these aging pros. QB is a constant problem for us, and always will be until we find someone who can give us a legitimate "best chance to win". If it's not Campbell, I hope we don't turn to another guy like Mark Brunell. Yeah, we might get lucky with a guy like that for a season or two, but where is that gonna put us long term?[/quote]

These are all good points. Although Brad J. was still in his prime when we got him.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

How about bad luck with injuries and getting robbed by refs?

That's my answer.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

On offense, we have the talent but don't have the QB to get the ball around, right now. I like JC, he's improving, but it's to early to tell how his career is going to progress.

On D, I think we lack the talent and depth at a few spots that is needed to be a top D in the league. We got injured and old quickly in a few areas and didn't have the depth for players to step in.

Re: Big C's "Is It the Talent" Poll
 

all in all its the owners fault cause he makes the final decision.plus if a team has no chemistry they dont win.the snyde doesnt know football.he should sell the team to kent cooks son who has football in the blood.