Hunter Axed

[CrazyCanuck]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Getting rid of Hunter is a complete fail, like cutting Sushiam last season. Solves Zero and sends a crappy message. Snaps have been an issue since preseason and Gano kicking field goals been an issue all year.

I gotta agree with this too. Not sure what the message here is... The Skins will not stand for mediocrity or mistakes?? lol...

If you're gonna dump Hunter for a dropped (high) snap then I can give you reasons to dump every bum on this squad.

I blame this whole fiasco on the Curse of the Red Snapper.

[Chico23231]

^Exactly. This is the only FO move i've had a problem with in this "new" era...seemed like a very Vinny/Danny typical knee-jerk reactionary move, just stinks of past...

[SmootSmack]

I love Hunter the Punter, but I've got no problem with cutting him. He wasn't having a good year and at almost 40 years old he probably won't get much better. Plus you already know what you have in him and it's not like there's high demand for him.

With the team out of playoff contention, why not bring in a young guy see if he can be a factor not only as a punter but also maybe as a holder, and whether the overall kicking unit can benefit.

This is a no harm move

[sportscurmudgeon]

Making a roster change ought to do something significant to imrove the team - - unless you are making the change as a result of an injury to a starter or unless you are making the change as a knee-jerk reaction.

Is this supposed to put the Fear of God in the rest of the roster with regard to on-field accountability? Give me a break. If on-field accountability mattered, at least a third of this roster would be looking for work in a warehouse by now. The players do not fear The Wrath of the Shanny any more now than they did a week ago.

Did the team get better? Maybe. But when you are expending effort tweaking the performance of your punter, normally the rest of the team is playing lights-out football. Here, we see yet one more PR move by the Skins. Special teams f*cked up a field goal so somebody has to be hung out to dry.

The famous scribe Billy Shakespeare had the line that best describes this entire matter in MacBeth (Act V, Scene V I believe):

Tis a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing...

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

Making a roster change ought to do something significant to imrove the team - - unless you are making the change as a result of an injury to a starter or unless you are making the change as a knee-jerk reaction.

Is this supposed to put the Fear of God in the rest of the roster with regard to on-field accountability? Give me a break. If on-field accountability mattered, at least a third of this roster would be looking for work in a warehouse by now. The players do not fear The Wrath of the Shanny any more now than they did a week ago.

Did the team get better? Maybe. But when you are expending effort tweaking the performance of your punter, normally the rest of the team is playing lights-out football. Here, we see yet one more PR move by the Skins. Special teams f*cked up a field goal so somebody has to be hung out to dry.

The famous scribe Billy Shakespeare had the line that best describes this entire matter in MacBeth (Act V, Scene V I believe):

Tis a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing...

dang SC, didn't think a Hunter the punter gets cut thread warranted Shakespeare!

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

Making a roster change ought to do something significant to imrove the team - - unless you are making the change as a result of an injury to a starter or unless you are making the change as a knee-jerk reaction.

Is this supposed to put the Fear of God in the rest of the roster with regard to on-field accountability? Give me a break. If on-field accountability mattered, at least a third of this roster would be looking for work in a warehouse by now. The players do not fear The Wrath of the Shanny any more now than they did a week ago.

Did the team get better? Maybe. But when you are expending effort tweaking the performance of your punter, normally the rest of the team is playing lights-out football. Here, we see yet one more PR move by the Skins. Special teams f*cked up a field goal so somebody has to be hung out to dry.

The famous scribe Billy Shakespeare had the line that best describes this entire matter in MacBeth (Act V, Scene V I believe):

Tis a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing...

DO you not think that they believe (as I do) Hunter is NOT the punter and with a handful of essentially meaningless games left that a better time could not be chosen to evaluate some other possible answers at this and some other positions for next year?

Seek now what you will need for the morrow........
-Benjamin Franklin

[sportscurmudgeon]

Originally Posted by Hog1

DO you not think that they believe (as I do) Hunter is NOT the punter and with a handful of essentially meaningless games left that a better time could not be chosen to evaluate some other possible answers at this and some other positions for next year?

Seek now what you will need for the morrow........
-Benjamin Franklin

Actually, I believe that the Skins were perfectly satisfied with Hunter all along. If they were not, then at 4-3 - - with visions of the playoffs dancing in their heads - - they would have taken a look at an upgrade. There are always unemployed punters looking for NFL work; it isn't as if they needed to hire an executive search firm.

At 4-3, an upgrade to any position that you think is deficient makes sense in the context of a season full of meaning (potentially). The Skins made no such move.

At 5-8 and mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, changing your punter to look at new talent is like deciding whether or not to have dessert on the Titanic on that fateful night. It does not matter - - but for those around you it looks as if you are focused on what is in front of you.

I don't think Hunter Smith is a vital cog in the Redskins revival as a franchise by any means. Whether he stays or goes is irrelevant to 2011 - - and like it or not, 2010 has no importance anymore. At the same time, this move is nothing more than scapegoating and public relations nonsense. Even if his replacement is 8 yards better on average per punt - - that is a HUGE upgrade - - it will matter not even a whit.

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I love Hunter the Punter, but I've got no problem with cutting him. He wasn't having a good year and at almost 40 years old he probably won't get much better. Plus you already know what you have in him and it's not like there's high demand for him.

With the team out of playoff contention, why not bring in a young guy see if he can be a factor not only as a punter but also maybe as a holder, and whether the overall kicking unit can benefit.

This is a no harm move

Yeah this is pretty much exactly how i feel. At first i felt like it was a knee jerk reaction to our loss, but as of today i started thinking well at this point in the season its more about finding guys that can be good for us in the future. I wouldnt mind seeing Durant Brooks brought back, wasnt Denver the other team big on him back in Shanahan's last year there?

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I love Hunter the Punter, but I've got no problem with cutting him. He wasn't having a good year and at almost 40 years old he probably won't get much better. Plus you already know what you have in him and it's not like there's high demand for him.

With the team out of playoff contention, why not bring in a young guy see if he can be a factor not only as a punter but also maybe as a holder, and whether the overall kicking unit can benefit.

This is a no harm move

SS ,I will disagree here to me it sends the wrong message .....now had you cut the kicker that would hae been a message but the holder who had a high snap and a wet ball , yet you let Haynesworth get away with his BS alll year? This is like firing Shanahan for the screw up at the end of the first half that cost the Skins 4 points ,now if it happens alot ...ok I see the point.

Gano = 2 missed field goals ...6 points lost

Shanahan = bad time management ....4 points lost

Smith= miss handled a snap for xrta point...1 point

.....................and you cut Smith,sorry I don't get it?

[CRedskinsRule]

SC, it also may be warranted if you are out of contention (we are), the player cut is old/not going to be on the team next year(he is, and wasn't), and you want to explore other options(I guess they do).

I am sure I am just justifying, but in the end, this move wasn't a huge deal. Shame for HS though.

[Hog1]

I am not sure if you are suggesting that a good P game has little advantage over a poor punting game? I do not think that is the case. AND changing the punter in this late part of the season has no meaning for this season, but obviously could have significant meaning in the field position game for next season. It is a great time to audition any potential.....weapons in game situations under fire (rather than training camp scenario).
Additionally I find impossible to believe that our current FO staff would endorse such a childish and thinly veiled move as to hand over the punters head as penance for a loss. H the P is a problem and losing him is a good thing. Find out if someone else can play in "game situations"....now.

[sportscurmudgeon]

Originally Posted by Hog1

I am not sure if you are suggesting that a good P game has little advantage over a poor punting game? I do not think that is the case. AND changing the punter in this late part of the season has no meaning for this season, but obviously could have significant meaning in the field position game for next season. It is a great time to audition any potential.....weapons in game situations under fire (rather than training camp scenario).
Additionally I find impossible to believe that our current FO staff would endorse such a childish and thinly veiled move as to hand over the punters head as penance for a loss. H the P is a problem and losing him is a good thing. Find out if someone else can play in "game situations"....now.

Of course a good punting game is better than a poor punting game. So, how come when the Skins were over .500 and looking at the playoffs - - remember, we had a thread here on just how the Skins would win the NFC East - - improving the punting game was not so important?

There are lots of other deficiencies on the 2010 squad. How many of them are also going to be jettisoned in the next couple of weeks to audtion new talent in game situations under fire (rather than in training camp scenarios)? Don't worry about needing the fingers on two hands to count those instances.

If you do not think that the Redskins organization is capable of scapegoating someone on the roster after a serious on-field blunder, you have not been paying attention either to the current owner of the team or to the current head coach.

When the 2010 season was still relevant, the team (coaches, FO and owner) had no problems with Hunter's punting, Gano's missing, Haynesworth's malingering etc. but once the season circled the drain and fans got very angry, then the team (coaches, FO and owner) "took action" to remedy things they said they recognized all along.

Sorry, I'm not shopping at that store...

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

Of course a good punting game is better than a poor punting game. So, how come when the Skins were over .500 and looking at the playoffs - - remember, we had a thread here on just how the Skins would win the NFC East - - improving the punting game was not so important?

There are lots of other deficiencies on the 2010 squad. How many of them are also going to be jettisoned in the next couple of weeks to audtion new talent in game situations under fire (rather than in training camp scenarios)? Don't worry about needing the fingers on two hands to count those instances.

If you do not think that the Redskins organization is capable of scapegoating someone on the roster after a serious on-field blunder, you have not been paying attention either to the current owner of the team or to the current head coach.

When the 2010 season was still relevant, the team (coaches, FO and owner) had no problems with Hunter's punting, Gano's missing, Haynesworth's malingering etc. but once the season circled the drain and fans got very angry, then the team (coaches, FO and owner) "took action" to remedy things they said they recognized all along.

Sorry, I'm not shopping at that store...

As a matter of fact, Haynesworth performance and shannanigans on and off the field have been a daily issue since he arrived.........or didn't.
I think the punting and kicking game have been as well since we have had numerous misses that could have salted away a few games and "makeable" FG's failed.....and we lost.
Way to many times have Hunters efforts left a short field to the enemy needlessly.
I imagine the...botched "hold" the other day was simply the last straw in an erstwhile lackluster year or two. I really don't get how you read such sinister activities in this event?
AND if he used it to send a messgae to the rest of the team that mediocrity is not the key to a long Redskin career...you have a problem with that?

[Darrell_Green_28]

If I am not mistaking, I think they cut him because of his punts and mechanics were not to their liking.

Mike Shanahan Explains The Release Of Hunter Smith

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Darrell_Green_28

If I am not mistaking, I think they cut him because of his punts and mechanics were not to their liking.

Mike Shanahan Explains The Release Of Hunter Smith

Oh I know that is what is being said but I'm not buying it,come on 3 games left and this is what you think will send a meesage?