Roster transition in the Shanny era

[SmootSmack]

So we're not going to talk about how it was Andre Carter who went to the Redskins front office initially and said "no hard feelings but I don't think where you guys are headed and what I'm looking for mesh anymore" or that basically the whole league "soured" on Carlos Rogers' initial contract demands

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

So we're not going to talk about how it was Andre Carter who went to the Redskins front office initially and said "no hard feelings but I don't think where you guys are headed and what I'm looking for mesh anymore" or that basically the whole league "soured" on Carlos Rogers' initial contract demands

It seems the Skins Mgmt stated that he requested the trade to find a team more in line with his abilities......AND they honored it because he's a great dude that worked hard...Super Smart....Always fighting his guts out...etc

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Hog1

It seems the Skins Mgmt stated that he requested the trade to find a team more in line with his abilities......AND they honored it because he's a great dude that worked hard...Super Smart....Always fighting his guts out...etc

And, I mean, heck of a signing by the Patriots. It's too bad about his injury, it would have been fun to watch Andre Carter in the playoffs again.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by Hog1

It seems the Skins Mgmt stated that he requested the trade to find a team more in line with his abilities......AND they honored it because he's a great dude that worked hard...Super Smart....Always fighting his guts out...etc

Word. Pretty hard to find sh!t to complain about with AC...he's about as high-character as they come.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

So we're not going to talk about how it was Andre Carter who went to the Redskins front office initially and said "no hard feelings but I don't think where you guys are headed and what I'm looking for mesh anymore" or that basically the whole league "soured" on Carlos Rogers' initial contract demands

Do you or do you not feel like we could have used those two guys on this years team?

I think I'm guilty of misrepresenting my own points at times. I do not think the Redskins have failed under Mike Shanahan because they granted Andre Carter his release instead of talking him into staying and making a fortune on his annual salary, and because they decided they could replace Carlos Rogers through free agency. We have more or less replaced the contribution of those "pro bowlers" with a first round pick and a free agent signing at corner. The issue, of course, is the lack of steady (2009-2012), clear improvement. But I think those are high-profile lapses in judgement/talent evaluation brought to light by the combination of the Redskins not being good and those guys (justifiably) being elected to the pro-bowl.

I wanted to talk more about how the Redskins struggle to evaluate talent, but oddly, no one seems to wants to argue against that point. Of course, whenever I talk about other symptomatic mistakes the Redskins make more consistently that maybe don't get as much publicity...well, why don't you go back through the thread and I can save you six paragraphs.

In short: people dismiss minor symptomatic moves as trival mistakes that no one should care about, and then they come up with individual justifications for moves that received a lot of publicity and were obviously wrong (McNabb). Then, based on some creative justifications, they arrive at the conclusion that the Redskins don't have an issue evaluating talent. For someone like me who doesn't need to eat food because I can sustain myself on a diet of haterade, well, logic and reasoning are much easier without the delusion.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Do you or do you not feel like we could have used those two guys on this years team?

I think I'm guilty of misrepresenting my own points at times. I do not think the Redskins have failed under Mike Shanahan because they granted Andre Carter his release instead of talking him into staying and making a fortune on his annual salary, and because they decided they could replace Carlos Rogers through free agency. We have more or less replaced the contribution of those "pro bowlers" with a first round pick and a free agent signing at corner. The issue, of course, is the lack of steady (2009-2012), clear improvement. But I think those are high-profile lapses in judgement/talent evaluation brought to light by the combination of the Redskins not being good and those guys (justifiably) being elected to the pro-bowl.

I wanted to talk more about how the Redskins struggle to evaluate talent, but oddly, no one seems to wants to argue against that point. Of course, whenever I talk about other symptomatic mistakes the Redskins make more consistently that maybe don't get as much publicity...well, why don't you go back through the thread and I can save you six paragraphs.

In short: people dismiss minor symptomatic moves as trival mistakes that no one should care about, and then they come up with individual justifications for moves that received a lot of publicity and were obviously wrong (McNabb). Then, based on some creative justifications, they arrive at the conclusion that the Redskins don't have an issue evaluating talent. For someone like me who doesn't need to eat food because I can sustain myself on a diet of haterade, well, logic and reasoning are much easier without the delusion.

Rogers yes, Carter no

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Do you or do you not feel like we could have used those two guys on this years team?

I think I'm guilty of misrepresenting my own points at times. I do not think the Redskins have failed under Mike Shanahan because they granted Andre Carter his release instead of talking him into staying and making a fortune on his annual salary, and because they decided they could replace Carlos Rogers through free agency. We have more or less replaced the contribution of those "pro bowlers" with a first round pick and a free agent signing at corner. The issue, of course, is the lack of steady (2009-2012), clear improvement. But I think those are high-profile lapses in judgement/talent evaluation brought to light by the combination of the Redskins not being good and those guys (justifiably) being elected to the pro-bowl.

I wanted to talk more about how the Redskins struggle to evaluate talent, but oddly, no one seems to wants to argue against that point. Of course, whenever I talk about other symptomatic mistakes the Redskins make more consistently that maybe don't get as much publicity...well, why don't you go back through the thread and I can save you six paragraphs.

In short: people dismiss minor symptomatic moves as trival mistakes that no one should care about, and then they come up with individual justifications for moves that received a lot of publicity and were obviously wrong (McNabb). Then, based on some creative justifications, they arrive at the conclusion that the Redskins don't have an issue evaluating talent. For someone like me who doesn't need to eat food because I can sustain myself on a diet of haterade, well, logic and reasoning are much easier without the delusion.

So were T. Williams, Riley, Paulson, Bowen, Carriker, Cofield, Gaffney, Hightower, Kerrigan, Jenkins, Hankerson, Helu, Gomes and Royster examples of poor talent evaluation? Were the 52 players released and now out of the NFL examples of poor talent evaluation?

I guess I kinda feel like Col. Jessup in A Few Good Men.. Please tell me you have more than Rinehart, E. Williams and Justin Tryon.. Please tell me this is about more than Carter and Rogers.. We're talking about the future of our beloved franchise, please tell me you're basing your argument on something more than Stephon Heyer.. I'm going back to my base..

So again, for clarification, is the issue who is NOT here anymore or the fact that better players who replaced the 52 departed aren't better players. That I would agree is an issue but I'd offer that there's more at play than just 'poor' talent evaluation.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

So were T. Williams, Riley, Paulson, Bowen, Carriker, Cofield, Gaffney, Hightower, Kerrigan, Jenkins, Hankerson, Helu, Gomes and Royster examples of poor talent evaluation? Were the 52 players released and now out of the NFL examples of poor talent evaluation?

I guess I kinda feel like Col. Jessup in A Few Good Men.. Please tell me you have more than Rinehart, E. Williams and Justin Tryon.. Please tell me this is about more than Carter and Rogers.. We're talking about the future of our beloved franchise, please tell me you're basing your argument on something more than Stephon Heyer.. I'm going back to my base..

So again, for clarification, is the issue who is NOT here anymore or the fact that better players who replaced the 52 departed aren't better players. That I would agree is an issue but I'd offer that there's more at play than just 'poor' talent evaluation.

Well...talent evaluation is rather critical in pro football. It's as much the story between Patriots vs Rams as it is Belichick vs Spags. Smart to brilliant talent evaluators tend to keep their jobs as long as they wish. Poor ones get canned within a couple years. So far, Mike has been a lousy talent-evaluator more often than not, and especially where it counts most in pro football...at quarterback. But he's the "safest" coach in pro football tonight.

And you cannot say "rebuild the defense in season 1" or why else McNabb? Why additions at WR? I just don't see the planning angle you do...

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

So were T. Williams, Riley, Paulson, Bowen, Carriker, Cofield, Gaffney, Hightower, Kerrigan, Jenkins, Hankerson, Helu, Gomes and Royster examples of poor talent evaluation? Were the 52 players released and now out of the NFL examples of poor talent evaluation?

Well, when Zorn left SOMEONE FORGOT TO LOCK THE BACK DOOR and Mike Williams and Casey Rabach got contract extensions as a result.

To answer your question, no. I mean, you shouldn't need more examples of poor talent evaluation than I have provided to believe there is a problem. Compile a list of names of the players who the Redskins have targeted and acquired in trades (McNabb, Brown, Hightower, and well, yes, Gaffney). Compile a list of names of the players who the Redskins have targeted and extended (M. Williams, Rabach, Moss, Montgomery, Alexander, Doughty) from their own roster. Now consider who the the core players on this team are and have been and how many of those guys have actually been awarded contract extensions since Dec. 2009 vs who has been allowed to walk.

My assertion there would be that at least 20 other NFL teams, and probably 25, could match the names on your list just with moves dating back to March 2010. It's not something we should believe that Mike has brought an unprecedented amount of good football players into the organization. He had a strong draft in 2011. Some teams had a good draft in 2010. The Redskins weren't one of those teams. Neither the 2010 or the 2011 draft is going to define our personnel department the way the evidence I provided throughout this thread is going to.

I guess I kinda feel like Col. Jessup in A Few Good Men.. Please tell me you have more than Rinehart, E. Williams and Justin Tryon.. Please tell me this is about more than Carter and Rogers.. We're talking about the future of our beloved franchise, please tell me you're basing your argument on something more than Stephon Heyer.. I'm going back to my base..

So again, for clarification, is the issue who is NOT here anymore or the fact that better players who replaced the 52 departed aren't better players. That I would agree is an issue but I'd offer that there's more at play than just 'poor' talent evaluation.

I think the strength of my argument speaks for itself. I mean, if you boil it down in a way so that you're just looking at guys like Tryon, Rinehart, and Edwin Williams alone, well, then that point isn't strong. If you're just looking at Carter and Rogers alone, well, that point isn't strong. If you're just looking at McNabb, well, then that point doesn't mean much by itself. Actually that's lunacy, no one thinks highly of the McNabb trade.

If you actually realize that the struggles the Redskins have had to identify the players within their own building that are worth keeping and building around vs the ones that are totally useless and out of the league the day they are handed their walking papers has been completely unprecedented in the NFL these last two years, well, then that's not weak at all, it's very telling.

You could maybe, maybe argue that the Mike Holmgren Browns have been just as bad at evaluating talent as the Mike Shanahan Redskins. That team did let a lot of the talent that Rob Ryan brought into that organization walk for nothing. But I don't know if "we do it as well as those schlubs in Cleveland!" has quite the same ring as the fact that "we're finally getting our QB this year" whether or not it is true.

And Colt McCoy is a better quarterback than anyone that Mike Shanahan has brought to town to date, which would be the tiebreaker between the two organizations.

[Hog1]

Kinda' makes me hungry for.....BBQ

[GTripp0012]

I think if Carter played all of Adam Carriker's snaps this year at the same position, plus played the edge in sub package pass rushing situations, I think he would have had a heck of a year for us. Then we would have been able to use an extra linebacker in the dime package for the interior rush and gotten even more pressure on quarterbacks in those long yardage. I think Carter absolutely would have helped, but they would have needed to come to an agreement on not trying to make him a 3-4 linebacker.

Then again, I'm not a proven defensive talent evaluator, so what the heck do I know?

[That Guy]

yeah, carter and rogers would have been to have, but carter didn't fit, and i'm not sure he'd be a great 3-4 end with his size... he's one of those guys that loses body weight during the season from what i remember.

meanwhile, carriker wasn't wanted in STL and has been solid here. I really don't feel like responding about tryon or reinhart - they showed us nothing and tryon may not be in the league, and even if they are, there are about 1000 other guys that can do the same thing. they're NFL bodies, nothing special, and guys that generally aren't that important to your W/L record.

[Bushead]

Gtripp, I've read a lot of the posts you've had since the season ended and I'm just not quite sure I follow your vendetta. You seem completely against anything and everything Shanahan has done from free agents, drafting, playing certain players, play calling, time management, personnel.

I personally just don't get it. I'm not saying you are wrong or your opinion is not backed up, but can you succinctly tell me why you are so anti-Shanahan when it comes to almost everything?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Bushead

Gtripp, I've read a lot of the posts you've had since the season ended and I'm just not quite sure I follow your vendetta. You seem completely against anything and everything Shanahan has done from free agents, drafting, playing certain players, play calling, time management, personnel.

I personally just don't get it. I'm not saying you are wrong or your opinion is not backed up, but can you succinctly tell me why you are so anti-Shanahan when it comes to almost everything?

There are people here that are convinced I cannot do anything succinctly.

In brief: I didn't think Shanahan was a good hire for where the Redskins were at the time, I wasn't enamored by his staff picks (particularly Kyle), he kept an incredibly high percentage of Zorn's roster in year one for most of the offseason (though perhaps not the right percentage), I didn't like the McNabb trade, I didn't like how poorly and largely uninspired the whole team performed in year one, I don't like how he treats some veteran players (McNabb in particular, but there are other examples) vs others, I didn't think that the direction of second offseason showed a great concept of where this team was at the time, I thought the whole Rex vs. Beck thing was stupid and easily avoidable, I don't like that he has managed to fall vastly short of my expectations as a manager of the game on the sideline, and I don't always like that when Shanahan opens up a window (via the dreaded media relations) into what he is thinking that he often seems to have little grasp of what is actually happening around him. None of that was a case of second guessing, it was all first guessing.

As to the reason why it seems like I hate everything so much, I think that's more a case of everyone else being irrationally hopeful that there is no way that this era could fail and doing anything and everything to justify mistakes made by this regime as some sort of process of suffering before we come out the other side as super bowl contenders. I would suggest that absent that sentiment that things WILL work out and the Redskins WILL have a quarterback tomorrow that is better than anyone we've ever had at the position before, well, then I'm just some dude with some opinions that are likely too bullish on the Redskins (with the right moves they can compete for the division next year!!!11!), and others that are too bearish and don't give enough credit where it is due.

So that would make me pretty much like anyone else here, except that my football paradigm doesn't lead me to the conclusion that things will be absolutely alright as long as Mike Shanahan is the coach here. My football paradigm doesn't lead me anywhere exactly. The evidence Shanahan has left does lead me to the conclusion that he will not succeed here, but that's not something I necessarily believed when he was hired.

[SkinItup]

Rogers left years ago. He was just still playing on the team. Short of paying him more than Nnamdi got payed he was leaving the skins and even than it was questionable.

AC was a scheme causality. Too small for 3-4 DE not good standing in space.

They are both good players just not for the skins.