Should Mike Shanahan be fired?

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by Skinzman

Some of these teams that were turned around arent exactly model franchises. Lions had a QB that finally stop being injured. They had one good year and are struggling again. Niners was more about Singletary than anything else. They actually had a good team, just one that refused to play for a guy that relied on insults instead of coaching. The Bengals are the same inconsistent team they usually are with a random winning season here and there. The record is a little better as a whole than 10 years ago but no one considers them world beaters. If the Bengals are what we are aspiring to be, then why care who our coach is?

The situations of all three were completely different than what the Redskins had three years ago.

The biggest problem is that the Redskins have been run by a fan. One that calls for heads to roll after a year or two, and that has been one of the problems of this team. There has been no continuity or chemistry. Especially given that Snyder will most likely look to go back to the days of Snyderatto if he fires Shanny. Which does not mean winning, in case you missed the last 20 years.

To say we are no closer to being competitive is to call RG3 a scrub. There is no way that statement is even remotely true. I get that a lot want to win something so bad that going back to winning the offseason every year is a goal. Its just a stupid goal. Win today or be fired tomorrow is not going to cut it in the NFL. We have been through 20 years of that and some are desperate to go back. I am personally not that excited about winning the offseason just so fans can claim that we have won something.

Shanny has been here 2 1/2 years. Second year was a lockout so FA was not ideal by any stretch of the imagination. First year Shanny deserves a lot of blame, because he actually thought he could win now. He deserves his fair share for that but it seems we are moving to build through the draft the last two drafts and I dont want that to stop. A coaching change now just means a brand new O-line being put in place (since the ZBS isnt exactly common) as well as massive changes to everything else. How long will that rebuild take? According to some here, it should only take 3 games. I call bs to that assertion. Does he deserve 10 years? No, and I never said he should get it. But this carousel at coaching and philosophies will never work.

As for Parity, the last 10 or so years, the same parity has existed in MLB as has in the NFL. 3 teams won it all twice with a few breakthroughs from a couple of other teams.

If the goal is to ruin RG3, then by all means, keep screaming for a new coach every year.

All four teams I mentioned would beat the snot out of Mike's football team. I win

I keed I keed. Not about all four teams beating Mike's though, that shit is real. We were in a lot of games last year, and the year before. We were a below average team. (BTW the intellectual acrobatics on display about all teams playing down to us story is impressive) This year we're in most of our games. We're (still) a below average team, and it's for many of the same reasons as in years one and two e.g. bad defense, lousy special teams, poor discipline, inconsistency, questionable play-calling/play-design, and FA busts.

Nobody that I know discussed canning Mike right after last year, and obviously not after his first year. I don't know where you heard that...but neither do you probably lol.

It's year three. Some of us don't see any overall progress. We traded in a good defense/average offense (pre-Shanahan) for a shit defense/great offense that struggles in a lot of situations, usually the kind that win football games. And that's with ROY at QB.

Sometimes there is a fine line between continuity and complacency, but this isn't one of those times. Mike does not know how to win anymore as an HC. Some believe it's because he could only really win with Elway. Some believe it also had something to do with playing in a week division, and against fewer elite teams in that era. Still others believe it's because he's not actually winning anymore. That last one is a real stretch if you ask me

I think SmootSmack is right that the real continuity is with Bruce Allen. Well, SS hasn't said it that way yet but it's what he thinks.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by punch it in

I know exactly what u are talking about. Teams dont gameplan to score one or two touchdowns. Ever. Never.
Teams are throwing the ball on us and not running cus our secondary sucks not cus rg-3 is scoring alot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ahhhhhhh snap!!!

[Skinzman]

Originally Posted by punch it in

I know exactly what u are talking about. Teams dont gameplan to score one or two touchdowns. Ever. Never.
Teams are throwing the ball on us and not running cus our secondary sucks not cus rg-3 is scoring alot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Our secondary has ALWAYS sucked...

Hall and Wilson were our corners last year. Our safeties were Landry and Atogwe. Landry was often injured so in reality, our safeties were Atogwe and Doughty. Are you honestly saying that D Hall and Wilson were probowl corners last year? That Atogwe and Doughty were world beaters at safety? We have always had a terrible secondary, yet we see teams passing twice as often this year than in the past few years. Why? Conservative game plans and play calling from the past few years.

Im not exactly sure what you see different in our defense this year. We switched two crappy safeties out with two other crappy safeties. Other than injuries, Its the same players and the same coaching.

[Skinzman]

Originally Posted by The Goat

All four teams I mentioned would beat the snot out of Mike's football team. I win

I keed I keed. Not about all four teams beating Mike's though, that shit is real. We were in a lot of games last year, and the year before. We were a below average team. (BTW the intellectual acrobatics on display about all teams playing down to us story is impressive) This year we're in most of our games. We're (still) a below average team, and it's for many of the same reasons as in years one and two e.g. bad defense, lousy special teams, poor discipline, inconsistency, questionable play-calling/play-design, and FA busts.

Nobody that I know discussed canning Mike right after last year, and obviously not after his first year. I don't know where you heard that...but neither do you probably lol.

It's year three. Some of us don't see any overall progress. We traded in a good defense/average offense (pre-Shanahan) for a shit defense/great offense that struggles in a lot of situations, usually the kind that win football games. And that's with ROY at QB.

Sometimes there is a fine line between continuity and complacency, but this isn't one of those times. Mike does not know how to win anymore as an HC. Some believe it's because he could only really win with Elway. Some believe it also had something to do with playing in a week division, and against fewer elite teams in that era. Still others believe it's because he's not actually winning anymore. That last one is a real stretch if you ask me

I think SmootSmack is right that the real continuity is with Bruce Allen. Well, SS hasn't said it that way yet but it's what he thinks.

The case for Firing Mike Shanahan - hailRedskins.com Fan Board

Not this forum board, but dont say I dont know where I heard it. I have heard it, and im sure you have as well . The thread Im linking is not even after his first year, but during. Something tells me that if I was willing to spend the time to go back through this specific forum board, that I would find similar sentiments. Some people have been calling for his head since his first season. Granted some people also called the trade for RG3 to be one of the worst trades in the history of the entire sport.

A lot of people screamed "Young QB... Young QB..." his first two years. He waited, and we arent stuck with Gabbert. Let me repeat that... "WE ARENT STUCK WITH GABBERT". Most of the people calling for Shannys head would have taken Gabbert and called it a great day that the Skins finally have their QB of the future. And the losing would have continued for another decade regardless of who our coach is.

Did he screw up with the McNabb trade? Absolutely... But most people would not of had the guts to wait that extra year when an entire fan base was screaming for a young QB, and then had the guts to drop what was needed to bring RG3 here. Shanny does deserve credit for that, and if RG3 continues to develop into what I think he can be, then he deserves at least one more year beyond this year to see if he can make it work. We dont need to do to RG3 what we did to JC and change his offense every single year, that is a huge mistake.

[Krusheasy]

Originally Posted by JGisLordOfTheRings

fire you fire me fire everybody

i agree. Can we make a change at owner during the bye ?

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

The 49ers sucked, their talent did not. I listed all the talent on that team. Mike Singletary obviously was a poor coach. It still wasn't a "turn around" with a team with bottom of the barrel talent. We had Orakpo and old ass London Fletcher. You going to compare that with the list I put up the 49ers had?

No, the Lions haven't turned shit around man. Who's to say that 10-6 record last year was a fluke. They are sucking so far this year. Fact is, that Mike had a better record his first 2 years than did Schwartz, YET you are up here patting that guy on the back?

Schwartz was 8-24 his first two years. Mike was 11-21. Also, you talk about Detroit being the worst, did you not forget THEY BEAT US!!! Yeah, that little fun fact escaped your alternate reality didn't it.

This is mind boggling. It really is.

The Lions were 0-16 (the
Worst) the YEAR BEFORE schwartz got there. His first year they beat us. So your memory is a tad foggy too. They ended that season winning four in a row. Than the next year 10-6.
Lets do the math. 0 wins. Hire scwartz. 10 wins in year TWO.
What is mind boggling is that in your alternate reality you make the case as to why this isnt a turnaround but MS in his third year is on the rite track at 3-5?
Really?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by Skinzman

Our secondary has ALWAYS sucked...

Hall and Wilson were our corners last year. Our safeties were Landry and Atogwe. Landry was often injured so in reality, our safeties were Atogwe and Doughty. Are you honestly saying that D Hall and Wilson were probowl corners last year? That Atogwe and Doughty were world beaters at safety? We have always had a terrible secondary, yet we see teams passing twice as often this year than in the past few years. Why? Conservative game plans and play calling from the past few years.

Im not exactly sure what you see different in our defense this year. We switched two crappy safeties out with two other crappy safeties. Other than injuries, Its the same players and the same coaching.

Thanks for reading the rosters too me. Our secondary is far and away worse than last year and if you are going to tell me it isnt than this conversation is going to go into the land of false premise where people say whatever they want and pigs fly and that becomes exhausting.
ARE YOU REALLY going to sit there and tell me teams conservatively game planned against the Redskins? Completely healthy - good teams - with high powered offenses -coservatively gameplanned to beat us 14-10 because they didnt want to get hurt for no reason cus beck and rex couldnt beat them anyway? Does that sound as brilliant as it did when you wrote it down as it does when you read someone else writing it down for you?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

And J.S. has more talent in Detroit by far

In all fairness He inherited an 0-16 team so if he has more talent than its because they did a better job of amassing that talent. I mean ill listen to the "mike inherited a shitshow" argument and i agree with it. The lions were 0-16 - so this is one time i dont want to hear about Mikes mess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skinzman]

Originally Posted by punch it in

Thanks for reading the rosters too me. Our secondary is far and away worse than last year and if you are going to tell me it isnt than this conversation is going to go into the land of false premise where people say whatever they want and pigs fly and that becomes exhausting.
ARE YOU REALLY going to sit there and tell me teams conservatively game planned against the Redskins? Completely healthy - good teams - with high powered offenses -coservatively gameplanned to beat us 14-10 because they didnt want to get hurt for no reason cus beck and rex couldnt beat them anyway? Does that sound as brilliant as it did when you wrote it down as it does when you read someone else writing it down for you?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Its far and away worse because teams are going for it this year. Had they gone for it last year, the defense would have been bottom 25 not high teens. Thats exactly what im saying. Our defense is the exact same except we switched out two safetys. One of which is still on the team and cant start over M. Williams.

Im surprised that you are claiming that a conservative game plan has never been tried in the entire history of the NFL. I guess pigs have been flying the whole time.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by punch it in

His first year they beat us. So your memory is a tad foggy too. They ended that season winning four in a row. Than the next year 10-6.
Lets do the math. 0 wins. Hire scwartz. 10 wins in year TWO.
What is mind boggling is that in your alternate reality you make the case as to why this isnt a turnaround but MS in his third year is on the rite track at 3-5?
Really?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Are you high? I said they beat us and yet you sit there and say my memory is foggy?....lol WoW. This conversation is brutal and pretty useless to be honest with you. Listen one more time. You claimed the Lions were the worst in football. I pointed out it was basically that same team that beat us. We ended their losing streak. So if they were the worst and beat us, what the **** does that make us? It makes even worse than the worst.


Also. In regards to the underlined.


(thank you JR for this gem)

He was NOT 10-6 his second year. I posted the record of JS's tenure in Detroit and yet you still ****ed it up?... /facepalm

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Just curious what your take on the train of thought that offenses didn't run it up on us because they believed we couldn't come back - thus artificially raising our defensive stats.

Well in 2011, on average about 46% of an opponent's offensive plays were running plays. In 2012 it's around 36%.

In our 2011 losses, it was around 50%. 2012-41%

That tells just part of the story though because you'd probably need a quarter by quarter breakdown to get a stronger sense of just how passive/aggressive the opposing team's offense was

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Well in 2011, on average about 46% of an opponent's offensive plays were running plays. In 2012 it's around 36%.

In our 2011 losses, it was around 50%. 2012-41%

That tells just part of the story though because you'd probably need a quarter by quarter breakdown to get a stronger sense of just how passive/aggressive the opposing team's offense was

Wait, statistics, facts and analysis. How could that be? I thought we were just going to accept that it was:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Completely fabricated. No basis in reality.

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Are you high? I said they beat us and yet you sit there and say my memory is foggy?....lol WoW. This conversation is brutal and pretty useless to be honest with you. Listen one more time. You claimed the Lions were the worst in football. I pointed out it was basically that same team that beat us. We ended their losing streak. So if they were the worst and beat us, what the **** does that make us? It makes even worse than the worst.


Also. In regards to the underlined.


(thank you JR for this gem)

He was NOT 10-6 his second year. I posted the record of JS's tenure in Detroit and yet you still ****ed it up?... /facepalm

I dont care that they beat us. Its about detroit making a turnaround. To go from 0-16 to the playoffs a couple years later is a friggin turnaround no matter how you dance around it. Jeez.

Edit: there is a marked improvement for three years witj JS in Detroit. Also alot of it was without Stafford but Culpepoer etc at qb. How in the hell are you gonna sit there and say he did not turn the detroit lions franchise around How stubborn. My God. If i could facepalm on my iphone it would be inserted several times here.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Well in 2011, on average about 46% of an opponent's offensive plays were running plays. In 2012 it's around 36%.

In our 2011 losses, it was around 50%. 2012-41%

That tells just part of the story though because you'd probably need a quarter by quarter breakdown to get a stronger sense of just how passive/aggressive the opposing team's offense was

SS do you agree with the fact that the aggressive play calling could have something to do with the fact that my dog could pass for 300 yards against this current secondary and not so much to do with the fact that teams only try to score 13 points against teams with Rex at qb. That is one of thee most ridiculous arguments i have ever heard in my entire life.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SmootSmack]

I think if you believe the opponent is incapable of scoring quickly and in bunches you may have a different offensive gameplan than you might if you think they are capable.