Short memories from angry fans

Defensewins · 10-14-2004, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4TH RING

......My point was that Gibbs is going to have problems adjusting. Twelve years away from the game has'nt helped him, thats obvious......

I think this issue is so overplayed. The media loves to talk about this. Yes Gibbs has made some mistakes and some of those mistakes are related to his time away. But Gibbs is a smart man and he will figure it out. Nobody is perfect including you.
The bigger point is Gibbs inherited a mega-underacheiveing team. My point of this thread is 'OUR REDSKINS SUCKED LAST YEAR'.
We are now losing close games this season, we are not getting blown away like last year...we no longer suck. Our team is at least doing the little things like blocking and playing defense in a respectable way, while it works out its problems. It is not the end of the world that skins did not come out of the gate running this season.
Some here like to point at Parcells and say he had a great 1st year last season. Well look at him now. His team has regressed from last year. He is not perfect either. They beat us 27-0 last year. This year they barely beat us in Gibbs 2nd or 3rd game back. Thay should prove we are way better under Gibss in comparison to Spurrier.

4TH RING · 10-14-2004, 01:51 PM

I agree, when you lose by 27pts as supposed to 3pts there is a huge difference. A 27pt loss to our arch rivals at home and we have Spurrier on the sideline scracthing and shaking his head is demoralizing. I guarantee you ask anybody on our team last year and they would agree.

I've been defending Gibbs because you'll never see him on the sidelines making f***faces when things are'nt going our way. Anyways i'm confident he will get this team on track. And by next year our team will live up to all it's expectations.

sportscurmudgeon · 10-14-2004, 02:19 PM

Defensewins:

You are on the mark here, my man. The reason this team is 1-4 this year - after a wonderful 5-11 season last year - is that the players on the field are not good enough to be 5-0. The coaching is better; the players as a whole are better but they are still not anything special.

Much of the frustration on this board comes from the knee-jerk reaction of too many fans to take any trade or draft or signing by the Redskins and look at it so unrealistically that expectations cannot possibly be met. Yes, I know, that's what fans always do. But if you temper the reactions just a tad, you don't have to go into a depression when expecations are not met.

Look at the players on this team as if you were the GM of another team that thinks it is only a player or two away from a conference chammpionship or a Super Bowl championship. What Redskins' players would you be frothing at the mouth to add to your team? Don't hyperventilate here:

Receivers: None. Coles is far and away the best of this lot and he is not likely to be the guy to put a team in that state "over the top".

Tight Ends: None. Maybe - I said MAYBE - some day Cooley fits that description but not now. There are 16 NFC teams. As of this weekend he might be the 10th best TE.

Offensive Linemen: Jansen. That's it; that's the list. And Jansen isn't playing this year.

QB: None. No discussion needed here.

RBs: Portis. End of message. Anyone who begins to type out a response that has the word "Rock" or "Sultan" in it is dreaming.

Defensive linemen: None. Do not tell me how much better someone on this line is when compared to the Easter Island Statues who played there last year. None of these guys are difference-makers. None.

LBs: Arrington and Washington. If you already had three good linebackers on your team and thought you needed a 4th as a back-up to get over the hump, you could put Pierce on this list too. But Pierce is not the guy to carry a team to the Super Bowl.

DBs: Smoot (maybe) and Springs (maybe). Both guys play hard and both can have good games but I'm not sure they are guys other teams would be frothing at the mouth to sign.

Safeties: None. Not even Ade Jimoh. Sean Taylor has potential but sadly for Redskin fans this year, "potential" means he hasn't achieved anything yet.

So, you have a 53 man roster and on that squad you have about 4 guys that other teams ought to go after with gusto given the chance and another 4 or 5 who would not be bad guys to add to an already good team. That's why the team in 1-4.

And the reason it hurts a lot of folks so much is that they drank the Kool-Aid when:

Ramsey had a good game last year and then they anointed him as the 2nd coming of John Unitas and

Chris Samuels went to the Pro-Bowl even though he wasn't really that outstanding and

Sean Taylor intercepted two passes in an exhibition game from a QB and to a receiver who may never take a snap in a real game and

Bruce Smith/Deion/Jeff George brought their gaudy stats from long ago to town.

MTK · 10-14-2004, 05:34 PM

I have to disagree with SC, this team is more talented than the record indicates.

They are not a 1-4 team because they don't have the players to get it done.

Turnovers, a new system, new coaches, a bunch of new starters, Gibbs adjusting to the game after a 12 year layoff, are all key reasons for the 1-4 start.

I'm not saying we have Super Bowl talent, but this certainly isn't a team lacking in playmakers.

SmootSmack · 10-14-2004, 05:44 PM

Joe Gibbs coached for 12 years, won 3 Super Bowls and yet the Redskins have just one Hall of Famer (Riggins) from all that. They'll soon have two with Green, and should have three with Monk.

My point is that Gibbs' teams were never really about talent per se. They were about playing as a team and maximizing players strengths. Rypien, Ricky Sanders, Ricky Ervins, Fred Stokes, Greg Manusky-I could go on but you get my point (maybe) that these Redskins of the past weren't the most talented players in the league back then either but they found ways to win

That Guy · 10-14-2004, 06:17 PM

i think a lot of teams wouldn't mind having hall either (not a game breaker, but a better kicker than a lot of teams have), and chad for returns (though he looked much better as a jet with actual BLOCKING in front of him), but i think that post is correct as to who other teams would want to have...

but if we did this kind of breakdown on every team, i'm not sure you'd such much more than 8 guys on them either (out of 22 or so)... so i'm not so sure that its possible to have studs at every position or that its needed to win... where we don't have stars, we have some solid players (being solid is much better than having 2 stars and a bunch of crap.. or in GBs case 0 stars and total crap)... i think you need to judge positions by overall capability and not star power...

any owner would want williams at DC and probably gibbs as well

Sheriff Gonna Getcha · 10-14-2004, 06:36 PM

I guess I'm just one of those dumb fans.

I expect more of a team that has the HIGHEST paid roster in NFL history.

I expect more from Brunell, Ramsey, Coles, Gardner, Samuels, Thomas, Portis, Washington, Smoot, Springs, Griffin, Taylor, et al.

I understand that it is Gibbs first year back and it's still early, but come one, I'd like to see some life on offense. Gregg Williams has brought in a new system and turned one of the lowest ranked defenses into the 3rd best in the league.

Sure, it takes longer to coach up the offense than the defense, but come one, I'd like to see some life here. Pass protection is mixed, run blocking sucks, our offense can't score unless the ball is given to them in the opponents red zone, people are dropping passes, throws are always going awry etc. I have patience and I'll always be around to support the team, but it's not crazy to ask that our offense show some signs of life.

I VERY VIVIDLY remember there being a great deal of consensus that our offense would be unstoppable. What happened to that sentiment? Isn't there a reason to be frustrated?

DirtBagZ · 10-14-2004, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

I guess I'm just one of those dumb fans.

I expect more of a team that has the HIGHEST paid roster in NFL history.

I expect more from Brunell, Ramsey, Coles, Gardner, Samuels, Thomas, Portis, Washington, Smoot, Springs, Griffin, Taylor, et al.

I understand that it is Gibbs first year back and it's still early, but come one, I'd like to see some life on offense. Gregg Williams has brought in a new system and turned one of the lowest ranked defenses into the 3rd best in the league.

Sure, it takes longer to coach up the offense than the defense, but come one, I'd like to see some life here. Pass protection is mixed, run blocking sucks, our offense can't score unless the ball is given to them in the opponents red zone, people are dropping passes, throws are always going awry etc. I have patience and I'll always be around to support the team, but it's not crazy to ask that our offense show some signs of life.

I VERY VIVIDLY remember there being a great deal of consensus that our offense would be unstoppable. What happened to that sentiment? Isn't there a reason to be frustrated?

`

I think you summed up my own sentiments nicely. I never thought the team would be a playoff contender, I always felt 8-8 would be a reasonable season, considering the turnover and implementing a new system.

My other wish was that the team would at least be competive, since Redskins' teams past had a bad tendency to just give up. Guess you have to watch out what you wish for a close loss is more aggrevating then getting blown out, you are compelled to watch the game when it is close.

sportscurmudgeon · 10-14-2004, 08:15 PM

Ramseyfan:

I am not saying you are dumb; I said you drank the Kool-Aid which means that you let your emotions take over. Thinking is done with the brain and not the glands.

The problem here may be that you look at salaries and conclude that high salaries mean that the team has boatlaods of talent. The other way you can have the highest paid team in the league is to overpay lots and lots of people by a little bit. Someone once said that the surest way to go bankrupt is to lose a little bit of money on each and every deal - and then try to make up for it in volume. :confused:

Many GMs and football analysts said that Danny Boy paid too much for his "Jetskins raid" last year. Specifically, they said that Coles was asking for something like a $10-11M signing bonus and Danny Boy tossed $13M on the table. I don't know if that's true because I wasn't in the room with all those folks when the negotiating was done. But when that story hit the streets, the general reaction here - and among Redskin fans in the DC aree - was that Danny Boy was a genius who swooped in and got the guy he needed and did not permit any other team to do any negotiating with him. That's true; but if that scenario is correct, it would also be true that he "overpaid".

So, IF that has happened in more than a few circumstances then maybe the team has such a high payroll because everyone is getting just a bit more than they are worth.

So far, Mark Brunell hasn't looked like a guy worth $30+ M with an $8-8.5M signing bonus to me.

I like Clinton Portis but so far there is no indication that he's going to provide $50 - 60M worth of services to the team.

Now you can get angry about the overpayment but that is not the players' fault. If your boss came to you and offered to pay you 20% more than the "market rate" for whatever your skills are, you'd take the raise in a flash. If you didn't take that deal, then I would say you were dumb!

Forget what these guys are paid for a minute and forget what the scouting combines said about them or whether or not they went to the Pro Bowl 3 years ago. Watch them play football and watch them do the fundamental things that football players at their position are expected to do routinely. Since you'll be emotionally invested in the game when you are watching it live, try taping the game and then going back and watching it when you already know what will happen so you can be more analytical. Here are some things I think you'll see if you do that:

1. The interior DL does not get any pressure in the middle so the opposing QB has lots of room to step up into the pocket and deliver the ball - or to break out and run because the DE's have rushed upfield. That is an important ability for a DT; the Skins' DT's haven't done that reliably for about 7 years now.

2. The defensive backs need to be sure tacklers; by the time it is their responsbility to make a tackle, there is already a "problem" and they are there to prevent a "disaster". That's why the call them "safeties". Only Springs is a fundamentally sound and reliable tackler in the DB. The other guys are either headhunters or in Smoot's case undersized against lots of guys coming at him with the ball.

3. The wide receivers need to block on running plays. If they are not going to "block" in the classic sense, they have to be very effective in "getting in the way" of the defender who will be coming to the play. Coles is good at this but sometimes gets clobbered by a defender who outweighs him by 40 lbs. Gardner holds or clips as often as he lays a solid block. I have yet to see Jacobs throw an effective block. Thrash is the best blocking WR. But if you run whenever Thrash is on the field, the other defensive coordinator will pick that up in about a half of football and the results will not be pretty. If you keep Thrash in there for every down, you aren't going to make the passing game something to be feared.

4. The offensive line has to be able to get to the point of attack on a sweep before the runner gets there AND before the defense sniffs out where the point of attack is and gets a couple of defenders there. The Skins seem able to do that when they run to the left a whole lot better than when they run to the right. I have my own theory about why that is the case, but I would need to see a lot more examples before I was confident enough to draw a conclusion. If I see that, what do you think the chances are that opposing defensive coordinators also see that?

These are areas of deficencies in fundamentals. Before you leap to the conclusion that this is the fault of the coaching staff, remember that these players are in the NFL and to a large extent have already developed their way of playing. Yes, the coaches can adjust some techniques and they can get players to work harder in the weight rooms [example: Dockery is significantly better at pass blocking this year than last even though he is hardly a master of that skill] but you aren't going to change everything that needs to be changed about every player in a single training camp. Especially when there are time limits on how much practice time is allowed and there can be a union grievance if the practices and meetings run too long! :frusty:

Gibbs & Co. inherited a flawed football team. Part of the problem is the FO fascination with big name free agents. Part of the problem is four different head coaching philosophies in 5 years each one trying to emphasize different specific skill sets. Part of it is a cadre of players from previous regimes that were selfish and whiney and not that hard-working.

I figured that Gibbs would be able to significantly reduce the number of mental errors that the team made and it seems that he has. No more hitting the guy out of bounds after he was stopped short of a first down; no more illegal procedure penalties on consecutive downs; no more loafing back to the line of scrimmage when the team needs to spike the ball to stop the clock. But the physical and technique limitations are going to take a lot more time because now it's apparent to me that it was NOT the "Fun 'n Gun" that made these guys look ragged; it's that a lot of them are just that - - ragged.

That Guy · 10-15-2004, 03:17 AM

wow, nice post Sports... i know our DEs are making double what other DEs of similar talent are making, and brunell looks like a $1mill a year player, not 42mill long term contract + a 3rd round pick (ended up being next year's 2nd rounder cause we got cooley)... marcus looks like he's worth the money... out of the jetskins, only chad was offered market value (hence the arbitration with the jets to try and keep him), everyone else got high offers...

williams has done a great job of making up for weaknesses in the D though... our LBs are really pretty good overall and our CBs are good enough... DLine is okay, but not great and safety is the weakest position with bowen and lott out (ouch)...

Defensewins · 10-15-2004, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

....The problem here may be that you look at salaries and conclude that high salaries mean that the team has boatlaods of talent. The other way you can have the highest paid team in the league is to overpay lots and lots of people.....Gibbs & Co. inherited a flawed football team. Part of the problem is the FO fascination with big name free agents....

You hit it out of the park with these two points. Nice Job!
I have always believed a great team has to have a good mix of stars and good blue collar players. They all have a vital part and all have to contribute, especailly in the age of the salary cap. The problem is our blue collar guys are not playing well just yet.
We have no great inexpensive, undrafted free agent head hunters on our team. This has always been one main complaints with our default GM's Snyder and Vinny bag of doughnuts. The do not draft well in the lower rounds and free agency.

Sheriff Gonna Getcha · 10-15-2004, 03:02 PM

Excellent post SC. I agree we have overpaid many of our players. However, I still argue that the team has consistently been in the top 5 in the league in terms of talent. I'd just like to see that talent show up on the field. My sentiments are certainly based in part on emotion (I can't help but be emotional about my beloved team), but I think they are grounded in reality.

SkinsRock · 10-15-2004, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Defensewins

We have no great inexpensive, undrafted free agent head hunters on our team. This has always been one main complaints with our default GM's Snyder and Vinny bag of doughnuts. The do not draft well in the lower rounds and free agency.

It looks like we may have one in Pierce, but a couple more would be nice. Now our "default GM" is Gibbs, so hopefully it will get better...

MTK · 10-15-2004, 04:42 PM

Gibbs placed alot of emphasis on undrafted FA's this year and that will continue.

Maybe next year we'll actually have some draft picks to try to find those later round gems.

wolfeskins · 10-15-2004, 08:00 PM

i cant throw in the towel on coles just yet,like some of you are doing.he was paid alot of money to come to washington but that was for steve spurriers' system and he had a real good year in it.i remember watching him play last year and thinking to myself ,"that was money well spent" ,he just needs to adjust to gibbs' system, like everyone else.plus he's hurt.

10-14-2004, 02:19 PM	#18
sportscurmudgeon Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,159	Defensewins: You are on the mark here, my man. The reason this team is 1-4 this year - after a wonderful 5-11 season last year - is that the players on the field are not good enough to be 5-0. The coaching is better; the players as a whole are better but they are still not anything special. Much of the frustration on this board comes from the knee-jerk reaction of too many fans to take any trade or draft or signing by the Redskins and look at it so unrealistically that expectations cannot possibly be met. Yes, I know, that's what fans always do. But if you temper the reactions just a tad, you don't have to go into a depression when expecations are not met. Look at the players on this team as if you were the GM of another team that thinks it is only a player or two away from a conference chammpionship or a Super Bowl championship. What Redskins' players would you be frothing at the mouth to add to your team? Don't hyperventilate here: Receivers: None. Coles is far and away the best of this lot and he is not likely to be the guy to put a team in that state "over the top". Tight Ends: None. Maybe - I said MAYBE - some day Cooley fits that description but not now. There are 16 NFC teams. As of this weekend he might be the 10th best TE. Offensive Linemen: Jansen. That's it; that's the list. And Jansen isn't playing this year. QB: None. No discussion needed here. RBs: Portis. End of message. Anyone who begins to type out a response that has the word "Rock" or "Sultan" in it is dreaming. Defensive linemen: None. Do not tell me how much better someone on this line is when compared to the Easter Island Statues who played there last year. None of these guys are difference-makers. None. LBs: Arrington and Washington. If you already had three good linebackers on your team and thought you needed a 4th as a back-up to get over the hump, you could put Pierce on this list too. But Pierce is not the guy to carry a team to the Super Bowl. DBs: Smoot (maybe) and Springs (maybe). Both guys play hard and both can have good games but I'm not sure they are guys other teams would be frothing at the mouth to sign. Safeties: None. Not even Ade Jimoh. Sean Taylor has potential but sadly for Redskin fans this year, "potential" means he hasn't achieved anything yet. So, you have a 53 man roster and on that squad you have about 4 guys that other teams ought to go after with gusto given the chance and another 4 or 5 who would not be bad guys to add to an already good team. That's why the team in 1-4. And the reason it hurts a lot of folks so much is that they drank the Kool-Aid when: Ramsey had a good game last year and then they anointed him as the 2nd coming of John Unitas and Chris Samuels went to the Pro-Bowl even though he wasn't really that outstanding and Sean Taylor intercepted two passes in an exhibition game from a QB and to a receiver who may never take a snap in a real game and Bruce Smith/Deion/Jeff George brought their gaudy stats from long ago to town. __________________ The Sports Curmudgeon www.sportscurmudgeon.com But don't get me wrong, I love sports...

10-14-2004, 05:44 PM	#20
SmootSmack Uncle Phil Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 45,256	Joe Gibbs coached for 12 years, won 3 Super Bowls and yet the Redskins have just one Hall of Famer (Riggins) from all that. They'll soon have two with Green, and should have three with Monk. My point is that Gibbs' teams were never really about talent per se. They were about playing as a team and maximizing players strengths. Rypien, Ricky Sanders, Ricky Ervins, Fred Stokes, Greg Manusky-I could go on but you get my point (maybe) that these Redskins of the past weren't the most talented players in the league back then either but they found ways to win __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

10-14-2004, 08:15 PM	#24
sportscurmudgeon Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,159	Ramseyfan: I am not saying you are dumb; I said you drank the Kool-Aid which means that you let your emotions take over. Thinking is done with the brain and not the glands. The problem here may be that you look at salaries and conclude that high salaries mean that the team has boatlaods of talent. The other way you can have the highest paid team in the league is to overpay lots and lots of people by a little bit. Someone once said that the surest way to go bankrupt is to lose a little bit of money on each and every deal - and then try to make up for it in volume. :confused: Many GMs and football analysts said that Danny Boy paid too much for his "Jetskins raid" last year. Specifically, they said that Coles was asking for something like a $10-11M signing bonus and Danny Boy tossed $13M on the table. I don't know if that's true because I wasn't in the room with all those folks when the negotiating was done. But when that story hit the streets, the general reaction here - and among Redskin fans in the DC aree - was that Danny Boy was a genius who swooped in and got the guy he needed and did not permit any other team to do any negotiating with him. That's true; but if that scenario is correct, it would also be true that he "overpaid". So, IF that has happened in more than a few circumstances then maybe the team has such a high payroll because everyone is getting just a bit more than they are worth. So far, Mark Brunell hasn't looked like a guy worth $30+ M with an $8-8.5M signing bonus to me. I like Clinton Portis but so far there is no indication that he's going to provide $50 - 60M worth of services to the team. Now you can get angry about the overpayment but that is not the players' fault. If your boss came to you and offered to pay you 20% more than the "market rate" for whatever your skills are, you'd take the raise in a flash. If you didn't take that deal, then I would say you were dumb! Forget what these guys are paid for a minute and forget what the scouting combines said about them or whether or not they went to the Pro Bowl 3 years ago. Watch them play football and watch them do the fundamental things that football players at their position are expected to do routinely. Since you'll be emotionally invested in the game when you are watching it live, try taping the game and then going back and watching it when you already know what will happen so you can be more analytical. Here are some things I think you'll see if you do that: 1. The interior DL does not get any pressure in the middle so the opposing QB has lots of room to step up into the pocket and deliver the ball - or to break out and run because the DE's have rushed upfield. That is an important ability for a DT; the Skins' DT's haven't done that reliably for about 7 years now. 2. The defensive backs need to be sure tacklers; by the time it is their responsbility to make a tackle, there is already a "problem" and they are there to prevent a "disaster". That's why the call them "safeties". Only Springs is a fundamentally sound and reliable tackler in the DB. The other guys are either headhunters or in Smoot's case undersized against lots of guys coming at him with the ball. 3. The wide receivers need to block on running plays. If they are not going to "block" in the classic sense, they have to be very effective in "getting in the way" of the defender who will be coming to the play. Coles is good at this but sometimes gets clobbered by a defender who outweighs him by 40 lbs. Gardner holds or clips as often as he lays a solid block. I have yet to see Jacobs throw an effective block. Thrash is the best blocking WR. But if you run whenever Thrash is on the field, the other defensive coordinator will pick that up in about a half of football and the results will not be pretty. If you keep Thrash in there for every down, you aren't going to make the passing game something to be feared. 4. The offensive line has to be able to get to the point of attack on a sweep before the runner gets there AND before the defense sniffs out where the point of attack is and gets a couple of defenders there. The Skins seem able to do that when they run to the left a whole lot better than when they run to the right. I have my own theory about why that is the case, but I would need to see a lot more examples before I was confident enough to draw a conclusion. If I see that, what do you think the chances are that opposing defensive coordinators also see that? These are areas of deficencies in fundamentals. Before you leap to the conclusion that this is the fault of the coaching staff, remember that these players are in the NFL and to a large extent have already developed their way of playing. Yes, the coaches can adjust some techniques and they can get players to work harder in the weight rooms [example: Dockery is significantly better at pass blocking this year than last even though he is hardly a master of that skill] but you aren't going to change everything that needs to be changed about every player in a single training camp. Especially when there are time limits on how much practice time is allowed and there can be a union grievance if the practices and meetings run too long! :frusty: Gibbs & Co. inherited a flawed football team. Part of the problem is the FO fascination with big name free agents. Part of the problem is four different head coaching philosophies in 5 years each one trying to emphasize different specific skill sets. Part of it is a cadre of players from previous regimes that were selfish and whiney and not that hard-working. I figured that Gibbs would be able to significantly reduce the number of mental errors that the team made and it seems that he has. No more hitting the guy out of bounds after he was stopped short of a first down; no more illegal procedure penalties on consecutive downs; no more loafing back to the line of scrimmage when the team needs to spike the ball to stop the clock. But the physical and technique limitations are going to take a lot more time because now it's apparent to me that it was NOT the "Fun 'n Gun" that made these guys look ragged; it's that a lot of them are just that - - ragged. __________________ The Sports Curmudgeon www.sportscurmudgeon.com But don't get me wrong, I love sports...

10-14-2004, 01:51 PM	#17
4TH RING Special Teams Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 129	I agree, when you lose by 27pts as supposed to 3pts there is a huge difference. A 27pt loss to our arch rivals at home and we have Spurrier on the sideline scracthing and shaking his head is demoralizing. I guarantee you ask anybody on our team last year and they would agree. I've been defending Gibbs because you'll never see him on the sidelines making f***faces when things are'nt going our way. Anyways i'm confident he will get this team on track. And by next year our team will live up to all it's expectations.

10-14-2004, 05:34 PM	#19
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: NY Age: 52 Posts: 99,518	I have to disagree with SC, this team is more talented than the record indicates. They are not a 1-4 team because they don't have the players to get it done. Turnovers, a new system, new coaches, a bunch of new starters, Gibbs adjusting to the game after a 12 year layoff, are all key reasons for the 1-4 start. I'm not saying we have Super Bowl talent, but this certainly isn't a team lacking in playmakers.

10-14-2004, 06:17 PM	#21
That Guy Living Legend Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: VA Age: 42 Posts: 17,553	i think a lot of teams wouldn't mind having hall either (not a game breaker, but a better kicker than a lot of teams have), and chad for returns (though he looked much better as a jet with actual BLOCKING in front of him), but i think that post is correct as to who other teams would want to have... but if we did this kind of breakdown on every team, i'm not sure you'd such much more than 8 guys on them either (out of 22 or so)... so i'm not so sure that its possible to have studs at every position or that its needed to win... where we don't have stars, we have some solid players (being solid is much better than having 2 stars and a bunch of crap.. or in GBs case 0 stars and total crap)... i think you need to judge positions by overall capability and not star power... any owner would want williams at DC and probably gibbs as well

10-14-2004, 06:36 PM	#22
Sheriff Gonna Getcha Franchise Player Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 45 Posts: 8,317	I guess I'm just one of those dumb fans. I expect more of a team that has the HIGHEST paid roster in NFL history. I expect more from Brunell, Ramsey, Coles, Gardner, Samuels, Thomas, Portis, Washington, Smoot, Springs, Griffin, Taylor, et al. I understand that it is Gibbs first year back and it's still early, but come one, I'd like to see some life on offense. Gregg Williams has brought in a new system and turned one of the lowest ranked defenses into the 3rd best in the league. Sure, it takes longer to coach up the offense than the defense, but come one, I'd like to see some life here. Pass protection is mixed, run blocking sucks, our offense can't score unless the ball is given to them in the opponents red zone, people are dropping passes, throws are always going awry etc. I have patience and I'll always be around to support the team, but it's not crazy to ask that our offense show some signs of life. I VERY VIVIDLY remember there being a great deal of consensus that our offense would be unstoppable. What happened to that sentiment? Isn't there a reason to be frustrated?

10-15-2004, 03:17 AM	#25
That Guy Living Legend Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: VA Age: 42 Posts: 17,553	wow, nice post Sports... i know our DEs are making double what other DEs of similar talent are making, and brunell looks like a $1mill a year player, not 42mill long term contract + a 3rd round pick (ended up being next year's 2nd rounder cause we got cooley)... marcus looks like he's worth the money... out of the jetskins, only chad was offered market value (hence the arbitration with the jets to try and keep him), everyone else got high offers... williams has done a great job of making up for weaknesses in the D though... our LBs are really pretty good overall and our CBs are good enough... DLine is okay, but not great and safety is the weakest position with bowen and lott out (ouch)...

10-15-2004, 03:02 PM	#27
Sheriff Gonna Getcha Franchise Player Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 45 Posts: 8,317	Excellent post SC. I agree we have overpaid many of our players. However, I still argue that the team has consistently been in the top 5 in the league in terms of talent. I'd just like to see that talent show up on the field. My sentiments are certainly based in part on emotion (I can't help but be emotional about my beloved team), but I think they are grounded in reality.

10-15-2004, 04:42 PM	#29
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: NY Age: 52 Posts: 99,518	Gibbs placed alot of emphasis on undrafted FA's this year and that will continue. Maybe next year we'll actually have some draft picks to try to find those later round gems.

10-15-2004, 08:00 PM	#30
wolfeskins The Starter Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: chesapeake,va. Posts: 2,160	i cant throw in the towel on coles just yet,like some of you are doing.he was paid alot of money to come to washington but that was for steve spurriers' system and he had a real good year in it.i remember watching him play last year and thinking to myself ,"that was money well spent" ,he just needs to adjust to gibbs' system, like everyone else.plus he's hurt.

Short memories from angry fans

Locker Room Main Forum