Frank Herzog: The Redskins are just bad

The only thing owed Spurrier is a kick in the arse! Pulllease! Gibbs won the Super Bowl in his second year as an NFL coach, Spurrier headed back to the golf course after his. The two names should not even be used in the same sentence. Gibbs is the best ever. He will fix this team. It takes a little longer than a month to fix 12 years of ineptitude.

Well said. I never hated Spurrier I just felt he was overmatched. But to mention Spurrier in the same sentence as Gibbs is ludicrous. :stop:

I think our biggest mistake was firing marty.
i would have never fired marty to hire steve"i have a 5 o clock tee time"spurrier.say what you want too,marty has forgotten a whole hell of a lot more about being a pro coach that ss ever thought about learning.when it comes to hiring joe gibbs over marty,i'll take 3 shiny lombardis over two almost trips to the big game anyday.

What Frank Herzog is saying has nothing to do with a comparison between Gibbs and Spurrier. Frank Herzog is calling out the players as the cause for the poor performance in the last season and a quarter. And he has hit the nail squarely on the head.

I know that lots of people here are blindly in love with players who wear Redskins uniforms - even if it is only in the pre-season and against scrubs from other teams - but it's the players who lose the games and it's the players who make the mistakes. When you watch game films, there is not one coach who has ever blown a pass coverage or dropped a first down pass or fumbled or jumped offside or hit aman out of bounds giving the opponent a first down. All of the people who do that have numbers on their backs; coaches don't.

Sadly, some of Skins' the most publicized players are the ones who make the mistakes and that causes fans a lot of angst because they are conditioned by the "kiss-ass Washington sports media" to believe that these people are heroes of mythic proportion. They're not.

When you assemble a team, you have to look at player "potential" as one aspect of the roster you keep. But if you temporarily FORGET potential and look strictly as performance, this team has a whole lot of really ordinary players who are good enough to prevent losing by three TDs on any given weekend - but not good enough to win more often than they lose. That's harsh. It also happens to be demonstrably correct.

These players who are just good enough to keep their losses close are making Joe Gibbs a less successful coach than he has been in the past - just as they did to Steve Spurrier before that and Marty before that...

sportscurmudgeon - that is by far the best post I have read on this board. No emotion just the unpleasant truth. I have mentioned this before that the Redskins are a "Paper Tiger".

Year after year we hear about how talented the Redskins are yet the ugly truth is one, yes one playoff appearance in the last decade and a dismal 13 losses in the last 14 games against the Cowboys. There is practically an entire generation of young Redskins fans who do not know the joy of beating Dallas. Sadly your commentary and Frank Herzog's remark reflect the state of the team.

Antonio Gates? Donnie Edwards? SD has a lot of talent and are vastly improved on the O line and D line from last year.

They are improved over last year (largely because their roster is so young), but their roster is still the worst in the league. Name me a team with a worse roster.

The bigger mistake was hiring Marty in the first place. Snyder isn't the kind of owner that can give 100% control to someone like he did with Marty.

With Gibbs he at least feels like he has a say in things, even though he's probably nothing more than Gibbs' personal ATM.

I don't think the decision to hire Marty was a bad one. We were better under Marty than we were under Spurrier. With the exception of his tenure in SD, Marty has been very successful in the league and I don't think anyone could produce miracles in San Diego (save the Lord himself).

i would have never fired marty to hire steve"i have a 5 o clock tee time"spurrier.say what you want too,marty has forgotten a whole hell of a lot more about being a pro coach that ss ever thought about learning.when it comes to hiring joe gibbs over marty,i'll take 3 shiny lombardis over two almost trips to the big game anyday.

I agree. I think at first, I would have understood if they took Spurrier over Marty, but our team was obviously headed in the right direction at the end of Martys run, it was just like Gibbs first year so I hear, 0-5 , finish 8-8.

They are improved over last year (largely because their roster is so young), but their roster is still the worst in the league. Name me a team with a worse roster.
49ers... maybe the cards (since shipp and boldin are out), and possibly the bears... miami and baltimore on offense...

I don't think the decision to hire Marty was a bad one. We were better under Marty than we were under Spurrier. With the exception of his tenure in SD, Marty has been very successful in the league and I don't think anyone could produce miracles in San Diego (save the Lord himself).
My point was Marty was a terrible fit here. It was the old square peg through the circle hole. He is a quality coach, it just wasn't going to work here.