RGIII Named Starter

I've seen this comment more than a few times this offseason from a variety of sources and I just really don't get it. Other than appeasing an impatient fan base, what exactly would this accomplish?

The analysis came out last week that Shanahan has replaced all but 15 players from the roster he inherited (and that assumes that Moss & Cooley return in 2012). Also, we have drafted more players (21) than any other team in the league the past 2 years. AND, by the way, we just drafted our franchise QB for the next decade who just happens to fit, according to ALL NFL experts, perfectly in the offensive system he and his son run.

So according to you, if we improve to 7 wins he should be fired and we start over AGAIN? Help me understand what the logic is other than bloodlust? What results would you expect in 2013 from the team he specifically built to suit his vision from another coach/regime?

Franchises like the Lions and Bengals have been turned around completely in three years and (especially w/ Detroit) starting way further down in terms of talent than Mike inherited in Washington. He chose to make the transition even harder by blowing up the defense.

Point is good coaches have shown three years is sufficient to turn a franchise around. The notion we won't find a better coach is absurd. Mike has made myriad mistakes here already that are on him and him alone...starting this year the results fall on his shoulders and it's time to put the legacy argument to bed.

"Yes it's amazing how fans get mad at Snyder for changeing coaches every 2 to 3 years, yet this is what most people think we should continue todo."


Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/a/albert_einstein.html)

Dang, just when I thought we were actually gonna talk about Griffin and the possibility of the no-huddle.

Yes it's amazing how fans get mad at Snyder for changeing coaches every 2 to 3 years, yet this is what most people think we should continue todo.


Momma always said...stupid is as stupid does.

Yes it's amazing how fans get mad at Snyder for changeing coaches every 2 to 3 years, yet this is what most people think we should continue todo.It's insane.

Dang, just when I thought we were actually gonna talk about Griffin and the possibility of the no-huddle.

You made a great point earlier in the thread, and I think people resigned themselves to the idea that the chances are minimal of anything as progressive as the no-huddle being used spontaneously in situational mismatches was going to come out of this regime.

But I think anything that can accentuate the ability of our QB, who is obviously comfortable in the no-huddle, or that makes our system more dynamic, and unpredictable should be the goal. There are so many situations during a game that having the no-huddle in your arsenal can really shift the momentum, and change the overall pace. If it were me I'd consider this period an all out experimentation phase with RG3, but do I think that will happen here. Not likely.

Yes it's amazing how fans get mad at Snyder for changeing coaches every 2 to 3 years, yet this is what most people think we should continue todo.

This.

Momma always said...stupid is as stupid does.


Just as asinine not to consider the possibility that this 2 season sub 500 coaching staff with cart blanche might not come away with a winning season. You guys are arguing that we shouldn't repeat past mistakes, but keeping a coaching staff regardless of record, gameplanning, playcalling, production, half time adjustments, adaptation, exploitation of opponants weaknesses, personnel decisions, just because you believe we should keep a regime in place for 5 years, sounds like one big perpetual mistake. The Shanaman, just like any other man, should be held accountable for his mistakes. He deserves this year though, to see if he can turn things around, but the man vouched for Grossman, the same with Beck, same with McNabb, and he said after all that failed that he just needed a QB that fits his system. He's got one, let's see what he can do with him.

Just as asinine not to consider the possibility that this 2 season sub 500 coaching staff with cart blanche might not come away with a winning season. You guys are arguing that we shouldn't repeat past mistakes, but keeping a coaching staff regardless of record, gameplanning, playcalling, production, half time adjustments, adaptation, exploitation of opponants weaknesses, personnel decisions, just because you believe we should keep a regime in place for 5 years, sounds like one big perpetual mistake. The Shanaman, just like any other man, should be held accountable for his mistakes. He deserves this year though, to see if he can turn things around, but the man vouched for Grossman, the same with Beck, same with McNabb, and he said after all that failed that he just needed a QB that fits his system. He's got one, let's see what he can do with him.where and how did he vouch for those 3 qbs?

where and how did he vouch for those 3 qbs?

Really dude?

Shanahan says he’ll stake his reputation on Grossman, Beck | ProFootballTalk (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/07/29/shanahan-stakes-his-reputation-on-grossman-beck/)