Turnaround Time

I think the cap penalty (which to this day I believe was ridiculously unfair and borderline illegal) and RG3's injury are two things that are hard to overcome. This team would be a lot different had we not gotten screwed by Mara and Goodell. And RG3's injury was a bit of a freak injury.

While I think we are fine on offense (just have to get it together), our defense is in bad shape and the lack of cap space (and now picks) is going to improving this unit a HUGE challenge. We have both green and aging DBs, a question mark at ILB, and a solid front seven that is not good enough to overcome the other deficiencies.

Nobody can deny the cap penalty hurt us. But that doesn't explain: undisciplined players; unprepared players (RG aside cuz that's different); horrible play-calling through most of Mike's tenure; horrible clock management; unmotivated and uninspired performances, with the exception of an 8 game streak last season.

I also take issue with the notion this team had no talent when Mike took over. The team gave up Zorn's last year and stats looked worse than they would otherwise be, but the defense we had in place prior to Mike's era was vastly superior to what he's conjured up. I don't think anybody can make an honest argument the other way. Yes, that defense was aged and needed additional players, but isn't that what Mike's done anyway? We've added a lot of players to the defense, and it sucks. Again, that's a staple of Mike's coaching/teams over the last decade.

But, I tend to agree with those who say give him the rest of the season IF AND ONLY IF this team starts to show better preparedness, discipline, motivation. IMO those things say everything about where a team is headed.

Actually it kinda does.. You are who you are, and not many players turn a new leaf. Sometime you have to take chances for a lower buck and it shows.

Actually it kinda does.. You are who you are, and not many players turn a new leaf. Sometime you have to take chances for a lower buck and it shows.

Yep, Meriweather wasn't in demand by any other teams. Morgan's career wasn't going anywhere. Players like Nick Barnett would probably still be unemployed, but our dire financial situation from the cap penalty gave them a spot with us out of desperation to fill the 53-man roster with more than 7th-round draft picks.

To Morgan's credit, he's been a positive contributor with his blocking and some key catches when we've needed him, but if we had a full cap, we'd likely have Vincent Jackson as WR1 and Garcon or player of comparable ability at WR2.

Of course, it's also possible we'd have Peyton Manning. I prefer a future with Griffin over 2 years of fun with Peyton, but the talks about us going after Peyton only died when the cap hit made him unaffordable...same with V-Jax, Talib, Brandon Carr...and the list goes on.

Can anyone make an argument that haslett should stay through the bye?

I think he should stay for the sole fact that I don't think anybody can fix the hot mess we have on defense. He doesn't have the ingredients to make this into a top 10 defense and changing DCs insn't going to fix that. If we had the pieces and they weren't buying into the coaching and a change would bring results I would go ahead with a firing, but I don't believe in firing and hiring for lateral chnages o9nly if it will raise the bar. From my perspective we have been on the coaching carousel enough the last decade.

Nobody can deny the cap penalty hurt us. But that doesn't explain: undisciplined players; unprepared players (RG aside cuz that's different); horrible play-calling through most of Mike's tenure; horrible clock management; unmotivated and uninspired performances, with the exception of an 8 game streak last season.

I also take issue with the notion this team had no talent when Mike took over. The team gave up Zorn's last year and stats looked worse than they would otherwise be, but the defense we had in place prior to Mike's era was vastly superior to what he's conjured up. I don't think anybody can make an honest argument the other way. Yes, that defense was aged and needed additional players, but isn't that what Mike's done anyway? We've added a lot of players to the defense, and it sucks. Again, that's a staple of Mike's coaching/teams over the last decade.

But, I tend to agree with those who say give him the rest of the season IF AND ONLY IF this team starts to show better preparedness, discipline, motivation. IMO those things say everything about where a team is headed.

But these added players are gambles if they were shore bets then they would go for a lot more than we could afford with the cap penalties and getting the Cerratto hits taken care of. I understand the frustration, but the front office has given Mike and his staff five years, I say give him the five years to do it his way and see if we see the improvements we expect.

Couple of quick statements:
- Your point about the average NFL career being 3 yrs. is correct, it's actually a little over 3 1/2 yrs., but keep in mind that's an average. Lots of guys at the lower end cycling on-off rosters so it's a tad skewed. I believe the average career for 1st & 2nd rounders (typical NFL starters) is about 6 yrs.

- The MS regime took over in Jan. 2010. This is year 4 and to your point, outside of a great 7 game stretch at the end of last year, the last three years have left a lot to be desired. On D by Pts Allowed we've ranked 21, 21, and 22nd. This year we're currently 31st. Haslett would be fired immediately after the Raiders game, no matter the outcome, and Raheem Morris put in place as DC.

We've been OK with personnel decisions, some good, some bad.
Good:
- Most of the draft picks in Rds. 1-5 are contributing.
- $ 18M cap penalty sucks, working thru it is a challenge

Not so Good:
- TW isn't playing up to expectations of his draft position, I would've gone with Okung (yes, I know he's had some freak injuries, but he also didn't lose 4 games due to drug suspension)
- The McNabb pick-up was a risk that didn't pan out, we could've had Nate Allen with the #37 pick in 2010.
- Let Rogers get away, 2011 Pro Bowl, resigned 4yr./31M w/SF.
- Gave up on Landry due to injuries, 2012 Pro Bowl $3.5M contract with only $ 700K guaranteed.

- Offensively we have the franchise QB, however this Read Option has stunted his development as a passer. RG3 is plenty capable, he's got arm strength, accuracy, smarts, but the coaching staff his limited him with the RO based offense. The RO was a nice gimmick, but will not be successful long-term and we're already seeing the teams that used it primarily either use it much less or see much less success. (For those who want to argue with me, I'll take Mike Tomlin's opinion and the on-field performance of the 49ers, Skins, Eagles this year to back me up).

Bottom line, this regime has had plenty of time to show improvement and it's not. Time for a change in the off-season.

Couple of quick statements:
- Your point about the average NFL career being 3 yrs. is correct, it's actually a little over 3 1/2 yrs., but keep in mind that's an average. Lots of guys at the lower end cycling on-off rosters so it's a tad skewed. I believe the average career for 1st & 2nd rounders (typical NFL starters) is about 6 yrs.

- The MS regime took over in Jan. 2010. This is year 4 and to your point, outside of a great 7 game stretch at the end of last year, the last three years have left a lot to be desired. On D by Pts Allowed we've ranked 21, 21, and 22nd. This year we're currently 31st. Haslett would be fired immediately after the Raiders game, no matter the outcome, and Raheem Morris put in place as DC.

We've been OK with personnel decisions, some good, some bad.
Good:
- Most of the draft picks in Rds. 1-5 are contributing.
- $ 18M cap penalty sucks, working thru it is a challenge

Not so Good:
- TW isn't playing up to expectations of his draft position, I would've gone with Okung (yes, I know he's had some freak injuries, but he also didn't lose 4 games due to drug suspension)
- The McNabb pick-up was a risk that didn't pan out, we could've had Nate Allen with the #37 pick in 2010.
- Let Rogers get away, 2011 Pro Bowl, resigned 4yr./31M w/SF.
- Gave up on Landry due to injuries, 2012 Pro Bowl $3.5M contract with only $ 700K guaranteed.

- Offensively we have the franchise QB, however this Read Option has stunted his development as a passer. RG3 is plenty capable, he's got arm strength, accuracy, smarts, but the coaching staff his limited him with the RO based offense. The RO was a nice gimmick, but will not be successful long-term and we're already seeing the teams that used it primarily either use it much less or see much less success. (For those who want to argue with me, I'll take Mike Tomlin's opinion and the on-field performance of the 49ers, Skins, Eagles this year to back me up).

Bottom line, this regime has had plenty of time to show improvement and it's not. Time for a change in the off-season.

You can argue TW and McNabb as bad FO decisions. But the Carlos Rogers and Landry moves IMO weren't bad moves, we werent going to pay Rogers what he wanted and he didnt want to be here anymore. He never proved himself here, and Landry was injured too often and when he didnt get offseason surgery they werent going to pay him either. So hindsight is 50/50 lol on those.

How is Trent Williams a bad FO decision?

How is Trent Williams a bad FO decision?

Exactly...he's arguably the best (impact) player on the team right now; and has been one of the best LTs in the game (when he's not injured or serving time for smoking ganja)

How is Trent Williams a bad FO decision?Didn't say "bad" just "Not so Good". I understand you can debate TW vs. Okung. But what you can't debate is TW had questionable work ethic, which was confirmed by OU staff and in his Bench numbers (23 reps for a top-rated LT ain't good).

Redskins Insider - Trent Williams' potential: an assessment from Oklahoma (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/the-main-knock-against-left.html)

If you look at TW today, he still has a "soft" body and that drug suspension shows lack of discipline as well.