Who's your pick's for next HC, DC and OC?

The system for the Offensive line works. We just need a set of guards that are better at doing it.

Seattle was in a 2 year decline when PC came in. Wash was in a 20 year decline when MS took over. The situations are not comparable in any way.

I do agree that the Redskins situation is more complex than Seattle's, however, we made the playoffs in 2007 as well, it is not like we weren't a decent football team 6 years ago. To suggest that Mike is cleaning up messes from 8 years ago much less 20 is incorrect.

I do agree that the Redskins situation is more complex than Seattle's, however, we made the playoffs in 2007 as well, it is not like we weren't a decent football team 6 years ago. To suggest that Mike is cleaning up messes from 8 years ago much less 20 is incorrect.

Exactly what I'm saying.

Outside of Moss and I believe K. Golston this team has been completely revamped under Shanahan's watch.

And we're supposed to believe what's holding us back right now is something that happened 10-20 years ago? Heck even 6-7 years ago under Gibbs? Considering the average player lasts 3 seasons that's two generations ago in football terms.

Like who?

BTW, on the subject of the Seattle Seahawks, here is their 2005 Super Bowl Roster:

2005 Roster (http://www.footballdb.com/teams/nfl/seattle-seahawks/roster/2005)

2009 Roster (http://www.footballdb.com/teams/nfl/seattle-seahawks/roster/2009)

2010 roster when Pete Carroll Took over:

2010 Roster (http://www.footballdb.com/teams/nfl/seattle-seahawks/roster/2010)

And their 2013 Roster:

2013 Roster (http://www.seahawks.com/team/roster.html)

So if we look at the first year that Pete Carroll took over in 2010, there is a HUGE difference between that roster and the Super Bowl roster. Even so, there is a big difference between the 2009 roster and the 2010 roster. Honestly, looking at the differences between the rosters from 2005 onto the present, it doesn't support the theory that Pete Carroll was left with a core group of guys left over from the Super Bowl and playoff teams that he built the team around. Carroll did completely gut the team. If there is anybody left over from those playoff teams, you're talking about one, maybe two players at most.

Exactly what I'm saying.

Outside of Moss and I believe K. Golston this team has been completely revamped under Shanahan's watch.

And we're supposed to believe what's holding us back right now is something that happened 10-20 years ago? Heck even 6-7 years ago under Gibbs? Considering the average player lasts 3 seasons that's two generations ago in football terms.

Agreed. There is absolutely nothing from even 6 years ago that has to do with the current Redskins roster. The issues that the team is having is the roster and/or coaches on the defensive side of the ball and special teams. Replace those coaches and revamp that squad and this team is easily a perennial playoff team.

Exactly what I'm saying.

Outside of Moss and I believe K. Golston this team has been completely revamped under Shanahan's watch.

And we're supposed to believe what's holding us back right now is something that happened 10-20 years ago? Heck even 6-7 years ago under Gibbs? Considering the average player lasts 3 seasons that's two generations ago in football terms.

Of course this is a completely different team from a few years ago. What I'm talking about is how losing and winning can create a culture. That's how things that happened 2, 4, 6, 10 years ago can impact today's team.

There's a reason that team's like Denver and NE consistently win over long periods of time and with lots of different players and it because of their culture of winning.Teams like Oak, Wash and Clev have developed cultures of losing and because of that they continue to lose no matter who is on the roster.

Shanny has seemed to start to turn the Skins now ingrained culture of losing into a culture of winning. This change wont happen overnight and it wont be a linear progression but IMO its starting to happen.

Seattle was in a 2 year decline when PC came in. Wash was in a 20 year decline when MS took over. The situations are not comparable in any way.

But like Matty sAid the superbowl run had nothing to do with what PC inherited. Who cares if it had been 2 years or 20? A team in decline is a team in decline. The situations as far as recent success arent comparable, but the situations as far as what was there when Shanny and PC took over are completely comparable.

Of course this is a completely different team from a few years ago. What I'm talking about is how losing and winning can create a culture. That's how things that happened 2, 4, 6, 10 years ago can impact today's team.

There's a reason that team's like Denver and NE consistently win over long periods of time and with lots of different players and it because of their culture of winning.Teams like Oak, Wash and Clev have developed cultures of losing and because of that they continue to lose no matter who is on the roster.

Shanny has seemed to start to turn the Skins now ingrained culture of losing into a culture of winning. This change wont happen overnight and it wont be a linear progression but IMO its starting to happen.

The reason New England has sustained success over a long period of time is Tom Brady, not a "culture" of winning. When did Denver sustained such a run? Since Peyton got there they have been good - last year and this year. I think you are greatly over estimating the "winning breeds winning" theory. That holds true maybe over the course of a season, but not over the course of years. Even the Steelers had lousy teams for a decade or so in their history.

This is such a ridiculously retarded post that I can't comment on what you suggest with a straight face. Let's get rid of RGIII....LOL!!! Which brings me to my next point, kids, don't do drugs.

Usually just add schmuck like you to my ignore list and move on, but in this case I'm responding because there's absolutely nothing about what I said to indicate getting rid of RG.

Changing the offense to protect him for the long term, absolutely.

So long.

Of course this is a completely different team from a few years ago. What I'm talking about is how losing and winning can create a culture. That's how things that happened 2, 4, 6, 10 years ago can impact today's team.

There's a reason that team's like Denver and NE consistently win over long periods of time and with lots of different players and it because of their culture of winning.Teams like Oak, Wash and Clev have developed cultures of losing and because of that they continue to lose no matter who is on the roster.

Shanny has seemed to start to turn the Skins now ingrained culture of losing into a culture of winning. This change wont happen overnight and it wont be a linear progression but IMO its starting to happen.

Funny how our culture of winning in the 80s didn't carry over once Gibbs left.

I wonder why.