Coaching and Front Office Changes

Doug Williams out of the personnel side of things:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001095592/article/doug-williams-out-of-personnel-dept-in-redskins-reorg

Thank goodness. He's completely unqualified for that job; however, it does seem like he has done a good job helping players with off-field personal issues, so this should be great for him. Solid move by Rivera. It also clearly seems to be leaving an opening for a new GM to be hired, whether external or through promoting Kyle.

Perhaps the analytics part is the reason why Riveria decided that Schaefer isn't good fit for his plans. Redskins didn't utilize analytics as a tool to help coaches before and it looks like Riveria want to use it.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

I would guess it had more to do with getting rid of one of Dan's cronies. Snyder no longer has any of his sycophants in the building he can use to influence football decisions. This isn't to say that Schaffer was not really good at his job, but reports were that last year, they were re-negotiating his contract and he wanted more money and more influence over personnel decisions. That is clearly not his forte, so its a good move to let him move on and bring in someone who will stay in their lane and do their job. It has also been insinuated a number of places that Shaffer was the source of a lot of the teams leaks.

I forget who it was, but I saw someone on twitter post that its a sign of a good house-cleaning when competent people lose their jobs. Rivera is bringing in people who HE hired, who are beholden to him, and who share his vision. There will be no power-plays or mutinies by any of the old hold-overs. The team will either succeed or fail based solely on the job Rivera does, and he's not going to be undermined by any of the old guard.

The skins have needed to clean house for a LONG time, and I'm glad to see the it finally playing out. I continue to be supremely impressed with everything Rivera is doing. This is the first time since Dan hired Vinny that we have legitimate reasons for complete optimism for this franchise. True football people are in charge of making the football decisions.

"Coach Centric"

"Coach centric" is a cool new word I have learned over the past couple weeks. Everything is going to revolve around the Coach vs the traditional GM as the head of decisions. This seems to be the way to go. Im fine with it. The Browns announced they are also going "coach centric". pats are the best known coach centric team bc of Bill and his success.

Rivera said in his long meetings with Dan that Dan talked about the winning structure NE has.

If there are 15 competent Head Coaches and maybe 10 competent GMs in the league ... why shackle your competent Head Coach with an incompetent GM or vice versa. Assuming you are lucky enough to have a competent Head Coach or a competent GM. If you dont, you are the Redskins for the past 6 years or so.

We seem to have a competent Head Coach. Why not let him be the center vs bringing in a less than ideal guy for GM just because we think we need to have someone named GM.

Wouldnt be surprised if we dont hire/have a named GM.

Rivera/Rob Rogers/Kyle Smith/Alex Santos seems to be our 4 headed decision making committee. Im fine with that.

I would guess it had more to do with getting rid of one of Dan's cronies. Snyder no longer has any of his sycophants in the building he can use to influence football decisions. This isn't to say that Schaffer was not really good at his job, but reports were that last year, they were re-negotiating his contract and he wanted more money and more influence over personnel decisions. That is clearly not his forte, so its a good move to let him move on and bring in someone who will stay in their lane and do their job. It has also been insinuated a number of places that Shaffer was the source of a lot of the teams leaks.

I forget who it was, but I saw someone on twitter post that its a sign of a good house-cleaning when competent people lose their jobs. Rivera is bringing in people who HE hired, who are beholden to him, and who share his vision. There will be no power-plays or mutinies by any of the old hold-overs. The team will either succeed or fail based solely on the job Rivera does, and he's not going to be undermined by any of the old guard.

The skins have needed to clean house for a LONG time, and I'm glad to see the it finally playing out. I continue to be supremely impressed with everything Rivera is doing. This is the first time since Dan hired Vinny that we have legitimate reasons for complete optimism for this franchise. True football people are in charge of making the football decisions.

I agree that clearing the deep roots out is one of the reasons for the change, however, the owner Tepper is big on analytics, and Rogers was the guy they put in place to create the analytics department. I don't think that he would leave a job that has huge upside with the team owner without some incentive to build the team up here, likely including building an analytics department here (though no announcement like that has come out yet).

I agree that clearing the deep roots out is one of the reasons for the change, however, the owner Tepper is big on analytics, and Rogers was the guy they put in place to create the analytics department. I don't think that he would leave a job that has huge upside with the team owner without some incentive to build the team up here, likely including building an analytics department here (though no announcement like that has come out yet).

This could be my own ignorance, but I have no idea what Analytics means in terms of building a football team, other than that the Browns tried to "moneyball" football and have completely failed. I also have read that Rivera is not a big believer.

This could be my own ignorance, but I have no idea what Analytics means in terms of building a football team, other than that the Browns tried to "moneyball" football and have completely failed. I also have read that Rivera is not a big believer.

Andrew Brandt wrote an excellent article (https://www.si.com/nfl/2020/01/07/cleveland-browns-jimmy-haslam-constant-change?xid=socialflow_twitter_si&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sinow) about this.

The Browns didn't fail at "moneyball" they really didn't try it. The article talks about how the Browns hired DePodesta, but never paired him with a coach that would be on board with analytics nor did they allow him to hire a coach that would be on board with it (Hue, Kitchens were never on board with it).

IDK if I'm buying all this analytics stuff. In the end you have to look at the tape and see how a guy performs in games, how fast he runs in games, not at the underwear Olympics.

Belichick was talking about this stuff on some show. He said that after a loss the team got on the plane and some of the front office guys were on their pads doing some of this stuff. After he watched the tape of the game he came to the conclusion that the reason they lost the game was they didn't tackle well enough... lol.

IDK if I'm buying all this analytics stuff. In the end you have to look at the tape and see how a guy performs in games, how fast he runs in games, not at the underwear Olympics.

Belichick was talking about this stuff on some show. He said that after a loss the team got on the plane and some of the front office guys were on their pads doing some of this stuff. After he watched the tape of the game he came to the conclusion that the reason they lost the game was they didn't tackle well enough... lol.

Analytics these days includes way more than just the underwear olympics. These guys are looking at playcall success rate vs certain defenses, probability of converting downs with certain personnel on the field and MUCH more than I can pretend to know off the top of my head.

While I agree, analytics are not the end all-be all decider and heart/passion can play a big part in a teams success, I'm not against using it in today's modern era. To not even HAVE an analytics department in 2020 is ridiculous and a bit ignorant if you ask me.

I say add it to the toolbox and if it can swing even one game in our favor it's a plus.

Analytics these days includes way more than just the underwear olympics. These guys are looking at playcall success rate vs certain defenses, probability of converting downs with certain personnel on the field and MUCH more than I can pretend to know off the top of my head.

While I agree, analytics are not the end all-be all decider and heart/passion can play a big part in a teams success, I'm not against using it in today's modern era. To not even HAVE an analytics department in 2020 is ridiculous and a bit ignorant if you ask me.

I say add it to the toolbox and if it can swing even one game in our favor it's a plus.

Agree. I think you need it in a balanced form...you still need that instinctual sense in your coordinating coaches. Game has feel and rhythm to it...also you need to know when to make adjustments. In planing, analytics really helps, real time, I’ll trust a harden football coach with instinct about the game

Agree. I think you need it in a balanced form...you still need that instinctual sense in your coordinating coaches. Game has feel and rhythm to it...also you need to know when to make adjustments. In planing, analytics really helps, real time, I’ll trust a harden football coach with instinct about the gameI think this is exactly how Rivera sees it based on his comments.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk