Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[quote=Beemnseven;262388]Those who defend this front office have to do it with "what ifs" and hypotheticals. The skeptics, those who criticize the current system only have to point to the scoreboard.

This is just a thought, but... the people who blindly and relentlessly defend the upper levels of the franchise who are in charge of personnel -- weren't they the same people who told us that everything would be fine once the exhibition games were over and the regular season started?

I'm not calling for major changes to the coaching staff. I believe the structure is fine just the way it is -- and Saunders WILL pay dividends, it's only a matter of time. And I don't buy into the 'too many cooks in the kitchen' arguement.

I am firmly on the side that says the personnel decision making process needs to be revised. What has to stop is the current system, which resembles a couple of teenagers with a blank check from Daddy Warbucks'.[/quote]

I'm not blindly following anything, and I'm pretty much done with defending myself on that point. Last year wasn't a what if, remarkable as it may have seemed to some, the personnel that was selected by this front office led this team to 11 wins including the playoffs. It's not crazy to think that it can happen again.

Back to my hypothetical, because that is what we do here on occassion, what if this team goes to the Super Bowl? Will the front office get any credit, or will the team have somehow overcome the totally inept front office??

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

Of course Matty. It's one or the other. Someone has to focus on the negative. Someone will say, "Man, if we had a GM would have been undefeated this year!" This all begs the question of whether or not the team would perform as it has for another coach. THAT'S when I don't question Gibbs. Sure, I'm not a Gibbs apologist by any means, but talk about a guy who can motivate and run a team.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection;262403]Yes, Pierson IS a starter. He was scheduled to start alongside Taylor in the opener.
[/QUOTE]

NO Pierson's [U]NOT[/U] the starter. He wasn't the starter last year. Ryan Clark was, then Arculeta was brought in to replace him. Prioleau was a back-up. Notice also he was injured on a special teams play.

Now, you could make the argument that since Archuleta is an incompetent, inept BUFFOON, Prioleau would have been called upon to start in place of him. But who's fault was that? Could it be the fault of the people who called for Randle El AND Brandon Lloyd when James Thrash and David Patten were riding the pine? Could minor adjustments here and there, say ... taking a corner instead of Rocky McIntosh (who only took 13 games or so before he was ready for significant playing time) have something to do with the fact that there's no one else to turn to in the secondary but Mike Rumph and Ade Frickin' Jimoh?

Or, that we have to depend on Warrick Holdman when Antonio Pierce might have offered a better alternative at linebacker? Noooo. Now Antonio sits in the middle of a pentagram, surrounded by burning candles in a hypnotic trance whenever he gets the chance to play his former team to inflict revenge like the kind the Redskins have never seen!

Oh that's right. I'm thinking of Mike Barrow, not Holdman. How could I have forgotten that brilliant addition?

What else needs to happen before you concede that the way things are set up now don't exactly work?

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

All I need to know is I look at the people we have now, that came from this current group of coaches. We have Portis, Moss, and a number of great defensive starters. You forgot to mention THEM didntcha'?

And yes, Pierson was slated to start because of the strike-out on AA. That happens. GM. No GM.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

Prioleau was scheduled to start week one

[url=http://www.washtimes.com/sports/20061205-114824-6486r.htm]In the NFL, everybody hurts - Sports - The Washington Times, America's Newspaper[/url]

Either way, he was a big loss in terms of flexibility in the secondary.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven;262404]Based on the past success of Gibbs, Williams, and Saunders, I don't think any deserve to be fired. That's not to say there weren't breakdowns in certain fundamentals of coaching, because obviously there were. For the sake of continuity with regard to offensive and defensive systems and philosophies, I think it's best that the coaching staff remain intact.

I just don't want them in charge of personnel anymore.[/QUOTE]

Ok, but I guess what I'm asking is do you think that this coaching staff can coach this team (fully healthy) to the playoffs and beyond in 2007? And if so, what's the problem with the personnel then?

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

Not to...

[CENTER][IMG]http://images.southparkstudios.com/media/images/602/602__image_09.jpg[/IMG][/CENTER]
[LEFT]
...but hiring a GM would only be a ceremonial gesture to placate the critics of the current front office. Whoever the guy would be, he'd only be a "yes" man here.[/LEFT]

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection;262420]All I need to know is I look at the people we have now, that came from this current group of coaches. We have Portis, Moss, and a number of great defensive starters. You forgot to mention THEM didntcha'?

And yes, Pierson was slated to start because of the strike-out on AA. That happens. GM. No GM.[/QUOTE]


And all I need to do is point to the record: 5-9. What sort of ranking do those "great defensive starters" have this year?

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=EEich;262001]Dilfer won the Superbowl... or at least he didn't lose it.
The only thing Shuler won was a congressional seat (complete failure :)).[/QUOTE]

Shuler's gotten filthy rich off real estate here in East Tennessee. He wasn't so hot at QB, but he's running a very successful company.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;262422]Prioleau was scheduled to start week one

[url=http://www.washtimes.com/sports/20061205-114824-6486r.htm]In the NFL, everybody hurts*-*Sports*-*The Washington Times, America's Newspaper[/url]

Either way, he was a big loss in terms of flexibility in the secondary.[/QUOTE]

So Prioleau was slated to start [U]because of injury[/U]. He was not expected to be the starter for the year.

If Betts had snapped his Achilles before Week one, he would not have been a starter that was lost for the year. He was a back-up, slated to start because of injury -- same as Prioleau.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS;262424]Ok, but I guess what I'm asking is do you think that this coaching staff can coach this team (fully healthy) to the playoffs and beyond in 2007? And if so, what's the problem with the personnel then?[/QUOTE]

Again, "what if" ???

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven;262437]Again, "what if" ???[/QUOTE]

???

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[quote=Beemnseven;262433]And all I need to do is point to the record: 5-9. What sort of ranking do those "great defensive starters" have this year?[/quote]

All we need to do is point to key injuries. Whether you like it or not, no GM can plan for it and it can alter the course of an entire season.

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[quote=Beemnseven;262436]So Prioleau was slated to start [U]because of injury[/U]. He was not expected to be the starter for the year.

If Betts had snapped his Achilles before Week one, he would not have been a starter that was lost for the year. He was a back-up, slated to start because of injury -- same as Prioleau.[/quote]

Because of injury? Where does the article say that?

[quote]The Redskins have four players on injured reserve: Portis; Prioleau, who was slated to start at safety ahead of Adam Archuleta in Week 1 before injuring his knee on the opening kickoff; kicker John Hall (groin); and tight end Christian Fauria (ankle). [/quote]

Re: Casserly Keeping his options open
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;262451]All we need to do is point to key injuries. Whether you like it or not, no GM can plan for it and it can alter the course of an entire season.[/quote]

Big deal. Portis got hurt. A good GM would have drafted a backup of equal value. Springs was hurt. A good GM would have kept a reserve #1 CB on the bench just in case. Griffin got hurt. A GM would have made sure a run stopper of equal caliber played in his place. A good GM would have forced the new OC to make the team learn his system faster and with less mistakes in a shorter period of time. A good GM would make sure all rookies that he drafts would be able to learn the offense/defense and start immediately. A good GM would make sure our kicker makes every FG. A good GM wrinkles his nose and everything works perfectly. A good GM will never burn his microwave popcorn. A good GM always has just enough cereal left in his box before he totally runs out.