Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsguy
I'm not sure some of you guys who have a short leash tied around Mike Shanahan's neck truly know the depth and the extent to what all is involved in rebuilding a franchise that has been a losing franchise for the past twenty years. I mean, we sit here and piss and moan about Daniel Snyder and how he changes coaches like Skinsguy changes his socks - just like the media that pisses and moans about Daniel Snyder - and then us fans turn around and expect instant results within a two season span. Yes, you can go back and say, well Jim Zorn was just given two seasons......completely different situation. Zorn had no business being a head coach at that point. He was not qualified to be a head coach. Anybody with eyes and the least amount of football knowledge could see this.
Mike Shanahan has been coaching for well over 30+ years. He's coached Super Bowl teams, he's been around the best of the best coaches in the NFL. Shanahan knows his stuff. If he says he's here for five years and it's going to take that amount of time to build the Redskins into a dominating football team, what does that tell you? This team was in THAT bad of shape. Yet, we sit here and grade Mike Shanahan after two seasons, and say, "You know, he's not any better than Jim Zorn." That's just ridiculous. Come back and do your "I told you so's" after season five. If the Redskins are not a dominating football team by then, then I'll concede that Mike Shanahan didn't have what it took to rebuild this team.
But, while I agree that he's going to have a lot of pressure on him to show progress in the win column (and I did state that in another thread) next season, I give him his five years to bring this team back to being a dominate team. If this team is the "same ol' Redskins" by then, then you're more than welcome to say "I told you so so shut the efff up!" Until then, you had might as well strap on your helmets, pick your favorite seat on the bus, and brace yourself for a bumpy ride until we get to our destination.
And one more thing, don't give examples about the 49ers or the Lions, or even the Bengals. Those teams have had the correct talent or system in place for several seasons, it just so happened that the combination of both those players and the correct coaching staff(s) happened to fall in place this season. None of those teams were overnight successes, and any and all of those teams can be right back into last place come next season. As Shanahan said, to do it the right way, it takes time. Can't we just give a proven coaching staff, that time and realize we have to endure through all the crap if we plan on keeping the rebuilding on a consistent pace - as slow as it seems to be?
Sorry if I sound grumpy, I stayed up way too late watching the Baylor/Washington game last night and have only had one cup of coffee! I don't mean this toward any one person, I just think it's ridiculous to be complaining about not having what we've needed all of these years (a better GM in Bruce, a Super Bowl proven head coach, consistency) and then to complain because we have those things now. Just doesn't make sense to me.
Hail.
|
*1980's teen movie slow clap building to raucous applause*
Couldn't have said it better myself. The comparisons to records between Zorn and Shanahan are simply silly. The roster that Shanahan inherited was old (oldest in the league), poorly constructed (no depth at key positions, very limited playmakers at skill positions) and bloated with poor contracts for unproductive players-including some of the 'pro bowlers' GTripp mentioned (which is a bit of a joke by itself) that weren't playing to a high level.
I've got no problems at all with the decisions to move on from Andre Carter and Carlos Rogers. Carter has shown, twice, in two different cities that he's not a 3-4 end or LB. He is classically suited for a 4-3 so rather than continue to try a square peg-round hole scenario they moved on and found a better fit in Kerrigan. Now it remains to be seen if Kerrigan is a better PLAYER overall than Carter but it's clear he's a better fit for our scheme.
Rogers was productive once in his Redskin career, in a contract year. It was roundly acknowledged that he improved his practice habits, his attentiveness in meetings, his mental game, etc. in that year. Then when he got a one year tender, he sulked and reverted to his same poor habits. Other than that his reputation was nonchalant preparation, getting repeatedly beaten on double moves, getting benched, sulking, dogging it on injuries and of course, the drops. This year, he's again in a contract year and playing balls out. Good for him, but with his rep there's no way I'd commit long money to him.
Even bringing up Portis in the discussion of 'pro bowlers' jettisoned almost completely negates any credibility in posting questions about whether Shanny should return. Same can be said about Haynesworth, Sellers, McNabb or Jammal Brown. If anything, questions can be raised about the McNabb and Brown acquisitions but nothing coaching-wise. Moss put up career numbers last year and Cooley has been dinged up this season so how that supports anything negative re: Shanahan is puzzling.
While the record doesn't yet reflect it, I find it amazing that many fans and pundits can't see how progress is being made from the 2011 draft (2 starters), 2012 free agency (5 starters) and 2012 draft (4-5 starters) and with some competent play from the QB the future looks brighter than the present or the past.