Snyder sell the team

[firstdown]

Were we really such a great team under Gibbs 2, GW's, and Snyder. Well it took two winning streaks to get into the playoffs which was nice but it was some hard playing as much as some luck. We have not been very consistent (note needing to win all those games to get into the playoffs) and lost our first game this year and lost our second in 05 after beating a team with only 160? yards on the O. We lost a bunch of games this year in the second half which with better coaching we should have won. I'm not saying that Gibbs, Williams, and Saunders were all that bad but I'm not sure why everyone is freaking out now they are gone. If we went back and look at post over the past year we would find a ton that say get rid of Saunders, Williams, and many had said that Gibbs 2 was not getting it done. The only thing that changed is we lost ST and had a winning streak but before that we had lost 4 straight games. Before this year we had a ton of post about Williams and how he was clashing with players. We heard that Saunders system takes 2 years but who has a syatem that takes so long to learn with the way thing change in the NFL. My view is that I'll sit back and see how these changes take shape on the field before I decide if they are the wrong or right moves.

[MTK]

Here we go with the luck thing again.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Here we go with the luck thing again.

I did not say we won because we were luck but if several teams would have won a couple of games we would not have been in the playoffs even with the 4 wins. So, yes we got lucky that other teams lost.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I did not say we won because we were luck but if several teams would have won a couple of games we would not have been in the playoffs even with the 4 wins. So, yes we got lucky that other teams lost.

But we were better than them. Yes, we had no control over how many games they would lose, but teams are going to win and lose games that reflect somewhat their talent level.

We were a better team that the Saints, and a better team than the Vikings. We can't control how many games they win over the course of the season, but we can control the fact that we have a better roster than them, so more times than not, we were going to win more games.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Were we really such a great team under Gibbs 2, GW's, and Snyder. Well it took two winning streaks to get into the playoffs which was nice but it was some hard playing as much as some luck. We have not been very consistent (note needing to win all those games to get into the playoffs) and lost our first game this year and lost our second in 05 after beating a team with only 160? yards on the O. We lost a bunch of games this year in the second half which with better coaching we should have won. I'm not saying that Gibbs, Williams, and Saunders were all that bad but I'm not sure why everyone is freaking out now they are gone. If we went back and look at post over the past year we would find a ton that say get rid of Saunders, Williams, and many had said that Gibbs 2 was not getting it done. The only thing that changed is we lost ST and had a winning streak but before that we had lost 4 straight games. Before this year we had a ton of post about Williams and how he was clashing with players. We heard that Saunders system takes 2 years but who has a syatem that takes so long to learn with the way thing change in the NFL. My view is that I'll sit back and see how these changes take shape on the field before I decide if they are the wrong or right moves.

Consistency is in the eye of the beholder. We played at a somewhat consistent level all season, and ended up with a record that justified our play.

The means to the end were at times downright wacky, but it all balanced out in the end. That is to say that, overall, we neither got totally boned, nor particularly lucky.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

But we were better than them. Yes, we had no control over how many games they would lose, but teams are going to win and lose games that reflect somewhat their talent level.

We were a better team that the Saints, and a better team than the Vikings. We can't control how many games they win over the course of the season, but we can control the fact that we have a better roster than them, so more times than not, we were going to win more games.

I agree but it should have never come to that in the first place.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I agree but it should have never come to that in the first place.

I know, but the way our scheduled worked, we had all of our tough games in November.

We played a bad game against the Bills, under understandable conditions, but outside of that we just happened to have to play New England, Philadelphia, Dallas, and Tampa Bay in a period of 5 weeks. It should shock no one that we went 1-4 in that time period.

Outside of that stretch of the schedule, we baically had average opponents, and went 8-3 against them. To me, I was not all that surprised by the outcome.

It just seemed like we got lucky to string together 4 wins, but in reality, that's just when we happened to be scheduled against the Bears, Giants, Vikings, and a Cowboys team that was resting its starters and playing shitty football. It shouldn't be a shock that we could win those games.

[SantanaMan]

I am not ready to delve into the depths of doom and gloom that these "fans" who are already sitting on the edge of the cliff are ready to do.

San Diego if i remember correctly changed HC, OC, DC in the last 12 months and still did ok (in fact, in terms of playoff play, they did better this season than last, with a poorer reg. season record), we may not be up there with SD in terms of talent, but we're sure as heck not down with the Dolphins/Raiders/Jets.

Zorn, a former QB, former QB coach will get the most from JC - something which I don't think we have seen.
Blache, in terms of continuity, he knows the players, they know him, the system shouldn't change a whole lot under him.

I am confident that Dan will make the right decision (in my mind, preferrably Mooch, Spagnuolo or Daniels - the ONE guy I am dead set against is Fassel).

[SmootSmack]

What do you have against Fassel?

[Dirtbag59]

RESIGN LAVAR!!! Oh sorry, wrong thread.

[SantanaMan]

The guy apparently got fired halfway through a Ravens season as he was going about it half-assed, waiting on his next HC gig.
As OC I don't think he even got their O into the top 20 in the league - I want our next HC to be hungry, not to be doing things by halves.

[maxiemom]

Yes, Snyder needs to sell the team. He is responsible for the mess Joe Gibbs had to come out of retirement to correct. Now he's set to destroy it again.

Those of you who are taking the 'wait and see' attitude are not taking into account this moron's past actions! The man has been nothing if not consistent! He has never considered the effect his disasterous decisions would have on the team, from hiring Deion Sanders (which, you may remember, cost millions more than that overrated bozo was worth and ended up benching up the much more talented and underpaid Darrell Green), to hiring Shittneheimer, then the worst of the worst, Steve Spurrier, let alone the other many horrendous mistakes and miscues this man has made!

The only smart decision he ever made for this team was bringing Joe Gibbs back. (Those of you who think he was simply too old: what has that got to do with it? Had any other coach been in his place when Sean Taylor died, this team would have self destructed. I, for one, am sick of people selling this man short. Don't forget the laughingstock Spurrier had made it, after the downward spiral led by Danny Boy. Look at how far up he had to take it, and how far it rose? You people need to get some perspective.)

THE WORST DECISION HE EVER MADE WAS BUYING THE TEAM IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!

DAN SNYDER: SELL THE TEAM ASAP!!! STOP THE DESTRUCTION!!!

[SmootSmack]

I see. I think the Ravens disaster will actually make him hungrier. I think he really is determined to proved that was a fluke. More importantly though, I think he could do a good job holding the team together. I think the real work in terms of schemes and putting the players in the best position to play will be in the hands of Zorn and Blache.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by maxiemom

Yes, Snyder needs to sell the team. He is responsible for the mess Joe Gibbs had to come out of retirement to correct. Now he's set to destroy it again.

Those of you who are taking the 'wait and see' attitude are not taking into account this moron's past actions! The man has been nothing if not consistent! He has never considered the effect his disasterous decisions would have on the team, from hiring Deion Sanders (which, you may remember, cost millions more than that overrated bozo was worth and ended up benching up the much more talented and underpaid Darrell Green), to hiring Shottenheimer, then the worst of the worst, Steve Spurrier, let alone the other many horrendous mistakes and miscues this man has made!

The only smart decision he ever made for this team was bringing Joe Gibbs back. (Those of you who think he was simply too old: what has that got to do with it? Had any other coach been in his place when Sean Taylor died, this team would have self destructed. I, for one, am sick of people selling this man short. Don't forget the laughingstock Spurrier had made it, after the downward spiral led by Danny Boy. Look at how far up he had to take it, and how far it rose? You people need to get some perspective.)

THE WORST DECISION HE EVER MADE WAS BUYING THE TEAM IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!

DAN SNYDER: SELL THE TEAM ASAP!!! STOP THE DESTRUCTION!!!

1. The all bold, all capital letters act is getting old. That ends now

2. If you only joined this site to rant and rave and offer nothing of value to the discussion take it somewhere else

3. Say hi to the kids

[SantanaMan]

Yeah Smootsmack, it could make him hungrier - having looked at his NYG record, he seemed to be pretty competitive almost every year.
Having said I am against the idea of hiring him, it doesn't mean if he is hired I will boycott the team or anything - just that I'd be coming in with the attitude that he'd have to win me over a little more than say a fresh face like Daniels or Spagnuolo who wouldn't be coming in with this shadow hanging over them.