Casserly Keeping his options open

[#56fanatic]

Originally Posted by Hog1

Did not Charlie spearhead the effort to draft Mario Williams, and pass up Vince Young, Reggie Bush, and Matt Leinart?

i was just getting ready to type that. Do you want the guy that passed on possibly the best talent coming out of college football in the past 10 years? for a DE?? pass on a guy that could touch the ball 25 to 30 times, for a guy that may get a sack a game and 5 tackles.

[#56fanatic]

A GM may or may not be the answer. I think the players we have on our team are better than 90% of the roster of most teams in the NFL. A GM would not have won us 5 more games. We got out coached in a few of the games. GW out coached himself this year with trying all kinds of cover 2 schemes that he has never used. We didn't stick with what won us all those games at the end of the year last year. That is why we are 5-9. Our D didn't play with the hear and emotion of last year. Springs being hurt may have hurt us a bit, but when you #1 corner is the getting beat (Carlos) like a mule it doesn't really matter who your #2 is does it? I think the front office, including Gibbs, jumped a little too quick. We had the #11 ranked offense in the NFL last year. Personally, I dont see anything wrong with that. Teams that have the continuity, the familiarity of each other are the ones that start winning more games every year. I think the coaching staff got a little lazy in the offseason and just assumed we would come right back and be the same team. In stead of getting rid of people we think are the problem, why not keep them around(Saunders, williams, AA ect) Williams is a great D coach, Saunders systems have won a super bowl and is usually top 5 every year. I would agree to a GM in the regards to drafting college kids, but all in all its the players and coaches who win and lose games. we have the talent every year to win a ton of games.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Because of injury? Where does the article say that?

Then that only proves the blunder of the Archuleta signing even more. Their $10 million man, uninjured, gets beaten out by a journeyman defensive back who's been a reserve for most of his career.

Either way, you cannot tell me with a straight face that Gregg Williams, the man who according to many accounts, personally lobbied for signing Adam Archuleta expected him to be the #3 safety behind Sean Taylor and Pierson Prioleau all year long.

Take a look at the words of our own "Burgundy Army" blog, from July 28 of this year:

http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:...&ct=clnk&cd=19

Here's the exact wording:

"While ‘Skins fans were relieved to have Taylor in the fold again, they were also buzzing over the addition of Adam Archuleta. Arch’s workout routines are legendary, providing him with the ability to dish out immense punishment in close quarters. His range gives Gregg Williams the ability to blitz from either safety position and still cover a large portion of the field with one safety. Prioleau again figures into the mix as a solid 3rd option as safety, as well as a valuable special teams contributor."



How many different ways can we illustrate how bad of a move this free agent signing was? Good lord man, I'll take Casserly's mistake of drafting Mario Williams any day over this cluster fornication!

[SmootSmack]

I think "starting" is a very loose term here. Seems like both Prioleau and Archuleta were going to play enough minutes and downs that who was taking the field at the very beginning is kind of a moot point.

[Beemnseven]

Well, we all know that Williams doesn't like the idea of 1st string, 2nd string, and so on. He makes it a point for every player, regardless of thier perceived position on the depth chart, to get significant playing time.

Nonetheless, to say that Archuleta was expected to be #3 behind Prioleau, or that somehow, Prioleau would have been the difference maker in the secondary this year is a bit of a stretch.

There's one thing that's not in dispute -- we all know where Archuleta is now.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

So he gets credit for the good things, but no blame for when things haven't worked out??

Every GM makes bad picks. Look at Bobby B. He made some HORRIBLE PICKS. Remember Tory Nixon? I just think CC is a smart sharp person when it comes to the NFL. I'm not saying bring him back as the GM but perhaps a consultant or something like that. He's certainly better than anyone we have now.

[skinsfan69]

All I know is you CAN NOT have the coaches picking the players. It just does not work.

[MTK]

Nobody is saying Prioleau was supposed to start all year. The simple point was he was slated to start week 1, he got injured, and it was a significant injury as far as the secondary goes.

That was the original argument... that we can't blame injuries for this season because we "only" lost Portis for half the season and Springs for half. We countered with Prioleau and how important his loss was, and that's when the discussion spiraled away from the original point.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

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.

HA! LOL

I heard Casserly burns popcorn though.

[Bill B]

I think everyone agrees that injuries are part of the game and every team should expect some during the year. I would add that yes a GM is not responsible for players getting injured - I would never hold any GM accountable for that. What I would hold a GM accountable for though is not thinking beyond the starters and hoping on a wing and a prayer that none of his starters get injured and not bother to build quality depth behind the starters.

I know in Gibbs era I with plan B free agency the Redskins were great at stacking up guys and building depth when starters went down. As far as Gibbs era II, I don't think there is near the depth they had in his first era - this is in my opinion is due to the salary cap. But with the salary cap in mind I would think there are a lot of teams out there that see this and know that they can't put all their eggs in one basket and devote huge bonuses to their starters thus leaving crumbs for the backups.

Here is a thought - instead of going out and getting 2 wide recievers and giving both large signing bonuses, why not sign one and use the money that was orginally used to sign the other to build depth so when a safety of a defensive lineman goes down they don't have to scrqamble and see who's available on the market?

[TheMalcolmConnection]

It's tough to have that kind of depth no matter who you are. If you look at ANY team around the league, even those with "so-called" GMs, when a key player goes down, it directly affects the season. I'm talking that's the case with 99% of teams.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

I mean what do you propose we do in that situation. Say instead of signing Lloyd and Randle El, were we supposed to go out and sign Steve Hutchinson to have quality depth on the line? We got our insurance for a year in Duckett in case Betts AND Portis were hurt.

[Bill B]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

I mean what do you propose we do in that situation. Say instead of signing Lloyd and Randle El, were we supposed to go out and sign Steve Hutchinson to have quality depth on the line? We got our insurance for a year in Duckett in case Betts AND Portis were hurt.

I would say sign either Lloyd or ARE but not both. I am not saying go out and use the money we saved by not signing both to go sign Steve Hutchinson - everyone knows he is a all pro and a starter. I say you get quality backups if you can. I know that finding these guys is tough but at least if you have the money you have the chance to go get them. Maybe you strike out and some of the quality backups are not that great, but at least you have the cap space to do it.

Also I would say you try to get these backups without giving up draft choices as they did in the Duckett deal.

All in all I say try you try to get descent backups without giving up draft choices, sign a big free agent or two but don't break the bank for every top flight player out there, and keep as many draft choices as you can so you have more chances to pick a couple of good players. Just maybe this will provide the team with some good depth.

Heck the Patriots had a couple of lineman go down and they had some backups to replace them and they are in the palyoff hunt. They were able to get these backups by not breaking the bank and having the cap space to do it - whats wrong with that philopshy?

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by Bill B

What I would hold a GM accountable for though is not thinking beyond the starters and hoping on a wing and a prayer that none of his starters get injured and not bother to build quality depth behind the starters.

Here is a thought - instead of going out and getting 2 wide recievers and giving both large signing bonuses, why not sign one and use the money that was orginally used to sign the other to build depth so when a safety of a defensive lineman goes down they don't have to scrqamble and see who's available on the market?

Bingo. Couldn't have said it better.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by Bill B

I would say sign either Lloyd or ARE but not both. I am not saying go out and use the money we saved by not signing both to go sign Steve Hutchinson - everyone knows he is a all pro and a starter. I say you get quality backups if you can. I know that finding these guys is tough but at least if you have the money you have the chance to go get them. Maybe you strike out and some of the quality backups are not that great, but at least you have the cap space to do it.

Also I would say you try to get these backups without giving up draft choices as they did in the Duckett deal.

All in all I say try you try to get descent backups without giving up draft choices, sign a big free agent or two but don't break the bank for every top flight player out there, and keep as many draft choices as you can so you have more chances to pick a couple of good players. Just maybe this will provide the team with some good depth.

Heck the Patriots had a couple of lineman go down and they had some backups to replace them and they are in the palyoff hunt. They were able to get these backups by not breaking the bank and having the cap space to do it - whats wrong with that philopshy?

There's nothing wrong with that, what I'm saying is what's wrong with OURS? Why not get both Lloyd and Randle El? We still have money leftover. If there's anything the Skins know how to do, it's stretch cap space. You'd think that if whoever the GM was KNEW that Portis, Springs and Pierson would go down, they would have gone out and GOTTEN the aforementioned quality depth.