A Tale of Two Teams...

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by irish

Gibbs is not a personnel guy and his moves are proving disasterous. This team needs a GM now.

I really think the issue is more with scouting than whether or not we have someone who is a "general manager"

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

I really think the issue is more with scouting than whether or not we have someone who is a "general manager"

I know it is en vogue to bash the Skins but I have heard several times that the Skins employ one of the worst scouting offices in the league. I don't get it. Why? A guy like Chrid Landry who is the scout for FSR basically said they are the worst in the league.

[irish]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I'm talking about since Gibbs came back.

The players we aquired in 2004 were the foundation of the playoff run in '05.

Like I said in an earlier post, Gibbs making personell decisions has been a huge disaster because we are making bad free agent signings and giving away draft picks too. This team needs a GM so Gibbs can go back to doing what he does best, coaching.

[Citizens for 81]

Originally Posted by irish

Like I said in an earlier post, Gibbs making personell decisions has been a huge disaster...

Huge exaggeration.

[MTK]

Schneed has had some nice posts in the past outlining the hits vs. misses regarding personnel moves the team has made under Gibbs. Perhaps he can release his updated version? Hint, hint.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Citizens for 81

Huge exaggeration.

To say the least.

That huge disaster led to 11 wins last year, not sure how they did that in spite of this huge disaster.

[irish]

Originally Posted by Citizens for 81

Huge exaggeration.

If you think signing free agents that dont work out or play and giving away draft picks for the privlidge isnt a disaster the Redskins may have a position for you.

[freddyg12]

The blog makes a valid point, one that is certainly not original.
It doesn't state that it's an either/or proposition between the draft & free agency, rather that the Bears chose to build the CORE of their team via the draft. Of course they added some free agents to fill needs but they didn't do so at the expense of their previous players.
It's important to note that we've not only signed big $ free agents, but we also did so while cutting some players, e.g. Ryan Clark.
Anyone who says this team has never been in "cap hell" has a short memory for this past spring when if it weren't for the new cba we would've had to make some mean cuts.
I don't disagree w/anyone that says the draft isn't a guaranteed way to build a winner, it's just the most effective, cheapest & most efficient. Of course teams have drafted poorly for years, but nowadays I just think its not that hard to have a 50% or higher success rate in the draft. By that I call success having players that you'd like to re-sign at the end of their rookie contract. The more picks you have the better chance you have of reaching this success. Either way, the players don't cost much, which gives you more cap room to bring in a FEW needed free agents.
Look at the success we've had in the draft the past few years - Cooley, ST, Rogers (ok, maybe not up to par yet), Campbell, Golston, hopefully Rocky. Of course there were late rnd. picks that didn't pan out, but the later the rnd. the less chance they make it. We trade away all of our most valuable picks from which a team can be built on the cheap - rnds. 2-4.

[irish]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

To say the least.

That huge disaster led to 11 wins last year, not sure how they did that in spite of this huge disaster.

And they had 15 wins in 1991, who cares, thats over and done with. This year is the only year that counts and this team has 4 wins this year and not many picks in next year's draft because they have been given away in the process of assembling this years 4 win team. I call 4 wins a disaster especially in light of the team talking Super Bowl.

[Citizens for 81]

Originally Posted by irish

If you think signing free agents that dont work out or play and giving away draft picks for the privlidge isnt a disaster the Redskins may have a position for you.

I can think of 2 free agents that have not worked out well (off the top of my head).

That's not to say many of the incoming free agents have been ridiculously overpaid though.

While most of the acquisitions haven't been to the probowl, they have been successful for the most part.

[irish]

Originally Posted by freddyg12

The blog makes a valid point, one that is certainly not original.
It doesn't state that it's an either/or proposition between the draft & free agency, rather that the Bears chose to build the CORE of their team via the draft. Of course they added some free agents to fill needs but they didn't do so at the expense of their previous players.
It's important to note that we've not only signed big $ free agents, but we also did so while cutting some players, e.g. Ryan Clark.
Anyone who says this team has never been in "cap hell" has a short memory for this past spring when if it weren't for the new cba we would've had to make some mean cuts.
I don't disagree w/anyone that says the draft isn't a guaranteed way to build a winner, it's just the most effective, cheapest & most efficient. Of course teams have drafted poorly for years, but nowadays I just think its not that hard to have a 50% or higher success rate in the draft. By that I call success having players that you'd like to re-sign at the end of their rookie contract. The more picks you have the better chance you have of reaching this success. Either way, the players don't cost much, which gives you more cap room to bring in a FEW needed free agents.
Look at the success we've had in the draft the past few years - Cooley, ST, Rogers (ok, maybe not up to par yet), Campbell, Golston, hopefully Rocky. Of course there were late rnd. picks that didn't pan out, but the later the rnd. the less chance they make it. We trade away all of our most valuable picks from which a team can be built on the cheap - rnds. 2-4.

This is the best post I ahve seen in a long time.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by irish

And they had 15 wins in 1991, who cares, thats over and done with. This year is the only year that counts and this team has 4 wins this year and not many picks in next year's draft because they have been given away in the process of assembling this years 4 win team. I call 4 wins a disaster especially in light of the team talking Super Bowl.

Ok so we'll only discuss this season then.

You know what else has been a disaster? The adjustment to a new offense, Portis going down, and key injuries that have really hurt the defense. Those factors have played just as heavily into this season as personnel.

And for the record the team in 1991 was 17-2 overall.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by irish

And they had 15 wins in 1991, who cares, thats over and done with. This year is the only year that counts and this team has 4 wins this year and not many picks in next year's draft because they have been given away in the process of assembling this years 4 win team. I call 4 wins a disaster especially in light of the team talking Super Bowl.

All we have to do is pray and everything will be ok

[freddyg12]

I won’t criticize the fa signings overall from a personnel standpoint, as Gibbs did bring in some good guys. What I take issue with is;
1) The price & contract; AA & Loyd will be on the books for us for a while, yet you could argue that both have already made a negative impact on the field.
2) Signing fa’s and not re-signing guys like Pierce, Clark
3) Giving away high draft picks w/little to no return. Aside from the JC trade, in which it was necessary to give something & worth it to move up & snag a potential franchise qb, teams loot us for draft picks in every trade.

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by irish

This is the best post I ahve seen in a long time.

Thanks Irish! Like all of us here, I've certainly thought about these issues a bit.