Who Can Lead This Team?

[fanarchist]

Wikipedia is really not most reliable source for information. I saw an excerpt from Wikipedia that claimed Dan Snyder was gay for dinosaurs. It's funny, but highly doubtful in the fact catagory.

For the most part, I think a number of decisions this coaching staff has made, personnel wise, this season have been great. Helu, Josh Wilson, Kerrigan, Bowens, Hank, OJ etc. all, in my opinion very good acquistions. But Fred Davis being virtually non-existent in the game last night, and essentially replacing his touches with what seems to be a smaller, slower, less menasing version of the Captain Chaos we are accustom to seeing, seems, atleast to me, like a very poor game planning decision. Especially when Fred Davis had been a dominant safety blanket in the first 2 games. Running stretch plays on most early 1st down scenarios. Redzone playcalling that discourages us from capitalizing on scoring opportunities, and turnovers. I realize that they're in the past, but the McNabb and Haynesworth debacles didn't really instill a solid foundation for trust. Larry Johnson, Joey Galloway. I'm not going to just accept these shaky decisions based on a lulling adherence to the Shanahan's past achievements. I will question.

Sorry if my initial statement was percieved as contentious, it wasn't my intent. I was looking for elaboration.

That's all.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by fanarchist

I saw an excerpt from Wikipedia that claimed Dan Snyder was gay for dinosaurs. It's funny, but highly doubtful in the fact catagory.

Not only is that fact true, it also explains a lot.

[dgack]

Originally Posted by fanarchist

Wikipedia is really not most reliable source for information. I saw an excerpt from Wikipedia that claimed Dan Snyder was gay for dinosaurs. It's funny, but highly doubtful in the fact catagory.

I understand what you're trying to say here, and in many cases you're correct (I wouldn't rely on their entry on chemistry experiments) but in this case Wikipedia is a reliable source because the disagreement was whether anyone else thinks of Rex Grossman as a "gunslinger". The fact that someone went to the trouble of editing Grossman's entry to include references to this would seem to indicate that there are people who feel this is true.

Further, the article itself was located as a result of typing "Rex Grossman gu.." into Google, where "Rex Grossman gunslinger" is the #3 search term (behind "Rex Grossman guarantee", "Rex Grossman guarantee nfc east" and just after "Rex Grossman gut").

I realize that they're in the past, but the McNabb and Haynesworth debacles didn't really instill a solid foundation for trust. Larry Johnson, Joey Galloway. I'm not going to just accept these shaky decisions based on a lulling adherence to the Shanahan's past achievements. I will question.

Well, I don't disagree with disliking many of those moves, but hindsight is 20/20. Signing McNabb was a risky move but one that a great deal of pundits thought would make us instant contenders. Nobody realized how far McNabb had fallen physically and the bigger issue probably turned out to be his attitude.

I'm one of those guys who thinks that the real issue with McNabb was that he refused to take direction from coaches. I read an an article that hinted that he'd always been this way in Philly, but Reid covered for him and for the most part, he used his physical attributes to brute force his way through bad decisions. But because he wouldn't take any coaching, and would just wave off instruction as "beneath him", be started to become less and less effective as he got older. What can you say, the guy was really good at saying the right things, and he was just too old to help us.

As for Haynesworth, I really don't understand what anyone can hang on Shanahan there. He didn't sign the guy. He made his intentions to switch to a 3-4 clear (and it's paying dividends now, so he seems validated) and they gave Fatal Bert plenty of opportunities, but Shanahan refused to kowtow to a spoiled player, and I think that was absolutely the right move. The inmates ran the asylum for far too long, and again, the discipline and cohesiveness we're seeing with this year's squad is proof that it was the right move.

LJ and Galloway, I mean, whatever, you bring in warm bodies for camp, if you think they can help you give them a shot. Hell, Gibbs brought in McCardell when he was 37. Lots of coaches bring in veteran players for a variety of reasons; they're cheap, they're experienced, they provide leadership and stabilize a team, and they're expendable if a young guy starts to shows promise and overtakes them.

I really can't say anything definitive about Davis being a non-factor last night except that I noticed it too and assumed he was just well covered the defense when he was in. It's safe to say teams know who he is now and he won't be able to get open quite so easily. Cooley has a lot of experience against Dallas so it would make sense to try and work him in often, but I agree with you that he's starting to look like he's really slowing down.

[fanarchist]

Originally Posted by dgack

I understand what you're trying to say here, and in many cases you're correct (I wouldn't rely on their entry on chemistry experiments) but in this case Wikipedia is a reliable source because the disagreement was whether anyone else thinks of Rex Grossman as a "gunslinger". The fact that someone went to the trouble of editing Grossman's entry to include references to this would seem to indicate that there are people who feel this is true.

Further, the article itself was located as a result of typing "Rex Grossman gu.." into Google, where "Rex Grossman gunslinger" is the #3 search term (behind "Rex Grossman guarantee", "Rex Grossman guarantee nfc east" and just after "Rex Grossman gut").



Well, I don't disagree with disliking many of those moves, but hindsight is 20/20. Signing McNabb was a risky move but one that a great deal of pundits thought would make us instant contenders. Nobody realized how far McNabb had fallen physically and the bigger issue probably turned out to be his attitude.

I'm one of those guys who thinks that the real issue with McNabb was that he refused to take direction from coaches. I read an an article that hinted that he'd always been this way in Philly, but Reid covered for him and for the most part, he used his physical attributes to brute force his way through bad decisions. But because he wouldn't take any coaching, and would just wave off instruction as "beneath him", be started to become less and less effective as he got older. What can you say, the guy was really good at saying the right things, and he was just too old to help us.

As for Haynesworth, I really don't understand what anyone can hang on Shanahan there. He didn't sign the guy. He made his intentions to switch to a 3-4 clear (and it's paying dividends now, so he seems validated) and they gave Fatal Bert plenty of opportunities, but Shanahan refused to kowtow to a spoiled player, and I think that was absolutely the right move. The inmates ran the asylum for far too long, and again, the discipline and cohesiveness we're seeing with this year's squad is proof that it was the right move.

LJ and Galloway, I mean, whatever, you bring in warm bodies for camp, if you think they can help you give them a shot. Hell, Gibbs brought in McCardell when he was 37. Lots of coaches bring in veteran players for a variety of reasons; they're cheap, they're experienced, they provide leadership and stabilize a team, and they're expendable if a young guy starts to shows promise and overtakes them.

I really can't say anything definitive about Davis being a non-factor last night except that I noticed it too and assumed he was just well covered the defense when he was in. It's safe to say teams know who he is now and he won't be able to get open quite so easily. Cooley has a lot of experience against Dallas so it would make sense to try and work him in often, but I agree with you that he's starting to look like he's really slowing down.

And my point was that there are clear incongruities in how individuals define what actually constitutes a "gunslinger". I don't care if you labeled him, or if it's the most searched topic on the web. In my definition,(you can reference previous posts if you care to refresh your memory)Rex Grossman is not a "gunslinger", plain and simple. He's simply a pathetic decision maker that suffers from tremorous bouts where he lacks any impulse control whatsoever.

And to everything else you wrote. It's like I'm always battling with an incarnation of the same person, spewing the same rhetoric, from the same sources, where virtually no independant thought is required. Everything is a reference from someone else, and it fast becomes boring and myopic. I could glean your perspective on these issues by funneling the mass consensus through the same narrow vortex. Your last post was a huge waist of time. If you want to know how I would respond to all the same points go to my post history. I'm done playing the redundancy game.

[dgack]

Originally Posted by fanarchist

And my point was that there are clear incongruities in how individuals define what actually constitutes a "gunslinger". I don't care if you labeled him, or if it's the most searched topic on the web. In my definition,(you can reference previous posts if you care to refresh your memory)Rex Grossman is not a "gunslinger", plain and simple. He's simply a pathetic decision maker that suffers from tremorous bouts where he lacks any impulse control whatsoever.

And to everything else you wrote. It's like I'm always battling with an incarnation of the same person, spewing the same rhetoric, from the same sources, where virtually no independant thought is required. Everything is a reference from someone else, and it fast becomes boring and myopic. I could glean your perspective on these issues by funneling the mass consensus through the same narrow vortex. Your last post was a huge waist of time. If you want to know how I would respond to all the same points go to my post history. I'm done playing the redundancy game.

Or perhaps you just don't like rational debate with someone who doesn't always agree with you. I'm sorry to disappoint you.

[fanarchist]

Originally Posted by dgack

Or perhaps you just don't like rational debate with someone who doesn't always agree with you. I'm sorry to disappoint you.

No I don't like it when people take what I say out of context, fragment, and skew it on a tilt so that it leans in a direction of their choosing. I enjoy rational debate, just not generic debate. But my posts are there. I've covered most of these topics.

And when we're running single wing offset I with Logan Paulson playing the wing, Cooley as the FB, and Fred Davis no where in sight on consecutive drives. There's a problem. Perhaps you should pay more attention to the game, and think less about how you're going to impress the pod people on the warpath.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by fanarchist

No I don't like it when people take what I say out of context, fragment, and skew it on a tilt so that it leans in a direction of their choosing. I enjoy rational debate, just not generic debate. But my posts are there. I've covered most of these topics.

And when we're running single wing offset I with Logan Paulson playing the wing, Cooley as the FB, and Fred Davis no where in sight on consecutive drives. There's a problem. Perhaps you should pay more attention to the game, and think less about how you're going to impress the pod people on the warpath.

Speaking of this, any word on Davis? I've been avoiding sports radio/twitter/internet lately. I'm still baffled at how the guy disappeared.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Speaking of this, any word on Davis? I've been avoiding sports radio/twitter/internet lately. I'm still baffled at how the guy disappeared.

He was on the field all but two snaps. Dallas just took him away in the passing game.

[dgack]

Originally Posted by fanarchist

Perhaps you should pay more attention to the game, and think less about how you're going to impress the pod people on the warpath.

LOL. That's one way to "win" an argument, I guess. Kudos to you! Is that what you're looking for? I honestly don't know.

Like I said, I agreed with you that it was odd that Davis' name wasn't called more often and my first thought was that he had simply been covered well. Your reaction is to chide me for not paying enough attention to the game?

Good show, though! You're living up to the edgy nickname and will be an internet legend in no time. I await your next missive with bated breath!

[Mechanix544]

Originally Posted by fanarchist

And my point was that there are clear incongruities in how individuals define what actually constitutes a "gunslinger". I don't care if you labeled him, or if it's the most searched topic on the web. In my definition,(you can reference previous posts if you care to refresh your memory)Rex Grossman is not a "gunslinger", plain and simple. He's simply a pathetic decision maker that suffers from tremorous bouts where he lacks any impulse control whatsoever.

And to everything else you wrote. It's like I'm always battling with an incarnation of the same person, spewing the same rhetoric, from the same sources, where virtually no independant thought is required. Everything is a reference from someone else, and it fast becomes boring and myopic. I could glean your perspective on these issues by funneling the mass consensus through the same narrow vortex. Your last post was a huge waist of time. If you want to know how I would respond to all the same points go to my post history. I'm done playing the redundancy game.

anyone ever wonder why the smilie of the guy in "shit hitting the fan" has his tongue out after the shit is all over his face?????That s fvckin sick!!!!!


Oh yeah, you should change the hater smilie to hatter. that is all.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by fanarchist

Wikipedia is really not most reliable source for information. I saw an excerpt from Wikipedia that claimed Dan Snyder was gay for dinosaurs. It's funny, but highly doubtful in the fact catagory.

For the most part, I think a number of decisions this coaching staff has made, personnel wise, this season have been great. Helu, Josh Wilson, Kerrigan, Bowens, Hank, OJ etc. all, in my opinion very good acquistions. But Fred Davis being virtually non-existent in the game last night, and essentially replacing his touches with what seems to be a smaller, slower, less menasing version of the Captain Chaos we are accustom to seeing, seems, atleast to me, like a very poor game planning decision. Especially when Fred Davis had been a dominant safety blanket in the first 2 games. Running stretch plays on most early 1st down scenarios. Redzone playcalling that discourages us from capitalizing on scoring opportunities, and turnovers. I realize that they're in the past, but the McNabb and Haynesworth debacles didn't really instill a solid foundation for trust. Larry Johnson, Joey Galloway. I'm not going to just accept these shaky decisions based on a lulling adherence to the Shanahan's past achievements. I will question.

Sorry if my initial statement was percieved as contentious, it wasn't my intent. I was looking for elaboration.

That's all.

Crazier things have happened.