How the Hell is this happening!
 

First and foremost, I still think St. Joe will turn this thing around, and I have faith, but looking at this today really shook me up....[i]someone help explain this to me![/i][indent]Under then FIRST year coach Spurrier, the 2002 redskins went 7-9 and scored over 20 points 10 times that year, his QB was a rookie Pat Ramsey and journeyman Shane Matthews, our WR's were Kevin Lockett McCants, Thompson, Gardner.
[/indent]I know our offensive is struggling and I'm sure Its not because of these things....
[list][*]Its not talent, [*]it can't be all execution cause you should score over 18 at least by accident in the span of 10 games. [*]Its not the schedule.[*]and its nots injuries. Look at Carolina....they got injuries, not us.[*]I won't believe that Gibbs has let the game pass him by that much.[*]and God knows its not bad practice, attitude, or motivation...[/list]I can confidently say that it is not any of those things I listed....[b]what then???[/b]

It IS the talent. There are a few really good players and lots of players that have been hyped to be "outstanding" but who are merely "slightly above average".

It is the players on the field who do not execute. Joe Bugel did not the two illegal motion penalties and the holding penalty when the skins had first and goal at the ten. Joe Gibbs did not drop the two passes that hit receivers in the hands in that sequence of plays.

Talent deficiencies on the current team:

They need an upgrade at WR. Coles is good but not great. Nothing behind him is better than average.

They heec an upgrade at offensive guard and center. They need Jansen back at strength to play LT.

Cooley has promise as a tight end. None of the others on the team are anything other than back-ups.

The RBs are fine - - as long as they don't have to play Cartwright.

I think they had a problme at QB for the immediate future because Brunell looks really bad and Ramsey just doesn't get it yet. And Tim Hasselbeck is not the answer either.

The DL has two good players and the rest are waiver wire specials. One danger here is that GRiffin - one of the good players - has a history of playing good one year and playing very nonchalantely the next year. If that happens, the defense will take a step back next year.

The LBs are fine.

They still need a safety and they need a much better nickel back and dime back than they have. (Apologies to Ade JImoh Fan Club; he just doesn't get it done...)

I think that it is entirely the on-field talent that needs to shoulder the blame for the season.

psssh... talent level shud not shoulder the seasons failure. how about an offense that is, relative to its talent level, by far the poorest in the NFL... execution and talent on D is the only reason each game is bearable. i dont review tape or analyze games but we have, what seems to me to be a serious problem in our offensive scheming. i think gibbs will eventually put something together...
and as for drops, penalties... isnt gibbs the guy that wouldnt tolerate that... that was supposed to disappear... hah... so what we have is a horrid O thats no focused at all...
what gibbs was known for, and supposed to bring back to DC must still be sittin in a pit stop somewhere cos i havent seen nothin

I agree,

I don't think that our talent can shoulder the blame for our offense, I'm talking strictly offense, here.....comparing us to carolina, or cincy, two teams that have shown forms of life on offense, we have pretty good talent....now, I'll be the first to admit that we tend to hype up Coles, Gardner, Samuels, ect....

I want reasons why our offense is so bad, and can't even score over 20 points in ten games when the 2002 skins scored over 20 points, 10 times in 16 games??? I don't think its talent....we got at worst, an average football team talent wise....anyone agree or disagree with that argument.....

I disagree with the dismissing of P-Ram because in his first start against one of the dominant teams and a scallled back play book and lead handed recievers showed some of the same poise and skills that got everyone excited in the first place.

You dismissed the thought the game was lack of execution but when you are the ten threatening to score then move the ball out of FG through penalties and dropped passes thats kind of a punch to the guts that knocks the wind out of the team.

Execution again why is it Portis can find his game some games but looses it again when we most need it. Why can our O line not disrupt the opposing D plans weathit it be blitz the hell out of the QB or keying on Portis. Again no running game though makes the enire team drop its shoulders.

And finally injuries, sure Carolina has injuries but thier record shows that the problem with our injuries are they are key players team lifters we have lost two starting safties which in turn restricts the DBs available , two starting LBS and a couple of back ups as well, two OL with Thomas possibly going down for the year , two defensive line men Griffin is in proball form and missing and key special teams players. In a rebuilding learning year these are the kinds of losses we really cannot afford.

so SC, our WRs are worse now than in 2002? our TEs? our QBs? (PR is still here, shanes a backup)...

seriously, it seems like you only think a player is good if he has TO type talent... we're doing less offensively now (with more talent) than spurrier had two years ago... so i'd like to hear how that team was twice as "talented" as our current roster, and that playcalling had nothing to do with the W/L ratio either...

[QUOTE=sportscurmudgeon]It IS the talent. There are a few really good players and lots of players that have been hyped to be "outstanding" but who are merely "slightly above average".

It is the players on the field who do not execute. Joe Bugel did not the two illegal motion penalties and the holding penalty when the skins had first and goal at the ten. Joe Gibbs did not drop the two passes that hit receivers in the hands in that sequence of plays.

Talent deficiencies on the current team:

They need an upgrade at WR. Coles is good but not great. Nothing behind him is better than average.

They heec an upgrade at offensive guard and center. They need Jansen back at strength to play LT.

Cooley has promise as a tight end. None of the others on the team are anything other than back-ups.

The RBs are fine - - as long as they don't have to play Cartwright.

I think they had a problme at QB for the immediate future because Brunell looks really bad and Ramsey just doesn't get it yet. And Tim Hasselbeck is not the answer either.

The DL has two good players and the rest are waiver wire specials. One danger here is that GRiffin - one of the good players - has a history of playing good one year and playing very nonchalantely the next year. If that happens, the defense will take a step back next year.

The LBs are fine.

They still need a safety and they need a much better nickel back and dime back than they have. (Apologies to Ade JImoh Fan Club; he just doesn't get it done...)

I think that it is entirely the on-field talent that needs to shoulder the blame for the season.[/QUOTE]

What you're saying could apply to a lot of teams though:

Coles is playing hurt, Gardner is one of the more underrated receivers in my opinion. And Jacobs and McCants are young and I think getting better

Is that a typo or are you saying Jansen should be our LT? If so, I agree get rid of Samuels

Cooley is just a rookie, too soon to write him off and how many starting TEs do you expect them to have?

Need a safety? This take into account Bowen and Lott who are hurt?

Yeah - I'm not so sure about some of sportscurmudgeon's analysis.

1. WR talent is fine. They get open deep, but we haven't been able to hit the deep ball yet. I think they need some time to gel with Ramsey, but also, Coles is playing somewhat injured this year and I think we can all agree Gardiner, "50/50," may not be the best 2nd receiver on the team.

2. I think our interior OL is fine. They held up well today and are getting better. The injury to Randy Thomas scares me. Obviously, RT has been a huge sore point, but next year, Jansen will hopefully step back in and play at his pro-bowl level over there.

3. I think all those other guys are back there for blocking primarily - and have done a decent job. Gibbs doesn't want a Shockey at TE, or rather, doesn't need a Shockey at TE - he needs solid hard-nosed blockers.

4. I may be the only one, but I think Ramsey showed a lot during the game. He has quickly learned how to play how Gibbs wants him to play. Once he has earned Gibbs' trust, I think you'll see the reigns come off a bit, and I think you'll see him start hitting some deep passes with more consistency. I think he looked great running the offense - he went 21 for 34 and had about 5 or 6 drops. If the receivers had held on to the ball, he would have completed over 75% of his passes!

They are a first-year team with a first-year coach! They have been playing tough, hard-nosed football and just have not had that certain je ne sais crois this year.

But....they are learning and fighting together, as a team. If the front-office does its job, resigns Smoot and Pierce in the offseason, and drafts well, I think you'll see a 12-4 team next year.

While I like our WR's, I just laugh when someone says we have one of the best WR groups in the league.

Coles hasn't been the same since his toe injury. He was a playmaker that defenses feared before, now he's just another WR. I really have to wonder if he's ever going to be the same again.

Gardner is still too damn inconsistent.

McCants and Jacobs are still relatively unproven in this league.

Thrash provides good depth but he showed in Philly that he can't be counted on to be a go-to guy.

[QUOTE=sportscurmudgeon]It IS the talent. There are a few really good players and lots of players that have been hyped to be "outstanding" but who are merely "slightly above average".

It is the players on the field who do not execute. Joe Bugel did not the two illegal motion penalties and the holding penalty when the skins had first and goal at the ten. Joe Gibbs did not drop the two passes that hit receivers in the hands in that sequence of plays.

I think that it is entirely the on-field talent that needs to shoulder the blame for the season.[/QUOTE]

Danny, is that you? Snyder my man, I thought that was you. So how do you think you're going to get around the salary cap?

I'm with you, I say we totally revamp our roster. Maybe we can get Peyton Manning with McNabb as our backup, Moss might be a good #2 wideout, etc. Thank God we're finally going to try to overhaul our roster. We haven't tried making some changes to our roster yet. Salary cap, schmallery cap.

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]While I like our WR's, I just laugh when someone says we have one of the best WR groups in the league.

Coles hasn't been the same since his toe injury. He was a playmaker that defenses feared before, now he's just another WR. I really have to wonder if he's ever going to be the same again.

Gardner is still too damn inconsistent.

McCants and Jacobs are still relatively unproven in this league.

Thrash provides good depth but he showed in Philly that he can't be counted on to be a go-to guy.[/QUOTE]

Matty, you were one of those people (like me) who said we had one of the best WR corps in the league.

How can y'all possibly judge the WRs given the QB play and the play calling? While they certainly aren't the best in the league, I really don't think that's a particular weak spot right now. But like I say, we don't really know: Peyton Manning makes WRs look great; Mark Brunell makes them look like do-do. We'll see with Ramsey. My guess is the WRs are going to start looking a lot better.

[QUOTE=JWsleep]How can y'all possibly judge the WRs given the QB play and the play calling? While they certainly aren't the best in the league, I really don't think that's a particular weak spot right now. But like I say, we don't really know: Peyton Manning makes WRs look great; Mark Brunell makes them look like do-do. We'll see with Ramsey. My guess is the WRs are going to start looking a lot better.[/QUOTE]


As long as they keep on dropping balls, they're gonna be viewed as a "weak spot" on our team.

I think SC is absolutely right; especially about the wide receivers. Coles is good, but he hasn't shown the brilliance that he did in New York....but I'll give him the fact that he's been injured even though he had the same injury last season and I figured that would have been taken care off in the off season. Cooley has developed into a decent tight end, but as SC states, there is no one else to go to as far as passing tight ends. The RB position is fine, but one thing I would upgrade is the full back position. We need a big guy to come in on those third and ones or third and shorts...a Bettis type of guy. Portis would still be our number one RB, but his running style doesn't match up too well in these situations. Another thing that is missing that Gibbs had in his previous tenure (which goes along with the big full back) is the jumble package. On downs where the yardage was short, Gibbs would take out of his smaller quicker linemen and replace them with bigger linemen that could shove any D-line back...it was almost automatic that we would get the first down or TD (depending on the situation.) I haven't seen anything like that this year, but I think that is something that could help us to make those first downs easier when right now 3 and short is still a challenge.

Don't get me wrong, I do think our receivers have the talent, size, skills...but I think it comes back to what I said before... the sport is 90% mental 10% physical..and we need at least one Art Monk type of receiver on our team.

Instead of expressing shock and horror that someone - OK it's me - might suggest that the on-field talent is deficient, please explain to me how:

If the WR corps is "one of the best in the league" AND

If Patrick Ramsey is bordering on greatness with his courage and strong arm

The Redskins scored two field goals yesterday? TWO DAMNED FIELD GOALS!


By the way, the Redskins are now the lowest scoring team in the NFL - lower than the Miami Dolphins and the SF 49ers!! We KNOW that those teams have talent problems but for some reason when it comes to Washington, it isn't the talent on the field; it is something else. Wanna buy some beachfront property in Nebraska?


The offensive line - which is satisfactory to many here - generated all of 51 yards rushing yesterday. Remember, the weakness of the Eagles' defense was supposed to be that you could run on them. What happened?


It isn't worth the trouble to go and look up the exact numbers here but there have been 10 games so far this year. My guess is that the entire wide receiver corps has less than 10 TDs. I know Gardner has 4 or 5 and Cooley has 3 or 4 and Coles has 1. That's it; that's the list; none of the others has produced a point. Note, I'm being generous here and adding Cooley into the wide receiver stats so that they are not really embarrassing.


If I go to some other team websites, how many of them will have fewer than 10 TD by their WRs for the season now? A dozen? I'm not sure it is that high but it isn't worth the effort to go and check it out. We do know that the Eagles will not be one of the teams below 10 TD receptions because their lead receiver has 13 TDs this year and the Skins' lead receiver has 1. That's some kind of disparity.



Ramseyfan:


I wish you were right and that I was Danny Boy Snyder. The first thing I'd do is take a trip around the world and start enjoying my wealth instead of trying to meddle in a football team that I obviously know nothing about and making myself look like the village idiot. Correction, make that the metropolitan idiot!


The point is that the team has a lot of money invested in and tied up in players who are good - but not good enough. If they were good enough they would be just a tad better than 8 - 18 in the past two seasons.


The secret to winning in a salary cap era for more than one year is to be able to identify and sign and train YOUNG talented football players who do not cost much versus the cap. Then you can sign some "high paid talent" - and it damned well better be the right ones - and you can blend them together. When one of the guys who has played well but not great for you wants a big contract, you thank him for his services and release him. When one of the guys who has played really well for you has time left on his deal, you get him signed to a long term cap-freindly deal. That's how it's done and it all begins with the identification of young talent.

Note, young talent is often low round picks and undrafted free agents and not big-name draft picks that get a lot of play on the mock draft boards. The Eagles starting DTs yesterday were both undrafted free agents. They were spelled by another DT who was an undrafted free agent and a first round draft pick. They do not have a lot of money tied up there, but they have played decently, this year, no? Or would you argue that the Redskins' DL is better than the Eagles' DL?

And that is what has been in short supply here for the past 5-8 years and that is why the records in that period of time have been "discouraging". And the only way to change it is to start getting many more young players who are much more capable and starting the blending process with those high paid vets who are worth retaining.

Does that sound like "blowing up the team"? It should. Because that's probably what it's gonna take. But there are all those folks who think the Skins are one or at most two players short of being a Super Bowl contender, and so to keep them happy, maybe all we need to do is sign a couple of glitzy free agents in March and draft someone we can fly in on a helicopter in April and then go 5-11 again next year.

still... just the fact that the team is so pathetic offensively shows me that there is an inherent flaw in the system. this is to be expected from someone who's been away for a while. its just spurrier-effect (a horrible system) except magnified. even spurrier drew up some decent gameplans with his unorthodox passing system. it just might be that the super conservatism doesnt fly anymore....

even with our own team we see williams takin no namers and puttin up a top 10 D... maybe we arent 1 or 2 against philly but overall easily top 5 or 10...

gibbs on the other hand has some pretty good players to work with... im sure hed rather work with samuels, portis, and coles over... marshall, clark, and evans

based on even a simple observation like that, we are seeing a flawed, flawed system...

i still feel that gibbs will work through it... but im not about to say that we all of a sudden have no talent offensively. im gonna actually face the facts

[QUOTE=sportscurmudgeon]The Eagles starting DTs yesterday were both undrafted free agents. They were spelled by another DT who was an undrafted free agent and a first round draft pick. They do not have a lot of money tied up there, but they have played decently, this year, no? Or would you argue that the Redskins' DL is better than the Eagles' DL?[/QUOTE]

Aren't Antonio Pierce, LeMar Marshall and Ryan Clark all undrafted free agents?

I would say our DL is better than the Eagles DL, especially when you consider who the Eagles have on the DLine.

SC, you mentioned two undrafted free agents. You also might want to note that they have JEVON KEARSE, Corey Simon, Darwin Walker, and Hugh Douglas. You might also want to note that until last week, their Dline's rush defense couldn't stop squat.

Salavea, Haley, Noble, Pierce, Marshall, Clark, & Co. weren't exactly 1st rounders.

SC,

#1 I never ever ever said that Ramsey is playing like some super stud. In fact, I thought he was going to get his arse handed to him yesterday (I posted a thread about that).

#2 I did say the playcalling sucks; which might explain the disparity between this team's talent and its record.

#3 I agree that you need to draft well to build a good team.

#4 You have said we need changes at QB, WR, or 8 or so positions. Sorry, you're not going to be able to do that in 1, 2, or 3 drafts. How do you actually expect to really mix up those 8 positions without spending a boat load of money or waiting 3 years (when half our coaching staff will be in nursing homes)?

You've critiqued Daniel Snyder, which is sort of like stealing the mentally retarded kids lunch money (so easy). You've said that we need to build through the draft (which few argue with). BUT, you simultaneously want to revamp our roster. I just want to know how you would go about doing that.

Here's how to revamp the roster.

You start by admitting to yourself that there are far too many players here making more money than they are worth. Then you invest the money in scouts who can find college and pro talent. Scouting other pro teams to get their "castoffs" who will be productive for you is an important part of the deal.

Then you set a team budget and let the football people and the "capologists" do their thing. Here is a fundamental problem that the Redskins have - and it was theoretically going to go away with the hiring of Joe Gibbs. When there is a "disparity of opinion" between Gibbs and Cerrato, they each state their case and Danny Boy decides. Guess what. That means Danny Boy is making football related decisions and we know that does not work.

Now blowing up a football team is not pretty. See the SF 49ers this year of what it will probably look like. But if you eat the cap money of the overpaid players and don't make the same mistakes again, you have the chance to rebuild - if of course you are willing to admit to yourself that some other teams have discovered the model for success before you did and therefore you will copy them and not be the "innovator" and the "leader" and the "trendsetter".

Who are some of the potentially overpaid players? I don't know all of the contract numbers so here is a list of players that I'd study hard on film and then study their contracts closely. Many would be employed elsewhere:

WR: Gardner definitely goes and maybe Jacobs if Jacobs has a big cap number. However, I'd keep both of them until I knew the results of Coles' surgery. If he refuses to have surgery, then I have to ask if a limping Coles is worth what his cap number is. His on-field performance this year playing injured is not what a $13M signing bonus WR should produce.

TE: NO one there is worth a big cap number and I suspect none of them are making a big cap number. So keep the best players here. Probably keep Cooley and Royal - assuming neither is expensive.

OL: Samuels is good but not $11M worth of good. Renegotiate or move him on. Raymer and Freidman have to come really cheap and even so, I'd probably keep only one because they aren't that good. Dockery is probably worth another year to see how he progresses. Brown and Parker would have to play for the minimum or move on. Jansen is a definite keeper; he is a building block for the team. He is the best player on the offensive unit.

RB: Since Betts probably costs next to nothing, keep him. Keep Portis. NO other RB can cost much more than the league minimum.

DL: Keep Griffin, Evans, Saalev'a and Noble i- f Noble does not cost too much. Wynn is a casualty because he is an ordinary player and he makes too much.

LB: There is a whole lot of cap money wrapped up in this position. This is where you will probably have to cut a productive player purely for economic reasons. Barrow and Marshall would be candidates here.

CB: You are already paying Springs a lot of money. If you re-sign Smoot for the kind of money he can command, that will tie up a whole lot of money in the CB position. Is that a disproprotionate investment? Probably not. But it will mean that all the other CBs will need to be making minimun salary or damned close to it.

S Taylor is "cap friendly" for the moment but you cannot renegotiate his deal because that would set a precedent and open the floodgates for other players. Contradt extensions are something ownership does to eas cap pain; it sin't something that players can be allowed to demand and expect that the demand will be met. I'd pay Clark and/or Lott a little above the minimum but nothing outrageous.

ST: Morton is probably a luxury that you cannot afford. I'd certainly have a really outstanding doctor look at Hall's injury from the standpoint of the likelihood that it might be recurring. If it is likely to be recurring, I'd be looking for a cheaper kicker now.

QB: I'd cut Brunell and eat the cap hit. I'd name Ramsey as the starter to be sure there is no ambiguity and use next year to figure out if I want to keep him after his contract expires. If so, then he will get a big contract; if not, we'll go shopping in two years with cap room galore because the dead money will have gone away. Hasselbeck can be the #2 guy and for an emergency situation I'd go out and find a Tony Banks or Jeff Blake or someone like that who will certainly be floating around looking to sign on for a year of clipboard duty at about $500K.


To be sure, this would be potentially an ugly team for a year or so. But it puts the fiscal house back in order.


Now if you think that Danny Boy is going to sit back and take the "long view" here, you are sadly mistaken. He thinks the team is one or two players away from GLORY. They aren't, but he thinks so. So get ready for a great ride in March and April 2005...

SC, spurrier took WORSE talent and scored a lot more points (and the D killed us), how do you argue the playcalling isn't hurting us, and its all on the talent?

williams came in and our D has gone up over 20 spots (of 32) in a single season, gibbs comes in and our O drops off and completely bottoms out, even with better talent... I just don't see how you can keep saying the coaching isn't really that important (1-2 games), when we've seen our team shift so drasticl in both directions specificly because of coaching...

thats not a huge blowup.. cut brunell, samuels, coles, wynn, barrow, morton
we'd need to draft/sign mike williams, an Olineman and a DE or two...

That Guy:

I'm not sure Spurrier had that much less talent. Granted last year's defensive line was atrocious. But the LBs are pretty much the same and the DBs are minus Champ Bailey this year. The defense has upgraded the talent but the only real positive difference is the OL

On offense the OL this year is a lot worse than last year because Jansen is not there. That's no one's fault but it is a fact. Running back is a significant upgrade Quarterback talent level has not changed since Brunell has not been significantly better than Matthews/Weurffel/Hasselbeck last year and Ramsey is still here. WRs are the same except for the addition of Thrash who is a minor player.

The team added players in the off-season and they did improve the talent level a bit, but it was not a HUGE increase.

That Guy:

My team restructuring note suggested the players that we all know who would be targets for "removal". Others would join them.

Nonetheless, I suggested cutting the starting QB (at the beginning of the year), either the #1 WR or the #2 and #3 WR, the starting LT, the starting center or his immediate backup, the most experienced DL on the squad and the guy projected to be the starting MLB until injuries hit. Add to that Morton and Hall as possible cuts and look at what you would have. Three of the four infamous "Jetskins" might be eslewhere.

If anyone has a more extensive "blow-up plan" please post it here.

I'm not in favor of any sort of major blow up plan in 2005.

Yeah we need to trim some fat and I'm sure we'll see some higher priced guys either re-work their deals or be cut, but I don't see the need for sweeping changes.

[QUOTE=That Guy]thats not a huge blowup.. cut brunell, samuels, coles, wynn, barrow, morton
we'd need to draft/sign mike williams, an Olineman and a DE or two...[/QUOTE]


You want to cut Coles? I dont think he's someone we can afford to cut, surgery or not. I dont think we can draft Mike Williams, espcially with the pick were looking at; we should probolby deal the pick. I agree with the other ones, except if Samuels will restructure. I'm with Matty though, I've said it before and I'll say it again, the biggest move we can make this year is no move at all. I think Smoot, even though he will cost $$, is someone we defintley resign.

There is a HUGE difference between [I]talent [/I] and [I]performance[/I]. The Redskins have a lot of talent, but they have not performed nearly as well as they should.
Our WR group is a perfect example of this. Talent-wise, they are probably top-ten, but from their performance this year, they are near the bottom.
Coles has nagging injuries, Gardner is Mr. Inconsistant, McCants and Thrash are solid but not great, and Jacobs is just starting to show what he's capable of, due to the injuries last year. So it is a work in progress, like the rest of the team. People say that they are not a 3-7 team, but guess what? They are, until they prove otherwise....and "blowing up" the roster in the offseason is NOT the way to do it.
This team needs STABILITY more than anything, and hiring Coach Gibbs was the first step in acheiving that.

GManc711:

I do not want to cut Coles. But if I am out to blow up the team - as I was asked to provide provide details on - and I am looking to see what players are producing at a level commensurate with their salary cap numbers now and into the future, then indeed Coles is a player I'd scrutinize.

Go check the stats to get exact numbers but I think this is correct. Coles has been a Redskin for 26 games; he has 7 TDs. That is not the on-field performance I expect or demand from a guy who get a $13M signing bonus and who will start to eat up cap space as his contract matures. Crazy Canuck can give you the figures for Coles in the out-years but I am confident that it is not a tiny number.

I believe that the reason for the less than spectacular performance is that he has an injured foot. Fine. Now, the question is what is the prognosis for that injury getting better. Surgery? Treatments? What? Because if I am correct that the reason for his less than fully productive performance is the injury, then I want him cured before I pay the rest of the contract. So, that becomes part of the decision process.

The Skins signed Coles with two good feet. And with two good feet, he is probably worth what he is getting paid. But on one foot...???

So, I don't want to cut him but I do want to try to figure out if the guy I hired to play WR with two good feet is the guy that will be showing up for work the next several years - - or not.