Redskins' Coach Watch: Mike Holmgren Is Not Our Guy
by KevinE on Nov 5, 2009 9:06 AM EST
in Analysis
76 comments
With Jim Zorn's fate sealed, the Redskins have already begun the hunt for a new head coach (and possibly GM). Since the Redskins front office has proven they have little skill or patience in selecting a leader not named Joe Gibbs, I've taken on the task to educate myself and anyone that cares about the strengths and weaknesses of the available candidates. We'll cover 3 main topics:
1.) Coach's reason for leaving their previous team
2.) Coach's relationship with the players
3.) Coach's ability to evaluate talent
First up is Mike Holmgren, and I'd like to thank John from the extremely popular and well versed SB Nation site, Field Gulls, for answering my Holmgren/Seahawks' related questions. In my final question, John gives a compelling argument of why the Redskins should stay away from Holmgren.
Hogs Haven: What were Holmgren's reasons for leaving? Seemed like he just wanted to retire, but he hasn't even been out of the NFL one year now he wants to coach again, preferably "an East coast team" as he said. Seems a little bizarre.
This is a somewhat controversial subject. Mike Holmgren announced he would retire after the 2008 season in January of 2008. Shortly thereafter, Tim Ruskell and Tod Leiweke announced that Jim Lawrence Mora would be the next coach of the Seattle Seahawks. Speculation is that Holmgren did not like that. Murmurs were that Holmgren wanted to return, but when asked Holmgren recited his stock "I promised Kathy I would take a year off and that's what I plan to do." Holmgren still hungers for football. He hated the way he went out both as a GM and a head coach and believes he has something to prove.
Hogs Haven: Holmgren would most likely assume the GM role as well. How would you rate his draft skills? At a quick glance, he seems to be almost perfect for the first 2 rounds. Dating back to the 2005 draft, everyone selected in the 1st two rounds is still on the roster, and dating back to 2000, he has picked a ton of winners (Hutchinson, Alexander, Trufant, Hamlin, Tatupa). From round 3-9, things get real dicey.
Holmgren was the GM from 1999 to 2002. He made two of the most important trades in team history: He traded a 10th overall and third round pick to Green Bay for Matt Hasselbeck, the 17th overall pick and a seventh round pick. Holmgren also traded Joey Galloway to Dallas for their 2000 and 2001 first round picks. He built the offense that led Seattle to Super Bowl XL. Holmgren had very little knack for defensive talent. His major achievement on defense was drafting Rocky Bernard, though selecting Ken Lucas in the second proved modestly successful too. Holmgren also failed at detail work. He could spot great offensive talent like Steve Hutchinson and mid-round systems players like Darrell Jackson, but his rosters lacked depth.
Hogs Haven: A lot of people would argue Holmgren played in easy division all those years, which explained the good record, but the inability to win the big games. There were a lot of NFC playoff losses. If you were Dan Snyder, would you have any hesitations making Holmgren your GM/Head coach?
If I were Dan Snyder I would have hesitations going to the dentist. I think Snyder wants a front for his machinations and that Holmgren is far too ambitious, proud and respected to be that.
Holmgren was perfectly respectable in the playoffs. He led the 2005 Seahawks to the Super Bowl and won Wild Card games in 2006 and 2007.
Hogs Haven: Any other thoughts I may have missed?
Sure. No team should want Mike Holmgren to be their coach or GM. There's a mystique that follows legendary figures and fans can fall into the trap of thinking that with the celebrity comes the success. Holmgren has a mind for offense and an eye for offensive talent, but many of the ways he forged his career with are outdated. He does not believe in the shotgun and very was resistant to implementing it in Seattle. He loathes trick plays and is conservative to a fault. Holmgren is loyal to a fault. He is stubborn. He decided in 2007 that announcing the team had abandoned the run was preferable to benching a clearly broken down Shaun Alexander. Mike Holmgren was a great NFL coach. His eye for and ability to develop quarterback talent is legendary. But Mike Holmgren is not still a great coach and hiring him would no more bring Washington Holmgren's offensive success than hiring Bill Cowher would make the Skins the Steelers.
Well damn. That is not a ringing endorsement.
Dan Snyder, as we all know too well, loves the big names. It gives the false illusion to season ticket holders that their investment is safe. As many people have echoed on this site, the hiring process should begin with a GM, not a coach. The Redskins have invested two years in the West Coast Offense, and my fear is that they are looking to plug a WCO coach first.
Next up...Jon Gruden, Russ Grimm, and Mike Shanahan.
2 recs |
76 comments
| Add comment
|
Email
Print
Comments
Well
Based on the success of his top 2 round draft picks, it sure seems he would make a good GM. Can I be for hiring him as GM and against hiring him as head coach. That’s what I’ll go with.
by Kurtstack on Nov 5, 2009 9:22 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Disagree
A GM’s rep is made in all seven rounds, not just 1 & 2. Even Snyderrato can draft first round players, so that shows you how much that is worth.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
by smutsboy1 on Nov 5, 2009 9:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
+10
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
by Scott E on Nov 5, 2009 10:26 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I tend to agree that the GM's rep is made in all 7...
but most of the time when a GM finds a gem in the late rounds, it’s all luck. Great teams are made from first and second round guys.. And you say Snyderratto can even draft first round platyers, not so fast. Here’s our first and second round draft picks since 2000. Besides Samuels, Taylor, Arrington, and maybe Landry, Rogers or McIntosh, the rest either aren’t very good, or aren’t even in the league anymore. That’s 6 out of 15 picks from the first two rounds that you could say were good, and two of them aren’t with us anymore. I didn’t include the 2009 draft because its too early to determine if those guys will be any good, but I would bet Orakpo will be one of the great ones. I would like to see what teams like the Patriots, Colts and Pittsburgh did in those same years to compare. Also, part of the problem with this is, they don’t even get a chance to draft a great player because they trade the damn pick away before the draft. No first round picks in 2003, 2006 and 2008….Terrible! Don’t even get me started on free agents these dumb asses have brought here!!
2000
1. LaVar Arrington, LB, Penn St.
1. Chris Samuels, T, Alabama
2001
1. Rod Gardner, WR, Clemson
2. Fred Smoot, CB, Mississippi St.
2002
1. Patrick Ramsey, QB, Tulane
2. Ladell Betts, RB, Iowa
2003
2. Taylor Jacobs, WR, Florida
2004
1. Sean Taylor, S, Miami (Fla.) (RIP)
2005
1. Carlos Rogers, CB, Auburn
1. Jason Campbell, QB, Auburn
2006
2. Rocky McIntosh, LB, Miami
2007
1. LaRon Landry, S, LSU
2008
2. Devin Thomas, WR, Michigan State
2. Fred Davis, TE, USC
2. Malcolm Kelly, WR, Oklahoma
by tmarine17 on Nov 5, 2009 11:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't forget the third round
2nd and 3rd rounds might be the most important rounds, IMO, because the talent drop off isn’t nearly proportional to the drop off in salary, By that I mean, the most cost effective talent can be found in those rounds, IMO.
Since ’04 Snyderratogibbs drafted good 1st rounders, not much else has been consistently good though.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
by smutsboy1 on Nov 5, 2009 12:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Cooley
2004 traded up w/ NO to get him in the third round.
by liger99 on Nov 5, 2009 5:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
...not much else has been consistently good...
and I look forward to the day we no longer spend multiple picks on players…
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
by smutsboy1 on Nov 5, 2009 5:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Holmgren
I wouldn’t mind bringing him in as a GM, but not a coach. Then they can hire Gruden as the coach. They have worked together before for both San Fran and Green Bay, so they know each others likes and dislikes. They also both know the WCO, so if we plan on staying with that, they can definitely help there.
by tmarine17 on Nov 5, 2009 9:23 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I can't see those two
big egos working well together. Plus, see smutsboy1 above on the “Disagree” and finally, we need to get back to smash mouth football. Football is in the end, just physics. The stronger teams tend to win, so lets get after that and cut out the finesse stuff.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
by Scott E on Nov 5, 2009 10:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agree
wholeheartedly. I want us to rebuild the bruising, physical reputation that we had in our glory years.
by CarverM on Nov 5, 2009 12:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I love Grimm
But I just see why we can afford to take the chance on another first time coach. I would love to have him, but how is this any different than the Zorn thing? I feel like I’m writing blasphemy, but can this fan base put up with the possibility of Grimm not working out? That might be like crossing the streams.
by monk81 on Nov 5, 2009 1:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Any thoughts on Grimm as GM?
Young, but… should at least know talent and who can play smash mouth. Then we work with Zorn and an OC to transition to a more smash mouth style. Could make it easier all the way around over the next couple of years.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
by Scott E on Nov 5, 2009 3:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Crossing the streams worked
if not, the world would have succumbed to the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
by CarverM on Nov 5, 2009 4:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
shows how young I am
that I didn’t get that as soon as he said it
SpotieOtieDopalicious
by Rekka on Nov 5, 2009 4:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What are you, 14?
I’m only 23, and Ghostbusters was a large part of my childhood.
by CarverM on Nov 5, 2009 5:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Also
If Sherman Lewis stays on as OC, they have both worked with him. Seems like a perfect fit to me..
by tmarine17 on Nov 5, 2009 9:24 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Just like...
the perfect storm. Lewis wasn’t allowed to call plays as Holmgren’s OC, so there is no real upside there.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
by Scott E on Nov 5, 2009 10:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope there's a Jim Zorn staying piece.
One of the most common complaints towards Snyder’s mismanagement of the team is his consistent turnover of coaches. Maybe staying on with the same gameplan for more than two years is the answer…?
Though I’d still recommend a new, play-calling, offensive coordinator.
by SSBlitz on Nov 5, 2009 9:44 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Not the worst option out there.
With a good GM and a good OC calling plays, Zorn might actually do well. The players like him, but maybe for the wrong reasons. He was playing mostly smashmouth the first 8 games of the season last year before CP and the O-line got worn down.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
by Scott E on Nov 5, 2009 10:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It could work
if they brought in a veteran coordinator to help stabilize him and the team.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
by smutsboy1 on Nov 5, 2009 10:33 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I want Zorn to stay
But I want the decision to be made by the new GM/Team President that Snyder hires. I could see Holmgren keeping his friend Jim Zorn on as coach if he takes a GM job.
Can we get away from wanting a Coach-GM combo? Let’s not settle for assuming thats what Snyder will inevitably do and resigning us to that fact. Keep the pressure on to hire a competent football personnel guy and empower him to make the decisions.
by Boo. on Nov 5, 2009 12:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You saw what he could do with an effective o-line last year.
If the team committed to fixing the o-line, I wouldn’t mind seeing him again. But do we have the patience to see the o-line re-built, new quarterback built, and Zorn learn how to be a coach?
by monk81 on Nov 5, 2009 1:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Do you need a new Quarterback too?
You saw what he could do with an effective o-line last year
You’ve also see what Campbell can do when he doesn’t have to worry about which linemen is going to let his defender through untouched.
With two strong additions to the line, keeping Dockery, Thomas, Rabach, Reinhart, Williams, and Heyer, all of the problems I see (minus dropped balls) would be fixed.
by SSBlitz on Nov 5, 2009 2:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dear god no, another one!?!?!?!
He does not believe in the shotgun
We can’t hire coaches who are this stubborn and traditional.
What is this, 1988?
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
by smutsboy1 on Nov 5, 2009 9:47 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I still can't figue out
what’s traditional about a WCO?
by CarverM on Nov 5, 2009 9:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It's 30 years old
It was cutting edge in the early 80s.
But that’s not what I meant by traditional. Maybe that was the wrong word for me to use.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
by smutsboy1 on Nov 5, 2009 9:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What's not to believe in the Shotgun?
Every team should have it as an option no matter what style of offense.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
by Scott E on Nov 5, 2009 10:33 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He's silly if he doesn't 'believe' in the shotgun
it does, in fact, exist regardless of what Holmgren says.
by CarverM on Nov 5, 2009 12:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and, shockingly, all the best offenses in the NFL use it
And the 2nd best offense, the Pats, use it over half the time.
Obviously there are more factors to the Pats/Colts than the shotgun, but contrary to what Zorn wants to do, it CAN be used successfully.
And I don’t think you need a HOF QB to do so.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
by smutsboy1 on Nov 6, 2009 10:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nice post, KevinE
An important piece of research for our future. Just knowing the options and being able to discuss may allow us to bring ideas to the attention of the FO, now that they know we are damn serious about this team.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
by Scott E on Nov 5, 2009 10:35 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
agreed. great post
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
by smutsboy1 on Nov 5, 2009 10:37 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Why even discuss this?
He ain’t comin and he’s already trashed Snyderatto in the media.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/11/02/scratch-holmgren-of-the-redskins-list/
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.
by GeoFly on Nov 5, 2009 10:37 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think that hardly precludes him from coming
Bigger disagreements have been patched over in the NFL
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
by smutsboy1 on Nov 5, 2009 10:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This aint the NFL
It’s the SFL.
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.
by GeoFly on Nov 5, 2009 11:04 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
WCO offense....what is it really?
No shotgun, cut down routes, shorter but suppossedly more effecient passes. It’s all bullshit because the WCO is just a traditional NFL offense with half the plays cut out of it. It’s a more specific offense and defenses have zeroed in on it greatly over the past few years.
Something many people don’t realize is that San Fran in the 80’s had ALL BIG, TALL, FAST RECEIVERS with a very smart QB, a great O – line, very good running backs, an awesome defense, a great head coach and oh yeah a system that was new in implementing and never really seen before and took most people by suprise. You can call it what you want but San Fran could have won without it. They had dynamic people all over the field. But their was another team who didn’t look anything like San Fran and still managed to win three super bowls in that era. Hmnnnnnn……….wonder who that was?
The fact is Vinny is chasing a pipe dream, a young man’s fantasy if you will. Not to mention that the key pieces on this team weren’t drafted for this. He’s a menace.
by skinsymets on Nov 5, 2009 10:49 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Yep
at this point, systems have been so mixed and matched that nobody runs a true WCO, and many non-WCO’s still involve WCO aspects.
This is why I cringe at guys like Zorn, Holmgren or Andy Reid. They are so stubborn about the WCO, that I think they hurt themselves by not incorporating other offensive ideas.
Like the damn shotgun.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
by smutsboy1 on Nov 5, 2009 10:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
Their is no true WCO. I dont think there ever really was IMO. San Fran had such a dynamic passing offense, that they were able to get by on a limited number of plays with those receivers they had.
They need to get back to basics, instead of the plays being all about the coaches and what they want, whatever happened to play calling to your players strengths?
I mean come on, if we really need offensive lineman, why not then try out big Al?
by skinsymets on Nov 5, 2009 11:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
being a lineman requires a lot more finesse that he's used to i suppose
SpotieOtieDopalicious
by Rekka on Nov 5, 2009 11:09 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
my understand of the WCO
is that basically it was just a shift in philosophy not a huge X’s and O’s change
before Walsh (and yes I am stealing this explanation basically word for word from something I read somewhere else a month or so ago, cant remember where)
anyway Before Walsh, coaches looked at a run play that gained 4 yards as a success, while a 4 yard pass play was a failure, Walsh understood that they were both 4 yard plays so went to a short pass to REPLACE the run ON OCCASION.
Now you have all these guys like Andy Reid who think that WCO means never run, when it doesnt it just means using short screen passes can be AN EFFECTIVE COMPLEMENT to the run game, not a COMPLETE REPLACEMENT of the Run Game
Do I have this right?
Pommylee
by Pommylee on Nov 5, 2009 9:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Kind of.
It would be using short passes to set up the defense in coverage for running. It also has alot to do with the timing the throws with the dropstep while reading coverages. A lot of compression formations for pre-snap reads and spread routes.
by SSBlitz on Nov 5, 2009 11:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and absolutely none of that Sounds Like JC
see this troubling, we are supposedly trying to implement this WCO but Campbell either does not have the capability or the inclination to call audibles nor does he do a good job of going through his read progression particularly when under pressure like he alway is, just seems this WCO decision is one based on ideology and not the pieces we have in place
Pommylee
by Pommylee on Nov 6, 2009 12:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
BINGO
just seems this WCO decision is one based on ideology and not the pieces we have in place
Watching this team try and run this offense is like watching the smartest 6 month old baby in the world try and solve a calculus problem, there’s lots of hope, but it’s just not going to happen. It’s a complete waste of time and talent. As long as there’s hope, Dans’ checkbook is in the black.
by skinsymets on Nov 6, 2009 7:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
lolol
Watching this team try and run this offense is like watching the smartest 6 month old baby in the world try and solve a calculus problem, there’s lots of hope, but it’s just not going to happen.
I still don’t understand why, if they trade picks just to draft him in the first round, they didn’t build him a house on this team. Instead, they just gave him 5 cents and said “I want a dollar back”
SpotieOtieDopalicious
by Rekka on Nov 6, 2009 9:04 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
why? because Vinny is an AWFUL GM
After Gibbs retired it seemed Snyder’s main MO was to build around JC and see if he was a franchice QB (which in theory was a decent plan, IMO).
So what does Snyder do? Hand over power (in theory) to Vinny, who in turn installs a system COMPLETELY counter to Snyder’s QB’s skill set.
This entire episode is extremely emblematic of ways in which Snyderrato are among the most inept front offices in the league.
No plan. No patience. No coherence.
Oh look! Smashmouth Martyball. Oh look! high flying Spurrierball. Oh look! Smashmouth Gibbsball. Oh look! WCO Zornball.
I mean, in the span of four regimes, could you have gone in the complete opposite direction more times than what I just described?
Snyder’s track record over the past 10 years is truly one for the ages.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
by smutsboy1 on Nov 6, 2009 9:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Right on
It’s about the talent and the motivation. The only ‘system’ that consistently works is having the ability to run the football behind a big offensive line, and mixing in passing plays (preferably to receivers who run good routes). That formula got us to 6-2 last season. Getting away from the run—by choice or by necessity—this year has landed us at 2-5. Future drafts/GM choices should be predicated on the philosophy of rebuilding a solid running attack and maintaining a stingy defense. Then when the right QB comes along after that, get him and ride him to the super bowl.
by Smack27 on Nov 5, 2009 1:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sugar...
I know this is not your post, but. I live in LA and they ran a piece on KTLA about the Skins fans revolting against their owner! The segment was with a local sports talk host , Roger Lodge (yes, the dating guy), and he compared the situation to a “what if” with the Clips!!!! He praised the passion and motivation of the Skins fans, and his advice was if you are unhappy, stop going! Good work! Viva La Revolution!!!!!!!
by brettpedigo on Nov 5, 2009 12:11 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
dude
I used to live in LA and called in to Lodge all the time. Is his partner still the guy from My Cousin Vinny? His show is better than people would think. Have you called in asked him about it? Where do you watch games? Joxy Daily or Barney’s?
by monk81 on Nov 5, 2009 1:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I bounce around..
I actually don’t listen on the radio. AM 830 is out of anaheim and I live in the valley now. He just does a segment on the KTLA morning show. As for games, I have the ticket now that I am a father, but I sometimes go to Hollywood Billiards, a big Skins fan base there. Busby’s, Ye Rustic Inn, and Cabo Cantina. If I go to the west side I will hit up Baja or The Whaler. You would be surprised to see how many Skins fans there are out here!!!!
by brettpedigo on Nov 5, 2009 3:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I remember the small contingent at Barneys
by monk81 on Nov 5, 2009 4:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
but i remember Joxy Daly's at Venice and Washington being a Redskins's bar.
There were always old time fans there too. It was a good place to go. This was early 2000’s. I was only there for a couple of years.
by monk81 on Nov 5, 2009 4:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There are a TON of bars now!
I am sure that it is this way everywhere now, but wherever you look a new sports bar is there. Busbys is on Wilshire near La Brea and has a games like free pool and such. there are alot of flat screens, but the feed is not HD. It was still fun. Hollywood Billiards is the best. It is on Hollywood between Vine and Western and it is HUGE!!!! almost too big. it fills up fast and is a great place for games. I go there for the Championship games (AKA the off season). I will have to check out Joxy Daly’s, I heard there was a skins bar around there, but never know the name!
by brettpedigo on Nov 5, 2009 5:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Damn
That would have been awesome. I lived in park La Brea and would have been able to walk there to some extent (I used to walk to Barney on very drunk sundays).
by monk81 on Nov 6, 2009 9:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I know I lived in walking distance
Those were the days!!!!!
by brettpedigo on Nov 6, 2009 12:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Blache Defends Snyder
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4626258
Please someone post this story, this is just oil on the fire of my vitriol for Redskins “leadership”, that is, regardless of the fact that ownership begets who becomes management, both ownership and management deserve wrath in the 1st degree from all of us. This is what i feel.
The fact is that Blache has a vested interest in protecting both Zorn and Snyder, both of them are the reason for his job security. Once Zorn is gone, so his his job. Fact is that the defense doesn’t have the blatant hole the offense has to shoulder in terms of the O-Line, and Blache has superb personnel to work with. The problem is he has likewise turned out woeful underperformance on his side of the ball but has no excuse for it. With Haynesworth, Hall, Rogers, Orakpo, Carter, McIntosh and Fletcher, Blache’s defense should have been a saving grace of this team. Instead, it’s just as unreliable as the offense and has absolutely no excuse. To make matters worse, Blache had until this point gone into hiding from popular accountability and sports media because he knew he would get called out for the shi*tbag job he has turned out, and after the old man lost it when that early journalist called him out, i don’t blame him. He sucks at his job and he sucks, like ownership and management save for Zorn, who has by virtue of his position as coach had to face popular scrutiny/accountability, he is blatantly unaccountable for his similarly unacceptable job performance. The defense has too much talent to be as unreliable/unfeared as it is, it’s Blache’s fault, and all we can count on him to show up for is Daniel Snyder’s defense.
by Grand Tanyon Sturtze on Nov 5, 2009 2:32 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Riggo went too far. Snyder doesn't have a 'dark heart'
Quite the opposite in fact.
However Blache didn’t address any of the major criticisms of Snyder. (meddling, egotistical, incompetent, stubborn)
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
by smutsboy1 on Nov 5, 2009 2:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
check out the article I put in another post
I always take anything I read about the redskins on ANY newsite, or website, with a grain of salt
SpotieOtieDopalicious
by Rekka on Nov 5, 2009 2:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Smutsboy1, let’s call a spade a spade. The geniune content of Riggins’s calling-out of Snyder was not centered on the premise that he possesses a “dark heart”, it’s that he is woefully incompetent, arrogant, meddlesome, an idiot in terms of football-decisions, and imperially feels literally zero accountability towards the popular fan base. When Blache came out of hiding like Dick Cheney to snipe for the boss before running back into the professional, financial, & reputational safety of returning to hiding, no one in their right mind thinks it was because he genuinely thought that the authentic thrust of Riggins’s, and the army of Redskins fans & commentators who agree with him, argument, was that Snyder is an intrinsically evil being. It’s that he’s egomaniacal and this feeds into what has been destroying the franchise since Snyder’s takeover of the team from the Cookes (see above: woefully incompetent, arrogant, meddlesome, an idiot in terms of football-decisions, and imperially feels literally zero accountability towards the popular fan base).
Essentially, Blache counter-pointed the tangential argument that Snyder is inherently a bad person to informally endorse his [Snyder’s] professional credentials (and destruction they have wreaked on the franchise) without having to come out and actually say it (and end up looking like a complete fool for it).
by Grand Tanyon Sturtze on Nov 5, 2009 2:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
don't disagree with any of that
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
by smutsboy1 on Nov 5, 2009 2:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
next coach
real simple here, Mike shanahan but we wont get him because of dallas. Dallas wants him also and since Mike played for and later coached under Tom landry, he has sentimental ties with the cowboys.
So that leaves Bill C. and chucky,
Bill wont take the job so in my estimate it boils down to John Gruden bein gthe next Redskins head coach.
time will tell….
by snyper94z28 on Nov 5, 2009 4:38 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I'm hoping the Cowturds
can win enough games to influence JJ to keep Wade Phillips around for another year or ten two. :-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvIX3S0f-2c&feature=player_embedded
by VA_Skin on Nov 5, 2009 8:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I like that plan
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
by smutsboy1 on Nov 6, 2009 9:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
First of all
I love this post and look forward to further analysis about our future coaching candidates. I have a couple of my own preferences but more on that later.
I’m honestly on the fence about Holmgren. We already know that Holmgren doesn’t like the way his little Seahawk buddy was handled by Snyderrato when they took his playcalling duties away. We know that Holmgren is friends with Zorn and probably wouldn’t just come in and take the HC job away from Zorn. And the former SB winner certainly isn’t going to come here in any capacity lower than the HC. So that leaves Holmgren coming in as our GM. IMO, that would be an upgrade over Cerrato, BUT, not necessarily the direction we want to go in. We need a master GM – not a novice GM .
Holmgren had very little knack for defensive talent. His major achievement on defense was drafting Rocky Bernard, though selecting Ken Lucas in the second proved modestly successful too. Holmgren also failed at detail work. He could spot great offensive talent like Steve Hutchinson and mid-round systems players like Darrell Jackson, but his rosters lacked depth.
Basically, I’d rather have Holmgren as the HC, not GM. But since that would require Zorn being demoted or fired, I don’t think it’s going to happen. Therefore, I am in agreement with KevinE that Holmgren is not our guy. However, it also wouldn’t be the end of the world if Holmgren did become our GM/HC.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvIX3S0f-2c&feature=player_embedded
by VA_Skin on Nov 5, 2009 9:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
imho the coach talk is premature
first: Vinnie is sent packing
second: the danny hires a football guy to be the GM
third: danny places himself in a cryogenic sleep chamber for three years after signing a series of checks in varying amounts
fourth: the GM hires HIS coach
fifth: we wait and see
I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused....
by piratedan7 on Nov 5, 2009 10:36 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Not sure if Scientology allows him to do this though!!!
third: danny places himself in a cryogenic sleep chamber for three years after signing a series of checks in varying amounts……….just brilliant
Still gotta love the ppl on thsi site for their amazing turns of phrase. one saving grace of a poor football team I suppose, releases the creativity in all of us!!!
Pommylee
by Pommylee on Nov 5, 2009 11:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I mean, yeah, but
none of what you described is going to happen.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
by smutsboy1 on Nov 6, 2009 9:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
well I guess I should have said
that any talk of who the next coach is probably won’t matter much if the same organizational structure remains in place. Would be happy to have that sentiment proven wrong, but I am dubious regarding the franchise’s ability to identify and procure someone with the skillset to establish a winner in this current environment. That is considering that we have a FO VP who has a lackluster reputation for selecting players outside of the first round and has issues identifying team needs coupled with an owner who has overridden “common sense” selections sacrificing those very same team needs and gone for “sexy” selections in either the draft or in free agency and sometimes both. I’m not sure that any coach would be able to thrive in such an environment
I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused....
by piratedan7 on Nov 6, 2009 12:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
completely agree
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
by smutsboy1 on Nov 6, 2009 1:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
