Your thoughts on how long it takes to build a longterm playoff team ??

[alleycat]

My thoughts. These are REDSKIN fan thoughts...But I think they are somewhat realistic.

#1 NO...I dont think we have done a fantastic job over the last 15 years.

#2 I DO think we have done better in the last cpl ...

We have all thought over the last few years...
We NEED a pash rush
We NEED recievers
We NEED O-line
We NEED healthy young secondary.

ok...

We cannot live by Santana alone. He has been getting dbl and trip teams sometimes... Most screamed...WE NEED A TALL BIG GUY...

So...We drafted 3 ball catchers in the 2nd rnd. None of them are tiny (Santana) kinda guys...They are big and bigger.
Aint not a dern one has done jack yet...
But...I dont think we know enough yet to make the call.
i do think we will have abetter idea after this year.
We needed recievers...and a big one...Done...did dat.

Needed a pass rush...different year...Did dat.

Need young healthy secondary...over a cpl years...Did dat

Needed O-line... Apparently everyone has already forgotten we signed Dockery. We have done SOMETHING.
We need to do more...Maybe we can find a cpl solid guys next year...Maybe we already have them...and this year they will show us.

There were rerasons to believe Campbell could do it...Jury is still out.
We will know this year.

I think it takes close to 4 years to build a good team...

YES...We have had 15 years to do it and haven't. That doesn't mean we will NEVER do it...It means Need D...Done...we are good... Need O...working on it...Coming soon.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

in order

franchise QB
pass rush
offensive line
dominant receiver
good young secondary
good linebacking corp
good TE
good RB

weve got a decent chunk of that stuff right now. i truly believe if we had gotten cutler or if rivers showed up on to this team we'd be division champs. we just have to hope that we can fix this offense before the defense starts showing signs of wear. we cant have this same group playing this well forever.

i just worry that by the time the offense catches up and starts playing well, were gonna have defensive problems. we need to get both units right to succeed.

[GibbsFactor]

You have to have a QB and both lines have to be top 10.

That's really the three keys in my opinion.

Get a QB.

Draft Dline and Oline in first two rounds for three years and you will have a great team.

[alleycat]

"You have to have a QB and both lines have to be top 10"


Can't argue that logic.

I think is is a borderline call with Campbell and top 10 this year. I do think it is possible. Our Line and recievers have made it tough as well as Campbell being iffy..

I have screamed for years...Focus on Lines before anything else...I truly believe if you have 2 very good lines....everyone else can be average and look great.

[MattFancy]

It all starts with the OL. Look at what the Hogs did for us in the 80s and 90s.

Next, I'd say have a great defense. I believe the 2006 Colts were the exception here. Most teams that win the Super Bowl have a really good defense.

Then, get a franchise QB. Its been proven you don't need one to have a few years of success, but to sustain long-term success you need a franchise QB.

[skinfan13]

assuming we can get all our ducks in a row in can be as fast as two seasons. Turnarounds can happen with current personnel too, so basically it really depends on the individual team to determine how fast an ascent can be made.

[WhoRUSupposed2Be]

You have to have a QB and both lines have to be top 10.

That's really the three keys in my opinion.

Get a QB.

Draft Dline and Oline in first two rounds for three years and you will have a great team.

I think that Pittsburgh would disagree with you especially their O-Line. ;)

[SolidSnake84]

I've always heard that the rule is usually 3-5 years to get a consistent good team together...and as many as 7 to have a true Dyansty

[Buck812]

More than anything you have to have consistency. We can’t keep changing coaching staffs and philosophy’s every two years or we will never get there. If this front office believed in Jim Zorn enough to hire him in the first place then they should give him at least 3 years to make the playoffs unless we just fall flat on our face this year and don’t compete when we are on the field.

[Cremins]

Your question is "how long to build a long term playoff team?". I would say there isn't a time frame. It's a continuous process that has to be renewed every year. Drafting high quality players in the lower first/second round contributes to that, but having the ability to find those quality players is a contributing factor as well. So I would say, a high quality scouting department working in tandem with a qualified talent evaluator and a front office that is willing to take chances on guys in later rounds is an excellent start to long term success.

[gortiz]

i would say 4-5 years.

the thing is, everything about a team can change at any moment. the coach can be gone, the palyers can be hurt, talent is always walking out the door ....

the one constant? THE CULTURE. The culture of the team has to be defined, it has to be clear, and it has to be consistent.

FO is the key to any team. This goes beyond the players and even the coaches. You have to have a FO that gets it.

You can win here and there and be lacking in a unit/position on the field and on the sidelines, but if you are lackign in the FO you will NEVER win consistently.

[turbodiesel#44]

I've always heard that the rule is usually 3-5 years to get a consistent good team together...and as many as 7 to have a true Dyansty
While I agree with you roughly, it is actually an invalid question. The question should be how many years for VINNY to build a dynasty team. Could be a long, long time. Maybe never.

[Destino]

I'd say about 5 years. In this order:

- Oline
- QB
- Dline

Those make all other players on their sides of the ball look better. A protected QB can make mediocre wideouts good enough. A great OLine gives average RB's holes to run through. A disruptive Dline force faster passes making DB's have to cover for shorter periods of time.After you have those pieces adding some talent at the skill positions should make you a consistent playoff team. Then you just need a little magic for a superbowl run.

What will destroy all of this however is age and a poorly run front office. You can't get better if you are constantly replacing units that were strong the previous season. Old free agents will not build a team, they will only compliment a good one. Randy Moss wouldn't have been amazing in New England if New England didn't have a great OLine... in fact the times that Brady has looked human have always been when the pass rush got to him.

[MattFancy]

I think that Pittsburgh would disagree with you especially their O-Line. ;)

True, but I think their defense is so good that it makes up for it.

[Oldfan]

Your question is "how long to build a long term playoff team?". I would say there isn't a time frame. It's a continuous process that has to be renewed every year. Drafting high quality players in the lower first/second round contributes to that, but having the ability to find those quality players is a contributing factor as well. So I would say, a high quality scouting department working in tandem with a qualified talent evaluator and a front office that is willing to take chances on guys in later rounds is an excellent start to long term success.

Good answer. I would add:

The talent should fit a sound offensive and defensive scheme devised by a head coach who can also manage his assistants in executing the plan. Zorn is off to a good start, in my opinion, but we will know a lot more this season.

[TheLongshot]

More than anything you have to have consistency. We can’t keep changing coaching staffs and philosophy’s every two years or we will never get there. If this front office believed in Jim Zorn enough to hire him in the first place then they should give him at least 3 years to make the playoffs unless we just fall flat on our face this year and don’t compete when we are on the field.


Your question is "how long to build a long term playoff team?". I would say there isn't a time frame. It's a continuous process that has to be renewed every year. Drafting high quality players in the lower first/second round contributes to that, but having the ability to find those quality players is a contributing factor as well. So I would say, a high quality scouting department working in tandem with a qualified talent evaluator and a front office that is willing to take chances on guys in later rounds is an excellent start to long term success.

I think the combination of these two are your answer. You need stability and you need to be able to refresh the talent on your team on a regular basis.

[mel25]

1. assuming campbell is THe guy, or they get THE guy in next years draft at qb

2. assuming at least 2 of the 3 second rounders are for real.

3. assuming that we draft fairly well over the next couple of years.

then we can be consistent playoff/superbowl contenders in about 3 years. we could completely rebuild the o-line, get 2 solid linbackers, maybe one or 2 D-tackles, and probably a some running backs sense all of them are pushin 30. not sayin they'll be done in a few years, but the question says "long term playoff team." every other aspect of the team is good. that's about 10 players with 21 pick.

[SolidSnake84]

To elaborate more on my opinion: i will try and outline it below.

We need a franchise quarterback, a competent coach, general manager, and good offensive line....we have none of those things.

Now IMO....We could be a dangerous playoff team/possible SB contender within 2 years if:

We get a franchise quarterback (bye by JC)
We get a real Head Coach (bye by Jim Zorn)
Hire a general manager (Cerrato cannot stay)

Synder also has to sell the team. His meddling and mindlessness will forever keep any respectable HC/QB Combo away from here....so until then the Jason Campbells and the Clinton Portis' will continue to ruin this team and set it back....

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

some of you guys are putting too much stock into the oline because of the hogs. please try and remember something: that was the best offensive line EVER. EVER. in history. once in a lifetime line. you dont just build that in a few years, this team got extremely lucky to be able to have a group like that, and its never going to happen again. we could build a very very good line with competent drafting and FA acquisitions, but the ability to obtain another version of the hogs is next to impossible. its like the colts thinking theyll have another peyton manning again after hes gone. wont happen.

the hogs were able to make QBs that werent amazing, look amazing. theyre frankly the only unit in history i can think of that ever accomplished what they did. i dont know of another team that had a line like that with a QB carousel and maintained the level of success we did. to try and recreate that seems near impossible IMO.

it starts with the QB, everything trickles down from there. the patriots are a perfect example. im not saying ignore the lines, but you have to have the QB.

[Oldfan]

I think the combination of these two are your answer. You need stability and you need to be able to refresh the talent on your team on a regular basis.

Continuity with weak schemes on offense and defense wouldn't work well. You'd keep getting the same mediocre results.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

Continuity with weak schemes on offense and defense wouldn't work well. You'd keep getting the same mediocre results.


very good point. when people talk about us staying consistent, i sometimes wonder why they want to see us stick with the same mediocre results. consistency doesnt equal productive.

[alleycat]

I've always heard that the rule is usually 3-5 years to get a consistent good team together...and as many as 7 to have a true Dyansty


Dynasty...I think is very hard to predict.

3 to 5 you say...I am good with that accept...many contracts are really only 3-4 year contracts...And to get all cylinders firing...You need to have all the pices for a cpl years...IMO

so I say about 4.

[Old Bay]

when people talk about us staying consistent, i sometimes wonder why they want to see us stick with the same mediocre results. consistency doesnt equal productive.

It has to start somewhere, though. And you won't really know until ample opportunity is given. I'm speaking more on Zorn than anything else here.

[alleycat]

Your question is "how long to build a long term playoff team?". I would say there isn't a time frame. It's a continuous process that has to be renewed every year. Drafting high quality players in the lower first/second round contributes to that, but having the ability to find those quality players is a contributing factor as well. So I would say, a high quality scouting department working in tandem with a qualified talent evaluator and a front office that is willing to take chances on guys in later rounds is an excellent start to long term success.

I agree and dont at the same time.
Certainly it is an every year process but...
To go from average or even poor...I say 4 years.
and that is 4 continous years of doing better than the previous year...

What I really like in your remark is the focus needed on Scouts and solid smart talent choices.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

It has to start somewhere, though. And you won't really know until ample opportunity is given. I'm speaking more on Zorn than anything else here.


ive been saying for awhile i wanna see zorns offense run by at least one more QB before we can pass judgment on whether it can be successful or not.

[alleycat]

some of you guys are putting too much stock into the oline because of the hogs. please try and remember something: that was the best offensive line EVER. EVER. in history. once in a lifetime line. you dont just build that in a few years, this team got extremely lucky to be able to have a group like that, and its never going to happen again. we could build a very very good line with competent drafting and FA acquisitions, but the ability to obtain another version of the hogs is next to impossible. its like the colts thinking theyll have another peyton manning again after hes gone. wont happen.

the hogs were able to make QBs that werent amazing, look amazing. theyre frankly the only unit in history i can think of that ever accomplished what they did. i dont know of another team that had a line like that with a QB carousel and maintained the level of success we did. to try and recreate that seems near impossible IMO.

As with a cpl other posters...I agree and disagree.
I am very curious about the remark about overestimating the importance of the O-line.
Absolutely...we cannot expect another decade of HOGS...But we can strive for it.
We were a dynasty because we had EVERY piece rockin back then.

It was before salary cap and when giys stayed put...Its a different game and I agree we have to focus on todays game.

Certainly there can be two camps here...If you have an amazing QB and skilled guys ...Your line can be average...But how many QB are amazing behind an average line.

What came first ...the line or the QB (Chicken or egg)

it starts with the QB, everything trickles down from there. the patriots are a perfect example. im not saying ignore the lines, but you have to have the QB.

[leesburgvaskinsfan]

It depends....

Starts at the top with an owner committed to surrounding himself/herself with experienced football people in the front office, scouts/talent evaluators and committed to his coaches. The coaches need to have the confidence in the owner and front office and vice versa to get players at need positions and to establish quality depth. Then, the coaches and front office need to have depth charts that show many aspects of the players at each position, such as age, player grade, injury history etc. in order to proactively fill holes before a crisis arises which often times happens with us (although I think we're getting better at this in the last couple of years overall).

The coaches need to evaluate their players to fit "talent to the system" and be able to evolve your schemes to fit your talent to achieve the best fit and opportunity for success on the field when the bullets are flying and constantly weaving new talent in with vet experience each year (kinda like what the Patriots do) to keep a high level of team unity and cohesion.

Timeframe? Not sure. With the right folks, it could happen in two years maybe three. It takes patience (again something we sorely lack here).

My two cents.

Hail!

[eljeasel]

2 strong offseasons and 3 strong seasons. You cant just be superbowl champs of the offseason, you gotta acheive some success repeatedly to see what you have/are capable of.

[alleycat]

It depends....

Starts at the top with an owner committed to surrounding himself/herself with experienced football people in the front office, scouts/talent evaluators and committed to his coaches. The coaches need to have the confidence in the owner and front office and vice versa to get players at need positions and to establish quality depth. Then, the coaches and front office need to have depth charts that show many aspects of the players at each position, such as age, player grade, injury history etc. in order to proactively fill holes before a crisis arises which often times happens with us (although I think we're getting better at this in the last couple of years overall).

The coaches need to evaluate their players to fit "talent to the system" and be able to evolve your schemes to fit your talent to achieve the best fit and opportunity for success on the field when the bullets are flying and constantly weaving new talent in with vet experience each year (kinda like what the Patriots do) to keep a high level of team unity and cohesion.

Timeframe? Not sure. With the right folks, it could happen in two years maybe three. It takes patience (again something we sorely lack here).

My two cents.

Hail!


GAWD !!! We gotta be some of the most patient fans in da league !!

LOL...Here we are...Ready to grind it out another season...And we are there for them !! I don't how it happens..But EVERY single year...I am optimistic !!

[WhoRUSupposed2Be]

True, but I think their defense is so good that it makes up for it.

Of course, but we're just speaking from a statistical standpoint.

[boofMcboof]

1) Establish and style of play and STICK WITH IT. I prefer smashmouth myself.

2) Build a top tier scouting department and treat the scouts well.

3) DO NOT TRADE AWAY DRAFT PICKS unless you are one or two players away from the Superbowl.

4) Draft players that are not going to be pigeonholed into one system. Recognize that other teams pass on talent because they are drafting players to fit in their system. Take advantage of that. This probably the most important concept I'm going to list.

5) Build a front office that understands the previous four concepts and can run a respectful football operation from top to bottom.

6) Build a coaching staff that has a mix of intelligence, motivators, managers, versatility, age and experience. Game to game versatility and adjustments are essential.

7) Front office and coaching staff must be in accordance with the players drafted. If they don't agree on a particular player, find the next highest rated player that both agree on.

8) Protect your QB.

9) Build a formidable pass rush.

10) Establish personal accountability from the very top of the organization all the way down.




That's how to really build a long term playoff team. Worrying about a timeline is precisely why Synderratto has failed so miserably and the reason why he always goes after big ticket free agents. Cheap talent is the key to managing the cap and maintaing depth. Get hard-working talent. Collect enough over a couple years and you have yourself a contender.

[Thirtyfive2seven]

In order:
GM
Head coach
Assistants
Offensive line
QB
Defensive Line
The rest

[leesburgvaskinsfan]

GAWD !!! We gotta be some of the most patient fans in da league !!

LOL...Here we are...Ready to grind it out another season...And we are there for them !! I don't how it happens..But EVERY single year...I am optimistic !!


LOL...some of us are patient, most of us aren't ! My gut tells me we're on the right track now if JC breaks out and gets signed to a long term deal, and we can manage at least a wildcard spot to get on the dance floor this year. Then in the offseason we beef up our o-line and other need areas through the draft and only use free agency if a great deal pops up.

Hail!

[TheLongshot]

Continuity with weak schemes on offense and defense wouldn't work well. You'd keep getting the same mediocre results.

It kinda goes without saying that you aren't going to be here long without schemes that work. What I'm talking about is beyond what makes a successful team, but what makes it a successful team in the long term.

[elkabong82]

There is no one singular way to build a consistent championship team. I've said this many times, but so many think there is this one magical way, and really there's not. For every method someone brings up, there is an exception.

For example, you say "You have to have a great OL," I then counter with Pittsburgh.

You say "got to have a great DL," to which I counter with Indianapolis. They have a decent pass rush, can't stop the run worth a damn w/o Sanders.

You say "have to have a franchise QB", I counter with Trent Dilfer.

Really, IMO, what you need is to establish one unit of your team as an elite unit, one which makes up for the weaknesses elsewhere. If you can get that elite unit, you are on your way. After that, you slowly keep adding pieces elsewhere so that the other areas aren't so weak.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

There is no one singular way to build a consistent championship team. I've said this many times, but so many think there is this one magical way, and really there's not. For every method someone brings up, there is an exception.

For example, you say "You have to have a great OL," I then counter with Pittsburgh.

You say "got to have a great DL," to which I counter with Indianapolis. They have a decent pass rush, can't stop the run worth a damn w/o Sanders.

You say "have to have a franchise QB", I counter with Trent Dilfer.

Really, IMO, what you need is to establish one unit of your team as an elite unit, one which makes up for the weaknesses elsewhere. If you can get that elite unit, you are on your way. After that, you slowly keep adding pieces elsewhere so that the other areas aren't so weak.



ill buy that dude. i think if you have one truly elite unit you can contend every year, whether that be the crazy QB, the dominant oline/run game, or the dominant defense.

maybe i just want the dominant QB so badly cause ive never gotten to root for one?

its always nice when were on the same page. :cheers:

[TD_washingtonredskins]

in order

franchise QB
pass rush
offensive line
dominant receiver
good young secondary
good linebacking corp
good TE
good RB

weve got a decent chunk of that stuff right now. i truly believe if we had gotten cutler or if rivers showed up on to this team we'd be division champs. we just have to hope that we can fix this offense before the defense starts showing signs of wear. we cant have this same group playing this well forever.

i just worry that by the time the offense catches up and starts playing well, were gonna have defensive problems. we need to get both units right to succeed.

I pretty much agree with your assessment. However, we're doing a good job of refreshing our defense with youth. Our eventual starting DEs are rookies this year. Our DTs are all young or in their prime except for Griffin. Our secondary is ridiculously young. Our MLB is aging (and it's the most important position on our D) but I can't believe we wouldn't be able to groom a replacement over the next 2-3 years. I think that's a key this off-season as well.

[4everaSkin]

How long does it take to build a longterm playoff team? For a competent owner and GM? 3-5 years. For Snyderrato? More than a decade and counting

[alleycat]

There is no one singular way to build a consistent championship team. I've said this many times, but so many think there is this one magical way, and really there's not. For every method someone brings up, there is an exception.

For example, you say "You have to have a great OL," I then counter with Pittsburgh.

You say "got to have a great DL," to which I counter with Indianapolis. They have a decent pass rush, can't stop the run worth a damn w/o Sanders.

You say "have to have a franchise QB", I counter with Trent Dilfer.

Really, IMO, what you need is to establish one unit of your team as an elite unit, one which makes up for the weaknesses elsewhere. If you can get that elite unit, you are on your way. After that, you slowly keep adding pieces elsewhere so that the other areas aren't so weak.


You say

"There is no one singular way to build a consistent championship team. I've said this many times, but so many think there is this one magical way, and really there's not. For every method someone brings up, there is an exception


And then you follow with a singular way to build a consistent chapion team ???

[illone]

I think it can be done with ONE good April.

Literally, one good draft can set your franchise up for years.

I believe you have to follow it up with subsequent good drafts every year, but as long as you can get 3-4 starters every year in the draft, even if they don't start right away, you are giving yourself the best chance to contend each and every year.

making trades and big splashes in free agency should be viewed as supplemental to the draft, and only done when you are a piece or two away from the big prize. Kind of like New England with Randy Moss, or Adalius Thomas.

[elkabong82]

ill buy that dude. i think if you have one truly elite unit you can contend every year, whether that be the crazy QB, the dominant oline/run game, or the dominant defense.



maybe i just want the dominant QB so badly cause ive never gotten to root for one?



its always nice when were on the same page.



Oh, def. agreed.



A dominant QB def. makes everyone else's lives easier. The only problem is, there are maybe 3 truly dominant QBs in the league. Typically a team has to suck ass and do so at the right time so they can draft a Peyton Manning.



Other teams have dominant OL which make the QB look better than he is. I will get flamed for this, but Brady is an example for this. Don't get me wrong, he's a good QB, very smart and excellent awareness, but the Patriots weren't scrubs before Brady, they were already contenders. Without Brady another career back-up steps in, and after a few initial kinks starts performing well behind that OL also. Having Randy Moss as your deep target and Welker as your intermediate is certainly a big help too. Cassell, IMO, is actually lucky he's going to the Chiefs. They've been rebuilding their line, and he's got Dwayne Bowe to throw to, and decent RBs in Johnson and Charles. I think he's gone into a better situation than Cutler.



I will say, you can't have just anyone at QB. A dominant OL will only help so much. Typically, you'll see either a young gun slinger or a smart game manager. Really it depends on what the team's philosophies are on either side of the ball.



For example, and I know this is going to come across as excuses, but last season the Skins were integrating a new offensive system. We kept the same running game to ease the transition on that side of the ball. The defense continues the bend but dont break stuff. This meant there wouldn't be multiple games where we put up 30 points. We didn't have the kind of defense which would consistently put the offense in short fields. The WCO is very complex, and expecting the 49ers offense under Walsh in year 1 is way beyond reasonable expectations. So instead you focus on holding onto the ball for as long as possible on offense, then when you have the lead you let the opposing offense slowly work their way up field, and shut them down in your territory. This kills a lot of time. This was the way we operated a lot under GIbbs, so it made sense to me to maintain that philosophy while the new coaching staff was still learning and the offense was learning.



Now, we have that season out of the way, and now we are moving towards an agressive D to complement an offense that wants a consistent passing attack with the run game as the complement.



The team this year won't resemble the team last year. The strategies have changed now that the coaches and team have become more comfortable with each other and with their own tasks.



So you have 2 different philosophies right there. One we had last season, and one it appears we will have this season. And why the change? Because we have something now we didn't before, a potentially elite DL, and defense overall. We had a rare opportunity handed to us. Other seasons, and we know this from arguing, the ability to revamp the DL was there, but the options weren't that great. This year we had a shot at Haynesworth and landed it, then we get Orakpo. It's a dream come true. Any team in the NFL would love to have those 2. We had the chance to make one of our units truly elite, and we went for it. Now we are seeing the philosophy changes to maximize the potential of that elite unit, which in turn will only help the weaker units.



Snyder had deep admiration for Gibbs, but looking over pre-GIbbs II and looking over post-Gibbs II, Snyder wants what most fans want, big passes and lots of sacks and INTs. High scoring games and a beastly defense. He tried to get it by bringing in Spurrier, and now he's hoping for it again by bringing in the WCO. Cerrato is more coy than people realize/give credit for. He's still under the image to many that he's just a yes man. But, instead of addressing the DL a little and also trying to address the OL, he realized what not a lot of people on this board have: that you can't fully address every single need in one offseason, and that adressing each unti "a little bit" still leaves them weak overall.



I'll explain further: Haynesworth is a great, great player. But would his addition, with him along side almost 30 yr old Carter, 30+ Griffin, and Daniels wind up being anything more than a short-term solution for the DL? This is why we also drafted Jarmon. Haynesworth, Orakpo, Monty or Golston or someone else, and Jarmon, that's a long-term DL. And a potentially elite one.



As far as the OL goes, we've slowly tried to revamp because the kind of opportunity which we had with the DL hasn't been there with the OL. We still have to see what Heyer can do, we have Rinehart who will probably be the starting RG by the end of this season or the start of next season, we brought back Dockery to replace Kendall (who replaced Dockery, lol). Samuels, even if he is starting to regress, (we don;t know, but coming off injury does slow you), he is an elite LT, so even regressing he's still an effective player. You wait on LT, and next offseason we've got center and possibly RT to replace, and that's it. We did not have the options this offseason to revamp the OL to a very good unit. Maybe one which was a little better than what we have now, but again, I'd sooner take the chance to have an elite, long-term DL, than to have an OL which is "a little better."



It's all about who can establish an elite unit somehwere on the field, and carry out an effectiove philosophy which maximizes that elite unit while also reducing weaknesses in other areas.

Sorry for the long post, but I wanted to take this chance to fully show my thoughts on this matter.

[Touchdown Redskins]

Not this long.

[elkabong82]

You say

"There is no one singular way to build a consistent championship team. I've said this many times, but so many think there is this one magical way, and really there's not. For every method someone brings up, there is an exception


And then you follow with a singular way to build a consistent chapion team ???

Yes and no. Seeing as there are many units on the football field, you can take any one of them and attempt to make it elite. But then you have to change your philosophy to take advantage of it, and you need to then fill in support roles elsewhere to compliment the elite unit. However, which ones you build depend on a number of factors, such as who's avaible in free agency and the draft, which players you currently have, the salary cap, etc, etc.

There is no exception to the elite unit rule. Every team that has won a Superbowl has had some aspect of it be the best, or among the very best, in the NFL.

Read my other post in here, 2 spots above this post, for further clarification.

[skinsdude]

Unfortunately for us it’s going to be several more years. We will have a new quarterback next year and possibly/probably a new head coach as well. Drafting or acquiring a new quarterback is going to be expensive in terms of either dollars or draft picks which is not going to allow us to spend a low round draft choice on an offensive lineman. Poor draft choices have put our team in a hole that is going to take a while to dig out of.

[S.T.real,lights,out]

in order

franchise QB
pass rush
offensive line
dominant receiver
good young secondary
good linebacking corp
good TE
good RB



Close but i might switch O-line and QB.

[RiggosMohawk]

in order

franchise QB
pass rush
offensive line
dominant receiver


You've got the top 4 dead on - I would swap receiver and o-line though. These really are the most important players on the field, regardless of the system they are in. I would sink all the salary cap into retaining these positions, and consistently take BPA in every round. You'll get 4-5 years out of your marginal starters, and can stay ahead of the curve by retaining these impact players. You save lots of cap space by avoiding pricey RBs and CBs.

[Elessar78]

I haven't had faith in this organization's ability to build a contender in years. The NFL is a top down organization, and we have some serious dummies at the top of ours. Every year I keep hoping I'm wrong, but it never materializes.

So how long will it take to build a long-term playoff team? "Never" to "A long time." or "After Danny sells the team."

Sporadic success maybe, but not sustained. We don't have a sustainable business model. If we do do anything, playoffs or SB, we'd couldn't maintain it 'cause of cap issues. Yeah, the FO loves to pull that hocus pocus with the cap every year, but I don't think it helps us long term.

In the current model, you draft talent and find value in free agency. The worst thing for this franchise (not the fans) is to actually get lucky and do something. That would affirm the FO's methodology. I'm tired of this... what other endeavor gets so much slack from it's consumers?

[Joeyskins]

17 years! Simple math....1992 was when the Skins ended their run as a long-term playoff team!

[NewCliche21]

Close but i might switch O-line and QB.

Agreed, and anyone who's ever played guitar or bass will tell you the same.

A $5,000 amp (offensive line) can make a $50 guitar (QB) sound like a $3,500 guitar.

A $5,000 guitar played through a $50 amp will sound like a $50 guitar.

But if you can pair the two together, then, well, you have the second quarter of XXII, and NOTHING sounded better than that!

[SkinsNumberOne]

Football is great because you can't look at things in a vacuum. Some teams and coaching schemes require specific kinds of personnel, others don't share that same philosophy.

Brian Billick won a SB in 2000 with a philosophy that bothered him to the core. I think he was a big part of the 15-1 Vikings under Cunningham, a dynamic team that aired it out and had a prolific offense. He went against his nature when he saw the powerful defense he had in 2000. I don't like Billick, but his strategy got it done.

It takes a lot more than simply a specific set of personnel. Someone has to adapt, the person drafting has to adapt to the coach, or the coach has to adapt to the personnel, but I think usually there has to be some kind of allowance for different people and schemes meshing together.

If you get that kind of thing going, I think you get a SB contender in 3 years. But that first year may be a big pain, because you're going to be creating that relationship between personnel and coaching.

*Fastest way, though, in my opinion: OLine and DLine. Strong lines. Everything, and I mean everything - feeds off them.

[Passizle]

It all starts with the OL. Look at what the Hogs did for us in the 80s and 90s.

Next, I'd say have a great defense. I believe the 2006 Colts were the exception here. Most teams that win the Super Bowl have a really good defense.

Then, get a franchise QB. Its been proven you don't need one to have a few years of success, but to sustain long-term success you need a franchise QB.
That was still about the defense. Remeber that season, WHat got them over the hump was the defense being outstanding in the playoffs.

[eljeasel]

That was still about the defense. Remeber that season, WHat got them over the hump was the defense being outstanding in the playoffs.

Not to mention they built that entire offense from the ground up, tailored for Manning.

[Horton_Predator48]

This team is capable of winning the Super Bowl. The Defense could be the best in the league. The offense could be in the top ten. They have to continue to come together as a team. What I do like is that players and coaches are setting that as their goal in the media. When the Skins play to their potential they can beat anyone in the league. We are going to to need Pass Protection.

[jkypoo]

To be cliche, it starts in the trenches. We have to be able to control the line of scrimmage on both sides of the ball. We have gone a great way towards doing that on defense, and we will soon see if in fact we have arrived. Once the o-line is shored up, I think we can say that we are on our way towards at least a few really good years. I would even argue that shoring up the o-line should come before the franchise QB. If I'm gonna put a franchise QB on the field, I want him protected.

Judging by where we are now...I'd say at least two more draft classes. Possibly three, given the rate of busts.

[Oldfan]

To all of you saying that there is an order to the process of acquiring talent -- build this unit first, find the QB first, and so on -- you are missing something.

Your theory is based on the premise that the sources of talent, the draft, free agency, trades, are like Home Depot -- make out your list, go in, and fill your needs. That's a false premise.

The Skins have it right. They are trying to recognize and seize opportunities to improve the football team as they come up.

It has to start with making scheme choices because you need to find players to fit the scheme.

[Elessar78]

To all of you saying that there is an order to the process of acquiring talent -- build this unit first, find the QB first, and so on -- you are missing something.

Your theory is based on the premise that the sources of talent, the draft, free agency, trades, are like Home Depot -- make out your list, go in, and fill your needs. That's a false premise.

The Skins have it right. They are trying to recognize and seize opportunities to improve the football team as they come up.

It has to start with making scheme choices because you need to find players to fit the scheme.

Your idea makes sense in theory, but where are the wins? Why don't we retain coaches? Why are we always building from scratch? Why do we make idiotic moves like hire an offensive coordinator first?

[NewCliche21]

Your idea makes sense in theory, but where are the wins? Why don't we retain coaches? Why are we always building from scratch? Why do we make idiotic moves like hire an offensive coordinator first?

The answer to all of your questions is that we've been making mistakes with, well, everything. Coaches, however, haven't been a problem since 2004, so you can scratch that one off your list.

That doesn't refute Oldfan's point, which is pretty infallible.

[alleycat]

To all of you saying that there is an order to the process of acquiring talent -- build this unit first, find the QB first, and so on -- you are missing something.

Your theory is based on the premise that the sources of talent, the draft, free agency, trades, are like Home Depot -- make out your list, go in, and fill your needs. That's a false premise.

The Skins have it right. They are trying to recognize and seize opportunities to improve the football team as they come up.

It has to start with making scheme choices because you need to find players to fit the scheme.

[NastyBoy]

17 years! Simple math....1992 was when the Skins ended their run as a long-term playoff team!


Correction.......17 years AND COUNTING!!!


Here's what I know. It shouldn't take that long.

We all know it's difficult to sustain in the NFL these days, yet some teams consistently perform while others try, yet fail. The consistency many refer to does not necessarily apply only to coaching staff........but to the philosophy of ownership itself.

I'm ok with making changes when they're needed. In fact I encourage that. But when change occurs, make it count. Tired of willy nilly moves which are huge gambles that rarely pan out. Sorry, Zorn.......but I fear your next on that list. Don't dispair, you're in good company.

The best thing Snyder could do is snag an experienced, well-respected head coach next season........al la Cowher, Shanihan, etc.... It will take someone with their credibility to settle things down and command the respect of his players, create the proper culture, AND have the ability to keep Snyder in check.

Until Danny boy gets that.......we're in for much more of the same.

[4everaSkin]

This team is capable of winning the Super Bowl. The Defense could be the best in the league. The offense could be in the top ten. They have to continue to come together as a team. What I do like is that players and coaches are setting that as their goal in the media. When the Skins play to their potential they can beat anyone in the league. We are going to to need Pass Protection.

Put down the bong and step away from the weed. :D

[SkinsFTW]

Really, IMO, what you need is to establish one unit of your team as an elite unit, one which makes up for the weaknesses elsewhere. If you can get that elite unit, you are on your way. After that, you slowly keep adding pieces elsewhere so that the other areas aren't so weak.

Did you not watch the Super Bowl?

Can you see Jason Campbell doing what either Roethlisberger or Warner did in that game?

Sure, Az was the offensive team, and Pitt was the defensive team, but what did it come down to?

Roethlisberger had to pull a rabbit out of a hat, and he did. Had nothing to do with their "elite unit" that Warner-Fitz owned late in the game.

When has Campbell done this in his career? It's all about being clutch, both of those guys proved themselves clutch in that game.

[theboomking]

A franchise QB and an elite D, with proficient coaching/playcalling can make a team an annual SB contender. Look at the Stealers. O-line is poor, WR's are average, RB's are average. In today's league, it is very difficult to be elite on both sides of the ball. I think we invested wisely by upgrading our defense this season. I'd much rather be elite on the defensive side of the ball than fair to good on both.

That is good news for us. Our D is close to being elite. The QB is the hardest part, but we may have a unique opportunity to sign Philip Rivers this off season.

[SonnyJ]

A franchise QB and an elite D, with proficient coaching/playcalling can make a team an annual SB contender. Look at the Stealers. O-line is poor, WR's are average, RB's are average. In today's league, it is very difficult to be elite on both sides of the ball. I think we invested wisely by upgrading our defense this season. I'd much rather be elite on the defensive side of the ball than fair to good on both.

That is good news for us. Our D is close to being elite. The QB is the hardest part, but we may have a unique opportunity to sign Philip Rivers this off season.

I'd say this is pretty close to my feelings.

It starts with the QB - if the QB is good, the offense will be at least effective (presuming at least a professional level of ability around him).

OL is overrated in my opinion. Is an excellent one desirable? Sure. But not necessary. You put a good QB behind an adequate line, and the offense will produce. "Good enough" applies here. A good QB doesn't need 5 seconds and a bulging pocket to do his damage - he's getting rid of the ball in 3-3.5 seconds or less on most occasions. A merely decent OL can provide that kind of protection.

Beyond having a sound QB, defense, and coaching, the rest can be filled in as necessary. If you have those three elements in place, though, you'll always be a contender.

[Oldfan]

Your idea makes sense in theory, but where are the wins? Why don't we retain coaches? Why are we always building from scratch? Why do we make idiotic moves like hire an offensive coordinator first?

The Skins have only been on the right course with the draft since 2007. After Gibbs left, the decision to go WCO was reflected in Vinny's pushing for Zorn, and his BPA selections in 2008, of three WCO type receivers. Our primary need was at the RT in this year's draft, but Oher evidently didn't rate high enough on our boards to pass on Orakpo.

The FO finally has a good plan. Now, they need the time to put it all together.

[Oldfan]

It starts with the QB - if the QB is good, the offense will be at least effective (presuming at least a professional level of ability around him).

"Profession level?" Can you be more specific? Is that an NFL average supporting cast?

[elkabong82]

Did you not watch the Super Bowl?

Can you see Jason Campbell doing what either Roethlisberger or Warner did in that game?

Sure, Az was the offensive team, and Pitt was the defensive team, but what did it come down to?

Roethlisberger had to pull a rabbit out of a hat, and he did. Had nothing to do with their "elite unit" that Warner-Fitz owned late in the game.

When has Campbell done this in his career? It's all about being clutch, both of those guys proved themselves clutch in that game.

Superbowl? What's that? :silly:

You should have read my whole post instead of just cutting out a portion of it to respond to. There have been ok QBs to play and win the Superbowl.

The situation you are talking about assumes the game would always come down to the last second where the QBs throwing abilities, as well as the WR capabilities, are most important. If a team with an elite DL playes in the Superbowl, the game might not ever be close enough to where great play by the QB is necessary.

So maybe if you get down to the last few minutes of the game and need a go ahead TD, then a great QB might be necessary. But if you have an elite unit which got you to the big game, more than likely that elite unit will be relied upon.

[elkabong82]

I'd say this is pretty close to my feelings.

It starts with the QB - if the QB is good, the offense will be at least effective (presuming at least a professional level of ability around him).

OL is overrated in my opinion. Is an excellent one desirable? Sure. But not necessary. You put a good QB behind an adequate line, and the offense will produce. "Good enough" applies here. A good QB doesn't need 5 seconds and a bulging pocket to do his damage - he's getting rid of the ball in 3-3.5 seconds or less on most occasions. A merely decent OL can provide that kind of protection.

Beyond having a sound QB, defense, and coaching, the rest can be filled in as necessary. If you have those three elements in place, though, you'll always be a contender.

How did the Ravens make the Superbowl in 2000 then? Wasn't due to Dilfer's great play. How about the Bears in '06? Is Grossman a good QB?

Point is, you need a unit that is elite, one so good that it lessens the impact of weaknesses elsewhere.

[Mahons21]

Superbowl? What's that? :silly:

You should have read my whole post instead of just cutting out a portion of it to respond to. There have been ok QBs to play and win the Superbowl.
-Certainly, but building a playoff team is more than just randomly winning the SB one year (though that would be amazing)... To compete for the trophy year in and year out, a great QB is necessary


The situation you are talking about assumes the game would always come down to the last second where the QBs throwing abilities, as well as the WR capabilities, are most important. If a team with an elite DL playes in the Superbowl, the game might not ever be close enough to where great play by the QB is necessary.
-Games in the playoffs often due come down to final drives... And I'm pretty sure PIT has an elite front 7 but they weren't able to stop ARZ down the stretch... Warner and Fitz great play overcame it


So maybe if you get down to the last few minutes of the game and need a go ahead TD, then a great QB might be necessary. But if you have an elite unit which got you to the big game, more than likely that elite unit will be relied upon.

-PIT's elite unit was there defense, in the 4th qtr there defense couldn't be relied upon and it was the offense and the QB that stepped it up.

[wwSEANd]

i thought this thread was an interesting idea, but it got me thinking: "but we're not starting from SCRATCH, so how long will it take to make the Redskins a perennial championship contender?"

as i see it, our major missing pieces are:
1) above-average starter at right tackle
2) good and reliable (healthy) right guard
3) a good QB (this might be JC, but we can't really tell yet)
4) solid #2 wide receiver (DT or MK needs to step up)
5) a true strong-side linebacker

other areas we could use an upgrade:
1) center
2) kicker
3) punt returner

current strengths that will need to be replaced soon:
1) left tackle (by 2011, must draft)
2) #1 wide receiver (by 2011/2012, hopefully DT or MK)
3) middle LB (by 2010/2011, hopefully HB Blades)
4) running back (by 2011/2012, not necessarily just one guy)

i actually see a great opportunity to really set this team up to be a serious contender for years to come. IF Campbell or Brennan proves to be at least consistent and productive, AND one of the 2nd year receivers steps up, then we can meet all of our needs in next year's draft and/or free agency. at that point we would just be looking to upgrade already decent positions, then replacing older players in future years.

the one thing that could derail our entire building effort is if we go after a QB in next year's draft. that would most likely require trading our 2nd rounder to move up to draft a true blue-chipper, which would leave him behind the same shaky line that hampered the guys he would be replacing. we would then STILL need to replace our RT and RG by the time that we should be addressing our LT, MLB and RB needs. that's an impossible task, and would force us to downgrade just to fill those positions with warm bodies.

so, basically, i would like to see Campbell get 8 games (or, even better, the whole season) to prove his worth. if he shows that he deserves an extension, give it to him. if not, hand over the reins to Collins (if we still have a shot at the playoffs) or Brennan. regardless of whether it's Collins or Brennan THIS season, if someone supplants Campbell, Brennan should get the entire 2010 season to prove himself. we have to fight the temptation to go after the "shiny new toy" top-tier QBs in the draft next year, because we can build a truly great team if we just address a few other needs instead.

[imaneaglesfan]

i must answer your serious question with another.. how long will it take to get rid of the danny/vinny love sessions? In all honesty i dont see the skins creating anything built for the longterm with those two yahoos at the helm.. just my 2cents.

[DCMONEY]

in order

franchise QB
pass rush
offensive line
dominant receiver
good young secondary
good linebacking corp
good TE
good RB

weve got a decent chunk of that stuff right now. i truly believe if we had gotten cutler or if rivers showed up on to this team we'd be division champs. we just have to hope that we can fix this offense before the defense starts showing signs of wear. we cant have this same group playing this well forever.

i just worry that by the time the offense catches up and starts playing well, were gonna have defensive problems. we need to get both units right to succeed.

Ask anyone building a team from scratch. You build from the inside out. Building outside in is why this team is what is right now.

You build your trenches up 1st. Thats where the game is played and won truth be told.

[DCMONEY]

The Skins have only been on the right course with the draft since 2007. After Gibbs left, the decision to go WCO was reflected in Vinny's pushing for Zorn, and his BPA selections in 2008, of three WCO type receivers. Our primary need was at the RT in this year's draft, but Oher evidently didn't rate high enough on our boards to pass on Orakpo.

The FO finally has a good plan. Now, they need the time to put it all together.

Man this front officw hasn't hasn't had a steady plan in years. Thats their problem. They make plans but can't stick to them and trust them. If I map out a plan to go somewhere and I keep sidetracking, I'll never get to where I'm going.

[imaneaglesfan]

A franchise QB and an elite D, with proficient coaching/playcalling can make a team an annual SB contender. Look at the Stealers. O-line is poor, WR's are average, RB's are average. In today's league, it is very difficult to be elite on both sides of the ball. I think we invested wisely by upgrading our defense this season. I'd much rather be elite on the defensive side of the ball than fair to good on both.

That is good news for us. Our D is close to being elite. The QB is the hardest part, but we may have a unique opportunity to sign Philip Rivers this off season.


only top 5 defense 2not make the playoffs = skins.

steelers#1, ravens#2, eagles#3 titans#4.. u gotta rely on more than your defense 2score points in this league. i might sound like a hater, which i am, but it is true.. someone should put a hit out on danny/vinny. how many years will you neglect the most important part of a team____the O-Line

[SonnyJ]

How did the Ravens make the Superbowl in 2000 then? Wasn't due to Dilfer's great play. How about the Bears in '06? Is Grossman a good QB?

We're not talking about individual seasons, though - we're talking about setting a team up for contending status season after season. In a single season, the performance in one area can be so dominant as to hide weaknesses in other parts of the team.


Point is, you need a unit that is elite, one so good that it lessens the impact of weaknesses elsewhere.

What unit are you talking about here? OL? I don't need an elite OL if my QB is solid (or better). The Colts and Patriots have shown that. Mind you, I certainly wouldn't avoid having one, but it's not essential. That doesn't mean you can just throw five truck drivers out there and be set - there has to be a certain level of quality. At some point, though, there are diminishing returns. Basically, the shakier the QB, the better the OL has to be. :2cents:

[Oldfan]

I don't need an elite OL if my QB is solid (or better). The Colts and Patriots have shown that. Mind you, I certainly wouldn't avoid having one, but it's not essential. That doesn't mean you can just throw five truck drivers out there and be set - there has to be a certain level of quality. At some point, though, there are diminishing returns. Basically, the shakier the QB, the better the OL has to be. :2cents:

Your evidence is weak. In recent years, the Colts and the Patriots have had outstanding O lines and receivers.

In 2007, Brady's QB rating was 33% higher than it was the previous year. In 2006, he had the worst receivers in the league. In 2007, he had the best. That's an indication of the value of the receivers. Then, there's the O line...

[Oldfan]

Man this front officw hasn't hasn't had a steady plan in years. Thats their problem. They make plans but can't stick to them and trust them. If I map out a plan to go somewhere and I keep sidetracking, I'll never get to where I'm going.

There's a plan in place. You just have to connect the dots and look for a pattern beginning in 2007.

[SonnyJ]

Your evidence is weak. In recent years, the Colts and the Patriots have had outstanding O lines and receivers.

In 2007, Brady's QB rating was 33% higher than it was the previous year. In 2006, he had the worst receivers in the league. In 2007, he had the best. That's an indication of the value of the receivers. Then, there's the O line...

I reject that their OLs are outstanding. The QBs prop them up.

The Patriots gave up more than twice as many sacks last season on fewer passing attempts. About 25-30 more, I believe. The only significant variation was at QB. This while playing a weaker schedule.

The Colts likewise benefit immensely from a QB that knows how to get the ball out quickly and keeps the defense on its heels. They've demoted their "young 2nd round stud LT" to second-string and moved the LG out to LT. Last season when the injury bug hit their OL, when I think they did have 3-4 truck drivers starting for them, Manning, even with a bad knee, was still able to pull out wins.

An outstanding OL is not essential for great offensive production, and those teams demonstrate that.

And outstanding receivers definitely help a QB. Who says they don't? But, notice that Brady was able to win 3 SBs w/o outstanding receivers. If I had a choice between an outstanding receiver/avg QB, or avg receivers/outstanding QB, I'll pick the QB and take my chances.

[Oldfan]

I reject that their OLs are outstanding. The QBs prop them up.

I understand your point that a QB's performance affects everyone around him, but you seem to be making it a one-way street when the interaction works both ways. The QB position is the most important on the field but he is also the most dependent on the help he gets in both team and scheme.

I don't use stats in most of my arguments because they are usually deceptive, but the Brady QB rating differential from 2006 to 2007 is instructive because everything else remained the same except for the receivers which went from worst to first.

I think all QBs who play for perennial winners are overrated because most fans and the media give QBs too much credit when they win and too much blame when they lose.

[theboomking]

I reject that their OLs are outstanding. The QBs prop them up.

The Patriots gave up more than twice as many sacks last season on fewer passing attempts. About 25-30 more, I believe. The only significant variation was at QB. This while playing a weaker schedule.

The Colts likewise benefit immensely from a QB that knows how to get the ball out quickly and keeps the defense on its heels. They've demoted their "young 2nd round stud LT" to second-string and moved the LG out to LT. Last season when the injury bug hit their OL, when I think they did have 3-4 truck drivers starting for them, Manning, even with a bad knee, was still able to pull out wins.

An outstanding OL is not essential for great offensive production, and those teams demonstrate that.

And outstanding receivers definitely help a QB. Who says they don't? But, notice that Brady was able to win 3 SBs w/o outstanding receivers. If I had a choice between an outstanding receiver/avg QB, or avg receivers/outstanding QB, I'll pick the QB and take my chances.

I agree with these tennets. A decent QB can look very good at times with a good O line and good receivers. Look at Eli pre and post Burress, or Daunte Culpepper pre and post Randy Moss, or for that matter Tom Brady pre and post Randy Moss. The problem is, if you want to contend for the SB every year instead of just the playoffs, that it only takes one Brett Farve or Jake Delhomme dud of a game to knock you out of the playoffs. A great quarterback and elite D put you in the hunt every single year.

Now, that being said, I would rather have a great QB and O line and decent receivers and RB than the other way around. An offense can really hum with decent receivers as long as you have a good receiving TE, and we have two. Look at Philadelphia and San Diego. Their offenses are good every year regardless of whether they have anyone, "special" at the receiver position.

For the member that said they didn't want to see us drafting a starting QB next year, I say, "Amen"! The last thing we need is to waste our the next 2-4 years of our defensive potential with developing a QB. We either need to stick with Campbell and continue to upgrade the OL and the D (SLB, MLB, DT), or obtain an established QB somehow.