If Shanahan's given up, what hope do we really have with him? A pretty darn disappointed and disillusioned long time backer of the HC.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

I'm not sure if i want Morris coaching the Defense now.. I want a good experienced DC, who AGAIN is EXPERIENCED in his scheme and the players who fit that scheme. IDK, there is just so much we need from an organizational and personel stand point, I really don't know where to start.

And the other problem, whilst there's doubts in the air over the future of Mike, is not only do you let him chose the DC; but if there's a chance of a HC change in the not too distant future, does the new coach want to run a 34? Haslett needs to go, no question.

But if there's any doubt at all over the future of the HC, it makes changing coordinators whilst he's still in situ makes it that bit more precarious for the next guy.

Hail.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

Oh I agree Haslet sucked in his 4-3 days, but at least he inherited a respectable 4-3 D. Only, Shanny converted our best 4-3 guys into 3-4 guys, or released them. And expected a guy with a thin resume to make it all work.

The aspect of the team that made our 4-3 "respectable" was our secondary. Remember how bad our front 7 was in 2005 and 2006? Guess what, Landry got hurt, Rogers got disgruntled, guys like Springs and Cornelius Griffin got old. So are we really crying over Albert Haynesworth (who was mishandled badly but he simply wasn't going to work here) Anybody coming in would had to mishandle our defense.

It must have killed Haslet to see his lifeline 4-3 guys, changed or flat out dumped. I always hated the 3-4, but primarily because we never ran it.

So you were biased against it from the beginning, and now that it's being run badly, you're running with that as a reason to dump it.

I wanted Rak and Ryan getting after the QB every pass play. Only, one is always stuck in coverage if we want to mask who is coming, the benefit of the 3-4. Does anyone ever want either in pass coverage? Just because other teams have found 3-4 OLBs doesnt mean its the best way for us to play defense.

So wait, we're the only team who's not allowed to convert 4-3 college DEs into 3-4 rush OLBs? I mean, literally every other 3-4 team seems to do it just fine. Hell, we did it just fine when Spanos was around.

We are so not a 3-4 team even after 3 years. Bulk up Rak and Kerrigan, and we are back into a 4-3 in no time flat.

Except that Cofield, Jenkins and especially Carriker are not good 4-3 fits. And do you really think it's as simple as just having Rak and Kerrigan gain 20 pounds? If so then you're more misinformed than I thought. They could be good 4-3s in a wide 9 or a cover 2 maybe, but then you need to find new DTs entirely that get up the field quickly, and then a stud run-stopping MLB that can fill wide run gaps...

Talent-wise, our front is okay with everyone healthy. Yes, Fletcher's decline sucks, but coaching and lack of secondary talent (which has nothing to do with the front) is putting everyone in bad positions.

[Skins Wingman]

Sean Peyton... But Shanny's not going anywhere. I wouldn't be suprised to see Peyton in Dallas next year.

what makes you think payton wont re-sign with the saints? he seems to want to be there, all the nfl did was terminate his extension.

[Sticksboi05]

What do you mean by "progress"? Did you expect something like 4-12, 6-10, 8-8? I think Shanahan has really started to put together the players he wants. If the coach tells you he's not taking shortcuts, why believe him and then fire him when you don't see short term results? And 3 years is still short term. Just not in DC, where it's an eternity for a coach. It's especially short when you also expect the team to be rebuilt to be much younger.

The special teams are still poor, still take penalties every return and the defense has regressed and they were even with Carriker/Orakpo. Now, we should have had Jackson/Merriweather but regardless they problably don't make much difference. I'm not saying Mike should be fired (maybe I did yesterday in rage but I've moved on from the loss), but to say he's doing a bang up job is just not true. Hiring Haslett was a massive mistake from the beginning and I still see a horridly undisciplined and physically dominated team every Sunday. That is not talent, that is coaching.

It is year three and we have not seen improvement minus Morris/RGIII. It's not that we're losing it's how. Undisciplined play and mental mistakes repeatedly. Repeatedly. Repeatedly.

[KDawg]

Also....the 2008/2009 draft has KILLED this team. Look at the players selected. Hardly any of those guys are 1) in the league or 2) contributing on an NFL roster. In some respects, we are still recovering from Vinny's mess.

I'm not absolving Shanny from blame, but I'd much rather see him get the full 5 years to see where exactly this ship is headed. There is a caveat with that tho. I'd only like to see him get the full 5 years IF something is done about the defense. I'm not overly concerned with the offense - yes, we need playmakers etc...however, the defense is absolutely killing this team. Record would be over .500 if we had a AVERAGE defensive unit.

I think there is some misconception on where GHH is coming from that's spawning some of the issues with the OP.

GHH isn't saying that Shanahan shouldn't be given more time due to personnel issues (although, for the record, I think our biggest personnel issues are on the coaching staff, specifically the DC, LB Coach and ST Coach).

GHH is stating that due to Shanahan's comments, he's nervous that he's going to lose the team and that's why he should be let go. I think there is reasonable debate to be had on that topic, but I can't say I agree or disagree with that premise. It remains to be seen on how the team responds to those comments, to be quite honest. But those comments were a bit on the stupid side.

[authentic]

And the other problem, whilst there's doubts in the air over the future of Mike, is not only do you let him chose the DC; but if there's a chance of a HC change in the not too distant future, does the new coach want to run a 34? Haslett needs to go, no question.

But if there's any doubt at all over the future of the HC, it makes changing coordinators whilst he's still in situ makes it that bit more precarious for the next guy.

Hail.

Herein lies the problem with Shanny as the GM/Coach, with Bruce reporting to him. If Shanny goes, Bruce goes with him the same way he came in (as a package). Thus we will have to press the reset button on the entire program once again. It would be nice for them to, not only evaluate the personel, but to also re-evaluate the current organizational structure BEFORE Mike leaves.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

Honestly, after reading all of it, the comments weren't that bad in context. He's essentially asking "Okay, we're probably not going to make the playoffs, now let's see who's going to play hard and who isn't". For everyone who's worried about the players giving up, do you want players who are going to mail it in under adversity? Who are going to lay down just because there is "nothing to play for"? Probably he should have said, at least instead of "next year", he should have said "now and going forward". But the meaning isn't "I give up on the season", the meaning is "We're evaluating who's going to keep playing hard even when the season looks lost".

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

This has probably been said but I had two not terribly revolutionary thoughts on this on my way into work.

1.It's amazing that a coach in his third year that has put up the record that Shanahan has put up is so comfortable in his job that he can treat one half of the season as "evaulation time." I don't think Belichik, Coughlin, or Tomlin would feel that secure in his job.

2. Coaches have to be aware of where they are in the season and what storylines they are feeding the press. To drop this kind of line before the bye is madness. He created a totally unnecessary two-week feeding frenzy. I'm sure most coaches ignore talk radio and blogs and such, but they have to be aware of their existence and what they look for. There was a strange lack of awareness here.

[xraycat7055]

When I first heard his comment, I took it as him trying to light a fire under the guys. Basically to tell them that they need to fight for their jobs every week. It can be interpreted each way. I can't imagine a guy like Shanny giving up. It seemed to me like a psychological threat. Like, "hey, play better or you don't have a job."

Which makes me wonder if Snyder said that in front of Shanny.

[RandyHolt]

So you were biased against it from the beginning, and now that it's being run badly, you're running with that as a reason to dump it.

So wait, we're the only team who's not allowed to convert 4-3 college DEs into 3-4 rush OLBs? I mean, literally every other 3-4 team seems to do it just fine. Hell, we did it just fine when Spanos was around.



Except that Cofield, Jenkins and especially Carriker are not good 4-3 fits. And do you really think it's as simple as just having Rak and Kerrigan gain 20 pounds? If so then you're more misinformed than I thought. They could be good 4-3s in a wide 9 or a cover 2 maybe, but then you need to find new DTs entirely that get up the field quickly, and then a stud run-stopping MLB that can fill wide run gaps...

Talent-wise, our front is okay with everyone healthy. Yes, Fletcher's decline sucks, but coaching and lack of secondary talent (which has nothing to do with the front) is putting everyone in bad positions.

yes i hated the 3-4 but gave it a try. I have given it 2.5 years. How many years of shoddy defense before you are ok with me not preferring changing all 4-3 guys we draft?

Cofield and Jenkins did just fine in the 4-3 in previous stops/college, IIRC.

Maybe we need Spanos around.

When the head coach puts 4-3 guys with a 4-3 coach into a 3-4, it doesn't matter if a fan like me doesn't like the 3-4. Even those that always wanted the 3-4 can see it failing miserably.

Square peg round hole, how many years do we keep pounding, before deeming moving to a 3-4 was dumb?

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

When I first heard his comment, I took it as him trying to light a fire under the guys. Basically to tell them that they need to fight for their jobs every week. It can be interpreted each way. I can't imagine a guy like Shanny giving up. It seemed to me like a psychological threat. Like, "hey, play better or you don't have a job."

Which makes me wonder if Snyder said that in front of Shanny.

Then that should of been in the locker room, behind closed doors.

To quote L_k_b a post above yours, he's created a 'totally unnecessary feeding fenzy' for the next two weeks. That's absolutely ridiculous and unprofessional in itself. To then word at as he did was utter madness and sends totally the wrong message to everyone. Owner, fans, press. And more importantly for him, the players he's supposed to be leading.

Hail.

[authentic]

GHH is stating that due to Shanahan's comments, he's nervous that he's going to lose the team and that's why he should be let go. I think there is reasonable debate to be had on that topic, but I can't say I agree or disagree with that premise. It remains to be seen on how the team responds to those comments, to be quite honest. But those comments were a bit on the stupid side.

Been thinking about this all morning... but i wonder if Mike's comments stemmed from a feeling that his team gave up on him. Remember earlier in the week he sent a message to the team with all the "This is a MUST WIN", yet the team played with no sense of urgency or desire, and essentially gave up on the field.... Don't misunderstand me, i'm not apologizing for Mike's comments, you never verbally express that you've given up by midseason. However, i'm just wondering if the reason why he said it was motivated by, in his mind, that "F*** it, they gave up on me, well i'm giving up on them, time to look at who will stay and who will be gone in the offseason".. *shurgs*

[Rodriggo]

The best player on this team, RG3, they drafted in April of this year.

It really is damning that the best, most exciting, most exceptional element of this team is a rookie QB that they've had THE LEAST time to work with.

The storyline for this year was "Growing Pains" but RG3 is going 100 mph, is pure charisma and leadership, can throw as good as he runs and has a penchant for late game heroics, he is the most unbelievable Skin since Darrell Green.

All they had to do to compete this year was be a middle of the road team everywhere else. Would it have been too much to ask for them to be that in year 3? I don't think so.

I am not a fan of Shanahan, have never been since the two massive FO debacles of the first year but I wanted to give him a clean slate this year since he finally got a decent QB but look around....this year is lost now too. IN WEEK 9! IN NOVEMBER! THAT'S straight from his ******* mouth in a presser! More importantly it's being lost in the same way other more notorious coaches lost them, with pathetic, mistake filled losses against completely inconsequential teams.

It's incredibly disheartening that the only person expecting greatness this year was the kid who hasn't been tainted by this ******** franchise....yet.

How long do we have to whip ourselves for the mistakes of the past? Yeah, the previous coaches sucked but guess what? Shanahan does too. What's worse is that he's this cagey, dour, uncharismatic figurehead that does nothing to sell this "grand reconstruction" he is supposedly undertaking. CLUE ME IN! CLUE THE FANS IN! I want to believe, but all I see is a rookie QB and a sophomore LB playing balls out and pedantic mediocrity everywhere else.

If they don't finish 7-9 or a very strong 6-10 he's going to get fired midseason next year. You can ******* forget that year 5 ********, what is this 1986? Look at the Colts! 5-3 with an interim coach! Dolphins, Seahawks, Vikings! All with rookie or sophomore QBs worse than ours. Are they just evaluating talent?! Retire grandpa. I'd rather have Kyle as HC.

[gortiz]

It's not that we're losing it's how.

this is the crux of it ...

our team just does not seem to go all out, and then couple the fact that they beat themselves.

That spells bad coaching I'm sorry ...

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

Been thinking about this all morning... but i wonder if Mike's comments stemmed from a feeling that his team gave up on him. Remember earlier in the week he sent a message to the team with all the "This is a MUST WIN", yet the team played with no sense of urgency or desire, and essentially gave up on the field.... Don't misunderstand me, i'm not apologizing for Mike's comments, you never verbally express that you've given up by midseason. However, i'm just wondering if the reason why he said it was motivated by, in his mind, that "F*** it, they gave up on me, well i'm giving up on them, time to look at who will stay and who will be gone in the offseason".. *shurgs*

So then, if that is the case, there would only be one possible outcome as that would suggest he's lost the locker room.

If the HC can't motivate a response from his players, and they've stopped plying for him; there can only be one outcome.

Hail.