Author Topic: Washington Commanders? Really? Thread (2022)  (Read 4970 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 35660
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Washington Commanders? Really? Thread (2022)
« Reply #550: January 09, 2023, 10:45:38 AM »
Not sure what you mean by stay successful. Patriots had a great run but now headed downhill. I guess the Steelers but not always a Super Bowl contender. What other franchises have been continually successful over the past 25 years? Can’t think of any in the NFC. They all have down years. Getting a QB is important but SF shows you can build a good team without a star there.
well, GB has had 4 losing seasons since 1992; it's just 3 of them have been since 2017. 6 conference championship losses and one lost Super Bowl dims it a bit.

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 23057
Re: Washington Commanders? Really? Thread (2022)
« Reply #551: January 09, 2023, 11:30:52 AM »
By stay successful, I mean at least five years of making the playoffs with a Super Bowl appearance or win. SF has a star coach, one who Snyder ran out of the building. For everyone who talks about process and doing things the right way, you can do the right thing and still be terrible. You can also be a terrible organization and luck into Joe Burrow.
Ok, assumed you meant more than that.  Cincinnati made the playoffs five straight years under Marvin Lewis.  9, 10, 11, 10, and 12 wins.  So that organization was successful also before Joe Burrow. 

It's the easiest of the leagues to get competitive in quickly for various reasons.  I think having a good GM and a good coach matters most.  But then those guys eventually butt heads.  It's not easy to have the consistent lack of success Washington has had for 30 years.  They have really had to work at that. 

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 23057
Re: Washington Commanders? Really? Thread (2022)
« Reply #552: January 09, 2023, 11:32:41 AM »
well, GB has had 4 losing seasons since 1992; it's just 3 of them have been since 2017. 6 conference championship losses and one lost Super Bowl dims it a bit.

Yea, GB.  SF has generally been very good but had a fairly long bad stretch.  I mean look at the Rams.  Super Bowl Champs to losing record in one year.  Eagles went form Super Bowl to losing record in three years.  And now back on top. 

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 23057
Re: Washington Commanders? Really? Thread (2022)
« Reply #553: January 09, 2023, 11:51:17 AM »
I guess I will throw in the Eagles since Lurie bought the team.  But still since 1995, 8 losing seasons.  Three in a row in the 1990s.  And then two in a row with Chip. 

Offline Smithian

  • Posts: 11314
  • Sunshine Squad 2022
Re: Washington Commanders? Really? Thread (2022)
« Reply #554: January 10, 2023, 04:55:59 PM »
No qb, terrible front office, a head coach coaching decades in the past, a run first OC in a past first league- they’re lucky to be .500
6-3-1 in games not started by Wentz. Some fluke wins, for sure.

I'm not too worried about the next OC. Many people ripped on Kyle Shanahan here and when he was in Atlanta. OCs reflect their talent and HC. Plus, the league as a whole became more run centric this season.

Assuming new ownership doesn't come in remarkably quick and turn the focus, I'd rather the Commanders focus on being a team that can win low scoring games. Use Wentz money on Payne. Dump resources into OL and LB. New ownership and leadership should be the ones to take a run at another veteran QB or a trade up in the draft. The current group gets Sam Howell.

I also think that's the exact approach that sets you up for success with a new QB. If a top QB becomes available, a team with a good defense and supporting pieces on offense is an attractive destination. New ownership would only add to that.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21230
Re: Washington Commanders? Really? Thread (2022)
« Reply #555: January 10, 2023, 06:33:45 PM »
6-3-1 in games not started by Wentz. Some fluke wins, for sure.

I'm not too worried about the next OC. Many people ripped on Kyle Shanahan here and when he was in Atlanta. OCs reflect their talent and HC. Plus, the league as a whole became more run centric this season.

Assuming new ownership doesn't come in remarkably quick and turn the focus, I'd rather the Commanders focus on being a team that can win low scoring games. Use Wentz money on Payne. Dump resources into OL and LB. New ownership and leadership should be the ones to take a run at another veteran QB or a trade up in the draft. The current group gets Sam Howell.

I also think that's the exact approach that sets you up for success with a new QB. If a top QB becomes available, a team with a good defense and supporting pieces on offense is an attractive destination. New ownership would only add to that.

If we’re really lucky we can get the next Wilson or Watson? Awesome

Offline Kevrock

  • Posts: 13730
  • That’s gonna be a no from me, doge.
Re: Washington Commanders? Really? Thread (2022)
« Reply #556: January 10, 2023, 07:17:56 PM »
He prefers Aaron Rodgers, lol

Offline GburgNatsFan

  • Posts: 22155
  • Let's drink a few for Mathguy.
Re: Washington Commanders? Really? Thread (2022)
« Reply #557: January 10, 2023, 08:49:26 PM »
Turner is gone.

Offline Smithian

  • Posts: 11314
  • Sunshine Squad 2022
Re: Washington Commanders? Really? Thread (2022)
« Reply #558: January 10, 2023, 09:50:10 PM »
If we’re really lucky we can get the next Wilson or Watson? Awesome
Or we get the next Brady or Stafford.

QBs aren’t a sure thing. Nothing is.

Offline KnorrForYourMoney

  • Posts: 16141
  • pissy DC sports fan
Re: Washington Commanders? Really? Thread (2022)
« Reply #559: January 10, 2023, 11:33:32 PM »
(Image removed from quote.)

Bless Smithian's heart, he's an eternal optimist when it comes to this dumpster fire franchise, which means he's been known to have some real galaxy brain takes on the state of the team.

I think it's like a coping mechanism at this point.  He's probably one 2-15 season away from turning into a RL version of the meme of Charlie Day plastering a bunch of post-it notes to the wall.  He'll be standing there explaining to his family how the next breakthrough in stem cell research will allow John Riggins and Joe Theismann to come out of retirement and lead the team to another Super Bowl.

Offline KnorrForYourMoney

  • Posts: 16141
  • pissy DC sports fan
Re: Washington Commanders? Really? Thread (2022)
« Reply #560: January 10, 2023, 11:45:46 PM »
Not sure what you mean by stay successful. Patriots had a great run but now headed downhill. I guess the Steelers but not always a Super Bowl contender. What other franchises have been continually successful over the past 25 years? Can’t think of any in the NFC. They all have down years. Getting a QB is important but SF shows you can build a good team without a star there.

Still AFC, but the Broncos and Ravens have generally had a really good run since the late 80s (if you count the Cleveland years for Baltimore).  Funny how that time period ties both franchises together with those era-defining playoff battles.

Of course, the Broncos are finally having a crappy period after a very long history of success.  The Steelers grab more headlines, but the Broncos are really similar in that a switch flipped for them in the 70s and they had a lot of prosperity from that point until Peyton's retirement.

The Ravens have the occasional down year, and the early relocation years were a rough patch for them, but the past 25 years have generally been very kind to them.

Only NFC team that might be worthy of being added to the discussion (along with the Packers and Eagles) is the Seahawks.  1999 was an inflection point for them just as much as it was for the Ravens, also thanks to a coaching hire.  In the Seahawks' case, it was Mike Holmgren.  That started a pretty good era for them; then they waste a year on Jim Moron Jr. only to bring in Pete in 2010 and the rest is history.

Offline Smithian

  • Posts: 11314
  • Sunshine Squad 2022
Re: Washington Commanders? Really? Thread (2022)
« Reply #561: January 11, 2023, 07:23:13 PM »
Bless Smithian's heart, he's an eternal optimist when it comes to this dumpster fire franchise, which means he's been known to have some real galaxy brain takes on the state of the team.

I think it's like a coping mechanism at this point.  He's probably one 2-15 season away from turning into a RL version of the meme of Charlie Day plastering a bunch of post-it notes to the wall.  He'll be standing there explaining to his family how the next breakthrough in stem cell research will allow John Riggins and Joe Theismann to come out of retirement and lead the team to another Super Bowl.
I can either be mad or look at the bright side.

Zorn into Shanahan was bad. RGIII brought me back in. We know how that ended up. I tried to really gave up on this franchise was after Jay Gruden's first year. Then they benched RGIII and had a competent season and made the playoffs with Cousins. Then they had a few more disappointing seasons.

I about gave up before Rivera's first year. Then they had the fun COVID playoffs run. Got me on board. I have a couple more disappointing seasons before I give up again.

Offline GataNats

  • Posts: 1058
Re: Washington Commanders? Really? Thread (2022)
« Reply #562: January 11, 2023, 11:28:14 PM »
Or we get the next Brady or Stafford.

QBs aren’t a sure thing. Nothing is.

Stafford sucks.  We really screwed the pooch drafting Chase Young over Herbert