A Redskins Fan Reflects On A Season Lost Before It Started….
I was going to blog about how well Jason Campbell is playing or how Jim Zorn’s playcalling has contributed to the Redskins woes in the red zone or Zorn’s job security….but what’s the point? This season was over before it started just like every season has been over since Dan Snyder bought the Washington Redskins.
Living in the Bay Area, I was reminded of an column I read by local sports columnist Tim Kawakami at the time of Zorn’s hiring. Kawakami used his one interaction with Zorn to conclude that Zorn to the Redskins was “probably the worst NFL hire of all-time”. That’s quite a statement coming from someone who covers the Al Davis’ Raiders full time.
Kawakami, after his brief interaction with Zorn, described him as:
“over-emotional, antsy, defensive and very short on the ability to communicate general NFL knowledge…”
…and after adding a number of other colorful adjectives summed it all up with:
“Zorn is the worst: Least prepared, worst communicator, most obvious risk for total failure, right from Day 1.”
And that’s certainly consistent with the impression I got based on the NFL Network’s “Sound FX” segment where they mic’ed both Zorn and Jason Campbell. Zorn comes off as a goof-ball who is guessing more than coaching. Feeling more than thinking. Zorn sounded nothing like a Joe Gibbs, Bill Belichick, or Bill Parcells.
And Zorn, who was never a coordinator before, is coaching the quarterbacks, calling the plays and trying to be a head coach at the same time. Having never taken on any of those responsibilities before, expecting Zorn to be able to successfully assume all of them at once seems like a short-sighted decision at best. None of Snyder, Cerrato or Zorn should have been ok with that arrangement.
Don’t get me wrong, I like Jim Zorn the person. He’s absolutely the kind of guy I’d like to have a beer with and watch some football with, but he’s clearly not head coach material (to say nothing of maybe not coordinator material either, considering that’s the role he was originally hired for).
So with Zorn, by all appearances, having lost the team by week 3 of the season, will Dan Snyder and/or Vinny Cerrato accept any responsibility for putting Zorn in a position he clearly isn’t qualified for? We know Zorn will end up a fall guy, but will Cerrato and Snyder accept responsibility for a badly flawed roster?
There is no longer a question as to whether the Redskins unorthodox practices of trading draft picks and overpaying for free agents might work. It hasn’t, and that the strategy is the exact opposite of the strategy employed by consistently strong franchises like Pittsburgh, New York (Giants), New England and Baltimore speaks volumes. Combine the mismanagement of the personnel with the similar complete mismanagement of the front office and coaching staff and you have a season that is over before it started. And now, seasons plural.
It’s an ironic situation when the franchise is pursuing a lawsuit against fans for not upholding their end of the bargain. The Redskins charge some of the highest ticket prices in the NFL and combine a terrible game-day experience with a terrible team which makes it Dan Snyder who isn’t upholding his end of the bargain. For that matter alone he should drop the lawsuits and hire someone else to run the football operation as a positive PR move.
At what point does a man smart enough to make enough money to buy the Redskins figure out where the fault, and accountability, lies. One would think the losing and constant mismanagement would be enough to get rid of the real culprit, Vinny Cerrato. Snyder must bring in a real General Manager and stop playing a billion-dollar game of fantasy football. One wonders whether Dan Snyder the Redskins fan will overcome Dan Snyder the owner.
How Jason Fried Whiffed On the Mint Acquisition and the Role of VCs
Jason Fried of 37 Signals stirred up a bunch of controversy on Friday with his blog posted titled “The Next Generation Bends Over”. Jason suggested that evil VCs forced Mint-founder Aaron Patzer to sell his company prematurely. And while I have a lot of respect for Jason, his “my way or the highway” approach to entrepreneurship (and blogging) rubs some folks the wrong way. And so when he falsely accused some very honorable and accomplished investors of acting out of sheer greed and at the expense of the Founder(s), Fried was appropriately taken to task.
Alexander Muse at Texas Startup Blog gave the most reasoned, thoughtful response noting that The Founders Fund and DAG Ventures, who led a $14M Series C round of funding last month, certainly are not happy with their return. Those firms spent more time doing diligence than as shareholders of preferred stock. But Muse didn’t go the extra step and spell out the real reason why Fried’s post was so far from the mark.
The truth is that Mint’s willingness to be acquired for $170M is actually an unmitigated disaster for the venture capital industry. Sure, DAG and Founders Fund are unhappy with their investments, but its a good bet that Patzer, Mint’s early employees and earlier investors are all pretty happy with their outcomes. First Round Capital claims to have done better than the 14X return they got when Ebay acquired Stumbleupon. That means Mint’s other Angel and Series A investors are likely to be pretty happy with their outcome (including Felicis Ventures, Shasta Ventures, Ron Conway, Dave McClure and other Angels).
Benchmark Capital led a $12M Series B round in March of 2008 and there’s no way they are happy with the outcome. For arguments sake, let’s assume they put in $6M of the $12M round and the Company was valued at $60M post money (both are somewhat arbitrary guesses and likely inaccurate but this is a ballpark placeholder. Valuations were falling at the time but Mint was a hot deal). Even then, Benchmark would have gotten about 3X or about $18M of the $170M. For a firm that just raised a $500M fund, $18M doesn’t move the needle very much. Needless to say, Benchmark was expecting needing a much bigger return.
But Fried was very much on point when he wrote:
Here’s a fresh new company that was gunning for an aging incumbent. And not only gunning, but gaining. They had a great product, great design, and great potential. They were growing rapidly and figured out the revenue game. They were on their way to redefining an industry — one that was left for dead by the current custodians.
There is no doubt that Mint is/was one of the more promising Web 2.0 startups yet Benchmark didn’t come close to making enough money to make their LPs happy. So what does this say for $500M funds and their ability to invest in Web startups?
I’m in no way picking on Benchmark- they are a fantastic firm with a hugely successful track record and all entrepreneurs should be so lucky to work with them - but funds of that size are will have a very tough time investing in capital efficient Web startups. Simply put, they can’t put enough money in to make it work. Web based startups just don’t need that kind of capital anymore to provide great outcomes for Founders and early, early stage investors. As Ron Conway noted recently, the Real-Time Web is going to create $5B in market opportunities, but given that these companies are certain to leverage Web economics it will be very difficult for firms managing large funds will be able to invest in most of those opportunities.
This is a great, great sign for smaller, more nimble firms like First Round, Alsop-Louie Partners and True Ventures. But the percentage of the global Venture Capital asset class that can actually make these economics work remains pretty small and serves as a great illustration of the Venture Capital Math Problem.
How The Pittsburgh Steelers Can Fix Their Running Game
With the 2009 NFL season about to kick-off, everyone wants to know if the Steelers can navigate all the usual challenges that usually prevent NFL teams from defending their Super Bowl titles.
The Pittsburgh Steelers return 20 of 22 starters, and in adding Trai Essex and Lawrence Timmons to the starting lineup, it’s possible that they have upgraded with the 2 new starters. The Steelers #1 ranked defense looks to be back with a vengence. With the return of punter Daniel Sepulveda and the addition of exciting return-man Stefan Logan the Steelers look to be much improved on special teams. And with young Head Coach Mike Tomlin at the helm, the focus looks like it’s there. In fact, I think Hardnosed over at Steeler Fury said it best when he observed “Tomlin’s personality is like a melding of Vince Lombardi, Yoda and John Shaft.”
But the Steelers offense underachieved badly in 2008, ranking 22rd overall in yardage and 20th in points, leaving plenty of room for improvement from the defending champions on that side of the ball. It’s fair to say that the Steelers and their dominant, #1 ranked defense won the title in spite of their offense, not because of it.
Ironically, the Steelers are loaded with talent on the offensive side of the ball. Ben Roethlisberger, with his 2 Super Bowl rings, a QB rating thanks ranks in the top 10 all-time, and the all-time record for most wins in his first 5 seasons (ahead of Dan Marino, John Elway, Otto Graham and Tom Brady), Big Ben looks like he’s already well on his way to the Hall of Fame and just entering his prime. With Hines Ward, Santonio Holmes and Heath Miller, there is plenty of talent in the passing game.
But the questions about the running game remain, where a running game featuring Willie Parker, Rashard Mendenhall and Mewelde Moore looks to improve. The franchise known for slobber-knocker, 3-yards-and-cloud-of dust, Jerome Bettis and Franco Harris-esque rushing attacks couldn’t run the ball in 2008. The Steelers rushing attack ranked 23rd overall in yardage, the Steelers 2nd lowest total since the NFL merger in 1970, managing a meager 3.7 yards per carry good for 29th in the league.
And the conventional wisdom all points to the same party line. As Chris Brown, author of “Smart Football” and a blogger at the New York Times Fifth Down blog wrote about the outlook for the 2009 Steelers run game:
…this year’s Steelers squad shouldn’t be as depleted by injury, and the run game should improve with a healthy Parker and a promising second-year player, Rashard Mendenhall.
The conventional wisdom here strikes me as missing the forrest for the trees, because to my eyes it sure looked like Willie Parker was the problem with the Steelers run game in 2008. A quick check of the facts seems to lend a lot of credence to that theory.
Willie Parker started 11 games for the Steelers in 2008. Parker averaged a mediocre 72 rushing yards per game at 3.8 yards per carry. In those 11 games, the Steelers averaged 20 points per game and 301 yards of total offense, numbers which would actually lower Pittsburgh’s already mediocre offensive ranks to 24th in yards and 26th in points.
And while that conventional wisdom says that injuries, a mediocre offensive line and suspect playcalling were the cause of Parker’s woes, those excuses fall by the wayside when you consider that Mewelde Moore found plenty of success playing with the same constraints.
Moore started 4 games last season and in those games averaged 90 rushing yards per game at a healthy 4.5 yards per carry, and because Moore is a threat out of the backfield he added another 20 yards per game receiving. These numbers are significant increases from Parker’s production across the board. And not surprisingly, the increased production at RB made the entire offense much more productive.
In Moore’s 4 starts, the Steelers offensive averages jumped to 327 yards per game and 24.5 points per game, numbers which would have given the Steelers offense numbers that ranked #17 in yards and #9 in points. (Moore’s 4 starts came against the New York Giants (5th overall), Indianapolis (11th), Cinncinnatti (12th) and Jacksonville (17th), no cupcakes in there).
If you subtract the rushing and offensive totals from those 2 games where Parker started but Moore got more than 25% of the carries (eliminating Moore’s more substantial impact on offensive numbers), Parker’s rushing yards per game rises a paltry 2 yards per game while the team offensive numbers fall off a cliff.
In the 9 games that Parker started and took the more than 75% of the team carries the Steelers averaged 18.4 points and 291 yards per game, numbers that would drop the Steelers offense to 25th in scoring and 27th in yards.
Despite fewer touches, Moore ended up with more yards from scrimmage, 1st downs, plays of 20 yards and touchdowns.
Willie Parker: 213 touches, 804 yards, 3.7 yards per touch, 29 1st downs, 4 plays 20+ yds, 5 TDs
Mewelde Moore: 180 touches, 908 yards, 5.0 yards per touch, 53 1st downs, 7 plays 20+ yds, 6 TDs
It seemed obvious at the time that Moore’s versatility and ability as a receiver out of the backfield made the Steelers staid offense one that became harder to defend. Then Colts DC Ron Meeks said about Moore:
“He definitely gives them a dimension they really needed”
Despite Moore’s obvious impact on the offense, Moore disappeared from the game plan down the stretch and in the playoffs, and no matter how poorly Parker performed Moore only saw time on 3rd downs.
This issue has flown under the radar, but Dutch at the well-regarded Steelers blog Post Game Heroes, recently brought the topic to light when he opined Mewelde Moore Might Be the Steelers Best RB.
Fast forward to the dawn of the 2009 season and all the stories are about Parker and Rashard Mendenhall with nary a mention of Moore. Mendenhall has been underwhelming to say the least, with the word “Bust” being bandied about. But being a 1st round draft pick, Mendenhall will get his chances regardless. What I found bizarre were Steelers OC Bruce Arians’ typically candid comments regarding Mendenhall and Moore:
“The job Mewelde Moore did for us last year was probably the most underappreciated job for us getting to the Super Bowl. He stepped in and hit some home runs. Those should be Rashard’s plays. That’s the role he should have.”
I’m confused why an offensive coordinator would acknowledge the contribution of a guy who “hit some home runs” and “[his contribution] in getting to the Super Bowl” then go on to give that role away so quickly and surely? Since the beginning of preseason, Arians and Tomlin have been clear that either Parker and Mendenhall would split carries or Parker would be “the guy”.
Moore’s career averages of 4.6 yards per carry and 9.1 yards per reception compare very favorably to other versatile RBs who have become key offensive players such as Tiki Barber, Brian Westbrook and Maurice Jones-Drew.
Barber, in particular, has a lot of similarities to Moore. given that 3 years into Barber’s career the Giants were so sure that Barber was only a 3rd down back that they used a 1st round draft pick on Ron Dayne. It wasn’t until Sean Payton became the Giants OC in 2000, when he said to then-Head Coach Jim Fassell:
Jim, every time Tiki gets his hands on the ball he’s gaining six or seven yards. We’ve got to get the ball to Tiki more.
As Fanhouse’s JJ Cooper noted, Moore has been extremely productive throughout his career when given the opportunity. Moore has 10 games with 15 or more carries and has averaged a gaudy 98.9 yards per game rushing at 5.0 yards per carry with 31.5 yards receiving per game.
Conversely, Willie Parker was, as recently as 2 years ago, an elite speed back…albeit one with limited vision. Parker turns 29 during the season and is rapidly approaching that age where RB production starts falling off a cliff. Parker’s yards per carry has dropped .3 yds each year for 4 straight years now and injuries are piling up so rationalizing an upward trend in production or durability at 29 seems a stretch.
Word from Tomlin and Arians is that Parker is not only the feature back but also likely to take goal-line carries, actually increasing his role from 2008. This seems shortsighted to say the least, given that the minimal likelihood of Parker being able to handle 250-300 carries without getting hurt. I can’t imagine too many franchises making such a poor between-the-tackles runner their goalline back, much less a back like Parker who would ideally be kept as fresh as possible. Parker’s reputation and status with the rabid fanbase seems to cloud objective thinking.
We know the Steelers defense will be an elite unit again in 2009 with even a precipitous fall meaning it’s still a top 5 unit. How quickly the Steelers figure out how to fix their running game will be the key to their return hopes. Bruce Arians has a seemingly hot-and-cold reputation around the league and one wonders if he would still have his job had the Steelers not won the Super Bowl. If Arians stops trying to fit a square peg in a round hole, the Steelers stand a very good chance of repeating.
For as much as “sabermetrics” and advanced statistical analysis are utilized in sports these days, it seems hard to figure how the Steelers can’t figure this out. It’s hard to rationalize a gameplan that includes either Willie Parker as a true, exclusive “feature back” or Mewelde Moore with fewer than 15 touches, but the Steelers seem intent on doing just that. If the Steelers continue basing their running game on past reputation and false theories rather than production the Steelers will have a very difficult time repeating.