Portis-for-Bailey was actually Portis-for-Bailey+2nd round pick, which became Tatum Bell. I don't think that's a good deal for Washington. It worked out ok - Portis is a great RB - but that doesn't mean it was a solid move. Bailey alone is worth Portis+something, imo, and Washington ended up giving a 2nd-rounder along with probably the best CB in the game to get an RB who is excellent, but may not be in the top-5 at this position.Getting Coles only worked out OK if you like shelling out something like $20 million in bonus money over three years at only one WR position. They got a good year out of Moss, but they overpaid tremendously, if you consider all the angles.I disagree on a lot of what you said.Portis-for-Bailey has worked well for Washington. They improved at RB and did not decline at CB. They'd make that deal again in a heartbeat.I don't think that some teams were better prepared, but I'm sure some teams tampered more effectively than others.
As for the Skins, it's easy to cherry-pick the good players, but that doesn't mean the moves were good. Washington gave up Bailey and a pick for Portis. That's a lot for an RB. They gave Coles a huge contract and ended up trading him back to the Jets two yers later. They screwed up with Arrington and Pierce. They screwed up with Ramsey. They screwed up with Smoot. Since Snyder's come aboard, the Redskins haven't had success until last season's playoffs. And I don't think anybody believes that Brunell is taking Washington to the Superbowl, which means that with all the moves and what have you, the Redskins chances of getting to a Supebowl hinge on whether or not a Campbell is a playoff-capable QB. To me, that's not a team that is well-positioned fo a championship run.
Getting Coles worked out OK, but they traded him for Moss who worked out excellently.
Arrington did himself in. They cut their losses and saved some money when it was clear he would no longer play to the level of his salary. He wants to be "the man", he won't play within a team defense concept, he got hurt and is not yet fully recovered, he slowed down.
Pierce was a good player they didn't want to lose.
Smoot was waaaaaaaaaaay overrated and it was best to let him go and draft Rogers. They did not miss Smoot, except for the excitement of seeing if he could catch the receiver he had left open who caught the ball.
Ramsey got ruined while playing under Spurrier, and may or may not be able to eventually lose his habit of holding the ball too long, and being uncertain in the pocket.
Brunell will not take them to the Super Bowl if they get there. Neither will any player. It would be a concerted team performance that would get there.
As for Arrington, when you blow the 1.02 selection in the draft, it's a bad move. Doesn't matter what, how or why, it's a bad move. Ask the Chargers.
Pierce we agree on - and he went to a division rival, fer cryin out loud! Terrible job by Washington.
Smoot is not, imo, overrated. I think he's a top-10 CB in the NFL. And if they had him, they could have teamed him with Rogers for a great defensive backfield. One does not preclude the other.
Ramsey is another 1st-rounder the Skins screwed up on. Blame it on Spurrier if you like, it's all the Redskins organization, and they squandered another 1st-rounder on Ramsey.
And I'm not even mentioning the obvious screw-ups like Dan Wilkinson, or even the incredible salary paid to Randy Thomas, who, at the end of the day, is a good OG, not a T.
As for your last point, it's true that it takes a team to win the superbowl - a team that starts a better QB than Mark Brunell.