pasta re coach gibbs ~ ~ ~

[kelly]

Thursday, September 30, 2004
By Len Pasquarelli
ESPN.com

~ ~ ~ Around the league

~ ~ We've reiterated several times in this space that we don't believe the game passed Joe Gibbs by during his 11-season absence from the league. But anyone who watched the Washington Redskins' loss to the Dallas Cowboys on Monday night might now want to agree with our other consistent premise: That just because owner Dan Snyder made a big splash in luring Gibbs from retirement didn't necessarily mean things were automatically going to go swimmingly in the coach's first year back. Gibbs made horrendous errors in judgment, game management, clock management and play-calling on Monday night. They were the kinds of untimely errors for which other coaches, say, Mike Martz, would be roasted by the media. To their credit, some members of the Washington media jumped off the bandwagon long enough this week to document the Gibbs Gaffes. Then again, there remain some blind loyalists now suggesting Gibbs might need another year or two to get his kind of players in place. Wait a minute. Wasn't the offensive line said to be a quintet that just needed the kind of guidance Joe Bugel could provide to finally reach full potential? Sure, we know the loss of right tackle Jon Jansen to an Achilles injury in preseason was a killer, but the rest of the unit hasn't performed well, either. And does anyone really believe that Snyder traded for quarterback Mark Brunell and for tailback Clinton Portis without having the Gibbs imprimatur on those deals? C'mon, he endorsed those trades, figured he could work with those players. But the coach's public support for Brunell aside, the veteran quarterback doesn't have a lot left, at least if Monday night was any indication. Brunell ended up with excellent numbers but they were exaggerated by a late-game comeback, and his arm strength, no matter what Gibbs claims, is lacking. One of the hallmarks of past Gibbs-designed offenses was a quarterback who could rifle the long ball, especially the deep "out" pattern, and Brunell can't do it. As for Portis, well, some of the preseason suggestions that he wasn't quite an optimum fit for the offense might have been accurate. Make no mistake, Portis is a marvelous runner, a slasher and dancer of the highest order. But if you take away the 64-yard touchdown run against Tampa Bay in the opener, the first time Portis touched the ball for the Redskins, he really hasn't done much. On his 71 carries since then, Portis, who entered the season with a career average of 5.5 yards per carry, is averaging a pedestrian 3.5 yards. He has just five rushes for 10 yards or more since that initial carry. More than one-third of his attempts in three games have netted one yard or less. Square peg in the round hole? Tough to tell, since the Washington offense hasn't created sufficient holes, square or round, for Portis. This looks like a slow, predictable offense so far, and offense is the side of the football that gets most of Gibbs' personal attention.

> http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=1892327

[Keino]

I love how people always want to take away the 64 yarder. Thats like saying teh Redksins are undefeated if you take away the 10 turnovers in those losses and bad officiating. The fact of the matter is you cannot take those thigs away in making an overall assessment.....everything factors in, including the 64yrd run

[dj_stouty]

I love how people always want to take away the 64 yarder. Thats like saying teh Redksins are undefeated if you take away the 10 turnovers in those losses and bad officiating. The fact of the matter is you cannot take those thigs away in making an overall assessment.....everything factors in, including the 64yrd run

Ya know...there was a time in which running the ball for over 60 yards in a single carry was a positive thing for a RB. Now it seems to be a black mark on a RB.

This guy is nuts.

[joethefan]

the problem is that everyone thinks that Parcells coaches here....buy saying that, they think that Gibbs will do the same thing Parcells did last year....23 new players...new D Coordinator..that warrants some time...Parcells already had he no 2 D in the league...same offensive players ...so he didn't have to worry about team collabloration..they were already there..whenhe got her...this guy...is nut!!!!!

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

Actually, I think he has some legitimate points.

[Ohiofan]

His point that Gibbs used to base his offense on a strong armed quarterback who could fire off 30 yard out patterns is very important and ABSOLUTELY TRUE. I don't know what it will take for some current fans to understand that the offense we are seeing now is a mere shell of the offensive scheme that took JG to 3 Superbowl wins.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

His point that Gibbs used to base his offense on a strong armed quarterback who could fire off 30 yard out patterns is very important and ABSOLUTELY TRUE. I don't know what it will take for some current fans to understand that the offense we are seeing now is a mere shell of the offensive scheme that took JG to 3 Superbowl wins.

That's exactly what i've been saying Ohio. But there are some fans who if they even think you are challenging Gibbs, will just mock and ridicule you
to death.

[Keino]

And yet there are more fans that know that 4 games is not enough time to issue Sweeping indictments about the QB play and the team as a whole. What good is a strong arm if the Defensenive players are the ones catching it?

I'll take the smart decisions over a rocket arm all day everyday.

[Ohiofan]

"smart" decisions(?) = 3 loses and five touchdowns in four games.
If you are watching the games, Brunell's decisions are not "smart". They are overly cautious. He is not even attempting to hit receivers who are in fact open beyond 20 yards. That is not "smart' football, as our record reflects.

How did someone describe doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?

Joe Gibbs did not use this type of offense during the glory years. he stretched the field. And that is a fact.

[whitskins]

Whether Brunell is the best choice or not, four games is not ample enough time to make this decision, especially when our team should be at least 3-1 if it were not for some mindnumbing mistakes of which Brunell had no part of.

[tomlcollins]

4 games is not enough time


If 3 out of 4 of those games are losses (heartbreaking losses at that) then there is plenty of reason to question whomever you like: players, coaches, yourself, even God :) 3 losses in the first 4 weeks is very close to a death sentence in the NFL.
One point I would like to make here:

Gibbs is not God, nor is he the same coach AT THE MOMENT that he was 10 or 15 years ago. The fact of the matter is that he has made some downright terrible decisions in regards to clock management and play calling. Also, he is not doing a good job disguising his plays (that is primarily a COACHES JOB, not a players!) and he is not running the offense very smoothly. The turnovers are what have really killed us thus far, but they're not our sole reason for losing. Now, I am writing all of this off to Gibbs being rusty. At the same time, I think it's ridiculous to think that he is exempt from any and all critisicm. I believe in him, but I also know that he needs to work on his approach and that he is not adapting as well to the game as we all thought he would.
And....let the yelling begin......

[SkinsKY]

We've reiterated several times in this space that we don't believe the game passed Joe Gibbs by during his 11-season absence from the league.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Lenny make the comment several times about Joe just being another Joe this time around? I'm not positive, but I'm pretty sure he said it after the Giants game.

[SkinsKY]

At least the Giants victory keeps the Redskins and sainted Joe Gibbs from going 16-0. Last week, one of the hosts of the popular ESPN-produced show dubbed something like Pardon the Insult suggested on local D.C. television that yours truly was "stupid" for predicting the reincarnation of Gibbs would not succeed.

Here it is (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=1884898)

We don't think it's passed him by. I suggested that he wouldn't succeed. Sounds like consistency.

[LadyNRedskinsfan]

yeah dick vermeil sucks too. his team blew 3 timeouts in the first quarter and they are 1-3.

[Keino]

Who's saying Gibbs should be exempt from criticism? I think he himself has acknowledged that he has to improve.......All Im saying is that we haven't lost games because of Brunell. IN fact, the game we won, Brunell had his worst game of the year. IMO the QB play has progressively gotten better. AND I WATCH THE GAMES. Don't you dare imply I don't watch the games. We just aren't seeing the same things and thats fine and good. I see Poor clock management and untimely turnovers as the reasons this team is 1-3 not the play of the QB.

[Ohiofan]

Did not mean to offend you Keino, but when i was at the game I could see all the way down the field that they do not show on TV. In other words, I could see what the QB can see rather than being limited by the TV screen. And if you had been sitting next to me, you would have seen at least five times where Brunell had men open deep & he did not throw to them. And he was not under pressure. The Browns were almost letting our guys go after twenty yards. And Brunell would throw underneath for a three yard gain. I really mean it and I am not exaggerating, if you could have seen the whole field, and not be limited by the TV screen, you would have seen that the Cleveland game was his worst.

[Maxemus]

yeah dick vermeil sucks too. his team blew 3 timeouts in the first quarter and they are 1-3.
Yeah dick vermeil is really rusty since his come back, he has a good team im just starting to question his huge credentials because of 3 losses, because the past doesn't count because defenses are faster now, and priest isn't being patient.

[sdredskinsfan]

The fat guy offers opinions like he is a member of a MB........not this one of course. Has he even ever played or coached organized football?

[redwolf1218]

His point that Gibbs used to base his offense on a strong armed quarterback who could fire off 30 yard out patterns is very important and ABSOLUTELY TRUE. I don't know what it will take for some current fans to understand that the offense we are seeing now is a mere shell of the offensive scheme that took JG to 3 Superbowl wins.
probably just the fact the some of us remember Gibbs starting 0 and 5 his first time around, then adjusting to his team's strengths. wow, it's a good thing he wasnt fired after that 0 and 5 start years ago before the 4 SP appearances and 3 SB wins.

[LATrueRedskin]

Ya know...there was a time in which running the ball for over 60 yards in a single carry was a positive thing for a RB. Now it seems to be a black mark on a RB.

This guy is nuts.

Exactly. I thought a 64 yard touchdown on the first carry was a good thing. But what do I know?

[sdredskinsfan]

His point that Gibbs used to base his offense on a strong armed quarterback who could fire off 30 yard out patterns is very important and ABSOLUTELY TRUE. I don't know what it will take for some current fans to understand that the offense we are seeing now is a mere shell of the offensive scheme that took JG to 3 Superbowl wins.

Neither Theismann nor Rypien had particularly strong arms relative to the average NFL QB. Schroeder had a very strong arm and made too many mental mistakes, which is why Gibbs got rid of him. Not too many people think the Redskins did NOT get the better end of the deal when they traded for Lachey.

Gibbs strongest attribute as a coach is adapting.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

Neither Theismann nor Rypien had particularly strong arms relative to the average NFL QB. Schroeder had a very strong arm and made too many mental mistakes, which is why Gibbs got rid of him. Not too many people think the Redskins did NOT get the better end of the deal when they traded for Lachey.

Gibbs strongest attribute as a coach is adapting.

Actually, Mark Rypien had a very strong arm. His arm strength was his best attribute.

[JoeDaSchmoe]

Rypein didn't have a strong arm? Are you kidding me?

Theisman didn't have a cannon arm compared to the rest of the league, but his strength would be about the same as, say, Marc Bulger's is now. Nothing that'll set distance records, but still able to make just about every throw.

[sdredskinsfan]

Actually, Mark Rypien had a very strong arm. His arm strength was his best attribute.

I ardently disagree here. He had average arm strength for an NFL QB. His arm strength was not even close to that of Ramsey's or Schroeder's. If you go back and watch these games he puts everything he's got when making his "long" throws of 45, 50 yds. BTW, he was deadly accurate in the '91 season when throwing "long", but not remarkably accurate with his short to mid-range throws by comparison.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

I ardently disagree here. He had average arm strength for an NFL QB. His arm strength was not even close to that of Ramsey's or Schroeder's. If you go back and watch these games he puts everything he's got when making his "long" throws of 45, 50 yds. BTW, he was deadly accurate in the '91 season when throwing "long", but not remarkably accurate with his short to mid-range throws by comparison.
We will agree to disagree my friend. But I will definitely concede that his arm was weaker than Williams,Ramsey and Schroeder....significantly.

[sknz2856]

I love how people always want to take away the 64 yarder. Thats like saying teh Redksins are undefeated if you take away the 10 turnovers in those losses and bad officiating. The fact of the matter is you cannot take those thigs away in making an overall assessment.....everything factors in, including the 64yrd run

I can't agree with you more!!!! Why does his 64 yard run "not count" He earned the yards...that really bugs me