What if Spurrier had Greg Williams as his D Coordinator?

[Redskinfan28]

Would we have made the playoffs this year? If not, tell me why?

[chrisbcbu]

Cause his offense was not good.

[hail2skins]

Some things just aren't worth discussing. Spurrier is not here and had he been here, he wouldn't have Williams as his defensive coordinator.

How would having Williams help Spurrier's blocking schemes. How would having Williams keep Ramsey from getting pounded like he did last season.

[Patrick]

Some things just aren't worth discussing. Spurrier is not here and had he been here, he wouldn't have Williams as his defensive coordinator.

You've got that right!!!!!

[Redskinfan28]

Some things just aren't worth discussing. Spurrier is not here and had he been here, he wouldn't have Williams as his defensive coordinator.


Why do you say that? Williams was fired and available, George Edwards would have been fired, and Danny still had money. The fact remains, though, is that we killed Spurrier last year, but the record was the same without a good D (remember all the DL comments). Tell me why Gibbs' offense is better than Spurrier's.

If this topic angers you or you don't want to discuss it, then don't reply.

[Patrick]

Would of, should of, could of, what if ........ but regardless these are things that are speculations AND not going to happen! Heck we could say the same thing about keeping Marty around ... What Ifs ....... WHAT'S THE POINT!!!!
We didn't so focus on the team we got.

[Redskinfan28]

Redskins - 2003

TOTAL OFFENSIVE YARDS 4659
SACKS 27
TOUCHDOWNS 30

Redskins - 2004 (One less game)

TOTAL OFFENSIVE YARDS 4079
SACKS 36
TOUCHDOWNS 23


Maybe we were a little hard on Spurrier.

[Redskinfan28]

Would of, should of, could of, what if ........ but regardless these are things that are speculations AND not going to happen! Heck we could say the same thing about keeping Marty around ... What Ifs ....... WHAT'S THE POINT!!!!
We didn't so focus on the team we got.

I am focusing on this team. With all the stuff we said about Spurrier, why aren't the same things being said about Gibbs?

[PennSkinsFan]

Ramsey would be crippled, Hass would be dead, and no QB woudl dare put on a Redskisn uniform. Spurrier did not give a crap about the QB, ti is all abotu the deep thorw, regardless of the hits they take. It is a horrible mentality in the NFL where hits can be nothing less than vicious.

Too many, almost all NFL teams, had the Spurrier offense figured out.....BLITZ

9-7 > 7-9 > 5-11 Nuff said. Defense was not the problem

[hail2skins]

Why do you say that? Williams was fired and available, George Edwards would have been fired, and Danny still had money. The fact remains, though, is that we killed Spurrier last year, but the record was the same without a good D (remember all the DL comments). Tell me why Gibbs' offense is better than Spurrier's.

If this topic angers you or you don't want to discuss it, then don't reply.

If I were angered you would know it and I decide when to or when not to reply to a topic.

You are ASSuming alot of things. You're assuming the defensive players we have now would be here if Spurrier were here. You're assuming that Gregg Williams would be here. You're assuming the defensive would be the way it is this year. You're just ASSuming. Why talk about the past that does nothing for us and why not talk about the future which can do something for us.

[joethefan]

Maybe we were a little hard on Spurrier.


Yea especially when you're the NFL's highest payed coach in the history of the league.

[chrisbcbu]

Because Spurrier should not be mentioned in the same sentence as Gibbs. Spurrier was horrible in this league, and knew nothing and admitted he knew nothing. No half time adjustments, no working with the OL, WR, RB. All Spurrier did was work with the quarterback. Spurrier is a gloryfied QB coach. Nothing more. This is pertaining to him being in the NFL. He is a quality college head coach.

[Redskinfan28]

If I were angered you would know it and I decide when to or when not to reply to a topic.

You are ASSuming alot of things. You're assuming the defensive players we have now would be here if Spurrier were here. You're assuming that Gregg Williams would be here. You're assuming the defensive would be the way it is this year. You're just ASSuming. Why talk about the past that does nothing for us and why not talk about the future which can do something for us.

It is a hypothetical, and don't take it so personal. Just a topic of conversation. If this wasn't Gibbs and was Spurrier, would we not be calling for his head? If not, please explain.

[Redskinfan28]

Ramsey would be crippled, Hass would be dead, and no QB woudl dare put on a Redskisn uniform. Spurrier did not give a crap about the QB, ti is all abotu the deep thorw, regardless of the hits they take. It is a horrible mentality in the NFL where hits can be nothing less than vicious.

Too many, almost all NFL teams, had the Spurrier offense figured out.....BLITZ

9-7 > 7-9 > 5-11 Nuff said. Defense was not the problem

All valid points, indeed, but we have more sacks this year than last year according to NFL.com. I don't think Spurrier is vicious - he just ran a wide open defense which certainly was hard on the QB. I guess my question is: What is better?

[PennSkinsFan]

All valid points, indeed, but we have more sacks this year than last year according to NFL.com. I don't think Spurrier is vicious - he just ran a wide open defense which certainly was hard on the QB. I guess my question is: What is better?

I didnt call Spurrier vicious, I called NFL hits vicious. If you want me to call Spurrier a name, I will, he was a MORON, unwilling to be flexible, unwilling to changem, unwilling to adapt. Plainily spoken, he is not and was never cut out for professional football.

[hail2skins]

It is a hypothetical, and don't take it so personal. Just a topic of conversation. If this wasn't Gibbs and was Spurrier, would we not be calling for his head? If not, please explain.

Dude, get off the mad trip. As I said if I were mad, you would know it. You start a thread and ask for our thoughts and you don't even express your own thoughts.

You want to compare Gibbs to Spurrier. A coach who has won at the professional level against one didn't. You said we would be calling for Spurrier's head if he were here this season, you right, we would. What has he proved on the professional level? He proved that he did not care about protecting his QB and he proved he could get a QB injured over and over again. He proved that he was stubborn and wouldn't adjust to his players. He proved he wouldn't adjust his protections for passing plays. He also proved his system would work in the NFL. Do I even need to mention Gibb's accomplishments.

notice that nothing I posted is hypothetical.

[hail2skins]

Test

[LuvSkins17]

No way in the world Spurrier flys to Buffalo and convences Williams to come to DC and help him bring back the glory days.
HA!
.......... and Williams says, uhhh no thanks.

[Redskinfan28]

Dude, get off the mad trip. As I said if I were mad, you would know it. You start a thread and ask for our thoughts and you don't even express your own thoughts.

You want to compare Gibbs to Spurrier. A coach who has won at the professional level against one didn't. You said we would be calling for Spurrier's head if he were here this season, you right, we would. What has he proved on the professional level? He proved that he did not care about protecting his QB and he proved he could get a QB injured over and over again. He proved that he was stubborn and wouldn't adjust to his players. He proved he wouldn't adjust his protections for passing plays. He also proved his system would work in the NFL. Do I even need to mention Gibb's accomplishments.

notice that nothing I posted is hypothetical.


It is also not hypothetical that Spurrier's offense was more productive than Gibbs's offense this year, and he did not have Portis. It is surprising.

Gibbs was great in 1992. Thoise accomplishments mean little in 2004.

Just my oopinion.

[Cruising270]

You made valid points so I'm not going to be ignorant and bash anyone for this thread because people should feel free to voice any opinion on here.

This is why I take Gibbs over Spurrier though
2002 Season - 40 turnovers
2003 Season - 28 turnovers

Now I understand that we have 25 this year with one game to go but this is Gibbs first year which is better than Spurriers. The reason I choose Gibbs not even factoring his reputation is the fact that he tried to adapt the offence to short passes and running the ball. He didn't just keep calling deep plays despite having no protection. Gibbs did this season what I cried to Spurrier to do last season and that was use less WR's, protect the QB with lineman, and pass for short stable yardage. Unfortunitly is didn't work and we didn't win games but he did what made sense to me.

The second reason which has alot to do with the above is that Gibbs has controlled time of possession much better than Spurrier. Our D might have not been able to hold up being on the field for that extra time. Here is the stats from this season on Time of Possession vs last.

2004 Season w/Gibbs (still 1 game left)
Redskins 31:23 opponents 28:37

2003 Season w/Spurrier
Redskins 28:45 oppenents 31:15

Gibbs has made alot of progress with this team even if our record doesn't show it. I know we owe 95% of this season to the defense which is Williams and Blanche but I still think Gibbs has taken the right steps, just things haven't worked out. As long as we show progression next season I will have nothing but patience for him to develope this offense.

[Axegrinder]

Hasselbeck would be the QB again.The others would be out due to injury!

[Skinz4lyfe]

If Spurrier had GW as his Defensive coordinator we'd be looking like we were in 2002 when we had Marvin Lewis. No, we'd probably we worse off because for the most we didn't have as many injuries then as we do now. Imagine a Spurrier offense w/o Jansen. That's scary!

I don't agree w/the masses in that I think Spurrier might have been effective if he had been surrounded by a competent and experienced coaching staff. But as Hail2Skins stated earlier its all water under the bridge now.

Not to be picky but we actually gave up 43 sacks last year. We only registered 27 sacks on defense last year.

[Redskinfan28]

Just taking stats off NFL.com.

Good point about Jansen.

[Redskinfan28]

You made valid points so I'm not going to be ignorant and bash anyone for this thread because people should feel free to voice any opinion on here.

This is why I take Gibbs over Spurrier though
2002 Season - 40 turnovers
2003 Season - 28 turnovers

Now I understand that we have 25 this year with one game to go but this is Gibbs first year which is better than Spurriers. The reason I choose Gibbs not even factoring his reputation is the fact that he tried to adapt the offence to short passes and running the ball. He didn't just keep calling deep plays despite having no protection. Gibbs did this season what I cried to Spurrier to do last season and that was use less WR's, protect the QB with lineman, and pass for short stable yardage. Unfortunitly is didn't work and we didn't win games but he did what made sense to me.

The second reason which has alot to do with the above is that Gibbs has controlled time of possession much better than Spurrier. Our D might have not been able to hold up being on the field for that extra time. Here is the stats from this season on Time of Possession vs last.

2004 Season w/Gibbs (still 1 game left)
Redskins 31:23 opponents 28:37

2003 Season w/Spurrier
Redskins 28:45 oppenents 31:15

Gibbs has made alot of progress with this team even if our record doesn't show it. I know we owe 95% of this season to the defense which is Williams and Blanche but I still think Gibbs has taken the right steps, just things haven't worked out. As long as we show progression next season I will have nothing but patience for him to develope this offense.

Very good post. However, while Gibbs surely preaches ball control, this offense must play an almost a perfect game because it cannot make up for mistakes with big plays. What it does do is prevent us from being blown out and does give us a chance to win.

[tbfoster1]

Hasselbeck would be the QB again.The others would be out due to injury!

maybe even hambrin, hamblin...whatever his name was

[hail2skins]

It is also not hypothetical that Spurrier's offense was more productive than Gibbs's offense this year, and he did not have Portis. It is surprising.

Gibbs was great in 1992. Thoise accomplishments mean little in 2004.

Just my oopinion.

The accomplishments you mentioned about Spurrier mean little in 2004 as well. That was the point I was making way back. Now you're trying to use it to justify your opinion but I couldn't to justify mine. Wow. Since nothing we did before 2004 means little (your words) to us now, we even pose the hypothetical question?

[Minnesota Mike]

If the Visor was stll here, Danny Woeful would have taken a bunch of snaps after Ramsey and Hass were laid out with season ending injuries.

There is no comparison. With the Visor this team was heading down a long slippery slide to oblivian. Gibbs has halted the slide and shown some signs of climbing back up the hill. There is still work to be done. But at least now the direction is the correct one.

[Redskinfan28]

There is no comparison. With the Visor this team was heading down a long slippery slide to oblivian. Gibbs has halted the slide and shown some signs of climbing back up the hill. There is still work to be done. But at least now the direction is the correct one.

That is one way to look at it, although I'm unsure that the Offense is taking a step forward.

[Redskinfan28]

The accomplishments you mentioned about Spurrier mean little in 2004 as well. That was the point I was making way back. Now you're trying to use it to justify your opinion but I couldn't to justify mine. Wow. Since nothing we did before 2004 means little (your words) to us now, we even pose the hypothetical question?

:thinker:

:Peace:

[Keino]

Why do you say that? Williams was fired and available, George Edwards would have been fired, and Danny still had money. The fact remains, though, is that we killed Spurrier last year, but the record was the same without a good D (remember all the DL comments). Tell me why Gibbs' offense is better than Spurrier's.

If this topic angers you or you don't want to discuss it, then don't reply.

Because the question is Speculative BS. The fact is SPurrier isn't half the coach Gibbs is and Gibbs has the hardware to prove it. Gibbs' offense has worked in the NFL, still works in the NFL and is currently being used by a number of teams

One of the reasons Spurrier left was because he was going to be asked to replace some of his coaching staff, including, but not limited to George Edwards, last years' DC. That he didn't want to and would rather resign (And cost himself Millions of dollars in the process) is a pretty good indication that had he stuck around Gregg Williams would've been someone else's Defensive Coordinator.......


I frankly, would like to forget that ole Pitch and Catch was ever our coach.

[BIGSEF3]

i think we should have kept spurrier for this year, then fired him and gotten gibbs, if for no other reason than it would have kept mark brunell off our team. someone else could have given him a league minimum salary in 2004 and let him be a backup for them.

[rskinsfan10]

i think we should have kept spurrier for this year, then fired him and gotten gibbs, if for no other reason than it would have kept mark brunell off our team. someone else could have given him a league minimum salary in 2004 and let him be a backup for them.

What do you mean "kept"?

[LATrueRedskin]

i think we should have kept spurrier for this year, then fired him and gotten gibbs, if for no other reason than it would have kept mark brunell off our team. someone else could have given him a league minimum salary in 2004 and let him be a backup for them.

Dumbest thing I've heard in a while.

[ZackMills]

What if? I'll tell you what if. We would be 9-7 and going to the playoffs.

[Redskinfan28]

Is that a picture of John Stamos? If so, why.....

[ZackMills]

Is that a picture of John Stamos? If so, why.....

Yes, because I like him

[rskinsfan10]

What if? I'll tell you what if. We would be 9-7 and going to the playoffs.

What proof of that can you offer?

[Skinz4lyfe]

What proof of that can you offer?

I'd love to hear your rationale too.

[ZackMills]

Well...the NFC sucks...Spurrier's offense was alot better than Gibbies...average offense+great defense>terrible offense+great defense.

[Keino]

Well...the NFC sucks...Spurrier's offense was alot better than Gibbies...average offense+great defense>terrible offense+great defense.

And here I thought you were gonna be oversimplistic in your logic.......

[LATrueRedskin]

What if? I'll tell you what if. We would be 9-7 and going to the playoffs.

:lol1: You sure about that?

[bgforever]

SS let Davis go, after he barely ran him the year before and when he did, it was at the most unopportune time. Davis was a basher, not a scat back and SS seemed to be asking the public, like PointuS Pilot, what should I do with this man. That was the biggest duh in the league. John Fox, showed SS what you do with Stephen Davis, and SD, was willing to restructure his contract too.

Also, SS's constant passing would keep the defense on the field more and more, score or no score, because it was long ball or die.

Manning and the receivers aren't the only ones with league leading numbers, so is Edgerrin James'. That means in spite of the prolific passing attack, the RB is allowed to flourish too, for balance. The very thing JG is working on, otherwise SS would have still been there correct? He's not since balance was a foreign word and he didn't care about defense, so by the time he got interested in asking Marvin Lewis questions about it, Lewis was packing his bags.

[garedskin]

Would we have made the playoffs this year? If not, tell me why?

Easy enough.
Spurriers offence had no ball control qualities to it.He kept his defence on the field almost 3 minutes a game longer than this years unit.That is why they where scored on so much last year.I dont care how great your defence is the longer it is on the field during a game it WILL break and be scored on.
Last years offence controlled the ball for 28:45 last year.Scoring Defence was ranked 24th(25th overall defence) . This years offence(thru 14 games) 31:41 Scoring Defence 5th( 2nd overall defence). :Peace:

[BIGSEF3]

last years offense may have been on the field less time, but they managed to put up a heck of alot more points than gibbs offense. a defense that is on the field 3 minutes longer is not as huge a difference in the grand scheme of things. especially considering how interchangeable our defense is. the reason its so good is b/c guys come in and out all the time. a "starter" can get rest while a "backup" goes out there and plays just as good.

[BIGSEF3]

Dumbest thing I've heard in a while.
dumb? do you think spurrier could have done worse than 5-11 this year? getting mark brunell was a 100 percent gibbs decision. would spurrier have gotten us to the playoffs? who knows. but atleast we would be free of brunell and his cap space. all other thngs being equal, we should have kept spurrier one more year and then gotten gibbs. sure, spurrier "resigned" but do you really think he wouldnt have gotten canned if gibbs wasnt going to be available. i garantee you snyder was in touch with gibbs before spurrier resigned.

its all nonsense to talk about b/c we cant do anything about it. but your calling my comment dumb is the dumbest thing i have heard in a while.

[Skin-E-Dip]

Redskins - 2003

TOTAL OFFENSIVE YARDS 4659
SACKS 27
TOUCHDOWNS 30

Redskins - 2004 (One less game)

TOTAL OFFENSIVE YARDS 4079
SACKS 36
TOUCHDOWNS 23


Maybe we were a little hard on Spurrier.


Its amazing how everyone seemed to jump on Spurrier for being a bumbling idiot who could not be in the NFL because his offense wasnt performing that well, the vet QB he brought in was over the hill, and he was not involved with the defense. But these same people look at Gibbs this year who had an offense that didnt just underperform but looked atrocious, brought in a vet QB who looks like he never played footbll , and who had no involvement with the defense and quickly say that Gibbs is simply 'adjusting'. You have to admit that this is a huge double standard. I understand that Gibbs has won multiple superbowls and Spurrier was a former college coach so you will have that double standard, but you can't argue that this season was better than last. Spurrier didnt have an all pro running back or a world class defense that Gibbs has had this season either. At lease with Spurrier you knew what he wanted to do with out a doubt - he wanted to kill the other team offensively. With Gibbs system, you would think you scored points for every completed 3 yard pass.

So the argument made in this thread is a legit one and Im sure if Snyder could have saw how this season would play out that he would have giving his full support behind Spurrier for another season.

[Skin-E-Dip]

SS let Davis go, after he barely ran him the year before and when he did, it was at the most unopportune time. Davis was a basher, not a scat back and SS seemed to be asking the public, like PointuS Pilot, what should I do with this man. That was the biggest duh in the league. John Fox, showed SS what you do with Stephen Davis, and SD, was willing to restructure his contract too.
.

This showed me that Spurrier had the balls to do what needed to be done. Davis did the exact same thing in Carolina that he has done with the Redskins - gain good yards in the regular season but constantly fall short in that all important 3rd and 1 or 3rd and goal and disappear altogether in big games against top teams. Then Davis would usually follow that with an injury. Getting that contract off our backs has been a huge plus as he is now Carolinas burden and he might not even last past this season there.

[BIGSEF3]

Well said. an excellent, honest, and fair assessment of the facts.

[lakeskin]

Spurrier quit.

You have 3 rings people are gonna give you leeway, and thats the way it should be. And last I checked Joe Gibbs wasnt exactly getting a free pass on this board, either.

[smoak]

Why do you say that? Williams was fired and available, George Edwards would have been fired, and Danny still had money. The fact remains, though, is that we killed Spurrier last year, but the record was the same without a good D (remember all the DL comments). Tell me why Gibbs' offense is better than Spurrier's.

If this topic angers you or you don't want to discuss it, then don't reply.

Gibbs brought in GW. Please do not forget that our reputation around the league is garbage and sometime no amount of money will help that. Gibbs had to sell GW on coming to the Redskins, and he did that by sharing his plan... You've only seen chapter one at this point, but notice how everyone is confident that they'll succeed? We're building a consistent model on how to run the organization now. It isn't perfect, but it is a plan... something I think Spurrier lacked. Marty didn't get enough time to implement b/c that was before Snyder matured as an owner... but now I feel much more positive about the direction of the organization.

[Minnesota Mike]

The Visor's offensive philosophy, which basically ignores protecting the QB would not work in the NFL. Period. End of story.

The Gibbs philosphy of protecting the QB, and dominating a game with the O-line is a proven recipe for success at the NFL level.

[Skin-E-Dip]

The Visor's offensive philosophy, which basically ignores protecting the QB would not work in the NFL. Period. End of story.

The Gibbs philosphy of protecting the QB, and dominating a game with the O-line is a proven recipe for success at the NFL level.

Yet QB's have been sacked more this year than last year. Simply put, the best weapon against sacks is getting the ball to the open man. Ramsey is a statue and tends to freeze. I totally disagree with you that his offense wouldnt work if giving time and the right players. Afterall isnt everyone saying the same thing about Gibbs

[smoak]

Its amazing how everyone seemed to jump on Spurrier for being a bumbling idiot who could not be in the NFL because his offense wasnt performing that well, the vet QB he brought in was over the hill, and he was not involved with the defense. But these same people look at Gibbs this year who had an offense that didnt just underperform but looked atrocious, brought in a vet QB who looks like he never played footbll , and who had no involvement with the defense and quickly say that Gibbs is simply 'adjusting'. You have to admit that this is a huge double standard. I understand that Gibbs has won multiple superbowls and Spurrier was a former college coach so you will have that double standard, but you can't argue that this season was better than last. Spurrier didnt have an all pro running back or a world class defense that Gibbs has had this season either. At lease with Spurrier you knew what he wanted to do with out a doubt - he wanted to kill the other team offensively. With Gibbs system, you would think you scored points for every completed 3 yard pass.

So the argument made in this thread is a legit one and Im sure if Snyder could have saw how this season would play out that he would have giving his full support behind Spurrier for another season.

Actually I don't remember most people saying Spurrier was a bust until after two years. After that first season people said he just needed to get the QB and start to mold the team...

I liked Spurrier as a person, but your comparison is maddening!!! the players were at the point of revolt under Spurrier. Jansen, a leader on the field who would normally never speak out about something was close to ripping Spurrier on a weekly basis. Meetings and practices were a joke with Sourrier... Cell phones rang constantly, players lazed their way through drills, coaches and players talked about non-football matters in practice and meetings...

Gibbs' biggest strength is NOT his offensive genius... it is his leadership.

Before meeting Gibbs a lot of players were frustrated with the organization and wanted out... I really don't blame them either. Now ask LaVar Arrington who he'd most want to have coaching him. Ask Samuels. Ask Jansen. Ask any of the guys that were here under the Turner/Robiskie/Marty/Spurrier mary-go-round and they will passionately tell you that Gibbs is the right man to lead this team.

If you don't feel he has done a good job, don't worry.... I'll be here to offer you a hand up once you're ready to get on the bandwagon. Gibbs is my coach and go into the depths of hell (i.e. Philly) for him. No other coach in our recent history has EVER had such instant credibilty with the team.

[Minnesota Mike]

Yet QB's have been sacked more this year than last year. Simply put, the best weapon against sacks is getting the ball to the open man. Ramsey is a statue and tends to freeze. I totally disagree with you that his offense wouldnt work if giving time and the right players. Afterall isnt everyone saying the same thing about Gibbs

The philosophy is in place, but the execution this year was suspect, largely due to the injury to Jansen. I am confident that next year this will be better, much better.

[smoak]

Yet QB's have been sacked more this year than last year. Simply put, the best weapon against sacks is getting the ball to the open man. Ramsey is a statue and tends to freeze. I totally disagree with you that his offense wouldnt work if giving time and the right players. Afterall isnt everyone saying the same thing about Gibbs

I'm with you on Spurrier's philosophies, but I have seen Ramsey make some sweet moves to avoid the rush... I'm not saying he's fast, but he is strong and quick enough to make some impressive plays back there... He just needs to mature a little more and get comfortable. I hope.

[Minnesota Mike]

Actually I don't remember most people saying Spurrier was a bust until after two years. After that first season people said he just needed to get the QB and start to mold the team...


I never liked The Visor. I never wanted him here and I never thought he could win here. I thought hiring him was a terrible mistake.

[garedskin]

Not calling anyone out but there is wrong stats up about the sacks spurriers chuck and duck offence gave up last season the total was 43(Ramsey was sacked 30 times in 11 starts in 03,and 18 in 5 starts in 02) sacks and that was with Jansen playing the entire season.Plus the ass whipping Ramsey endured put him on the injured list both seasons under Spurrier. :Peace:

[smoak]

I never liked The Visor. I never wanted him here and I never thought he could win here. I thought hiring him was a terrible mistake.

Well by "most people" I meant the media... I didn't join this site until.... I think it was when Gibbs was hired.

[Skins4life]

You guys are killing me. DO you honestly think that Spurrier would have run/controlled this team better than Gibbs? Gibbs is a proven leader - Spurrier was letting them come late to meetings and talk on cell phones during team meetings. He did not have control of his team - Damn - he didnt even know 1/2 of the players names - how could you play your heart out for a guy like that -

forget stats - bottom line - no gibbs would = no Gregg Williams, no Bugel, and no to 80% of the coaches that we have. Gibbs is about a legend, and getting the best out of people - Spurriers is about a 9 iron and 125 yard par three....................

[Skins4life]

and another thing - for all of you questioning Gibbs this time around - I bet there is no way any of you are old enough to remember the glory days. Granted Gibbs made some bad decisions, but he knows it better than any of us. Give the man time, or throw away your jerseys.

[BIGSEF3]

It seems to me that there are more similarities to Gibb's situation and Spurriers' than most people wish to admit. The one I want to focus on is this:

Spurrier was an incredibly successful college coach. But his success in college was dependant on constantly sending 4-5 receivers out play after play, and that just doesnt work in the NFL. Spurrier was GOOD at devising those kinds of plays. He wasnt good at devising plays that actually worked in the NFL.

Gibbs was incredibly successful in the NFL.... OVER A DECADE AGO. But the NFL now is different. When Gibbs last coached, there was no salary cap. The staff Gibbs had in his first tenure would very likely not fit under the salary cap today. Some could argue that Gibbs did what snyder has been trying to do - buy a championship. But its more than just that. Gibbs entire system requires alot of moves and shifting before the snap. THAT is what Gibbs was good at. Devising plays to confuse defenses. But now the playclock is shorter, and Gibbs literally CAN'T do part of what he was good at. In addition, defenses in general are ALOT more aggressive than they were in the 80's. Sure, it's still football, but its a whole new ballgame.

There is no question that Gibbs could go back to the NFL with the rules it had in his day and be successful. give Gibbs 5 seconds more and all the money in the world to play with and you know we would be headed for the superbowl now. The question is....

Does Gibbs have the talent, the know-how, the will, to REINVENT himself and the way he plays the game? Spurrier was considered an offensive genius, but he was obviously too stuborn, or unable, to do so.

We all HOPE gibbs can do it, we all WANT him to. But if Gibbs is to be successful, he has to stop relying on the counter-trey for every running play and he's going to have to cut back on the pre-snap shifting, run plays from more than a handful of pre-snap formations, and not be so dang conservative.

But I think he can do it. why? because look at what marty shottenheimer did. He had a similar philosophy as Gibbs of just trying to run the ball up the gut and chew as much clock as you can. but you know what? it didnt work. He had to have a really strong passing game that went deep often. Drew Brees completes alot of deep passes. but you know what, he throws alot of incomplete passes too. Marty changed. He started taking more chances.

If Gibbs does the same, he will be successful.

[GeneralDisorder]

It is a hypothetical, and don't take it so personal. Just a topic of conversation. If this wasn't Gibbs and was Spurrier, would we not be calling for his head? If not, please explain.

Under Gibbs this season (with the possible exception of the game in Philadelphia) the Redskins have stayed competitive in every game. I haven't seen the Redskins just throw in towel in the same manner they did in losses to the Bills, Buccs, Cowboys and Eagles last year. So the players are still playing for him...

Of course, it could be argued that Gibbs' offense cost the Redskins a shot at the Superbowl this year. So, by your rationale, let's fire Gibbs. And next year's coach when he doesn't do it at the first time of asking. And the one after him. And so on. Sound familiar...?

Why not, for once, and just for once, have some continuity around here...? If the last 5-6 years has taught us all one thing, it's that the quick-fix doesn't work. It's a long shot, but why not let Gibbs put in the foundations that'll have us challenging long after the bloke has retired...

[Redskinfan28]

Easy enough.
Spurriers offence had no ball control qualities to it.He kept his defence on the field almost 3 minutes a game longer than this years unit.That is why they where scored on so much last year.I dont care how great your defence is the longer it is on the field during a game it WILL break and be scored on.
Last years offence controlled the ball for 28:45 last year.Scoring Defence was ranked 24th(25th overall defence) . This years offence(thru 14 games) 31:41 Scoring Defence 5th( 2nd overall defence). :Peace:

I thought our D was bad last year because we had the "worst DL in the history of football."

[Skin-E-Dip]

and another thing - for all of you questioning Gibbs this time around - I bet there is no way any of you are old enough to remember the glory days. Granted Gibbs made some bad decisions, but he knows it better than any of us. Give the man time, or throw away your jerseys.


Its not that we dont remember. The fact that we do remember is what baffles us about this season. Sure we expected growing pains. But we also were hoping that Gibbs experience and success in the past would translate to somethign on the field besides being next to last in the league in offense. We are in front of th eBears but at lease they can say that their main QB( Grossman) got hurt for the season, whats our excuse for being at the bottom? I dont think any real fan on here is saying to fire Gibbs. Taht would be idiotic. But after another draft and offseason and spending the next 5 months looking at this offense on tape, I am expecting a much different product to come on the field the first game of next season. And I guarantee that Snyder is too

[bgforever]

Very good post. However, while Gibbs surely preaches ball control, this offense must play an almost a perfect game because it cannot make up for mistakes with big plays. What it does do is prevent us from being blown out and does give us a chance to win.

Very well put. In JG's assessment of the team with Williams, it was already understood, who would be there to hold back the opponents from getting big leads. The defense would have to carry the entire team, pretty much, while Joe G, Joe B. , Don Breaux, Byner, and Smith on ST, worked out bugs, taught the new system, language, communication, feedback, etc. It would at least take about 10 games for anything to resemble remotely some of what JG had in mind.

We didn't know what was on their table, they did.

We are just squirrels trying to get a nut. Outside looking in.

[flave1969]

Redskins - 2003

TOTAL OFFENSIVE YARDS 4659
SACKS 27
TOUCHDOWNS 30

Redskins - 2004 (One less game)

TOTAL OFFENSIVE YARDS 4079
SACKS 36
TOUCHDOWNS 23


Maybe we were a little hard on Spurrier.


You read it wrong, we gave up 43 sacks, 27 is the number we recorded.

[flave1969]

How you can even assume Gregg Williams would even be here is beyond me if SS was here.

Lets assume he was, lets assume the Skins made all the trades they did this past offseason. Lets assume the Skins took Sean Taylor, traded up fot Chris Cooley. Does this seem like a stretch too you? Yes?

We would likely be a poor copy of the Chiefs or Colts if Spurrier was still here. I say poor because Spurrier was not interested in lineman and the offensive capabilities of the teams named is based on their lines.

Spurrier was a pass happy coach who sacrificed a running game the minute he joined the team, so the pass was never going too be effective. This year the pass has been ineffective therefore making the run ineffective. Bottom line is Gibbs is more likely too bring a balanced offense too the table. That is what is needed, that is what the best offensive teams in the league have.

[GeneralDisorder]

Good point Flave.

Anyone remember what we gave up for Trung Canidate...? Or who picked him up after we released him...?

[garedskin]

It seems to me that there are more similarities to Gibb's situation and Spurriers' than most people wish to admit. The one I want to focus on is this:

Spurrier was an incredibly successful college coach. But his success in college was dependant on constantly sending 4-5 receivers out play after play, and that just doesnt work in the NFL. Spurrier was GOOD at devising those kinds of plays. He wasnt good at devising plays that actually worked in the NFL.

Gibbs was incredibly successful in the NFL.... OVER A DECADE AGO. But the NFL now is different. When Gibbs last coached, there was no salary cap. The staff Gibbs had in his first tenure would very likely not fit under the salary cap today. Some could argue that Gibbs did what snyder has been trying to do - buy a championship. But its more than just that. Gibbs entire system requires alot of moves and shifting before the snap. THAT is what Gibbs was good at. Devising plays to confuse defenses. But now the playclock is shorter, and Gibbs literally CAN'T do part of what he was good at. In addition, defenses in general are ALOT more aggressive than they were in the 80's. Sure, it's still football, but its a whole new ballgame.

There is no question that Gibbs could go back to the NFL with the rules it had in his day and be successful. give Gibbs 5 seconds more and all the money in the world to play with and you know we would be headed for the superbowl now. The question is....

Does Gibbs have the talent, the know-how, the will, to REINVENT himself and the way he plays the game? Spurrier was considered an offensive genius, but he was obviously too stuborn, or unable, to do so.

We all HOPE gibbs can do it, we all WANT him to. But if Gibbs is to be successful, he has to stop relying on the counter-trey for every running play and he's going to have to cut back on the pre-snap shifting, run plays from more than a handful of pre-snap formations, and not be so dang conservative.

But I think he can do it. why? because look at what marty shottenheimer did. He had a similar philosophy as Gibbs of just trying to run the ball up the gut and chew as much clock as you can. but you know what? it didnt work. He had to have a really strong passing game that went deep often. Drew Brees completes alot of deep passes. but you know what, he throws alot of incomplete passes too. Marty changed. He started taking more chances.

If Gibbs does the same, he will be successful.

Alot of hot air.I have not seen all the games this year but I have seen 8 and Have seen Ramsey leading the way the last 3 games.One thing for sure there are WRs running open down field at times and Patrick does not see them.When he does they are dropping the damn ball.The players are put into position to make things happen and time and time again the players are not making the play or commiting a penalty to wipe out a good play.Simply put the players are not executing.You are saying that Gibbs is too stuborn and needs to reinvent himself.LOL :lol1:
Sadly you are not joking you really believe your dribble.
The man has 3 SB rings with a different cast of players each time he won a new ring.(I know he always had his HOGS).

I will end on this I once did not believe in Gibbs and he gladly proved me very wrong. :Peace:

[garedskin]

I thought our D was bad last year because we had the "worst DL in the history of football."

Maybe but spurriers offensive scheme sure gave the other team plenty of chances/time to score on them.Hell Wynn,Haley,Noble(he was on the IR all season) where all apart of that line last year. :Peace:

[BIGSEF3]

Alot of hot air.I have not seen all the games this year but I have seen 8 and Have seen Ramsey leading the way the last 3 games.One thing for sure there are WRs running open down field at times and Patrick does not see them.When he does they are dropping the damn ball.The players are put into position to make things happen and time and time again the players are not making the play or commiting a penalty to wipe out a good play.Simply put the players are not executing.You are saying that Gibbs is too stuborn and needs to reinvent himself.LOL :lol1:
Sadly you are not joking you really believe your dribble.
The man has 3 SB rings with a different cast of players each time he won a new ring.(I know he always had his HOGS).

I will end on this I once did not believe in Gibbs and he gladly proved me very wrong. :Peace:


the man won 3 SB rings a long time ago. you cant rest on your laurels in this game. gibbs has had his worst season ever. yes, the players are not executing. when you have one or two players not executing, its the players fault. when almost none of the players are executing, it generally falls back on the coaching staff. not always, but usually.

gibbs needs to reinvent himself b/c he runs a counter trey or screen pass nearly every single play. that just doesnt cut it in the NFL anymore. If it did, the patriots, jets, bills, steelers, ravens, colts, jaguars, packers, vikings, seahawks, and falcons - teams with winning records - would be using it. gibbs whole offense is designed around runs and passes that dont go more than 5 yards. what that does is tell defenses they can stay up close and stop nearly whatever we throw at them.

the only teams gibbs has beaten this year are teams that are worse than us. those 5 wins are against teams even the dophins could probably have beaten. yet alot of those games were close and relied on the defense picking up the offenses slack.

coles and portis, two great, proven players with other teams, have arguably had the worst seasons of their careers under joe gibbs system. what does that tell you? the system does not work in todays NFL.

sorry to burst your bubble, but the NFL changed since gibbs left. he has to adjust to the players he has now, and the NFL he's in now, or he'll be gone by the end of next year, just like spurrier. the NFL is all about "what have you done for me lately" and quite frankly, gibbs hasnt done jack.

[IowaSkinsFan]

What if? I'll tell you what if. We would be 9-7 and going to the playoffs.


You mind if I borrow that Crystal Ball? I need to buy some lottery tickets and it can save me a lot of leg work on the winning numbers.

[Ohiofan]

There have not been that many dropped balls since Ram has been QB. A few, but not like it was under Brunnell. I think Ram throws such aa hard ball that the recievers are a little more alert than w/ Brunnell's ballons.
also if Ram is missing receivers that may be a part of his adjustment which was slowed to Gibbs' wasting over half a season on Brunell rather than developing Ramsey.

[BIGSEF3]

agreed. sometimes i think ram has to slow it down though. he reminds me of vick with how hard he throws. vick throws it so hard sometimes, guys jam their fingers trying to catch it. alot of his receivers often wont even try to catch with their hands b/c theire afraid it'll go through.

[Minnesota Mike]

There have not been that many dropped balls since Ram has been QB. A few, but not like it was under Brunnell. I think Ram throws such aa hard ball that the recievers are a little more alert than w/ Brunnell's ballons.
also if Ram is missing receivers that may be a part of his adjustment which was slowed to Gibbs' wasting over half a season on Brunell rather than developing Ramsey.

I think the lefty/righty part of it contributed to this. Recievers are used to the ball spinning one way with a righty QB and it spins the other way with a lefty.