Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Redskins Name Matt Cavanaugh QBs Coach


Recommended Posts

It's clear Jay realized after last year he can't do it all by himself. He is assembling a pretty nice staff (despite peoples misgivings about Joe Barry). WE clearly needed a QBs coach. Is Matt C. the right guy?

 

He has a lot of experience but that alone does not mean much. He has coached an aweful lot of very average to poor QBs. He coached Steve Young 1 season but it's been widely accepted that Mike Shannahan developed Young. Either way, 1 season  is not enough to claim much there. He also had Trent Dilfer at the Ravens and won a SB, but Dilfer was one and done and everyone knows that team was STs and Def, just hoping the Off didn't screw up too bad.

 

The rest is a who's who of also rans: Steve Buerline, Jay Shroeder, Dave Krieg, Stoney Care, Kyle Boller, Randall Cunningham (late), Kordell Stewart and others.  

 

His best run was probably at Baltimore but he had no less than 16 QBs in 6 season, with Kyle Boller the only lasting more than one season. He started every season he was there with new QBs. His next stint in the NFL was with the Jets from 2009 to 2012 where he had matt Sanchez. Matt started out nice but then got worse each season. His last 2 years is his 2nd stint with the Bears and with no other than Jay I am an idiot Cutler who everyone wants to run out of town on a rail!

 

Help me here, there was crazy uproar over Joe Barry who has at least had recent success at the LB coaching position with several top 10 Ds, with only the 2 bad seasons as DC were several years ago where everything at Detroit was bad, but people are excited by Matt C because "he has a lot of experience?"

 

I agree we need a QBs coach, but not sure this is the right one. Lot's of experience, if it's all bad, is not a good thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@go - Barry did acceptable from what I read in the tactical position of LB coach. His record says he was horrible at the strategic position of DC. The 2 coaching positions have little in common from the standpoint of what one would expect from a coach and there is no reason to believe that being good in 1 position will translate into good in the other.

The problem with Barry is he only has a record of being a loser at the strategic DC position in which he was hired and Gruden's comment about why he was hired was he is good at handling adversity. Barry's job is to keep from having to handle adversity not be good at handling it.

The Redskins will have to go thru a 3-4 year learning experience in hopes of getting the team super bowl capable for the first time in 20+ years. To be successful this period has to have good draft picks that have their skills enhanced by knowledgeable coaches - proven beats the heck out of theoretical.

Based on last year's failed performance there is no reason to believe Gruden has what it takes, however; I willing to ignore last year because we changed direction and hired a competent GM that can get us the good draft picks we need.

To be successful the next 3 year period must be devoted to coaches with a proven record of success, taking chance on a previous failure, like Barry, should be put back until we have a good foundation in place.

In summary, there is no reason to belive that Barry can operate in a strategic DC role and provide the inspiration and knowledge that all those young players will need to make us super bowl capable. Therefore, I say fire Gruden for taking an unnecessary risk with the future of the Redskins. I personally am not ready for another 20+ years of failed experiments. Sorry about the negativity but I don't see how else one can take the Barry hire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@go - Barry did acceptable from what I read in the tactical position of LB coach. His record says he was horrible at the strategic position of DC. The 2 coaching positions have little in common from the standpoint of what one would expect from a coach and there is no reason to believe that being good in 1 position will translate into good in the other.

The problem with Barry is he only has a record of being a loser at the strategic DC position in which he was hired and Gruden's comment about why he was hired was he is good at handling adversity. Barry's job is to keep from having to handle adversity not be good at handling it.

The Redskins will have to go thru a 3-4 year learning experience in hopes of getting the team super bowl capable for the first time in 20+ years. To be successful this period has to have good draft picks that have their skills enhanced by knowledgeable coaches - proven beats the heck out of theoretical.

Based on last year's failed performance there is no reason to believe Gruden has what it takes, however; I willing to ignore last year because we changed direction and hired a competent GM that can get us the good draft picks we need.

To be successful the next 3 year period must be devoted to coaches with a proven record of success, taking chance on a previous failure, like Barry, should be put back until we have a good foundation in place.

In summary, there is no reason to belive that Barry can operate in a strategic DC role and provide the inspiration and knowledge that all those young players will need to make us super bowl capable. Therefore, I say fire Gruden for taking an unnecessary risk with the future of the Redskins. I personally am not ready for another 20+ years of failed experiments. Sorry about the negativity but I don't see how else one can take the Barry hire.

 

We will have to agree to disagree. I think way too much is being made of 2 yrs that was some time ago. It's not like as LBs coach he was an alien during Defensive game planning :-)  

 

You have to at least give Gruden credit for seeing he needs help and getting people to help in those areas, despite what we may think about their individual abilities. Hopefully as a staff they come together and create something special.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not all bad. Add McCown to the list also - who he did do an outstanding job with.

 

 

Not sure that's the guy I would hold up - http://www.nfl.com/player/joshmccown/2505076/profile

 

Outside of a few games in 2013 he has been pretty bad, including last year when he was really bad - 11 TDs - 14 Int - 10 fumbles and an QB rating of 70.5.  Add to that he whopping 6.5 yds per attempt, and you can say if Matt taught him anything in 2013 it did not stick, like not at all.

Anyway, not saying this is a bad hire. Just not sure it was a great one. I totally agree we need a QBs coach. Even more, I am surprised at the over top backlash on hiring Barry and this is seen as a great hire.

 

Either way, I hope they all come together and make a great team.    HTTR! 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We will have to agree to disagree. I think way too much is being made of 2 yrs that was some time ago. It's not like as LBs coach he was an alien during Defensive game planning :-)  

 

You have to at least give Gruden credit for seeing he needs help and getting people to help in those areas, despite what we may think about their individual abilities. Hopefully as a staff they come together and create something special.

Attending meetings does not make an individual an executive. Less than 5% of workers in any career field have the capability to rise to the next level (e.g. tactical deployment manger {worker/supervisor/manger and bad executive} to a superior executive strategic manger). 

One should never give credit for success that has not occurred and for Gruden success has not occurred as a head coach, I think all of us can agree on that. I was ready to go forward with Gruden the next 2 years based on the Redskins hiring a real GM to build Gruden a competitive team and also give guidance. However, going forward assumed he corrected his head coaching faults - same mistakes week after week, inability to adjust his offense to the talent at hand (ours and the other teams), and the hiring of talented coaches. I like most of his hires to accomplish the objective at hand - build a super bowl capable team, winning is down the road and is the place you take chances on coaches.

Sorry about the negativity but I don't want any risks, and Barry is a risk, that has the potential of taking me thru another 20+ year experiment period in which failure is the constant. Sorry again, but I am getting too old for another 20 year loser run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't be worried about Barry joining our team if the Skins had a fantastic defense but with Orakpo maybe leaving along with DeAngelo Hall, possibly Ryan Clark we have no veteran leadership defensive player that has been playing more than 8 years as a leader. Barry is going to get his hands on our young players and maybe point them in the wrong direction. Fangio is a veteran that took a semi young 49ers defense and made them solid. I'm just confused why we didn't pick Fangio up when he was right in our laps.We have a nice young up and coming defense with Amerson, Breeland, Kerrigan, and Robinson but if Barry has a good record with working with LBs then he should work magic cause I believe our LB group are the stars on defense. I don't agree with firing Gruden with his decision of signing Barry but Gruden put himself on hot water if we get some nice defensive draft picks and FAs then Barry can't do the job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry I am extremely negative about the Barry hire but at this point giving people second chances is a risk. I feel that after 20+ years of failure success is a long over do requirement for this team. I am all for having proven successful only people teaching our many draft picks how to be a winners, that is not Barry at DC.

It is going take 3-4 years to fix the problems we have and having unproven winners involved is not to my way of thinking conducive to success.

However, like GO says it is OK to agree to disagree, but it is just as OK is to walk away from a loser. While I hate to walk away after all these 40+ years the prospect of another 20+ years of being a loser is a terrible thought, and again I am too old for that process to run the course. For me next year not showing improvement in the operational environment would be enough to say bye to the Redskins and focus on something enjoyable - this beating your head against the wall thing is not fun for me.

But in any case it was enjoyable communicating with the folks on this site over the past year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4TheyAreBack Hey I know what you mean. When RG3 was a rookie and he delivered the NFC East title for us and making the playoffs WHOA! I couldn't be more proud and that was like winning the Super Bowl for me. Now it seems like we're always in a rebuilding mode year after year after year and to be honest with you it's a coach or quarterback situation or both. I'm pretty sure all of Skins Nation knows how you feel but can't be negative like that to say bye to your football team. Even if we have another losing season I just hope we play our tails off and bring some Cowgirls down with us. HTTR!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ Bleed - You said you wondered why we didn't grab Fangio - He was never really coming here. He came for the interview and I would guess that was as much a favor to Scot M as anything. Fangio coached for John Fox in Carolina and they had great success together. Also, Fox will not coach more than 3 or 4 more years. I am sure the pitch was come to Chicago, let's turn this thing around and then I will step down and you can be HC if all goes well. That opportunity is just not here.

 

As for Barry, it's a moot point. The decision is made and we can't change it. Was he my first choice? No way. But he is ours now and I will  root for him just as hard as I root for any Redskins - with the lone exception being Jeff George who is to date the only redskins I actively rooted to get injured. Hell I didn't even root against dieon sanders when he was here.

 

The only thing I would suggest is that even if you hate the barry hire. look at all the moves made since the off season started. Were there more good ones than bad? I say it's a no brainer. Jay realized he needed help and he has made some much needed changes. Bruce Allen realized he was not a GM and got Scot M.

 

Time will tell but the team is doing the right things. You can't ask for much more.

 

HTTR!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ bleed and GO - Keep up the positive thoughts, they will do you well. I still am stuck with the no more 20 years, but I do want to think all for the spirited and insightful conversations we have had over the last year on this site.

 

 

I guess the difference is I am not focused on a potential 20 yrs more of losing. I am focused on this year and this year alone. Hell statistics suggest I probably will not live another 20 yrs. 

 

One thing I guess I really don't get is focusing on the one negative when there are many other positives. Let's look at the coaching changes/additions. I will mark them as + - or = (meaning no change). I will go with popular opinion for this, not my own. Let's add them up.

 

GM Scot M +

Oline Bill Callahan  +

DC Joe Barry -

DB/Secondary Perry Fewell =

QB Matt Cavanaugh + (Even though I am not sure he is the right guy I would put a + here just because hiring a QB coach was desperately needed)

Def Quality (WTF is this??? lol) Chad Grimm =  (Like the name, but name is not everything. He was at AR which has a very good D but then he worked last with Joe Barry. Since people don't like the Barry hire, I will call that bad and make it a = overall. For me it's + though.).

S&C Mike Clark + : Something was wrong with our S&C. Jay fired that guy quick. Anyone has to be an improvement.

 

 

I think that's it, at least for now. So that's:

4 +

2 =

1 -

 

My math says we are +3 (could easily be +4) - lol  But seriously, is one hire that you don't like really cancel out everything else that has been done that's positive? Is there something else about Joe Barry you don't like that we don't know about, like he takes candy from babies or something? Seems like a lot of negativity over 1 hire when even if you don't like that hire there is so much to be positive about. JMHO

 

Also, consider this, Perry Fewell has been a DC and HC before. If Barry is in over his head, how quick do you think he will be pulled/demoted and Fewell be put in place, at least interim? Same thing for Scott McVay. Callahan has done both jobs. If the young guy falls flat you have experience behind them right on staff.

 

I really like the way they have constructed this staff, even if I don't like some of the individual hires. Looking big picture, we should have something to be at least a little excited over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@go - agree with your assessment on positive and negatives, but waiting another 20 years for a winner would make me way too old to enjoy, If I am still around the next med may take presence over the next football game.

I still want a winner soon (3-4 years) and we will know early next year if the positives are headed our way, or if I need to find another winner. I still enjoy the spirited but not offensive debates that occur on this site, that I would miss with my new team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...