Jay Gruden and the new Philosophy - and all things coaching...hell it is offseason after all.

[Stefanskins]

Kudos and respect to those who will try to make some actual fresh conversation out of this, though.

Thanks Jumbo 

[The Rook]

In my opinion, one of Jay's major mistakes last year was his selection of QB coach.   

I think that may have contributed to the "QB coaching" through the press.

 

Thankfully, that has been remedied this year.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Rook

[Laron Burgundy]

In my opinion, one of Jay's major mistakes last year was his selection of QB coach.   

I think that may have contributed to the "QB coaching" through the press.

 

Thankfully, that has been remedied this year.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Rook

 

I certainly hope it helps, but I'm sure a lot of it was the haphazard way this team has been ran for 20 years.  Gruden was possibly one of the worst coaching candidates for our team.  I said it before he was hired and still stand by that.  We're a mismatch of parts that was better at running, specifically with zone blocking, than we were with passing.  What did we do?  We hired a guy who preferred man blocking and airing the ball out and got a top notch deep threat.  The result?  An offense that regressed in practically every meaningful stat.

 

It's not all on gruden, but he was definitely the wrong hire for this team.  I think we already have the talent on the roster to be a 9-10 win team, but probably not without our coach changing his philosophy.  We've heard big talk about the offense being tailored to RG3's strengths (don't we hear this every year?), but it's something I'll have to see on sundays before I believe it.

[Jumbo]

I think that's a legit premise and critique, Laron. 

 

Back then, I held very low expectations for any "vision for the team" that Bruce, Dan, & whoever else had to offer when Mike was fired, other than hearing the drumbeats of wanting to get Scot someday. It's hard to argue by evidence that any visions of "what to do" after Mike, that the brain trust had, were all that solid, rational, and well thought out in some detail like a "solid direction for the team" might be expected to be in the NFL.  <cough>

 

So in that regard, I thought there really wasn't a "right hire" to be made, or a particularly wrong one. Jay's choice as HC only left me "bleh", which was a step down from the "cautious hope" I felt MS merited.

[chipwhich]

We still get caught up in the Wonderland of coaching through the looking glass of characters.

 

We had the best of the best.

 

Some real "right hires".

 

The one college coach everyone wanted, the one super bowl winning HOF Redskins legend, the one grisly veteran, the respected Denver dude, the random Zoony tune.  All the stuff about the "right coach" is just noise.

 

We had no architect of the team.  It didn't matter who we hired as coach, they would have failed.

 

Now we have a GM who can architect a team and pick his coach if necessary.

 

Carry on.

 

“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?”

[FuriousD]

We had no architect of the team.  It didn't matter who we hired as coach, they would have failed.

 

Now we have a GM who can architect a team and pick his coach if necessary.

 

Carry on.

We love Gibbs and rightly so.  But those 3 Lombardi's at Redskins Park have every bit as much to do with Beathard as they did Gibbs. 1987 was a Beathard masterpiece and Casserly's FA adds in '91 were genius.  But they don't get the limelight that Gibbs does and it's understandable to a degree. We don't take time to think deeply on the construction; only getting high on what happens on the field.

 

Reality is SMac is the first GM we have had here in 20+ years with real vision. On the one hand very sad,.... on the other, real reason to rejoice!

 

HTTR!!!

[Peregrine]

Im hoping Gruden proves us all wrong.  But to be honest I wasnt a fan of the hire from the start.  I thought this team needed a defensive coach, that the best thing they could do for a young QB was to do what the Seahawks did, and hire a defensive guru who could take all the pressure off of the QB.  I thought it was a no-brainer.  You had a good running game, get a great defense, and a good QB coach and you dont need an offensive coach.  

 

Thats the reason I really wanted Mike Zimmer.  Sadly, it looks like hes doing those very things for Minnesota, and Im predicting the Vikings make the playoffs this year.  Teddy Bridgewater is probably very thankful for not feeling like he has to put up a TD every drive.

[TSO]

I like where this discussion is going right now... much more insightful and a lot less (hate to say this, but oh well) agenda-driven. 

 

I wanted to talk about my main concern/s with Gruden because I feel like I'm so often annoyed by the nature of the criticisms he receives here that I end up defending him by default the majority of the time I talk about him. It really is weird how that happened, lol. 

 

Before I get into those concerns, first, a few things... 

 

I'm honestly unsure about how good or bad Gruden is as a play-caller or strategist. I don't think anyone can be anywhere near confident in their ability to assess that right now. All I know is, with decent personnel acquisitions while coaching for the Bengals, he improved his side of the ball consistently and significantly. And in lesser leagues, he's done nothing but rise to the top in whatever he's done. Other than those facts, I won't get into this side of things much more right now. 

 

But as a public figure for the organization and what we saw from him last year, at least openly, I think I might be the only one who actually liked how Gruden handled the losing, lol. Far too often in the past I'd get the sense that our coach was just dejected and, I don't know... uhm, distant. And that may have just been their way of handling things publicly; not necessarily how they felt inside or what they showed to the team behind closed doors. Unfortunately, that's all we see to base our opinions on.  

 

But I found that Gruden's utter disgust and clear annoyance with the losing was a refreshing change. At no point did I feel like he wasn't affected by the losing to the very depths of his soul, lol. I might be an ahole for this, but I was pleased by his misery. The way it seemed like he was "losing it" meant something to me. 

 

My biggest issue with Gruden is, perhaps shockingly, actually about how he handles winning.

 

He seems like a guy who will really "let off" of the players if they're succeeding. I don't think I ever felt so confident about seeing an issue before it happened than in the lead up to the Thursday night game against the Giants, after we lost against the Eagles in a close one. I just really felt like he was allowing the team to be overly satisfied with their play... and the Thursday night game along with the subsequent week-long commentary coming from him and the players about how they "were too happy" and "thought they were really going places" after the Eagles game only proved it.

 

So, yeah, if there's one thing I'm majorly concerned about with Gruden, it's how he handles success. It was something I originally worried about when the hire was first made and all offseason last year everything coming out from the organization (FO, coaches and players) was how much of a player's coach he was and how much authority he'd give to the players. That works when you have great personnel you can trust to handle things on their own. Not so much, otherwise. And the organization was full of itself from the top. They had it way wrong in terms of where they were at as a whole. 

 

But the other issue with it is, what happens when you succeed? Do you start relaxing too much? Do you allow guys to get overly confident?  

 

Now, we might never see that situation come up, lol, so it may be a moot point... but, yeah, when it comes to concerns that's where I'm at. 

[Burgold]

We love Gibbs and rightly so.  But those 3 Lombardi's at Redskins Park have every bit as much to do with Beathard as they did Gibbs. 1987 was a Beathard masterpiece and Casserly's FA adds in '91 were genius.  But they don't get the limelight that Gibbs does and it's understandable to a degree. We don't take time to think deeply on the construction; only getting high on what happens on the field.

 

Reality is SMac is the first GM we have had here in 20+ years with real vision. On the one hand very sad,.... on the other, real reason to rejoice!

 

HTTR!!!

3 different QBs. 3 different RBs. 2 different GMs. Beathard built a great foundation as he did in Miami and San Diego, but Gibbs deserves all the lionization he can get. Gibbs and Beathard weren't equals. Take Gibbs out of the equation with the Beathard/Casserly team and we saw quickly and thoroughly the team disintegrated. Neither Pettibone nor Turner (who turned out to be a mediocre HC) could keep the ship afloat at all.

[chipwhich]

3 different QBs. 3 different RBs. 2 different GMs. Beathard built a great foundation as he did in Miami and San Diego, but Gibbs deserves all the lionization he can get. Gibbs and Beathard weren't equals. Take Gibbs out of the equation with the Beathard/Casserly team and we saw quickly and thoroughly the team disintegrated. Neither Pettibone nor Turner (who turned out to be a mediocre HC) could keep the ship afloat at all.

 

Uhhh, take Beathard out of the equation and you see him take another team to the super bowl.  You can play that game all day long.

[Burgold]

 

Uhhh, take Beathard out of the equation and you see him take another team to the super bowl.  You can play that game all day long.

 

OTOH, put Gibbs in a Vinny GMed team and see him take two of those to the playoffs and even win a game. Something that Norv, Schotty, Spurrier, and Zorn all failed to do. Even Shanny with what was left averaged 4 wins a year managing only one winning season when RGIII arrived as Superman.

[Skinsinparadise]

Sooo... last year the Oline wasn't allowing Morris to get hit behind the LOS, Morris wasn't struggling to find lanes like he did in previous years, and Desean had no affect on anything? Let alone the regression seen with the TEs in run-blocking as well. None of that happened because they were the same guys so it's impossible. Players don't age, QBs don't get injured, schemes need no adjusting, it should all just work.

Now, that could all be on Gruden. Or it could all be on those coaches he retained. Or it could be some combination of that along with a lack of an overall vision from the top and it would've been a tough situation for anyone to overcome (my position more or less).

Gruden was just a big dum dum. Kyle was just stupid, too. We probably could've finished as the best rushing team in NFL history had they just committed more. I mean, of course game situations and the defense knowing what's coming has nothing to do with anything. Just their commitment to it. Those idiots.

There's simply no way for you to know that more of a "commitment" would've helped the offense. There's no way to know how that would've affected the way defenses attacked us. There's no way to know how it would've affected the passing game. There's no way to know if the running game actually benefitted from the ratio we had due to the defense staying honest.

 

 

My point was in response to yours where you said the offense last year was better suited to throw the ball than run it.  My response was I think it was the reverse primarily because of the O line which was quick but not big -- zone blocking.  I wasn't going out on a limb with that point -- if you google it, you'd probably find 50 articles that talk about how the Shanny built O line is better suited to run blocking than pass blocking.

 

I talked about the imperfections of the pass blocking that also extends to TE and RB and the fact that we had young QBs learning a new system and IMO on balance the team was better suited to the run game.  My point beyond that was Scot and Jay at least rhetroic wise seem to be on board 

 

 A chunk of your response is off point with anything I said.  Unless, you are using my post to take aim at others.  Just some case in points:  that idea that "there is no way for me to know" with certainty that shifting the run to pass balance would have made a difference.  Well of course.  No one can project anything for sure retroactively or proactively.  It's all opinion. 

 

Or the idea that Jay is a dummy, Kyle too or that am missing that the running game had its own flaws (of course it did, we all know we stunk last year, it was a global issue).  

 

To me the point of the thread is a good one.  Jay both here and Cincy (which did have a good defense by the way) has been more of a pass guy than a run guy.  And as I stated here including to one of your posts -- IMO that's not an attack -- that's just who he has been as an offensive coordinator and plenty of offensive coordinators have been successful with that approach.  Scot's offensive teams in SF and Seattle were more run driven.  Will Jay mesh with this approach and as I said based on his rhetoric so far, yes.    The idea that Jay has been a more pass happy offensive coordinator isn't a condemnation of him.  It's just his style.  You said, heck the offensive was better suited to pass last year.  I disagreed.  That's it.

[Burgold]

Yeah, my understanding of the Shanny pass blocking system is that it really works best off  a ton of misdirection. If the play action game and the boot game isn't working it's dead.  Gruden didn't seem to like roll outs which hurts this line's ability to protect. The run game was semi-functional and Haslett kept letting the other guys score, so play action wasn't all that effective. To top it off, the tight ends, running backs, and QBs aided to the line woes.

 

In short though, the Shanny line is a better rush line, but it was generally ineffective at everything which was a good part of the reason that Mike could barely ever break the five win barrier in his four years with the 'skins.

[RandyHolt]

Good posts in here

 

Jay a rookie coach last year, needed a more hands on boss. Handling the QB situation, and heck all players egos - managing the entire team, clearly he struggled.  Allen just smiled and focused on winning off the field as Rome burned.

 

Now he has a real boss. I have been rough on Jay but part of my frustration may need to be pointed at Allen, who obviously let Jay walk right into failure. He let him do the almost unthinkable and roll with no QB coach, a young TE coach promoted to OC, retaining Haslett etc.  I don't care how many times it gets told to me that McVay was really and up and comer, our offense last year reeked as that being bunk and it being the party line to justify the promotion. I feel as if McVay was almost 2nd in command.

 

He needed the type of GM that could push him on why he was trying a power scheme with Mike's zone guys.

[Burgold]

I'm not as quick to absolve Jay though I'm fully behind him and want him to prove himself this year.

 

Jay had been a head coach before, different level, but should have understood the responsibilities better. More to the point, if he didn't, he had a Super Bowl leading Head Coach as a brother who he could lean on for advice. So, if Jay chose to go with an experience light OC and no QB coach that's really on his shoulders. He could have known better and perhaps should have known better.

 

That said, first years can be really tough. The good ones learn and take off from there. The bad ones flounder and sink. Gruden has every reason in the world to start swimming towards shore this year instead of grabbing at sharks hoping they're life preservers.

[LD0506]

I'm kinda w/ Burg here, whatever the reasons for last years dumpster fire everyone in the organization has incentive to learn and grow. Just assuming we've seen all there is, like no one in history has ever stumbled out of the gate but found their footing and succeeded, is trite and simplistic. Jay is not a naif, he's spent his adult life in the game, I am willing to withhold judgement 'til we see what happens this season.

 

Pointing fingers @ Allen doesn't get us anywhere either. He may well have seen that the team desperately needed a real GM but wasn't willing to commit to any of the available options (Scot wasn't one a year ago). Benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise- a pretty basic way to view such things that results in way less angst and acid reflux. Again, I need to see how it plays out before I go lighting my torch and sharpening my pitchfork.

 

I'm not sure that Joe Gibbs could have had the success he did w/o Beatherd (and Cooke as a matter of fact) anymore than Beatherd would have thrived w/o a Gibbs, it's always the sum of the parts. For 20 years we've been missing pieces of the puzzle, or had wrong pieces hammered into the roster or FO, etc., for the first time in a football eternity we seem (key word there) to have the whole thing coming together. Can we at least get it all reassembled and out to the track before we give up and have it towed?

[TSO]

My point was in response to yours where you said the offense last year was better suited to throw the ball than run it. My response was I think it was the reverse primarily because of the O line which was quick but not big -- zone blocking.

<EDITED FOR LENGTH>

To me the point of the thread is a good one. Jay both here and Cincy (which did have a good defense by the way) has been more of a pass guy than a run guy. And as I stated here including to one of your posts -- IMO that's not an attack -- that's just who he has been as an offensive coordinator and plenty of offensive coordinators have been successful with that approach. Scot's offensive teams in SF and Seattle were more run driven. Will Jay mesh with this approach and as I said based on his rhetoric so far, yes. The idea that Jay has been a more pass happy offensive coordinator isn't a condemnation of him. It's just his style. You said, heck the offensive was better suited to pass last year. I disagreed. That's it.

Yes, but my point was that you simply can't extrapolate the data from Gruden's time with the Bengals and assume that's all he is or all he'll ever be.

I get why you think my points weren't addressing yours for a large part, but they were made to emphasize that, overall, we don't really know what Gruden is about.

And I apologize if I came off too strong, not my intention, but re-reading my post it does a bit.

With the Bengals and here, it can be argued that the passing game was a strength just simply due to the WR corps. To argue otherwise is to assume the Oline, with Lauvao inserted, was equal to our past Oline in terms of zone-blocking and it ignores Desean's affect.

In the end, all we heard last offseason was how flexible Gruden is and how willing he is to tailor his offense based on player's strengths. We know he kept coaches here for the specific reason of keeping the ZBS, something not many new coaches do, instead opting to bring in "their guys" for "their scheme" immediately. We know Robert all offseason last year kept talking about how Gruden is giving him a lot of authority and the players will be in charge of what they want to be.

Did that all suddenly go down the drain? Gruden is, suddenly, this inflexible stubborn egomaniac who has a rigid definition of scheme? (Not what you're saying, I know, but it's a general sentiment that relates to your points)

That's my overall point here, and your ideas touched on them.

I think, taking into account all the above as well as the fact that he learned under his brother's offense... It's way too simplistic to say "oh, he just likes to pass based on his time with the Bengals and he's going to have to change his ways to fit Scot's vision", you know?

[Koolblue13]

Last year was a rookie year for Jay. Huge learning curve. Since then, we've upgraded (by way of theme of offensive direction) the Oline coach, got a QB coach with a good reputation, replaced several of our old regime coaches and added one of the most respected GMs.

 

Jays role has obviously been reduced, to just Head Coach.

 

This is the year I feel he can be judged correctly. Last year he was handed a **** sandwich and repeatedly asked how he enjoyed it. He was honest about it, which at first, the majority found refreshing, then as the losses mounted, his honesty was viewed as weakness and an unqualification. This year we got him a chef, fixed the kitchen up (S&C coach), got rid of a lot of old ingredients and hired some better line cooks.

 

If he shows improvement, I'm happy to be patient.

[Jumbo]

I thought that was a great post sub (#58)---and I know the feeling. Not everyone here is at the same level of "ugh" about Jay. And not everyone was displeased with his handling of everything. There is a ton of BS and nonsense that gets posted on all this just like with his inseparable link, RG3.

 

This is the much more intelligent dialogue (and I don't mean just on Jay) that many other threads could have had in the past. 

 

Some folks (more than a few being guilty) continue to bristle at this, but a great deal of the board stuff on jay's actions was tied to the severe level of "Leave Britney Alone" re: rg3 we had among so many.

 

To this day, virtually all the more ardent Jaynayers are "reformed" (somewhat) "all in for RG3" fans. Many of them posted along the lines that Jay "messed up" Bob's season beyond the latest injury's effect and hold him accountable for setbacks to Bob and thus (for them) the team. They're very very mad at Jay. "He's a bafoon" says the OP (people who are going to use that word should learn how to spell it, don't you think?--it's buffoon). 

 

But when we do stick with football points not driven by other things he is (as you and I have said repeatedly) still suspect in areas at this point. That we can credibly criticize jay without RG3  being involved is absolutely correct, even if that's not what's being practiced by some of those pointing it out.This year we should learn what we need to know. 

 

 

I didn't like how some of his "too open" dialogue might weaken the value of the QBs in any potential trades (which were non-existent so my concern was misplaced). But I liked the way he went about other things, including benching. It didn't help that instead of full and visible support from the owner and GM, he was quickly put at a distance by Dan---very different personalities in play and to be fair, one must allow that Dan may have been trying to be more in the background, apparently except when it came to rg3. Allen also was more withdrawn than not and closer to Dan, who left no doubt to those in close circles that he was still "all in for rg3" at heart in any matter.

 

I would think that it would have been like hell for Jay in that situation after the initial results of his tenure showed more struggles ahead rather than miraculous progress. You look at the FO back then, and just how supportive do you remember anyone being of Jay? Pretty minimal. The seriously biased poster will simply say he did little or nothing  to merit support. So along with all the other team issues, you take your rookie HC and undermine him, second guess him, and just let him dangle in the media wind far more often than not while decrying when the same is done to a young and struggling QB (a popular hypocrisy here for more than a few posters).

 

The environment was not as poisoned as it became with the Shanahans, but it was far from a productive model. Our FO handled Jay's first year just about as dysfunctionally as they did most other things up to Scot's arrival. I think Jay's going to have be a big boy with a thick skin and a lot of iron will, to go on top of x & o competence and ability to coach players to make it here, and that's that. With Scot and the other changes, it's far more on him than  it was last season.

 

I think left to himself, Jay is a straightforward no BS "real football guy" by attitude--just as Scot said. He's candid and honest with a good sense of humor who wants to win and enjoy football while doing it. Among other aspects re: this org, I think this setting was not a great match for those traits, but that the new hires of Scot and other staff can really turn that and other issues around. He ****ing knows a lot about football. Need to be real about that IMO. Whether this is all enough for him to be successful here, I don't know and remain more skeptical than optimistic, but then I got in that same place after the first season with Mike and look at the difference in their pedigrees.

[chipwhich]

I didn't like how some of his "too open" dialogue

 

I liken what Jay did with his openness to him not going down with the same ship every other coach went down on while here.  Especially Shanny and RG3.  Jay opened up the kimono each week and said, hey look what's in here, not much you want to see.  As a result, we finally got what we wanted.  Jay may or may not end up being a good coach, but he wasn't going to be a scapegoat for the drama, poor talent, locker room separation, etc that I don't think he realized he was walking into.

 

I can't believe I am saying this, but I actually think we may have a good team this year.  I am always most skeptical.

[TSO]

Wow, it's like one post after the other on here just upping the level of enlightened discourse.

Awesome, guys.

[Jumbo]

These articles below are old, but worth reviewing IMO and they all go to the nature of "Jay's offense." Over recent months in particular, I've read various posters speaking quite assuredly about the nature of "Jay's offense" when what I had read/saw over recent years of his career showed that Jay was really still forming/building his philosophy/preferred schemes (as one might logically suspect in a newer guy) and used varied approaches, often depending on the tools he had (as one also might logically suspect).

 

This all seems like it should be "duh" stuff, yet somehow wasn't given just due here previously in many cases. Now the fact that what he decides to do case by case goes against what many think he should have done still holds, of course, but many times I've seen posters asserting this concrete knowledge of jay's offense attach to it claims like "he won't adjust to his players"   or "jay likes to..." when I thought (as if often the case) there was a lot of conjecture (and even fabrication) offered as established fact.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/wp/2014/03/28/opposing-coaches-describe-a-jay-gruden-offense/

 

 

The question of exactly what Washington’s offense will look in Year 1 of theJay Gruden era remains a mystery, even to Gruden.

 

We know the playbook will feature some familiar elements, because the team retained Chris Foerster as offensive line coach, and promoted tight ends coach Sean McVay to offensive coordinator.

 

Things have yet to completely take shape, however, because as mentioned inthis morning’s post on Gruden, Robert Griffin III and the offense, a fair amount of experimentation lies ahead.

 

But there are some trademarks to a Jay Gruden offense, according to coaches that in the past three seasons faced him regularly as AFC North opponents. Precision, strong fundamentals and quarterback-friendly schemes rank among them.

 

 

“First off, Jay’s an excellent coach,” Ravens coach John Harbaugh said this week in Orlando. “It’s a West Coast offense. I think the Grudens have their own patent on their own version of the West Coast offense because they built it so well. But it’s based on running the ball effectively. They’re very physical up front, and three-step, controlled passing. The ball comes out quickly and it’s really hard to get to the quarterback. It’s based on probably a quick read and the ball’s out quick.

 

“It’s a lot of the classic West Coast principles,” Harbaugh continued. “And the thing that always strikes me, that I was always impressed with what Jay did in Cincinnati was the fundamentals were so well executed. I mean, they’re really fundamentally sound. You watch them in pregame and every one of their nine-routes is caught 42 yards, 4 yards from the sideline, which is kind of the textbook way of teaching that route. Every single guy caught the ball at that spot, so to me, that’s the sign of a good coach.”

 

Steelers coach Mike Tomlin agreed with Harbaugh’s assessment.

“I’m not going to speak specifically to his offense because I don’t know what he intends to do in D.C.,” Tomlin said. “But in Cincinnati, he utilized his personnel well. He’s a thoughtful guy, he keeps you off balance. He’s a good, fundamental football coach.”

 

 

 

Jay Gruden would love to find an offense that suits RG3

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24880773/jay-gruden-would-love-to-find-an-offense-that-suits-rg3

 

 

But there must be an offensive system in which RG3 can survive, right? If there is, Gruden has yet to find it.

 

<edit>

 

“I don't know what offense they are talking about,” Gruden said, via the Washington Post. “As far as offenses that I have studied in the National Football League, we all run similar dropback concepts. Not everybody runs the zone read.

 

“We run the zone read to try to help him out. We run a lot more play-actions and bootlegs than most teams. ...If you play quarterback in the National Football League, you're going to have to drop back and throw it.”

 

We'll mention again what we said 11 months ago when Gruden was hired: Back in 2011, when Gruden was the Bengals' offensive coordinator, he had a chance to take Colin Kaepernick, a quarterback whose style is similar to Griffin's, but went with Andy Daltoninstead.

 

Dalton had success in Gruden's scheme, one that relied on getting the ball out quickly and letting his playmakers, well, make plays. That's not Griffin's style, though he struggled prior to Gruden's arrival.

 

The Post's Jason Reid encapsulates Gruden's predicament in just two sentences: "(Redskinsowner Dan) Snyder and (general manager Bruce) Allen want to see (Griffin become a dropback passer), and those are the right people to have in your corner. Gruden is merely the coach. And at soul-crushing Redskins Park, that's one of the worst jobs to have."

 

 

 

As Jay takes it for not being committed to the run, he takes it for neglecting the passing game (this is not unusual for many coaches on many message board or in the media).

 

Pierre Garcon disappearing in Jay Gruden's offense

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000431770/article/pierre-garcon-disappearing-in-jay-grudens-offense

 

The versatile Garcon appeared to be a lock for 70 catches in Jay Gruden's system, but following the arrival of DeSean Jackson, he has taken a puzzling backseat in a system that is desperate for firepower.

 

"We tried to get Pierre involved early in the game and for whatever reason his targets are down and that's on us as play-callers," coachJay Gruden said Thursday, via the Post.

 

Garcon added: "It's all being on the same page and seeing what the defense is showing."

 

Gruden is right, of course. Garcon is one of the more dynamic receivers in football and, when paired with Jackson, should give opposing defenses fits. Instead, Garcon has been an afterthought to each and every quarterback Washington has trotted out this season.

 

Billick Says West Coast Offense No Longer Exists: Jay Gruden's West Coast Offense Will Be Similar To Jon's

 

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2011/2/4/1974619/billick-says-west-coast-offense-no-longer-exists-jay-grudens-west

 

 

Now that the Cincinnati Bengals have moved beyond the Bob Bratkowski era -- which brought three seasons with a top-ten ranking on offense -- the Bengals and their fans can focus more on what Jay Gruden, the team's newest offensive coordinator, may bring. When asked, during a conference call with the local media (I guess they still hate me), Jay Gruden was asked about his style of offense.

 

"The beauty of the West Coast is that it has a lot of different branches. We’re going to have a lot of different personnel groupings and a lot of formations. But when it’s all said and done we’ll be simple. I learned the offense from my brother Jon in Tampa Bay in seven years... The beauty of the offense is we can gear to our strengths, whatever they may be — great tight end, great running back, great running game. We have the ability to go a lot of different directions. Once we get into camp and get our roster set, we’ll fire a lot at ‘em and find out what we’re best at, what our quarterback likes and doesn’t like, and go from there."

 

We figured the offense would be more designed as Jon Gruden's version of the West Coast offense, which never ranked inside the top-ten in seven seasons with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Before you groan, read on. In three of his four seasons as the Raiders head coach, Gruden's offense ranked in the top ten and as the Eagles offensive coordinator (1995-1997), his offense ranked in the top-five in two of his three seasons there.

 

Before arriving at defensive-heavy Baltimore to coach the Ravens, Brian Billick was the Minnesota Vikings offensive coordinator from 1994-1998. And in three of those five seasons, Billick's offense ranked inside the top five with quarterbacks such as Warren Moon (at the end of his career), Brad Johnson and Randall Cunningham (at the end of his career). The Cincinnati Enquirer's Joe Reedy caught up with Billick on radio rowThursday night and Reedy asked about the West Coast offense.

 

"There’s no such thing as a West Coast offense anymore. It doesn’t exist," Billick said. "Everyone has taken different bits and pieces of it and its morphed into a number of different things. He may use some of the West Coast verbage but even the most ardent of west coast guys who came directly from the Walsh lineage whether its be via Holmgren to Andy Reid to Jon Gruden, they’ve all evolved it and it’s morphed into different forms almost like the Dungy 2 or Tampa 2, everyone uses a form of it. To identify a team like that, it’s kind of a misnomer because everyone is doing it."

 

 

 

 

 

 

A bit of a recap  from wiki

 

 

On February 3, 2011, Gruden was hired as the offensive coordinator for the Cincinnati Bengals.^[1][8] On January 13, 2012, Gruden signed a three-year extension with the Bengals at the position,^[9] even after being asked to interview for at least three NFL head coaching jobs (with the Jacksonville Jaguars, St. Louis Rams, and later turning down the Indianapolis Colts).^[10]

 

In January 2013, Gruden was interviewed by the NFL's Arizona Cardinals, Philadelphia Eagles, and San Diego Chargers for their vacant head coaching positions.^[11][12]

On January 9, 2014, Gruden was hired as the new head coach of the Washington Redskins, succeeding Mike Shanahan.^[13][14]

 

 

  

 

Gruden is also a work in progress. No one posting here simply "knows Jay's offense." Even veteran coaches with long-known tendencies mix it up at will for a variety of reasons, while fans often deploy that basic human behavior of selective vision. At best they may know a lot of stats related what he's done to date and the rest is conjecture, occasionally even intelligent, objective, and well-informed.

[Stefanskins]

3 different QBs. 3 different RBs. 2 different GMs. Beathard built a great foundation as he did in Miami and San Diego, but Gibbs deserves all the lionization he can get. Gibbs and Beathard weren't equals. Take Gibbs out of the equation with the Beathard/Casserly team and we saw quickly and thoroughly the team disintegrated. Neither Pettibone nor Turner (who turned out to be a mediocre HC) could keep the ship afloat at all.

great points as always..is Beathard in the HoF?  should be....first ballet...just for the fact of the 87' strike year...that cowboys game is etched into my memory...ingrained...elementum..i think Joe's greatest attribute/resource was (what he believed.. me too) his faith..not trying to start a theological debate (even though I love'em & politics)..but he has always come across genuine...free of any pretense..you always knew "what you see is what you get"...and that core faith has shaped a man that anyone can respect and root for...like my man Dean Smith...

 

/looking back I had some great role models growing up..

//alas role models are like brakes...if you don't use em' you're on your own..

[Burgold]

/looking back I had some great role models growing up..

//alas role models are like brakes...if you don't use em' you're on your own..

Yep, Gibbs was a model leader and if you needed a role model on how to party, but still just (barely) get your act together to be a hero at work there was always Riggo.

[pjfootballer]

My guy was Whisenhunt, but when we hired Gruden, I wasn't mad. I think he'll be a good coach, but he's going to need time. Let Scot have a couple of more drafts and you'll see what he can do.