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

[Burgold]

Usually, almost every year, my homerism creeps up right before the season starts.  I usually tell my friends "I think we could possibly go 10-6 this season", but in the back of my mind that inner voice always says, "Who are you kidding?  You know they'll suck".   Then the season unfolds and......they suck lol.   This year I'm telling everyone "we'll go 6-10", but now that inner voice is telling me, "you'll be pleasantly surprised". 

 

I made a 6-10 prediction.  I hope I'm wrong.

I think the biggest question is not Gruden or RGIII even, but Barry. Is Barry the guy we saw with the Lions or was he totally a victim. I have no idea if he is hopeless, terrible, miserable, poor, average, pretty good, or actually even good at his job. His record does not speak to success. Even as a linebackers coach, I don't remember San Diego having a stellar corp.

 

If Barry moves the needle from Haslett to below average or even average this could be a fun season. Gruden is a good enough playcaller. There are still talent questions, but enough to get it done. I don't think we were as hopelessly bad as our records have indicated. So, the question is did we fix safety, o line, and playcalling and, of course, have certain players improved.

[LD0506]

Kudos to Burg, Barry is going to be critical as to whether we get any better. The guy has been panned by critics and fans, so if he can win the hearts of the players he'll get to neener neener a bit by Halloween. I have to believe that he's oblivious to the criticism 'cuz otherwise he'd be huddling under a rock somewhere.

 

The FO has to have a plan here, we'll wait n see if it works but they aren't throwing darts, and I cannot accept that Barry was the only guy willing to take the job so I am looking forward to see what this D looks like.

 

I'd like to think the whole team is "thinking outside the box", since the Skins box has been a coffin for awhile.

[TSO]

We averaged 14.25 points the last month of the season and 45 ypg from Morris, which was the lowest totals of any quarter of the season.  I'm not sure how our offense looked improved, it was a hot mess until the very end.

 

And we saw how McCoy looks against a good d when we faced the rams and he got shut out, I have zero doubt that had he faced the 49ers, without Trent Williams mind you, he would have put up the same awful show RG3 did.  Likewise had rg3 played against the Colts I'm sure he puts up a stat line similar to Colt.  The qb change was COMPLETELY superficial.  A scapegoat for the rest of the offense/coaching staff.  That's why I dislike it.

 

Well, this was exactly why I didn't really want to go back and forth with you on this. Any attempt of mine to refute your arguments will be an attempt to refute your preferred perception. And with humans, that's a tough deal, lol.

 

But I'll answer you here more to point out for others how perceptions can shape what we choose to acknowledge, omit, downplay, etc...

 

I may be wrong, but I get the sense you're coming from a "Jay really did Robert wrong and was looking for a scapegoat" angle and everything is perceived through that lens. This is why you:

 

1) Downplay McCoy's game against the Colts and ignore it as a sign of offensive competence from Jay.

 

2) Highlight the game against the Rams, point out how we sucked against a "tough defense".

 

3) Completely omit the absolutely terrible game Robert had against the Bucs, who many wouldn't call a "tough defense".

 

4) Highlight the terrible game Robert had against the 49ers, pointing to it being a "tough defense" and undeserving of him being benched.

 

5) Ignore the way the team looked, at least offensively, after the Rams game and seemed to have a little fight in them, which was the original point in response to "they didn't respond to Gruden at all". 

 

6) Find an average (14.25 points) by way of a slightly arbitrary selection (I'll give you that it was the "last month" which is close enough to "end of season", but still) that suits your argument. The Rams game was an anomaly, which hurts any look at an "average" by any standard of scientific observation. 

 

Now, going into the season, we all knew Gruden was going to totally rely on Haslett for his side of the ball (huge mistake and, in the end, was his fault). By extension, however, that means the incompetence by the defense in terms of scheme/strategy was mainly on Haslett's shoulders. And that had an effect on Gruden's offensive game plans.

 

If one was so inclined, you could almost totally alleviate Gruden and call him, at the very least, a good offensive strategist, just by finding the games where the Defense held the opposing team to under 20 points (5 games in 2014) and seeing our record then (3-2, our other win coming against the Eagles who scored 24). So, essentially, we won 4 games when the defense did a good to average job. We lost 8 games when they did a poor job.  

 

But that's silly, to me. It's arbitrarily defining parameters to fit perceptions. I don't believe in the above at all. I think Gruden failed on numerous levels, but not the ones you're necessarily speaking of.

 

Now, I'm 99% sure I won't be able to change your perceptions here and how you're approaching this, and that's okay. You can have the last word if you'd like.   

[Jumbo]

<edit>

I have zero doubt that had he faced the 49ers, without Trent Williams mind you, he would have put up the same awful show RG3 did.  Likewise had rg3 played against the Colts I'm sure he puts up a stat line similar to Colt.  The qb change was COMPLETELY superficial.  A scapegoat for the rest of the offense/coaching staff.  That's why I dislike it.

 

 

Yes, you do dislike. Quite strongly. And that's fine--even may turn out to be very well justified, objectively. I'd say the odds favor you in any overall disapproval of Jay if I had to make the call today.

 

Laron, that red stuff reads as it's reality for you, but all it truly is, is your speculations and suppositions. The last two comments before your final sentence are not facts, of course, though they are written the same way they'd be if they were facts. The last sentence IS a fact though--you do dislike. You just created a "reality" of your own there that fed negative feelings you already held strongly, and then had that same emotional reaction to your creation.

 

It may be a perfectly reasonable contention that your imagined games and outcomes might have been as you suggest (or not), but even then you add those claims and conclusions that are highly debatable.

 

However,  your scenario didn't really happen, and I, for example, disagree with your "superficial" and "scapegoat" claims for "reasons" too, but I don't know, and won't post in a manner projecting that I do know, the actual truth of that matter. You basically "decided" you know on that matter and have taken that "knowledge" to reinforce already held beliefs. Such would often be a red flag re: bias in analytical process.

 

People (anywhere in textual or verbal communication) who routinely give their conjecture, speculation, extrapolation, interpretation, and projection--all parts of their "opinion"--the same gravitas and wording as actual established facts, and often don't consciously distinguish between them, may be practicing a common cognitive style that feeds rigidity of bias and ego (self-identity "needs/desires"), which in turn typically acts as obstacles to learning and communicating (i.e. "opinionated";"biased"; "argumentative"; "entrenched"). 

 

I'm not pinning those labels on you, btw, I'm speaking in general. 

 

Understanding this also allows one to get that, however informed or expert they see themselves, their's isn't necessarily "the one right view"---not only because they could simply be "wrong", despite ego telling them they know, but also because there often isn't "one right view", especially in matters when much is unknown and there are SO many variables in play.

 

NFL coaching staffs know a lot about football, too, but we have no hesitancy in telling how "wrong" they are often enough. Obviously message board posters, even when we know a lot about football, can be wrong.

 

I'm just advocating (again) in general and to any member for being aware of the value of some humility, some self-examination and self-awareness, and some objective detachment, as options.

 

For myself, however, I plan to continue just being a mutant weirdo and wreaking havoc. I am also available for parties at a modest fee.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

Yup, a nice summary of very reasonable positions, SIP. 

 

 

 

Too much of that is considered boring by many folks in this turf. 

 

 

 

I might haggle a bit on a take here and there, but then I'm impossible. 

 

If I may add at this juncture, I wana' cookie and a pat on the head for being super good and staying super far away from this thread.  . (Which is developing into an intriguing read. )

 

Hail. 

[Skinsinparadise]

I just think statements like "he (Gruden) hasn't shown anything to be special" are crazy from Skins fans, lol. Who the heck has here? I mean, really?

 

 

 

You know better than most, I've complained very loudly about the lack of a real GM and have even tried to do something about it in my small way along with others on the board including yourself, both relating to Cerrato and more recently Allen.  

 

And coaches here in various niches IMO have shown some special qualities. Shanny was able to build the running game here with a late rounder- no name back just like in Denver, you got Kyle's innovative 2012 offense, Gregg Williams inheriting Spurrier's bad defense and making them a top 5 defense a year later.  Gibbs' late surge win streaks towards the playoffs.  Marty starting off slow, and ending on a big winning streak without much talent and not having a QB.   Heck even Norv had a good run for a couple of years.

 

Jay on the other hand?   Now its just one year but IMO its not a good start.   No doubt the dysfunction at the top is a variable in the evaluation but IMO it doesn't make all the other variables irrelevant.  But running with that theme heck its not hard to tie Jay directly to the dysfunction at the top in that Bruce arguably was the head jester of the team's incompetence and air of nepotism, and Jay is his handpicked guy.  If you read one of the articles at the time of the hire, Bruce alludes to Jay practically had him at hello in the interview. Nothing would make Bruce look worse than Jay bombing at the job and multiple people who cover the team have said the same.

 

As to "special" what I mean about that is some coaches have more pedigree than others. There are assistant coaches who are considered  among the best of the best at what they do. Like for example Zimmer or Bowles on defense.  There are also some who are considered innovators -- like Shanny with the run game or lets say Chip Kelly's offense, etc.   Reputation wise, Jay isn't in those categories.  No one talked about modeling Cincy's offense or Jay was ground breaking or that he's one of the top 3 coordinators in the game, etc.  He was considered a good-competent WCO guy.   I can recall very well the buzz about the head coaches here from the 90s on as to their prior coaching resumes.  And yeah Jay would be ahead of Zorn but otherwise behind the rest including Norv.  

 

I am not going out on a limb with this point either.  John Keim (who is generally pretty reasonable) wrote multiple articles where he talked about asking numerous sources about Jay at the time of the hire and he said he got a mixed response.   My point is I don't see what Jay has done this year to show that he's any better than the B hire it was deemed at the time.  And heck yes I am considering context.  If I weren't factoring in Bruce where am grading Jay on a curve, I'd give Jay a D as opposed to saying he's treading water at a B.  

 

The B is somewhat based on hope that he rises to the level of his reputation which again isn't spectacular but good.   Hiring Cavanaugh and Callahan should help.  Don't know if Barry is an upgrade over Haz, we will see but the talent on D is better.  And hey we got Scot calling the shots.  The kicker to me and the big X factor is how does Jay grow from year 1 to year 2.  In theory it should be a big learning leap from that year to another so my main hope is we see a new and improved Jay and its plausible.

 

 

 

User Actions

 Following

John Keim‏@john_keim

Heard mixed opinions on jay gruden from others around nfl.

[Jumbo]

Just fyi Laron, I see sub just posted a "rebuttal" reply to you, too, but I wasn't trying to "pile on"  ---I had written that earlier but it's busy here and didn't get it finished and posted till just now. 

If I may add at this juncture, I wana' cookie and a pat on the head for being super good and staying super far away from this thread.  . (Which is developing into an intriguing read. )

 

Hail. 

 

 

Done, and glad to know you continue to elude Interpol. 

 

I'm glad you like the read so far. There are some intentional reasons why it's going the way it is and the rest is always luck of the draw. I notice our pal bedlam--and that's not a sarcastic use of "pal"-- the OP--is apparently too displeased with its direction to return. I don't know if he just wanted another basic "bash & trash" thread and is now disappointed, but the post (which should have just been added to an existing jay thread as I pointed out) sure seemed interested in little else.

 

For my two cents you shouldn't hesitate to jump in---everyone makes a choice as to what manner of "contribution" they want to make to a discussion regardless of their particular view, and there's always the option of actually thinking about that as though it mattered. 

 

I'm not skeered. I kilt a bar in AK when I was 9.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

.....

 

Done, and glad to know you continue to elude Interpol. 

 

.....

 

Thanks, but I tell yer it's not easy. I owe it all to Westy. I learn't how to go deep under from the man in the frog suit. (One of his initial brilliant disguises.).  

 

The fact I remain a free man following his ideology (or should that be idiotology) is as big a mystery to me as anyone.  .

 

Hail. 

[Laron Burgundy]

Well, this was exactly why I didn't really want to go back and forth with you on this. Any attempt of mine to refute your arguments will be an attempt to refute your preferred perception. And with humans, that's a tough deal, lol.

 

But I'll answer you here more to point out for others how perceptions can shape what we choose to acknowledge, omit, downplay, etc...

 

I may be wrong, but I get the sense you're coming from a "Jay really did Robert wrong and was looking for a scapegoat" angle and everything is perceived through that lens. This is why you:

 

1) Downplay McCoy's game against the Colts and ignore it as a sign of offensive competence from Jay.

 

2) Highlight the game against the Rams, point out how we sucked against a "tough defense".

 

3) Completely omit the absolutely terrible game Robert had against the Bucs, who many wouldn't call a "tough defense".

 

4) Highlight the terrible game Robert had against the 49ers, pointing to it being a "tough defense" and undeserving of him being benched.

 

5) Ignore the way the team looked, at least offensively, after the Rams game and seemed to have a little fight in them, which was the original point in response to "they didn't respond to Gruden at all". 

 

6) Find an average (14.25 points) by way of a slightly arbitrary selection (I'll give you that it was the "last month" which is close enough to "end of season", but still) that suits your argument. The Rams game was an anomaly, which hurts any look at an "average" by any standard of scientific observation. 

 

 

Absolutely terrible is a bit of an overstatement for RG3's game against the bucs.  It wasn't good, but let's factor in that, again, RG3 was missing Trent Williams, and that defensive front 7 still has talent.  It was a below average game from rg3, but absolutely terrible?  That's hyperbole.

 

And so if we omit the rams game, and only look in the last 3 weeks, we see, in your eyes, the team showing a bit more fight offensively.  Oddly enough, that's when RG3 played the majority of the snaps again.  So was the rg3 benching necessary or a kneejerk reaction to one very bad game?  Maybe you think the benching refocused rg3, but I think what we really saw was the sum of how our offense looks when we are missing our best player, Williams.

 

By the way, our average for points in the final 3 games is 19, the average for the season was 18.8.  That's not really a significantly better showing out of these guys.  I just don't see how our players rallied around Gruden.  I don't recall anyone saying so to the press either, seemed more like they just wanted the season done with.

[LD0506]

As entertaining as this thread is, I am still continually distracted by the thought that the entire board is a maze construct, we're the rats and Jumbo is the guy hiding the cheese.

[Jumbo]

shhhhh

 

 

 

 

 

[Laron Burgundy]

Yes, you do dislike. Quite strongly. And that's fine--even may turn out to be very well justified, objectively. I'd say the odds favor you in any overall disapproval of Jay if I had to make the call today.

 

NFL coaching staffs know a lot about football, too, but we have no hesitancy in telling how "wrong" they are often enough. Obviously message board posters, even when we know a lot about football, can be wrong.

 

I'm just advocating (again) in general and to any member for being aware of the value of some humility, some self-examination and self-awareness, and some objective detachment, as options.

 

For myself, however, I plan to continue just being a mutant weirdo and wreaking havoc. I am also available for parties at a modest fee.

 

Certainly I could be wrong about how each player would have played, but I just don't see how, based on how he played in other games, that he would have had another disaster showing, or that Colt would have been significantly better against the 49ers.  I was always told to make declarative statements in arguments.  It's not that the person doesn't take in to account being wrong in those statements, it's just that it wouldn't be too fun to read things like "The qb change was COMPLETELY superficial... possibly, but possibly not" in every other sentence.

[TSO]

Jay on the other hand? Now its just one year but IMO its not a good start. No doubt the dysfunction at the top is a variable in the evaluation but IMO it doesn't make all the other variables irrelevant. But running with that theme heck its not hard to tie Jay directly to the dysfunction at the top in that Bruce arguably was the head jester of the team's incompetence and air of nepotism, and Jay is his handpicked guy. If you read one of the articles at the time of the hire, Bruce alludes to Jay practically had him at hello in the interview. Nothing would make Bruce look worse than Jay bombing at the job and multiple people who cover the team have said the same.

User Actions FollowingJohn Keim‏@john_keim[/font][/color][/indent]

Heard mixed opinions on jay gruden from others around nfl.

You love to quote that tweet from Keim every chance you get, lol, but you never mention that almost every single hire, or even player acquisition, has Keim saying the same thing. And not just with our team.

I'm sure the same can be said about every beat reporter reporting about every team, as well. Not many hires are universally lauded like the McCloughan one.

I really don't care about Bruce on this matter. Bruce has had a career being around competent coaches, so I think you're taking his historical inability to evaluate player personnel successfully and are applying it to his ability to recognize a good coach. Dude is the son of George Allen for God's sake, I don't think he's a total idiot on the subject, lol.

The idea that Gruden was just "meh" this whole time is utter nonsense. He was in demand no matter how many times you try and claim otherwise. Please, quote your articles that you have bookmarked ready to go ( ) and I'll google to find otherwise, I know we've been through this spiel.

Gruden developed a Bengals offense moving on from Palmer and Ochocinco, with next to nothing but young players, a rookie QB, rookie WR, etc... To proceed to do nothing but improve until they were a top five Offense (I think they were top five, somewhere there, whatever). That garners you respect in the NFL, and he had it.

I'm on my phone right now, so maybe I'll do this later, but I think the Bengals were also top notch in red zone offense. Like top two good, I believe only behind the Broncos his last year there.

That's not easy in the NFL. That's actually pretty damn special. You don't do that by being "meh". Now, here comes the "well he had AJ GREEN ARGHHH" crap. Like he was the only coordinator with a stud WR. And I think Marvin Jones was actually the guy who scored most in the red zone. I should've kept those nuggets as ammo, I'm 99% sure those arguments were going to come, lol.

I don't know if he'll end up being a special HC or not. But I'm so sick and tired of seeing Skins fans constantly destroy the past accomplishments of the men who find themselves eating **** here. That goes for both players and coaches. It's. So. Annoying.

We prop them up. Overly praise them. Assume we can just copy and paste their past successes right on to their time here, expecting all that they've done well in the past to translate seamlessly.

And then it doesn't.

And thus begins the trashing and dismantling of anything that could possibly be perceived as positive about them or their pasts.

The next guy, though. He'll be awesome, I'm sure. He's really shown he can do x and is super efficient with y, and he knows how to get the most out of his players at z position. Surely, he'll succeed!

Then he doesn't. Then it's "come on, that idiot could never do x, he just had a good group of guys doing it all for him. And his super efficiency with y? Bah! That was just one year, really. Oh, and about his success with position z? Those players were just great and would've succeeded under anyone. What were we thinking hiring that doofus?"

Now that we have McCloughan, I probably won't get to test my hypothesis here out, lol. If Gruden fails, I think the next guy will be set up better than any coach we've brought in under Snyder's tenure to get the glory. So maybe the vicious cycle will end, but I refuse to accept it as anything else BUT a vicious cycle thus far.

And Laron Burgundy, I said you can have the last word on this so I'll honor that (somewhat, lol), but one little thing, I don't deal in hyperbole. I'm hardly alone in how I perceive Robert's game against the Bucs.

[chipwhich]

Jay on the other hand?   Now its just one year but IMO its not a good start.   No doubt the dysfunction at the top is a variable in the evaluation but IMO it doesn't make all the other variables irrelevant.  But running with that theme heck its not hard to tie Jay directly to the dysfunction at the top in that Bruce arguably was the head jester of the team's incompetence and air of nepotism, and Jay is his handpicked guy.  If you read one of the articles at the time of the hire, Bruce alludes to Jay practically had him at hello in the interview. Nothing would make Bruce look worse than Jay bombing at the job and multiple people who cover the team have said the same.

 

I really struggle to take anyone seriously who says the dysfunction at the top is a variable, but then puts the majority of the blame on Jay.

 

This is a franchise that discussed putting Pepper Rogers as a head coach, brought in a retired bingo caller to call plays, hired the most coveted college coach who failed, hired a hall of famer who spent like a drunken sailor and had 2 HORRIBLE seasons and 2 seasons needing miracles, hired a failure of a QB coach to run the team after the fans revolt, had Vinny Cerrato, drafted few players, and signed some of the worst free agent contracts in the history of the league, and then brought Jay in with a QB filled with drama and multiple serious injuries, no GM, and a joke of a roster, and you want to blame it on a first year head coach???

 

You really can't make this stuff up......

[TSO]

I am also available for parties at a modest fee.

BS, I won't even get into the exorbitant fees and random expenses you included last time we hired you.

[PigskinRedskin]

Well said, thesubmitted one and yes, you're correct about the Bengals in 2013 (Red Zone TD's):

 

1. Denver Broncos - 72.73% 

2. Cincinnati Bengals - 71.43%

...

...

...

21. Washington Redskins - 52.00%

 

Gruden was an highly sought after "up and coming" coordinator that many teams would gladly have taken as their next HC, it just so happens he come to us and acquired a complete dismantled, de-moralized football team and front office.

 

His first draft, still remains to be completely seen, is meh at best as of right now, which tends to be fairly normal for a 1st time HC with a GM that's concerned with planning events. Things have changed fairly dramatically this year and it seems he's picked some people he wants to work with (Barry, Callahan) and is given some strong players that can help shore up some glaring weak spots.

 

He's just going into his second year with a team that's been trouble for a couple decades now (a few flashy season, nothing near sustainable). As long as he can clean up some completely pointless attributes of his coaching (telephone play calling on the sidelines, maybe NOT so open with press) and McCloughin can instill some fiery players, we may string together a few winning seasons.

 

PS - Awesome conversation going on in here! 

[TSO]

^^ Okay, I'm glad I didn't just make that up about the red zone offense, lol, I was worried for a sec. SIP is just waiting for something to embarrass me with.

Thanks, Pigskin.

[chipwhich]

Meanwhile down in Baltimore, John Harbaugh rolled into town as a special teams coach from Philly, a team that has a GM, a few HOF'ers and took his team to the Super Bowl.  They get compensatory picks every year because they lose players to free agency, don't sign old players (Santana Moss), and move on from free agents each year.

 

John Harbaugh would be a DISASTER here.  But he won a SB in Baltimore.

 

Talent wins.

[88Comrade2000]

It's simple. Jay wins, Jay stays.  Jay loses and he is gone. Scott has no commitment to him; Jay has to show he's the man for the future.

 

This team has to be a better team by the end of 2015; leading you to believe better things will happen in 2016. IF he jumps ahead of the curve in 2015; that would help him out.  A repeat of last year and Gruden won't even last a full season.

 

 

Personally, I think Jay will show that he is still clueless as head coach and will be relieved of his duties at some point. That could happen early in the season or could it happen after the season; but my gut says a new coach in 2016.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

It's simple. Jay wins, Jay stays. Jay loses and he is gone. Scott has no commitment to him; Jay has to show he's the man for the future.

This team has to be a better team by the end of 2015; leading you to believe better things will happen in 2016. IF he jumps ahead of the curve in 2015; that would help him out. A repeat of last year and Gruden won't even last a full season.

Personally, I think Jay will show that he is still clueless as head coach and will be relieved of his duties at some point. That could happen early in the season or could it happen after the season; but my gut says a new coach in 2016.

No way in hell that happens. Gruden may not be back next year but he's not gonna be "relieved of his duties" mid-season, and especially not early in the season.

[Burgold]

No way in hell that happens. Gruden may not be back next year but he's not gonna be "relieved of his duties" mid-season, and especially not early in the season.

I agree with one caveat. I could see a very remote possibility that Callahan takes over. Just something in the way that McCloughan keeps praising him over and over.

 

I'd put the odds at mid season firing under 10 percent though.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

I agree with one caveat. I could see a very remote possibility that Callahan takes over. Just something in the way that McCloughan keeps praising him over and over.

I'd put the odds at mid season firing under 10 percent though.

Gruden would have to completely lose the locker room, not just games. Also, his play calling would have to be extremely lacking and the team would have to be playing undisciplined week after week. I just don't see Scot M being impatient.

[cakmoney61]

Enjoyed reading the posts about Jay. I am glad he is getting another shot. I thought it was good to see him snatch the team away from RG3 last year although his method of doing it was very questionable and quite messy. At that point, however, the Redskins became "his" team.

Unfortunately, his play-calling was very frustrating. Week after week, he would stop running the ball and would go pass happy especially when RG3 was the QB. It was like he was trying to prove to RG3 that being a pocket passer was over his head...and he was proven to be correct.

The defense and special teams only threw gasoline on the fire by being atrocious which forced the team into predictable passing situations with a horrid OL.

The Redskins appear to have accrued better talent and better coaches after hiring an actual GM. So Jay gets one more chance to prove he can be a good coach. A GM can give you better talent and coaches but execution, a positive, winning attitude, and team unity is the responsibility of the head coach. Needless to say, I hope Jay passes with flying colors.

If not, I suspect our GM will be hiring a new coach next year.

[LD0506]

Winning attitude, team unity, etc., only comes from a competent organization. Our problems have been systemic failures, not the coach, not the owner, but the whole damned mishmosh mess of disparate pieces. If Scot only really does one thing for this franchise I'd hope it was to show them what a normal, functional organization looks and runs like. He's seen several and ought to be able to perceive the basic elements that drive a winning team, hopefully he can communicate that to the others.

 

When we were good (and yes, we actually were) we had a strong owner, a GM that knew his place in the hierarchy, a HC that understood what his job was and that "coaching" is a helluva lot more than just playcalling on Sundays. New guys came in and were instantly immersed in that "winning attitude" we talk about like unicorns (popular topic of discussion but when's the last time you saw one around here?). Coaches joined the staff and were taken into the fold from day one, integrated into the larger scheme of production and accountability, etc, etc and so on.

 

I like what I've heard and seen so far, gonna withhold judgement until the season starts but focusing on the HC or QB in a vacuum, separate from everything that affects them, and passing judgement on their worth is really simplistic and kinda foolish. There is clear context to all these debates, and ignoring that just prevents anything of substance from making its way into the conversation.

[Laron Burgundy]

Enjoyed reading the posts about Jay. I am glad he is getting another shot. I thought it was good to see him snatch the team away from RG3 last year although his method of doing it was very questionable and quite messy. At that point, however, the Redskins became "his" team.

Unfortunately, his play-calling was very frustrating. Week after week, he would stop running the ball and would go pass happy especially when RG3 was the QB. It was like he was trying to prove to RG3 that being a pocket passer was over his head...and he was proven to be correct.

The defense and special teams only threw gasoline on the fire by being atrocious which forced the team into predictable passing situations with a horrid OL.

I don't agree with the snatching the team away from rg3. I don't think it was really ran by rg3 nor do I think you ever publicly bash your own players. Ever. Does anyone think Joe Gibbs would have done the same thing? I can't imagine ANY professional coach doing as much. It was bizarre.

Meanwhile he heaps praise on to our offensive line, you can't have that both ways if you're crying to the public about one player playing poorly but not others.

A coach has every right to bench a player if he thinks another guy gives him a better shot to win, but the wishy washy and yet vengeful way he went about it was several degrees off from the maturity and decision-making you'd expect out of a professional coach.

I think the low quality of head coaches we've gotten has vastly lowered the expectations some have around here. Harbaugh almost assuredly wouldn't have won a super bowl here, true, but I think you'd have to be naive to think he'd have that 4-12 circus either.