Vermeil II vs. Gibbs II

[Skins11]

In Vermeil's second stint as a head coach in St. Louis, he built a coaching staff out of people that he knew and worked with before. Vermeil proceeded to go 5-11 and 4-12 the next two years, at which point I believe he overhauled his coaching staff.

Joe Gibbs did pretty much the same thing in 2004 by hiring Bugel, Breaux, and the whole crew. This worried me a little bit due to Vermeil's early experiences in St. Louis. However, Gibbs has already had MUCH more success than Vermeil did his first two years with a coaching staff comprised of guys he has worked with before. In addition, Gibbs has already realized the value of hiring a bright mind from the outside by hiring Saunders. I see very good things in the very near future.

Not really too much of a revelation, but I was just wondering if there are other parallels/differences between the two situations.

[SkinsHokieFan]

A brand new QB in year 3 comes out and leads the team to a Superbowl

[AJ_Skins]

There is no question there are similarities. Vermeil won the SB in year 3. I think we've got a real shot with the right QB and one more WR.

[TheSteve]

I think the difference with Vermiel's relative failure is that Vermiel didn't have an excellent defense-both in talent and coaching staff, to offset his offensive struggles as he figured things out.

This defense has been the franchise's savior a number of times.

Also, it's somewhat ironic that DV thought he could win with a QB that really wasn't a great one, but certainly ok(as in average) NFL QB material, in Tony Banks(He wasn't as bad in St. Louis as he was in Washington, but he was still a boneheaded QB). Likewise, Gibbs has been stubborn in his continued support of Brunell, who was merely a good QB in his prime and can no longer maintain consistent play over the course of a season without breaking down, and at his best at this current point in his career still needs the team around him to be operating in perfect harmony in order to keep the team rolling.

In came Martz, a new QB, and a SB.

In comes Saunders, a new starting QB..super bowl?

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

In Vermeil's second stint as a head coach in St. Louis, he built a coaching staff out of people that he knew and worked with before. Vermeil proceeded to go 5-11 and 4-12 the next two years, at which point I believe he overhauled his coaching staff.

Joe Gibbs did pretty much the same thing in 2004 by hiring Bugel, Breaux, and the whole crew. This worried me a little bit due to Vermeil's early experiences in St. Louis. However, Gibbs has already had MUCH more success than Vermeil did his first two years with a coaching staff comprised of guys he has worked with before. In addition, Gibbs has already realized the value of hiring a bright mind from the outside by hiring Saunders. I see very good things in the very near future.

Not really too much of a revelation, but I was just wondering if there are other parallels/differences between the two situations.

I still think luck plays a big part in all of this. I like Trent Green a lot as a QB. But his getting injured was the best thing that ever happened to Dick Vermeil. Kurt Warner was a perfect fit in that offense and I don't think they have the same success with Green as the starter. If they go 9-7 that year and Vermeil gets axed, things are a lot different.

(It's amazing how luck affects football seasons. If Tommy Maddox doesn't get hurt in week 2 last year, the Steelers may have gone into this season off an 8-8 record and would have been rolling out an untested Roethlisberger. Heck, what would this season have been like but for Ramsey getting hurt in Week 1. Would we have beaten Dallas with him as the starter?)

[Skins11]

I still think luck plays a big part in all of this. I like Trent Green a lot as a QB. But his getting injured was the best thing that ever happened to Dick Vermeil. Kurt Warner was a perfect fit in that offense and I don't think they have the same success with Green as the starter. If they go 9-7 that year and Vermeil gets axed' date=' things are a lot different.

(It's amazing how luck affects football seasons. If Tommy Maddox doesn't get hurt in week 2 last year, the Steelers may have gone into this season off an 8-8 record and would have been rolling out an untested Roethlisberger. Heck, what would this season have been like but for Ramsey getting hurt in Week 1. Would we have beaten Dallas with him as the starter?)[/quote']

Green would have done well, but you're right... who knows what would have happened. The good thing for us is the rest of our team as a whole is better than the rest of that team prior to year 3.

[AJ_Skins]

I still think luck plays a big part in all of this. I like Trent Green a lot as a QB. But his getting injured was the best thing that ever happened to Dick Vermeil. Kurt Warner was a perfect fit in that offense and I don't think they have the same success with Green as the starter. If they go 9-7 that year and Vermeil gets axed' date=' things are a lot different.

(It's amazing how luck affects football seasons. If Tommy Maddox doesn't get hurt in week 2 last year, the Steelers may have gone into this season off an 8-8 record and would have been rolling out an untested Roethlisberger. Heck, what would this season have been like but for Ramsey getting hurt in Week 1. Would we have beaten Dallas with him as the starter?)[/quote']

Hard to say, since we had about 10 yards and zero points through 55 minutes of play with Brunell before they hit a couple of bombs over a lazy Dallas secondary...