bubba9497 Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 http://www.nfl.com/nflnetwork/story/9177796 - full article THE OTHER PART OF THE DEAL When the Redskins made Gregg Williams football's highest-paid defensive coordinator, they also made him a promise. The Redskins told Williams that they would go out and hire the best available offensive coordinator. The one the Redskins viewed as the best was former Chiefs offensive coordinator Al Saunders. It is the reason that Redskins officials used Daniel Snyder's private plane to fly to Kansas City to recruit Saunders to come to Washington, and why they made him football's highest-paid offensive coordinator. Saunders was on the Redskins' radar from the time they redid Williams' deal. They almost were like a package deal, Williams and Saunders. Now Washington has two of football's highest-profile coordinators, proving that football is as much about CEOs as Xs and Os. Joe Gibbs is now the Redskins' CEO, and the two coordinators beneath him are like the Redskins' two head coaches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHARLOTTESKINS Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 When Gibbs does eventually go, I don't think there is going to be any dropoff in team performance with GW and Saunders controlling both sides of the ball....i think Saunders will stay for a while because his head coaching shots are over.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 I'll be interested to see what if any response the team offers to the idea that they "promised" Williams anything specific about the OC position in getting his new contract done. I'll also be interested to see that conclusions people here make about the alleged promise, and what it really means in terms of everything from Gibbs' capabilites, Williams view of those capabilities, the future succession to HC, etc. We're off and running. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCS Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 Make conclusions? Here on Extreme? No way. Maybe some reading between the lines here and there..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
More Complete Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 I'll be interested to see what if any response the team offers to the idea that they "promised" Williams anything specific about the OC position in getting his new contract done. I'll also be interested to see that conclusions people here make about the alleged promise, and what it really means in terms of everything from Gibbs' capabilites, Williams view of those capabilities, the future succession to HC, etc. We're off and running. I agree, I mean they haven't even had a press conferance yet and all these so called "promises" seem alleged, and not fact. Who is the source for this information relating to this? Sounds like rumors. If true, I wonder why Williams wanted this. Isn't it kind of a slap in the face of Breaux, Bugel and Musgrave? I imagine everyone is going to say that Gibbs is now just a figure head or CEO and really doesn't do much as a head coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilbur58z Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 Total B.S. of a story. Shefter's basically saying Williams spat in Gibbs's and the rest of the offensive coaches faces by saying they were crappy coordinators and that he would leave unless they brought in the "best" offensive coordinator. He makes it sound like all the Redskins coaches hate each other, hate working for the Redskins, and have to be coaxed into staying with big money and specific clauses in their contracts guaranteeing they get whatever they want. And he makes Williams himself out to be like T.O. or something. It's almost laugh out loud funny. That could be the absolute worst tidbit I've seen from an NFL writer in years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metalhead Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 The article probably just used the wrong word in "promise". They told Greg they we're going to get the best OC available. There's no promise there, just a fact stated to Williams. It could be perfectly cool with Greg - maybe he wants the best OC available so he doesn't have to work harder on the O for if/when he takes over?? Greg didn't have huge success the first go-round in Buffalo and it's likely they he wants the team ready for greater success with great personel around him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H-O-G Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 So Gregg Williams signed the contract knowing we were going to go out and get the best offensive coordinator possiable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 I'll be interested to see what if any response the team offers to the idea that they "promised" Williams anything specific about the OC position in getting his new contract done. I'll also be interested to see that conclusions people here make about the alleged promise, and what it really means in terms of everything from Gibbs' capabilites, Williams view of those capabilities, the future succession to HC, etc. We're off and running. You read my mind.... except I'm guilty of greasing the wheels. I mean... come on. There HAS to be a change in the hierarchy a bit no? Not that I have a problem with it. None at all. But is it really far-fetched to think that the dynamic of our coaching structure might not be what we think it is? The Saunders hire, while a great move... was a peculiar one. The Redskins jumped from #29 to #11 overall on offense. Then decide to hire an offensive coordinator? During his first year.... Gibbs admits to watching tapes and stealing some plays from other teams. Then, in the off-season, he goes out and hires one of the coordinators from another team (Jags) and makes him the QB coach and implements the shotgun. Now, he goes out and gets one of the best offensive coordinators in the game to call the plays. Is it unreasonable to think Joe Gibbs might want to remove himself from (1) the offensive or (2) prepared himself for an administrative role? I'm fine with him on the sidelines though... and managing the coaches. That's cool too. But there's a motive behind every decision... and it would interesting to know these details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 Once again Redskins making offseason highlights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 Is it unreasonable to think Joe Gibbs might want to remove himself from (1) the offensive or (2) prepared himself for an administrative role? Actually, that was one of my first thoughts, that he's slowly weaning his way off of this team. In the end, it is probably best for him, and best for the organization in the long term. I mean, the goal was to return the Redskins to the right track, wasn't it? Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Operations Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 Gibbs is trying not just to win now but to right this franchise and put us back on a long-term track to consistent success. It's not about Gibbs's ego. It's about the team. I love Gibbs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 While I don't think for a minute Gibbs is going to walk away anytime soon, I can't help but think he badly wants to get back to the Super Bowl one more time while leaving the future of the team in the best hands possible. I think it pained him to see the team go down the tubes after he left last time and I think he wants to ensure that doesn't happen again when he finally decides to hang up his coaching hat for good, especially if he's already privately accepted a FO position. It also has me wondering if Dan Snyder will make Joe a minority owner. In any event, whether the story is BS or not, we have a HOF coach and two of the best, if not THE best, coordinators in the NFL supported by many guys have have been or will be coordinators or head coaches some day. Talk about your coaching dream team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaty49 Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 I agree, I mean they haven't even had a press conferance yet and all these so called "promises" seem alleged, and not fact. Who is the source for this information relating to this? Sounds like rumors.If true, I wonder why Williams wanted this. Isn't it kind of a slap in the face of Breaux, Bugel and Musgrave? I imagine everyone is going to say that Gibbs is now just a figure head or CEO and really doesn't do much as a head coach. Belicheck runs the same type of system. He had Charlie Weis and Romeo Crennel(sp). I think its good for the team to be like this. Gibbs is a great motivator. Let the other guys worry about the x's and o's and let Gibbs worry about game strategies and getting the guys ready to play. I love it. Gibbs is the best motivator, strategy planner, and GM in football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaty49 Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 Once again Redskins making offseason highlights. But this one is guaranteed to help, unlike Deion, George, and those bums. Coaching wins in this league, not flashy players. :helmet: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomE Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 I didn't particularly read any "venom" in the article. The writer may have "taken out of context" and "re-worded" some scuttle-butt coming across the sporting news grapevine.... nothing new there, now is there. If there is actually some substance to this so called promise, I'd view it as just a continued effort to get the best organization assembled as they can. Gibbs is not beyond making changes for the better, he may have given Williams assurances that there would be a continued effort to improve the offensive side and "do-whatever-it-takes"....... was it bait to keep Williams onboard.. probably not. I also doubt that Williams, after working with Gibbs over the past couple of years, would deem it necessary to stipulate demands of this nature.... knowing that Gibbs is gonna' do it anyway. Gibbs has referred to Williams as his "partner" ..... I would think that most who work with Gibbs feel that they are partners ..... similar to a high profile law firm.... a group of partners with one or two senior partners guiding the policy of the firm..... each partner, experts in their own field, are given autonomy to "get it done" .... within policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal2Washington Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 I highly doubt Williams tried to blackmail Gibbs and the F.O. into getting an OC or leaving. If a coach did that then I'm sure Gibbs and ecspecially Snyder would relieve said coach of his duties. Is it possible that Gibbs is secure in his coaching ability and "manhood" also known as pride, that he is willing to go out and better the team at his expense, by allowing his assistants to receive all the glory. Gibbs is teaching by making the ultimate sacrifice, he is showing everyone in the organization that trying to win a Super Bowl is about a team not one person. We all know, the coaches all know, and the players all know that we have a Super Bowl defense that is being held back by the offense. So what does Gibbs do? forget tweeking and adjusting the O, it wasn't good enough last offense to get us to the Super Bowl. Gibbs brings in arguably the best OC in the game, numbers wise, to give a shot of life in to the arm of the offense. It's not only a great coaching move but a great GM, if you will, move. The humility that Gibbs is capable of showing should be remembered as his greatest accomplishment during his second tenure, ecspecially if GW defense and Saunders offense when Gibbs his fourth SB. But we all know Gibbs won't except credit only blame. :dallasuck :gaintsuck :eaglesuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris 44 Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 I think many of us may be reading to much in to this. It was painfully obvious that our defense was good enough to take us to the SuperBowl. It was just as obvious that we had glaring weaknesses in the offense, and that is what kept us from advancing. Gibbs and Co. went out and did what they feel would best serve the team by hiring Saunders. I think it's that simple. :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinFan63 Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 Gibbs is trying not just to win now but to right this franchise and put us back on a long-term track to consistent success. It's not about Gibbs's ego. It's about the team. I love Gibbs. Exactly. Don't be fooled. Gibbs IS our head coach and will be for the next three years. But he is preparing our future with these moves. A future long after he's gone. The dynasty has begun! Hail!:point2sky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweezel Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 I think many of us may be reading to much in to this. It was painfully obvious that our defense was good enough to take us to the SuperBowl. It was just as obvious that we had glaring weaknesses in the offense, and that is what kept us from advancing. Gibbs and Co. went out and did what they feel would best serve the team by hiring Saunders. I think it's that simple. :2cents: I agree. However, on the other hand while the team is making improvements to weaknesses that it finds, they are putting in pieces of the puzzle that will keep this team strong when Gibbs leaves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimster Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 Is it unreasonable to think Joe Gibbs might want to remove himself from (1) the offensive or (2) prepared himself for an administrative role? I'm fine with him on the sidelines though... and managing the coaches. That's cool too. But there's a motive behind every decision... and it would interesting to know these details. I have a feeling that's just it - Joe Gibbs has decided to delegate more to others at this stage in his career. - This still allows him to have input wherever needed, yet not tying him down to any specific responsibility. But as of now, Joe is still the coach, and the players play for him. This also may be him trying to groom other coaches for the day that he does retire or take a seat in the FO. ...and as far as the "promise" to Gergg Williams. I have to believe that was more like Joe Gibbs: "Gregg, I promise we'll get better on offense". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 So if as most of you think he is preparing the Redskins for our future (and I do not necessarily disagree here) does that mean that he is planning on keeping both Saunders and Williams around here for a few years, after he has retired again himself? If so, I hope they can get along for that long, ;-) and I hope that Saunders does not mind spending what will probably be the last few years of his coaching career by then, as an offensive coordinator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HapHaszard Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 Never underestimate Joe Gibbs, he wrote the manual that all the modern coaches study. If you think that he is bringing in Saunders because the game has past him by, I suspect you have been reading too many articles in the Washinton Post. This move confuses me in that if all Joe needed was to pick his mind, he could have done that by watching tapes of the games Saunders has called. I suspect that Joe is preparing for the future of the team, as someone said on another thread, Williams and Saunders contracts are for 3 years, which is what Joes has said he will stay with the skins. Its an interesting move, and I suspect we will see what happens soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scskin Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 Gibbs probably told GW " We'll do whatever we have to do to improve the offense, even if it means hiring another set of eyes to help." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 The sgnng of Saunders maes t certan that GWllams sooner rather than later could succeed Gbbs as CEO ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.