Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

A negative on Saunders


Thinking Skins

Recommended Posts

One thing that gets me against us signing Al Saunders has nothing to do with his actual ability. It just kinda gives me reminders of the last time when we were in the playoffs and Snyder said, "We're almost there, we just need a few things" and went on to ruin the cohesion and chemistry that the team had developed. I'm not saying that Saunders will do this, but if his motive was to come here BECAUSE Snyder gives a lot of money to his coaches its a strike against what Gibbs has worked for 2 years to build up. My biggest fear about this is that Saunders and GIbbs get into an argument about the offense or about who's the boss.

For all of you who think this is a crazy fear, just let me worry peacefully. I'm gonna sit and pray that Saunders comes in here with an attitude of cohesion and team, instead of just wanting the money. Imagine, if he does just want the money, this would be the perfect setup for a job somewhere like Oakland or somewhere else where he got paid less because he will already have made the money of a HC. (Maybe he won't want to take a pay cut though).

But I just hope that Saunders wasn't trying to be greedy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, you can't blame Snyder for Saunders coming here regardless. Gibbs went after Saunders, and said in the press conference, that there would not have been any coaching changes had Saunders not been available. So good or bad, anything that comes from Saunders being here is on Gibbs' head, not Snyder's.

As far as the money and such, what I got from the press conference was that Saunders came here because wants another ring. He made it clear that what he hopes to do is give the offense the last push to match up with our good defense to get us to the Super Bowl, and would rather do that, than have the HC title, and struggle with a team that doesn't have all the pieces for a SB run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was Gibb's idea...Dan Snyder was convinced by him. If you believe Joe Gibbs, this decision was not made lightly. It was only made because it was such a good fit. Did you listen to the press conference?

This can not be characterized as Dan Snyder going off half-****ed signing too many coaches and ruining chemistry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, I'm not trying to "blame" Snyder. I'm just remembering last time.

The thing that kinga makes me happy is that the Redskins called him, not vice versa. And I don't think there was any negotiating, just GIbbs said we're offering $2 mil. That sounds nice. But whenever a large amount of money is involved, I get afraid because I never know whats motivating the guy, the team or the money.

Aside from Saunders skills and his credentials, (I don't really care about that) I just pray that we can keep the chemistry that we've developed here. I'd hate to have the family atmosphere ruined by coaches bickering and players taking sides because they want to be more or less agressive, etc.

I know I'm geting ahead of myself and probably worrying about nothing, but thats what I do when the season ends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) this wasn't snyder's idea, it was gibbs'

2) a little change on offense goes a long way

Ex: Steelers: For years they duke it out with cowher and grind it out and make the playoffs but never go anywhere. They finally open it up and BANG, they are tearing people up. You gotta think gibbs is seeing this and reevaluating some things. Saunder's brings us that kind of offense, and gibbs quite frankly doesn't. Gibbs brings in amazing players though, so he will stock saunders and williams with everything we need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saunders didn't come here for the money. While he is being compensated enormouslyas an assistant, he was a front runner for a number of head coaching opportunities that would have paid him more. I believe he came here because he believes with him Gregg Williams and Joe Gibbs this team has supreme post-season potential.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't let you worry peacefully when you post imbecilic, and quite frankly idiotic ideas on this message board <evil laugh>

Did you not hear some of the comments Gibbs made? For example "Al already knows most of the coaching staff very well"

Or how about talking about the coaching tree for god knows how long

And what does the money have to do with anything? Short of God, nobody in Washington DC is revered as much as Joe Gibbs is. Who do you think the owner, fans and public will back? Saunders, Snyder, or Gibbs?

Not only that, comparing the hiring of another offensive coach to signing over the hill vets (who by the way did very well, look at the results on D, it was offensive injuries that killed us in 2000) is just plain idiotic.

Gibbs is a master of chemistry and getting people to work together. Not just in football, but in NASCAR as well. Winning 2 NASCAR championships with Tony Stewart is a major accomplishment

Al knows what the program is. Did he ever blow up at Dick Vermiel in St. Louis or KC? It seemed to work out real well with him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Danny had gone out and said "we need a new offensive coordinator to get us there" it would be one thing, but that's not the way it went down. It was Gibbs idea, not Snyder's, and he stated repeatedly in the press conference today that it was not an issue of "we need a new coordinator" but rather he was available and Gibbs realised we would be better off as a team with Saunders on the staff.

It was done for all the right reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think bringing in a coach is different then bringing in a lot of "star" veterans. Our offense needed tweaking without a doubt and Saunders can help bring that. He fits in with what we do....

I do see the potential for similarities between this upcoming season and 2000 if we were to go out and get high priced free agents as oposed to keeping our own and bring in some solid young veteran players. We don't need Hutchinson, Wayne, and Co.....Just make sure we re-sign the guys that brought us to where we are today and compliment them with a few position guys and depth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strange article from a Kansas City reporter:

Posted on Sun, Jan. 22, 2006

Saunders a legend in the media’s mindJASON WHITLOCKBreaking news: Al Saunders did not invent the game of football.

This news, I’m sure, will shock many of my media brethren here in Kansas City, particularly those who earn a living hosting radio shows.

Saunders, however, did perfect the art of making insecure media members feel like they’re the next Howard Cosell. Saunders scored more points with members of the media than the Chiefs did on the football field during Saunders’ tenure as offensive coordinator.

Saunders returned every phone call, made love to every microphone put in his face, swapped locker-room hugs with Karen Kornacki, acted interested in Jack Harry’s ticket- and parking-prices rants, shared conspiracy theories with the New Don Fortune, counseled The Freak Renshaw during a meltdown, memorized the name of Neal St. Davey B. Franz and offered me dieting tips.

Saunders worked the media. And judging by the drastic overreaction to his departure, he accomplished his goal. He convinced members of the media that the Chiefs absolutely cannot play football without him.

Unfortunately for Saunders, he’s having a much harder time convincing NFL general managers and owners that he’s God’s gift to football.

There’s a reason that there were 10 NFL head-coaching jobs available, and Raiders owner Al Davis was the only man to pretend to be significantly interested in Saunders. The reason has nothing to do with Saunders’ age (59) or his rocky relationship with Carl Peterson.

Around the league, Saunders is known as a climber, a self-promoter, a snake. The labels have stuck with him since his days as head coach in San Diego, where reporters there contend Saunders used insecure media puppets to back-stab Don Coryell to get the Chargers job.

So I’m not surprised that Saunders is on his way to our nation’s capital to lead Joe Gibbs’ offense while sources claim that Peterson promised Saunders the head-coaching position here. Oh, and what a twist, Saunders, a reporter’s best friend, is shockingly unavailable for comment.

Yeah, when I learned that Saunders was inside Arrowhead Stadium on Friday, I made a special trip to Arrowhead to question him about Peterson’s alleged promise. I left a message on Saunders’ voice mail. I haven’t heard from him.

Not only did I want to know about Peterson’s promise, but I wanted to hear Saunders explain why nearly a third of the NFL’s teams took a look at his stellar resume and hired 30-year-old kids. Now, keep in mind, I’m someone who believed — until this messy departure from KC — Saunders was worthy of getting a second crack as a head coach.

But this messy departure says a lot about Saunders. Consider that the St. Louis Rams didn’t even grant Saunders an interview for their vacant head-coaching position. The Rams, despite pleas from Dick Vermeil, first pursued defensive-minded Gregg Williams and then changed course and hired Dolphins offensive coordinator Scott Linehan.

The evil and allegedly reneging Carl Peterson does not run the Rams franchise. He has no pull in St. Louis. John Shaw, the president of the Rams, knows Al Saunders quite well. Saunders worked in St. Louis with Vermeil and Mike Martz. Saunders couldn’t get an interview. That’s telling.

While Saunders has no problem connecting with star-struck members of the media, his connections with football folks aren’t nearly as strong.

A week ago, long before there was a strong hint that Mike Solari would replace Saunders as offensive coordinator, a low-level member of the Chiefs family and a Saunders fan told me a revealing story.

During training camp, Vermeil singled out an assistant coach to speak to the team each night. The assistants were rather competitive about the speeches. They put a great deal of thought into connecting with the team.

My details may be a little sketchy, but the overall point is accurate. Saunders talked with the team about growing up with an illness (polio) that could be helped by daily swimming. Saunders said his dad took a job at a location that had a swimming pool so that Al could swim every day. Al said he swam every day to save his own life, and that’s how he wanted the team to approach the season.

The person who told me this story said he was very touched by Al’s story and was surprised when he found players chuckling about Saunders’ story when the meeting broke up.

“They thought it was made up or exaggerated,” he told me.

When it was Solari’s day to speak, he showed a movie clip — I believe from Clint Eastwood — of a bunch of guys taking turns pounding a huge rock with sledgehammers. Solari said that’s how he wanted the team to approach the season.

“We gotta pound that rock.”

The players repeated Solari’s theme throughout the season. In this instance, Solari connected and Saunders didn’t.

Solari is quiet. He’s one of the most respected coaches in the league, but he totally avoids the spotlight. He pounds the rock year round and leads the strongest aspect of the Chiefs franchise — the offensive line. No disrespect to Saunders, but the play of the Big Willies — Willie, Will, Waters, Wiegmann and Welbourn — has been far more impressive and effective than KC’s play-calling or game planning.

Furthermore, Herman Edwards would be foolish if he failed to adjust Saunders’ record-setting, playoff-winless offense. You have to adjust for Larry Johnson’s talents. You have to adjust so that your all-world tight end, Tony Gonzalez, is a bigger threat in the red zone. You have to adjust because Trent Green will be 36 next season.

I hope Saunders enjoys success in Washington. Gregg Williams, Gibbs’ heir apparent, should watch his back. Washington owner Dan Snyder falls in love easily, and you can bet Saunders will tell Snyder everything he wants to hear.

As for things here, call me when the Chiefs players express outrage about Saunders’ departure. Edwards would’ve been stupid to retain Saunders as offensive coordinator. You don’t keep a guy on the assistant-coaching staff who openly believes he should be the head coach unless the players love him the way the Chicago Bears loved Buddy Ryan.

Those of us in the media don’t suit up. Our love of Saunders is irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saunders is already listed as associate head coach on redskins.com. I wonder how Gregg Williams feels about still being listed as assistant head coach. That would be an eyebrow raiser to me if it's true that Snyder and Gibbs told him that he's the heir apparent to coach the team. I just hope they all discussed the gameplan for the next few years and are all on the same page before they went to get Saunders and once they aquired him that he was on the same page with the rest of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saunders is already listed as associate head coach on redskins.com. I wonder how Gregg Williams feels about still being listed as assistant head coach. That would be an eyebrow raiser to me if it's true that Snyder and Gibbs told him that he's the heir apparent to coach the team. I just hope they all discussed the gameplan for the next few years and are all on the same page before they went to get Saunders and once they aquired him that he was on the same page with the rest of them.

Gibbs said his title was "Associate Head Coach, Offense." :whoknows:

But I imagine since Gibbs leave no details to chance that everything is copacetic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once again, I'M NOT SAYING THAT THIS WAS SNYDER's IDEA.

SAli457180, I do appreciate that Article cause it gives me a little insight into Saunders's character.

But the question remains of how will the offense gel. Last year when Gibbs brought in Musgrave, I didn't worry as much because it wasn't too powerful of a position he was getting.

But Gibbs is telling Saunders "You're in charge of the offense". But Gibbs loves the offense. So I wonder whats gonna happen when Gibbs comes and says "You should run this play next time we get 3rd and short" or "I want to play smash mouth football" or offers any "advice" to Saunders that Saunders doesn't take. Especially if doing it Saunders's way costs us a victory. (I.E. if We're up 6 with 5:00 to go in the fourth and Brunell throws a pick for a TD, and we lose the game)

I trust in Gibbs's character that he knows a lot of stuff about cohesion, but I don't know that Saunders's character is about cohesion, especially when he's used to being the commander and chief of offense.

I'm comparing this to the 2000 season since bringing in those players, no matter how good they were ruined the cohesion we had as a team. So is it better to have a defense of 5 Pro-Bowlers or a winning season? Is it better to have the number 1 offense in the league or to have a winnign season? I'll take the plan that leads to success. I just hope that Saunders will do the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't let you worry peacefully when you post imbecilic, and quite frankly idiotic ideas on this message board <evil laugh>

Did you not hear some of the comments Gibbs made? For example "Al already knows most of the coaching staff very well"

Or how about talking about the coaching tree for god knows how long

And what does the money have to do with anything? Short of God, nobody in Washington DC is revered as much as Joe Gibbs is. Who do you think the owner, fans and public will back? Saunders, Snyder, or Gibbs?

Not only that, comparing the hiring of another offensive coach to signing over the hill vets (who by the way did very well, look at the results on D, it was offensive injuries that killed us in 2000) is just plain idiotic.

Gibbs is a master of chemistry and getting people to work together. Not just in football, but in NASCAR as well. Winning 2 NASCAR championships with Tony Stewart is a major accomplishment

Al knows what the program is. Did he ever blow up at Dick Vermiel in St. Louis or KC? It seemed to work out real well with him

I'm not saying this is a knock on Gibbs, but I don't understand why everybody wants to lick Gibbs's balls because of this decision. I'm trying to have an intelligent discussion about this decision by stating that there MAY be problems associated with it.

I don't understand why I can't come to a MESSAGE BOARD and try to DISCUSS an issue? Are we reduced to cheerleaders now? We've got to say that there's no possibility of a problem with anything Gibbs does anymore?

In the past we've been able to have these discussions without being called idiots. Remember the discussions about bringing in Brunell? Or Curring Trotter? or trading Coles? or benching Ramsey? or losing to Tampa?

Gibbs is not so Holy that he cannot make a mistake. And he's definately not so Holy that the concept of him making a mistake can't even be considered (or as you put it, is idiotic).

So I mean, if you want to address the issue I'm bringing to the table thats fine, but if nobody wants to talk about it, just let the thread dwindle away. But don't come back and call me an idiot for composing a thought that differs from yours. It really makes me question the level of respect I give to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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