Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

The Big ? for this season will be AL Saunders


ProBowler

Recommended Posts

There is no doubt that AL Saunders is a great coach. His past proves that but I'm not sure if the way he has been given total control of the offense in his first season here is a great idea and I'm not sure if he was really needed here.

Joe Gibbs is a Hall Of Fame coach with 3 Super Bowls who made his name on the offensive side of the ball. For me he was good enough. I really wonder sometimes if some of the comments from his own players at times and people just in general didn't pressure him into this.

I remember his first go around and there were times the offense seemed to sputter. It wasn't pretty all the time but the Skins were always in the game with a chance to win. Gibbs made the Hogs very popular and really brought awareness to everyone of how important ball control and time of possesion was. Honestly, it was never really talked about that much until Gibbs made it so popular.

In Gibb's first year the Skins were ranked 30th in the league on offense with a team in wich he head very little input. Then in his second year with the addition of only 2 players Moss and Rabach the Skins were ranked 11th. This is one hell of an improvement considering what few changes were made. Not to mention that the Skins executed as well as anybody I seen in the NFL. People will always question the playcalling but you couldn't question the execution. Very few penalties and I would like to know of any team that executed any play as well as the Skins executed the WR screen last year.

Now this would have been Gibb's 3rd year with even more additions to the offense and everyone would have had 2 full years of experience in this system. There is no reason to think that he would have not ranked among the top offenses this year if not the very top. So why now completely change everything? Again, I'm not saying AL Saunders is not a good coach but is he going to be able to get everyone on the same page in one year?

Personally, I would have liked to seen AL Saunders as more of a major consultant to the offense this year and gradually give him total control but just from general work experience I know it is hard to have 2 people trying to tell you what to do, so I admire Gibbs descesion to do this but I just don't know how well it will work out this year. Especially in a year where alot of people are expecting this team to go to a Super Bowl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, he will keep us from what our Offense was doing last year, and that's playing too conservatively.
Exactly, Joe Gibbs was NOT calling the plays last year, Don Breaux and Bill Musgrave was, playing concervative football is playing skeered and it cost us in the Playoffs when Seattle was giving us everything they had. Thats the time to open things up, not be predictable like we were, Al Saunders will change that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that you have a point though I don't think that the changes will be as dramatic as you seem to be anticipating. As stated numerous times, both Gibbs and Saunders come from the same background so they really aren't installing an entirely new system.

There will be some changes and different looks for sure but the only downside that I see is that it will take some regular season game time to truly assimilate the changes that are going to be thrown their way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, he will keep us from what our Offense was doing last year, and that's playing too conservatively.

Exactly, Joe Gibbs was NOT calling the plays last year, Don Breaux and Bill Musgrave was, playing concervative football is playing skeered and it cost us in the Playoffs when Seattle was giving us everything they had. Thats the time to open things up, not be predictable like we were, Al Saunders will change that.

So, you 2 think that Joe Gibbs no longer knows how to coach offense? 3 Super Bowl rings with 3 different QB's dosen't mean nothing.

I guess you all missed the part about Gibb's making the Hogs popular and showing everyone how important ball control is even if that means playing so called conservatively. Some would call it smart football and not going 3 and out in 15 seconds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, you 2 think that Joe Gibbs no longer knows how to coach offense? 3 Super Bowl rings with 3 different QB's dosen't mean nothing.

I guess you all missed the part about Gibb's making the Hogs popular and showing everyone how important ball control is even if that means playing so called conservatively. Some would call it smart football and not going 3 and out in 15 seconds.

Nobody is calling out Gibbs for anything, that's like sacrilege around here. It's just the NFL has changed a little bit since Gibbs left- it's gotten faster and more open with the play calling. Conservative running games and controlling the clock are good when you're ahead, but just a look at the Seattle playoff game shows it's not so good when you're lagging behind in a divisional playoff game. It's still Gibbs' show, he still has oversight of everything (including the plays used and the gameplanning for the week), but c'mon dude, Al Saunders's offense is like if Gibbs had stayed in the NFL instead of retiring to do NASCAR, it's the same principles from the same coaching tree, just updated to work against today's competition. It's not like anyone's saying Gibbs "no longer knows how to coach" anything, he took himself out of Saunders' new role, take it up with him if it really bothers you that much. Relax, you might question it all now, but when the offense finally gets clicking at some point and we're putting up touchdowns at will in short amounts of time while our staunch defense is forcing short series after short series, you'll be happy about all of this.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, you 2 think that Joe Gibbs no longer knows how to coach offense? 3 Super Bowl rings with 3 different QB's dosen't mean nothing.

Times have changed. 2004 and too much of 2005 did not resemble the fiery nature of previous Redskins offenses. And though Gibbs was always conservative, the playcalling (he wasn't calling the plays but in crucial moments you have decision-making power) was cowardly and there was even a meeting with the players about it. Ask Jansen about what the offense was like in 2004. It's easy to bash Brunell but many times he was put in a bad position by the playcalling in 2004 and a few times in 2005.

Doesn't mean Joe can't catch up but he has an overall team to manage and will still have input and final say in the crucial moments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody is calling out Gibbs for anything, that's like sacrilege around here. It's just the NFL has changed a little bit since Gibbs left- it's gotten faster and more open with the play calling. Conservative running games and controlling the clock are good when you're ahead, but just a look at the Seattle playoff game shows it's not so good when you're lagging behind in a divisional playoff game. It's still Gibbs' show, he still has oversight of everything (including the plays used and the gameplanning for the week), but c'mon dude, Al Saunders's offense is like if Gibbs had stayed in the NFL instead of retiring to do NASCAR, it's the same principles from the same coaching tree, just updated to work against today's competition. It's not like anyone's saying Gibbs "no longer knows how to coach" anything, he took himself out of Saunders' new role, take it up with him if it really bothers you that much. Relax, you might question it all now, but when the offense finally gets clicking at some point and we're putting up touchdowns at will in short amounts of time while our staunch defense is forcing short series after short series, you'll be happy about all of this.

Well, I heard everybody ****in and complaining last year just like these two about the play calling being to conservative. Who else do you think this could be directed towards? Greg Williams? I'm sorry but wether they no it or not it is a shot at Gibb's. His playcalling the past few years are the same it has always been. I hear all these people acting like they know who calls plays. I would bet there isn't one play called that dosen't go through Gibb's.

Your the one who needs to relax. I don't need to take up anything with Gibb's it's not my place and why you come out of left field with some remark like that is beyond me. I was just saying if you read my post that I wondered if he didn't feel pressured into this by people on the team like Brunell and Jansen to name 2 who publicly took shots at the offense not to mention some of the other playcalling experts on this board who have played way to much Madden.

I hope your right. I hope we score 50 points a game but there is nothing wrong with scoring 14 points while keeping the opposing offense off the field the whole game and winning either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Times have changed. 2004 and too much of 2005 did not resemble the fiery nature of previous Redskins offenses. And though Gibbs was always conservative, the playcalling (he wasn't calling the plays but in crucial moments you have decision-making power) was cowardly and there was even a meeting with the players about it. Ask Jansen about what the offense was like in 2004. It's easy to bash Brunell but many times he was put in a bad position by the playcalling in 2004 and a few times in 2005.

Doesn't mean Joe can't catch up but he has an overall team to manage and will still have input and final say in the crucial moments.

Yea, times have changed. He took over a team that was nearly as talented as the teams he had in previous years. The first time he coached here guess what the record was his first 2 years? There identical to these past 2 years.

The meeting your talking about was if they lost another game they would be out of the playoffs. It was Gibbs who called the meeting not the players because of the playcalling.

If you think people are bashing Brunell. It might be for real this year. Gibbs did alot to protect him by keeping extra blockers in to protect him. Saunders is more wide open and we will see real early how good our offensive line is and if Jansen thought he was being put in bad positions last year by keeping extra people in to block we'll see how he likes it when he dosen't have them extra blockers to help him out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I heard everybody ****in and complaining last year just like these two about the play calling being to conservative. Who else do you think this could be directed towards? Greg Williams? I'm sorry but wether they no it or not it is a shot at Gibb's. His playcalling the past few years are the same it has always been. I hear all these people acting like they know who calls plays. I would bet there isn't one play called that dosen't go through Gibb's.

Your the one who needs to relax. I don't need to take up anything with Gibb's it's not my place and why you come out of left field with some remark like that is beyond me. I was just saying if you read my post that I wondered if he didn't feel pressured into this by people on the team like Brunell and Jansen to name 2 who publicly took shots at the offense not to mention some of the other playcalling experts on this board who have played way to much Madden.

I hope your right. I hope we score 50 points a game but there is nothing wrong with scoring 14 points while keeping the opposing offense off the field the whole game and winning either.

Look, the fact is Gibbs took it upon himself to bring in Saunders to help the team. Nobody currently playing on the Redskins or anyone in the Redskins organization would "pressure" Gibbs into anything like giving up his duties as head offensive coordinator. It just wouldn't happen, even Snyder kneels before Gibbs. So far under Gibbs II, the offense HAS struggled and has looked pretty lethargic at times, something that simply cannot be denied. Now a good bit of that has to do with health of certain players (Brunell, the o-line, etc.), but some of the play calling was a little ridiculous too (how long did it take us to finally open up and start trying to throw downfield in the loss to Seattle? And what happened when we did? We scored a touchdown finally?). Gibbs is undeniably one of the top NFL coaches of all time, but a lot of that also stems from his ability to deal with players on a personal level, seek out and manage talent, and keep the ship running the right direction. He'll still be the head honcho when it comes down to the final plays (a la Dick Vermeil in Kansas City last year), but he just won't be the main guy running the offense. Saunders knows his stuff unlike any other offensive coordinator in the NFL at the moment it seems, and like it's already been said, his offense is Gibbs circa 2006, rather than the sometime pre-dated Gibbs offense we were running before. Just looking back at the Raiders and Chargers games which led to a veteran locker room meeting with Gibbs to demand to make a change in the playcalling should say it all. Games we should have won, but didn't due to the offense stalling out. Gibbs had enough humility to say enough was enough for the good of the team and that maybe he couldn't update the offense soon enough to make a Super Bowl move, and that was that. I just think at this point, the record shows that Saunders is a beast of a coordinator and did A LOT with less for several years in KC, and we'll be talking about our offense next year as an unstoppable freight train rather than a Thomas the Train Engine toy set it sometimes looked like last year, and for that, we should all be happy. Gibbs might have updated the offense eventually, but who knows how long that might have taken? All I ask is, what are we losing by having Al Saunders run the offense now? Kansas City has had the top offense in the NFL for awhile now thanks to Saunders' monster running game and deadly vertical passing attack. Why wouldn't anyone want that on their team? Gibbs and Snyder saw an opportunity to rush the upgrade process on offense, and they went out and did it. So really, what's the issue here? Saunders is a proven mastermind, and Gibbs will still be the top dog of the entire team. Nothing's lost, but at the moment it seems the nearly everything has been gained.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm aware that Gibbs brought in Sanders on his own. I hope it all works out for the best. I just thought maybe he felt pressured to do so. I'm sure he wouldn't tell anyone if this was the case. Maybe he didn't and that's fine too. It was just a thought.

How some of you got the balls to call Gibb's offense out-dated is comical. Spartacus87, and the rest of you, just so you know, before you can open up the offense and go 5 wide you better have #1-Some people who can Block #2-You got to have people who can get open and catch the ball #3-You got to have a QB that is accurate.

Now, Last year how many people did we have who could get open consistentley own there own. I can think of 1, Moss. You could add Cooley if you want, so that's 2. Who else was there to open the offense up with, Nobody!

Gibbs did what he had to do to give the team any chance of winning. He wasn't being conseverative for the hell of it and his offense isn't out-dated I don't care what Jansen or Brunell say or especially some of you.

What made Gibbs a genius is that he figured out that you could win by controlling the time of possesion and playing field position. You don't want a shoot-out with every team. That's okay if you got the talent just like in basketball runin and gunin, but if you come up against a team that has better talent you will get blown away most of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with almost all of what you are saying ProBowler. I liked last year's 11th ranked offense, it reminded me a lot of the successful offenses of yesteryear. I did not see the need for a change either.

However, I think Saunders is a fine coach who has been successful for a reason and will continue to be so. Hopefully the changes won't be too dramatic.

I also like your name and location, that is too funny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm aware that Gibbs brought in Sanders on his own. I hope it all works out for the best. I just thought maybe he felt pressured to do so. I'm sure he wouldn't tell anyone if this was the case. Maybe he didn't and that's fine too. It was just a thought.

How some of you got the balls to call Gibb's offense out-dated is comical. Spartacus87, and the rest of you, just so you know, before you can open up the offense and go 5 wide you better have #1-Some people who can Block #2-You got to have people who can get open and catch the ball #3-You got to have a QB that is accurate.

Now, Last year how many people did we have who could get open consistentley own there own. I can think of 1, Moss. You could add Cooley if you want, so that's 2. Who else was there to open the offense up with, Nobody!

Gibbs did what he had to do to give the team any chance of winning. He wasn't being conseverative for the hell of it and his offense isn't out-dated I don't care what Jansen or Brunell say or especially some of you.

What made Gibbs a genius is that he figured out that you could win by controlling the time of possesion and playing field position. You don't want a shoot-out with every team. That's okay if you got the talent just like in basketball runin and gunin, but if you come up against a team that has better talent you will get blown away most of the time.

The point is, we lost a VERY winnable game against Oakland and a potentially winnable game against Seattle because of the inability to open it up and shoot downfield until it was way too late. I understand Brunell needs the extra protection a lot of times, and it made sense to do it against Denver, and Tampa, and the NFC East games, but when it came time to pull the trigger and go for the big shots, Gibbs hesitated, plain and simple (with the exception of the first Dallas game). It's something even he knows and acknowledges. If that wasn't the case, he wouldn't have brought in Saunders. It's not like Gibbs got on Extremeskins last year and read people calling the playcalling conservative and thought "well, we really played our guts out, but maybe the fans are right, and I need to step away from it...ooh new Sean Taylor highlights in the video forum!" He doesn't owe changing anything about himself to anyone, his bust is already in Canton, but he himself knows the flaws in the gameplan he was running, which is why he brought in Saunders to help fix it. Saunders and Gibbs then went out together and got guys like Randle El and Lloyd to help the passing game. As for the need for extra protection, I think Saunders and Gibbs releaze this, and I don't really think 5 wide will be the base set. They know Brunell needs the blocking help so he doesn't get killed, and I'm not worried that they won't give it to him, but there are ways to help the blocking while still getting better downfield production out of the offense, and that's what Saunders will do. None of this would ever have been an issue to begin with if Gibbs himself thought he could still do the best job possible with the offense, he clearly felt his offensive style wasn't doing the job anymore. It was his call to change it up, NOBODY elses, end of story.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your right Spartacus87 end of story because you will never get it. God could stamp it on your forehead and you would still try to find a way to wipe it off.

Your so right about the Oakland game too. Lemar Marshall getting matched up with Jerry Porter that resulted in a easy TD had nothing to do with that game either.

Your right about the Seattle game too in the Playoffs. Gibbs should have suited up and played WR and Joe Bugel should have also so he could replace Randy Thomas our best pulling guard wich Gibbs out-dated offense is predicated on. If we would have opened it up more the first time we played Seattle we probably would have won by 20.

Your even more right about AL Saunders. Joe Gibbs went out and got drunk and finally admitted to himself all of his game planning flaws especially against Oakland and Seattle and realized he didn't have it anymore and decided to get AL to bail him out before Snyder fired him.

:cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ProBowler, you seem to think that somehow, Saunders will go from the conservative style Gibbs favors to some open throttle west coast idea. That's not the case. Saunders is slightly more aggressive than Gibbs. But most of the style is similar.

However, I think it's perfectly reasonable to say that a little more aggression applied appropriately, is needed. If you look at the games, Gibbs was less conservative last year than the year before. And if he didn't bring Saunders in, I would imagine that trend would continue.

With Al, I think we're getting more or less what we would have gotten out of Gibbs anyway. But, with Gibbs hands out of the playbook, he can focus on make sure the team is working everywhere as a whole. Touch everything a little more because he doesn't have to worry as much about the Offensive side of the ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joe Gibbs knows how to put together a successful team, he's done it in the NFL, and he's done it in Neck-Car. He felt the need to ad Saunders. If we pretty much all agree that he's excellent organization builder, then the point is moot. Everyone needs to unbunch their panties stop the paralysis by analysis, and watch it unfold. Have some faith in Coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the main thing i like about saunders being here is that this offense fits completely with his coaching style. He does great with speedy recievers, a quick and agile running back that will make big gains when the hole opens up and a solid qb. Right now what Gibbs is doing to help the redskins dramatically is his moves that he makes. It seems like every move hes made this go around has turned out amazing with the moss trade, selecting taylor and rogers over winslow and williams, trading up to pick cooley.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probowler, I think the point here is not that Joe Gibbs is being replaced by the addition of Saunders, but helped by adding another mastermind, and maybe a little more updated version of input then Don Breaux to the playcalling.

Here's a quote from Joe Gibbs at Al's intro press conference

Each week, you can pick the teams that you would like to break down because [what they do] is similar to what you do or they believe in some of the [same] concepts. We always use Kansas City in our breakdowns because we feel like their concepts and what they believe in is a lot like what we believe in. They use a lot of [different] formations. They're very, very well-balanced.

As we studied things towards the end of the year, I knew that [former Kansas City head coach Dick Vermeil] was in the process of stepping out of coaching. I had conversations with him. We specifically talked about Al, but he brought Al up in the conversation. As I started thinking about that, I realized that Al's background is very similar to mine and most of the coaches on this staff. We come out of the same tree. It starts all the way back at USC when I was there as an assistant and Al was there as a graduate assistant who was starting his coaching career. It goes all the way down through people like Bobby Jackson, Ernie Zampese, and Don Coryell -- that tree of coaching that came out of Don Coryell.

....Al's been around a lot of people who were around Don Coryell. That system branched off. A lot of people came out of that system. Al is one of those. The terminology in Kansas City -- we were looking at it the other night when I was over there visiting -- is very similar to what we're doing here.

.....They're very well-balanced and well-structured. Then, of course, you look at what they've done. Kansas City, offensively, has pretty much been a machine over these last four or five years. They're highly productive and well-balanced. The concepts and formations are some of the best that we have seen. We had an admiration for that.

If there is any way to improve our football team, Dan wants to do and I want to do it. There's no ego from that standpoint. When it became obviously that Al might be available, I started thinking about it. Knowing that he was going to interview for several head coaching jobs, I kind of sat back for a little bit. Then I said, 'What the heck. Why not call?' I went over, sat down, and talked [with him]. In those conversations, I knew that he was still going to be considered for some head coaching jobs, so I kind of proposed what I was thinking about here -- we have a great coaching staff here right now. I spend most of my time with the offense. That's something that I've always done. Obviously, here with the Redskins, there's a lot to do. As I thought about that, I said, 'Hey, this might be a natural fit.' So, I proposed it to Al. I was really pleased that he would forego several opportunities that he would probably have the rest of this year from a head coaching standpoint and other positions. As we talked about it, he felt like, 'Hey, I'd like to come here and be part of the Redskins.'

and from Al Saunders

"It's not about titles it is about production. We are going to work together as a staff and we are going to share in the responsibilities. Everybody on that offensive staff will have tremendous value. I'm sure I will call the first play of the first game of the season and then Joe (Gibbs) might get on that headset and call the rest of them. I am looking forward to working with everybody."

http://www.redskins.com/news/newsDetail.jsp?id=15160

I don't see how this addition to the coaching staff won't be anything but good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is strange to me to suggest that a decision made by Gibbs himself - seeking out a compatriot who's offensive philosophy was directly modeled after Gibbs' own early NFL designs - would be bad for the team and defending said arguement by saying that Gibbs would probably do a better job by himself.

Why have so much confidence in Gibbs making one decision because you trust and believe in him but not in another decision made by the same man?

I think there were a lot of reasons that 2004 failed, and Brunell was a huge part of it. Lav Cole's inability to get *any* kind of seperation at all and Gardener's horrific route running (from what I heard it seems as if he sometimes wasn't even running the right play at times) not to mention his bad hands. All of this destroyed CP's confidence and any chance to get into the second level untouched, where his 4.28 speed really shines.

Last year CP also had trouble getting to the 2nd level untouched, he was one of the few top RB who's stats really weren't padded by a number of 40, 50, 60 plus yard gainers like LJ, Alexander and especially Barber. He really was running 4.3 yards a carry for a big part of the year.

The fact that he can do that is what seperates him from other small shifty backs who excelled in college but never made it in the NFL (Candidate, Bennett) or those that only really excelled in tailor made systems (Quintin Griffin, even Priest Holmes.)

CP was wobbling 1 out of every 3 times he passed the LoS. Crappy WRs was part of this.

Saunders can fix this. And he is great at adapting and wants to work under Giibbs.

Well that was a lot of writing, sorry I am just thinking with my fingers, but my point really is:

1)Gibbs wants to work with each part of the team individually more often, especially with younger players such as Sean Taylor and the rookies, even special teams.

2)Gibbs' best teams never were really that run oriented, the best were almost always pure balanced offenses. Just look at the TD #s on the best teams, almost 50/50 exactly. Gibbs ran in 2004 because we had a QB who was playing god awful, diva WR who couldn't do their job and only one real stud, CP. It was the best we could muster.

I love the Hogs, I love smashmouth football, but I never saw Gibbs' best teams as run only as the Steelers of the last few years. Run when you should, Pass when you should. The Skins always were a big play team, but the balance of those plays with clock management was great.

To think that a man who coached the team who held the record for most Points scored in a season for many many years (until the vikings in the 90's right?) would game plan to win 14-0 games every week is silly in my book. Gibbs is an offensive genius, and almost every single offensive set in the modern NFL comes from something Gibbs either invented, or translated from Coryell's college teams. (Including Dallas' "innovative" 2 TE set - that article made me vomit for gawds sake.)

In short, Saunders is here to do what Gibbs doesn't want to do, while giving Gibbs the opportunity to do anything and everything he wants to do. He also is here to team with GW for the future, whatever that may be. Gibbs has my trust completely now.

The players seem excited about it, that must mean something, no?:point2sky :logo:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ProBowler, you seem to think that somehow, Saunders will go from the conservative style Gibbs favors to some open throttle west coast idea. That's not the case. Saunders is slightly more aggressive than Gibbs. But most of the style is similar.

However, I think it's perfectly reasonable to say that a little more aggression applied appropriately, is needed. If you look at the games, Gibbs was less conservative last year than the year before. And if he didn't bring Saunders in, I would imagine that trend would continue.

With Al, I think we're getting more or less what we would have gotten out of Gibbs anyway. But, with Gibbs hands out of the playbook, he can focus on make sure the team is working everywhere as a whole. Touch everything a little more because he doesn't have to worry as much about the Offensive side of the ball.

No not really. I know they come from the same school of coaching. When I say open it up I'm talking more about the time he was with Vermiel at the Rams. I'think I'm correct about this. I think Martz was the QB coach at the time and Saunders was the OC and if I'm right we will look alot like the Rams Super Bowl team with our personel. That would be great!

All I'm saying is this. Yea, KC has led the league in offense almost every year if not every year when Saunders was there, but that didn't result in a Super Bowl either and it's not going to gurantee a trip to the Super Bowl here either. Just look at the Steelers. They are not flashy and only passed when they had too, but even the Steelers had a better tandem of WR's than we did.

I'm just saying Gibbs being the offensive leader for the skins is what brought the team 3 Super bowls. This was his way of always doing things. He was never a Vermeil Style of coach.

I'm excited about next year. This could be the best year ever for skins fans, but what if people including Gibbs under estimates how important it was for him to be doing what he has always done.

I mean seriously, what is Gibbs going to be doin on gamedays now. He was always a hands on coach on the sidelines. Maybe I'm just paranoid!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No not really. I know they come from the same school of coaching. When I say open it up I'm talking more about the time he was with Vermiel at the Rams. I'think I'm correct about this. I think Martz was the QB coach at the time and Saunders was the OC and if I'm right we will look alot like the Rams Super Bowl team with our personel. That would be great!

All I'm saying is this. Yea, KC has led the league in offense almost every year if not every year when Saunders was there, but that didn't result in a Super Bowl either and it's not going to gurantee a trip to the Super Bowl here either. Just look at the Steelers. They are not flashy and only passed when they had too, but even the Steelers had a better tandem of WR's than we did.

I'm just saying Gibbs being the offensive leader for the skins is what brought the team 3 Super bowls. This was his way of always doing things. He was never a Vermeil Style of coach.

I'm excited about next year. This could be the best year ever for skins fans, but what if people including Gibbs under estimates how important it was for him to be doing what he has always done.

I mean seriously, what is Gibbs going to be doin on gamedays now. He was always a hands on coach on the sidelines. Maybe I'm just paranoid!

Yeah I still don't think I understand what you are worried about. What Gibbs will be doing is being the Head Coach. I don't understand why you want him making certain decisions so badly but not this decision to bring in Saunders, it kinda seems like you think someone other than Gibbs himself made this move.

I still don't like it when people here, or people in the Media call Gibbs a "conservative" coach.

His teams were some of the most high scoring teams in NFL history. He was conservative in 2004 because we had :toilet: to go along with :pooh: as talent and/or performance by his WR.

Also.... sometimes one must realize that it isn't Gibbs' play calling that didn't "get the ball down field" but a QB who may not have thrown the ball to the right place or audibled to the right play to take advantage of a defensive shift.

Brunell is much further from perfect than Gibbs is. He still was by far the best QB on the market at the time that Gibbs signed him though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no doubts whatsoever that Saunders will be successful calling the shots on offense. He's proven and dare I say has more around him to work with than he did in KC. I think it's going to be an exciting year for us and I look for the offense to do great things

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I still don't think I understand what you are worried about. What Gibbs will be doing is being the Head Coach. I don't understand why you want him making certain decisions so badly but not this decision to bring in Saunders, it kinda seems like you think someone other than Gibbs himself made this move.

I still don't like it when people here, or people in the Media call Gibbs a "conservative" coach.

His teams were some of the most high scoring teams in NFL history. He was conservative in 2004 because we had :toilet: to go along with :pooh: as talent and/or performance by his WR.

Also.... sometimes one must realize that it isn't Gibbs' play calling that didn't "get the ball down field" but a QB who may not have thrown the ball to the right place or audibled to the right play to take advantage of a defensive shift.

Brunell is much further from perfect than Gibbs is. He still was by far the best QB on the market at the time that Gibbs signed him though.

I honestly feel that he felt some pressure about his offense. Wouldn't you if you had to listen to your own players, and everyone else questioning your offense publicly? I could be wrong it wouldn't be the first time.

I think people under estimate how much his offensive playcalling crontrols the flow of the game. Let me rephrase that dictates a game. Just look at the first year back. We were still the same sorry team, had a horrible record but we were in every game besides one I think.

People say this guy calls plays and that guy calls plays but I know for a fact his first time that Gibbs was the one on the sidelines looking at the charts and it appeared he was the one calling the plays to me. To be honest I haven't seen as much of that but I have still noticed at times when they have shown him that he has appeared to be talking over the headset calling in plays to Brunell from the sideline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No not really. I know they come from the same school of coaching. When I say open it up I'm talking more about the time he was with Vermiel at the Rams. I'think I'm correct about this. I think Martz was the QB coach at the time and Saunders was the OC and if I'm right we will look alot like the Rams Super Bowl team with our personel. That would be great!

All I'm saying is this. Yea, KC has led the league in offense almost every year if not every year when Saunders was there, but that didn't result in a Super Bowl either and it's not going to gurantee a trip to the Super Bowl here either. Just look at the Steelers. They are not flashy and only passed when they had too, but even the Steelers had a better tandem of WR's than we did.

Saunders was actually the WR coach with the Rams under Vermeil.

Secondly, the reason those KC teams didn't make a run at the Super Bowl was their defense, not their offense. The defensive side of the ball has been the problem in KC for years now, there is a reason they wanted Gregg Williams to be their head coach, and eventually settled for Herm Edwards.

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...