Art Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 We've seen a lot of concern over the motives Spurrier has in possibly starting Danny Wuerffel. Now, the coach has not said Wuerffel is his starter, but, the feel from press reports is that's the leaning. Many of you have simply gone ahead and written off the game if Wuerffel starts, chalking up the possibility as Spurrier simply wanting one last dance with his first love. But, I think more than anything, the trait I recognize in Spurrier is his desire to win. I don't think Spurrier has an ego regarding what people play on his team. His ego is that of wanting to win and he's not going to sacrifice victory to play out something he doesn't believe will work just to placate his appreciation of Wuerffel. Spurrier wants to win and if he taps Ramsey or Wuerffel, he will REALLY believe that guy gives the team the best chance to win the football game. If it is Wuerffel who lines up, we must remember that while it may not work, it is a decision made with the intention of getting this team a win rather than playing for the future (Ramsey) or playing his heart (Wuerffel). If Matthews is banged up, his choices are very simple and the guy he picks will be because that's the guy that can help us win. On a side note, either guy in there gets an immediate benefit of improved blocking. Rasby is among the best blocking tight ends in football. His possible addition in the running game should free up the passing game because we will get better push and seal on his edge there. His pass blocking is also very fine, but, I suspect he'll do more chipping there and then entering the route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awesome Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 Oh yeah, I had forgotten about ole' Walter. He should really improve that blocking. Will be glad to have him back in the fold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 Spurrier seems to see great potential in Wuerffel. The DW he coached with the Gators is the best QB he ever had. Tough, smart, and accurate, DW was a master of this offense. He showed flashes of his former brilliance in Osaka with near perfect reads, timing and delivery. Who knows, maybe Spurrier is right. Maybe DW is a great QB with a really bad mental block who just needs to get is confidence back. I just hope Spurrier pulls the plug quickly if things go astray. Ramsey is our future. He's big, strong, smart, and he has a cannon for an arm. At least if he makes the wrong read, his arm has a chance to get him out of trouble and make the play. Yeah, he's gonna make rookie mistakes but he's going to learn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 art...i agree with one exception...and this was discussed long ago. HBC is bringing with him the college mindset that QBs can be interchanged on the spot and often with minimal disruption. I'm not sure that is so at the pro level. And this team will pay a price for him to find this out. Because, without doubt, that is implicit in shifting from Mathews to Wuerful, and then Wuerful to Ramsey as he experiments with finding his field general. Many of us argue: if you're losing anyway, why not go to Ramsey from the git go and suffer the growing pains? Also, will these pains be that much different from what the team is enduring with DW/SM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 The road to hell is paved with good intentions. I can't think of a single coach in the league who doesn't "want to win". That desire of Spurrier's doesn't end the debate. What would you have us say? "Oh, you want to win, Steve? Well then, that's different, start whoever you want." Spurrier's intentions had damn well better be to win! I just think his judgement on who is best able to play QB for us is terribly clouded by their shared experiences/successes at UF when it comes to Wuerffel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 I can't think of a single coach in the league who doesn't "want to win". What about Norv? He just wants to "compete real well". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Potato Sack Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 It's nice to see Rasby is coming back. But, I think Flemister needs to be in the rotation a lot. This guys has good hands! He has really impressed me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 I can relate to Spurrier on a certain level. I have coached High School baseball for 7 years and am considered a good teacher of fundamentals. I also win every year, turning a program that had not finished with a .500 record in over 10 years, into undefeated district champs with in 3 years. (that feat had never been done as well... no one had ever gone 18-0) Every year, I get players that the rec league coaches say suck and are no good, but somehow, I turn them into good HSchool players. As a coach, you tend to stop listening to what others say and start trying to prove people wrong. But never, does winning take second place. I understand where Spurrier is coming from, I believe he feels he can make DW good. In someways he may beable to. I personally feel it's like trying to win with one hand tied behind your back..(DW's lack of arm strength that is). I just know that NOTHING is better than kicking a$$ with players that everyone thinks sucks... I love it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted September 27, 2002 Author Share Posted September 27, 2002 Redman, I can think of coaches who aren't thinking about winning right now. Dom Capers in Houston is more concerned with the ultimate development of his rookie than with winning games today. There are motives in football that may play into mind larger goals than current motivations. I don't find Spurrier to be that type of guy. I find Spurrier to be the type of guy who wants the next game more than he wants the game two games from now. He doesn't seem to play favorites if playing favorites hurts his chances to win the next game. While there is no question all coaches ultimately want to win football games, the fact is, there are ways to go about it that generally appear longer term in thinking versus shorter term in thinking. Carolina started Rodney Peete because John Fox felt he could win more games now. Weinke may still be the future starter, though likely not at this point. But, Fox didn't want to develop the future right now at expense of the right now. I think that was the quality I was more focused on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clubisyohankovic Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 "I can't think of a single coach in the league who doesn't "want to win". That desire of Spurrier's doesn't end the debate. What would you have us say? "Oh, you want to win, Steve? Well then, that's different, start whoever you want." REDMAN- You're right, the fact that he "wants to win" does not end the debate. I do, however, get tired of all of the people who suggest that his decisions are based, not on the desire to win, but instead out of stubbornness. For example, suggesting that he cuts better players to keep FL guys on the roster, or that he wants to play Danny W. just to prove that it wasn't a mistake to trade Sage away. To me, Art was saying this: Right or wrong, HBC is making the decisions that he thinks put the team in the best situation to win. Of course, whether he is right or wrong is absolutely open for debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 Art, if that's what you meant then fine, we're in agreement. He hasn't given up the season, which is why we're not seeing Ramsey just yet. I just vehemently disagree that Wuerffel's a better option for us than Matthews (assuming no injury), who has basically done all that we've expected him to do. In short, I'm all for either trying to win now with Matthews or playing for the future with Ramsey. Wuerffel has to me no clear role on this team other than 3rd backup given what I view are insurmountable talent limitations. Believe me, I hope I'm totally wrong about him, but I just don't think I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 I don't think Spurrier is simply putting Wuerffel out there to please Danny But I DO think his perception of whether Danny can win football games for him is colored by his play in another place, in another time and playing a different brand of football. There is no solid evidence to show that Wuerffel will be successful against the Titans if he gets the start. He has shown precious little when facing better than the truck drivers and shelf stockers he faced in the second half of those preseason games. Certainly his poor on field play combined with his physical limitations re arm strength and mobility don't all add up to a strong feeling that Danny is indeed ready to take the NFL by storm :laugh: :laugh: I think playing Wuerffel is one of the last wrenching experiences that will help to divorce Spurrier from recollecting performances of players from the Florida days. We can see from the pecking order established after camp that the ex-Florida boys at receiver didn't cut it, even when the game was set up for them to succeed, coming to a team with a familiar system, coaching and quarterbacking. They all remain backups or in Anthony's case were released. That reality set in fast for the staff.........the limitations of the receivers...... The harder reality is going to be admitting that his favorite pupil and performer from that 12 year chunk of his life isn't capable of bringing home the bacon. It's going to be ugly, folks. For those of us with no rooting interest in Wuerffel one way or the other, the only thing we want to see is a win. So the calls from FLA guys that we are predisposed to 'hate' Danny are mistaken. If I really thought Wuerffel was the answer I would be screaming to get him out on the field, believe me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 I think it mostly comes down to, who we have to choose from at QB. Ramsey when is ready will obviously be the best choice, but until then, we have seen 2 QBs that have been unable to hit open recievers standing behind an interior O-line that has been unable to hold any type of protection. Look at St. Louis right now, the O-line is horrible and look what is happening, the train has derailed. Warner has been exposed as a HORRIBLE QB on the run, if he is forced to scramble his game is DONE, OVER WITH....now word is Orlando Pace is out for 2-3 weeks.....scary thought for Rams fans. I don't think Shane Matthews is a bad QB,and I think with last years O-line we could be 2-1 right now, but that is wishful and "hypothetical" thinking, and for the team we have right now, we need a QB that can throw hard and throw in a hurry, and neither Shane nor Danny have showed that they can execute under these dire situations on the field right now.....I saw Spurrier should wait to late last week to give Ramsey those extra few days, and then pull the trigger and give him a shot. If he can get in there and light up a touchdown fast, it could set the team on an emotional high for obvious reasons....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsThug Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 Hey, if we win I'll be happy. I don't care if it's with Wuerfle, Matthews, or even if SS suits up. That being said, I can't imagine how Wuerfle gives us a better chance to win than Mathews. But I don't see Wuerfle in daily practices like SS does. I only see him in games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDSKINGATOR11 Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 Art, One of the better and most balanced posts I have ever read. As far as some of the comments about coaches wanting to win. I do believe that some coaches are happy with "moral" victories etc. Not SOS. He wants a W. To him a 49-7 loss is the same as 9-7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRMADD Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 Well.... I'm not sure that Spurrier either will play Wuerffel because he thinks he'll help the Skins win OR play him because he egotistically believes that he can turn Danny into a winner. I think Spurrier will play only if he has NO choice. If Matthews can't go, and Ramsey isn't ready, then Spurrier HAS to play him. It doesn't have anything to do with a fatherly relationship or with Spurrier's ego. It's just that his options are limited. I still believe his first choice is to start a healthy Matthews. If Matthews is healthy and doesn't play, ONLY then do we know that there's some other calculation going on in Spurrier's head. But Matthews does seem to be banged up. So that leaves Spurrier two options: Wuerffel or the rookie. Which one is the bigger risk to you? To me, it's Ramsey. Yes, he'll gain experience, but he'll also MORE THAN LIKELY lose the game. Wuerffel has looked awful, but he does understand the offense and can hand the ball to Davis without tripping. I know he's taking a good hard look at Ramsey in practice, but if he wouldn't plug him in at the end of the Philly rout, why would he start him against Tennessee? He'd need a GREAT two weeks of practice. If Wuerffel starts, it's not because Spurrier "wants to win" or wants to prove the world wrong about Wuerffel or just wants to be nice to his boy. It's because he has no choice. Do you really believe he'd start Wuerffel over a healthy Shane or a ready Patrick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
number twenty-eight Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 It seems to me that Spurrier is unhappy with the play of Matthews the last two games. I think he's particularly unhappy with his tossing the dump-offs and safety valves. As has been discussed, the protection has been poor and that would certainly contribute to his getting rid of the ball ahead of the WRs running out their patterns. Davis has 17 receptions already. Our backs have 32 catches between them. Our receivers have 26. While I don't especially prefer any of our QBs over another, I notice that Wuerffel goes downfield with the ball much moreso than Matthews. I have to believe that this is what Spurrier wants to see (the interception notwithstanding). Matthews is happy to dink and dunk it, Wuerffel looks downfield first. This contributes to the sacks Wuerffel has taken also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 Originally posted by number twenty-eight It seems to me that Spurrier is unhappy with the play of Matthews the last two games. I think he's particularly unhappy with his tossing the dump-offs and safety valves. As has been discussed, the protection has been poor and that would certainly contribute to his getting rid of the ball ahead of the WRs running out their patterns. Davis has 17 receptions already. Our backs have 32 catches between them. Our receivers have 26. While I don't especially prefer any of our QBs over another, I notice that Wuerffel goes downfield with the ball much moreso than Matthews. I have to believe that this is what Spurrier wants to see (the interception notwithstanding). Matthews is happy to dink and dunk it, Wuerffel looks downfield first. This contributes to the sacks Wuerffel has taken also. Good post, this actually makes sense. Matthews has been hesitant and hitting the shorter receivers and DW obviously is trying to throw downfield. I am still a Ramsey guy. I thing he's the longterm answer and if he can get the same mentality as DW, than we will have a winner. (I mean DW's downfield mentality, not the run around like a chicken with his head cut off, throw the ball up for grabs mentality) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orange&Blue Skins Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 Originally posted by number twenty-eight It seems to me that Spurrier is unhappy with the play of Matthews the last two games. I think he's particularly unhappy with his tossing the dump-offs and safety valves. As has been discussed, the protection has been poor and that would certainly contribute to his getting rid of the ball ahead of the WRs running out their patterns. Davis has 17 receptions already. Our backs have 32 catches between them. Our receivers have 26. While I don't especially prefer any of our QBs over another, I notice that Wuerffel goes downfield with the ball much moreso than Matthews. I have to believe that this is what Spurrier wants to see (the interception notwithstanding). Matthews is happy to dink and dunk it, Wuerffel looks downfield first. This contributes to the sacks Wuerffel has taken also. :notworthy Outstanding post. You are exactly right. I wish I was the one to have pointed it out. Unfortunately I've been squabbling with the unwashed, instead of adding value with reasonable posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwankGator Posted September 27, 2002 Share Posted September 27, 2002 What I want to see is Danny throw a long pass that doesn't look/sound like the Aflac duck shout out of an artillery gun. His two interceptions looks like he threw the ball higher in the air than it went in distance. :doh: Also, having Danny start a game means that he isn't coming into a game where the Skins are already done in and playing like they want to just go home uninjured. Anyway, I think Matthews gives the Redskins the best chance of winning. He may take short passes when Spurrier wants him to go deep, but he has kept the offense on the field for a few decent drives. Maybe he still has a bit of the WCO from the Bears burned in his brain that he needs to forget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted September 28, 2002 Share Posted September 28, 2002 as has been mentioned here already, there is NO deep game without a line capable of picking up its assignments and having a quarterback that can accurately throw the ball 30-40 yards downfield without causing a hernia Spurrier may like to have a vertical stretch to the offense but the talent isn't there to carry that off. And not only at qb and the OL right now. Gardner and Thompson are still learning. Thompson is essentially a rookie receiver out there. It is his first chance to see action. Gardner and Thompson were swallowed up by the Eagles, which is the same thing that happened to Westbrook and a lot of other Skins receivers over the past few years when taking on Vincent and Taylor :mad: The backup receiver perhaps SHOULD be getting more time on the field to help improve the conversion rate on third downs, ie Lockett and Doering, but I don't see them helping in the downfield phase much. Spurrier has to adapt a little bit, at least in the short-term. Gibbs changed the pass selection when there was a transition from a mobile qb with an accurate and decent arm in Theismann to a less mobile but stronger armed quarterback in Jay Schroeder and then on to Mark Rypien. You have to be able to overcome adversity, find another way of solving a problem. It isn't enough to keep saying 'stay the course', 'stay the course' when 'the course' may not be relevant to the NEW circumstances you find yourself in. Just remember a disciple of Air Coryell, Joe Gibbs became legendary for running an offense based on the RUNNING of a fullback and the blocking of an oversized line. Remember that because of injury to Phil Simms Parcells and his assistants in the 1990 season had to scrap part of their regular offense and go deeper into the playbook to find things that would work to the strengths of Jeff Hostetler, a more atheltic but less accurate and experienced player. They installed bootlegs and controlled sprint outs. They used more of the shotgun formation. They ran keepers up the middle. And lo and behold they ended up winning the Super Bowl that year now didn't they, despite the loss of a SB MVP quarterback Don't tell me it can't be done here. The fun'n'gun may very well work in full bloom but ironically it will probably only work when Ramsey gets in enough reps to be the driver for that race car Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted September 28, 2002 Share Posted September 28, 2002 Forget Spurrier..... What I want is........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.