Wow: THIS guy had an 8-6 record as a starter here?

[Larry Brown #43]

With Campbell getting the start Sunday, the Post this morning had a spread listing all the QBs who have started at least one game for us since Gibbs left in '93. Man, there have been quite a few. Campbell will be the 17th to start a game since Gibbs left.

Only three had a winning record as a starter here, and one of the three hardly counts: Jeff Hostetler, who went 2-1 for us in '97.

Brad Johnson had a 17-10 mark. No one else on the list even came close to matching that record.

But what was most amazing to me was the only other guy with a winning record as a starter for us was: TONY BANKS. He went 8-6 in 2001, the Marty year.

Man, if Marty could get an 8-6 record out of Tony freakin' Banks, who we yanked off the scrap heap that year after Dallas cut him loose, he just may have done a better coaching job that year than anyone realized.

[MeNoRevs]

I had no problem with Marty here. With Banks as our QB, we played Marty ball, I believe that was Stephen Davis's best year. He just wasnt able to do what he wanted to do with Snyder wanting to be part of the process.

[Sebowski]

I saw the thread title and immiediately thought of Banks. That sucked and was able to win games for us. Credit Stephen Davis and Schotty.

[G-Prime]

I had no problem with Marty here.. I had a problem with him being fired.. If we'd have had Marty those years steve Spurrier was here, I think we'd have 1 or 2 play off appearances.

[skinstzar]

Letting Schottenheimer go for Spurrier was the second dumbest move this franchise ever made. All Schottenheimer has done is win instantly everywhere he goes.

[Mr. S]

I had no problem with Marty here.. I had a problem with him being fired.. If we'd have had Marty those years steve Spurrier was here, I think we'd have 1 or 2 play off appearances.

But Marty tends to screwup in the playoffs and not make the Super Bowl. Look at how the Chargers always fizzle out.

Now then again, I think that argument is null because we did not fizzle out that year. 0-5 then going 8-3 with Tony Frikkin Banks? Stephen Davis was beastly that year as well.

Rumors were that Marty wanted Jake Delhomme that season. Not saying he would necessarily do better here, but it sure does show that he did better in Carolina.

Marty understood one thing, to build a team. He cut big profile guys and brought in workhorses. It's like what Greg Williams and Gibbs were successful with in the 2004 defense and in 2005 as a whole. I was hoping they would learn from their mistakes for 2006 and just be thrifty and try and get more draft choices.

I was shocked to see Marty go.

[cphil006]

Vinny Cerrato gave Spurrier Trung Canidate.

Vinny Cerrato gave the Redskins Jeff George.

see a pattern

Schottenheimer fired Cerrato

Snyder hired him back in the Spurrier era.

[Burgold]

Spurrier was a chance at greatness. Marty was a chance at mediocrity. Plus, there were mutinies everywhere. I don't really blame Snyder for that. Plus, after they climbed back to .500 they lost every meaningful game. They were an almost team. Banks may have had a winning record, but that offense was as painful to watch as this year's with Brunell and may have been more painful.

[NOVA2Tampa]

Vinny Cerrato gave Spurrier Trung Canidate.

Vinny Cerrato gave the Redskins Jeff George.

see a pattern

Schottenheimer fired Cerrato

Snyder hired him back in the Spurrier era.

Yup...Vinny has to go...and we could have made the SB with Marty.

[redskinsunshine]

Schottenheimer has never figured out the playoff thing. His brand of football (when he was here, anyway) is as dull as day-old toast. And (when he was here, anyway) he has a very dictatorial management style. I am very glad that he is not here any more.

[NOVA2Tampa]

Spurrier was a chance at greatness. Marty was a chance at mediocrity. Plus, there were mutinies everywhere. I don't really blame Snyder for that. Plus, after they climbed back to .500 they lost every meaningful game. They were an almost team. Banks may have had a winning record, but that offense was as painful to watch as this year's with Brunell and may have been more painful.

Spurrier was a bust...face it...we were better off with Schotty.

[BAFGA]

With Campbell getting the start Sunday, the Post this morning had a spread listing all the QBs who have started at least one game for us since Gibbs left in '93. Man, there have been quite a few. Campbell will be the 17th to start a game since Gibbs left.

Only three had a winning record as a starter here, and one of the three hardly counts: Jeff Hostetler, who went 2-1 for us in '97.

Brad Johnson had a 17-10 mark. No one else on the list even came close to matching that record.

But what was most amazing to me was the only other guy with a winning record as a starter for us was: TONY BANKS. He went 8-6 in 2001, the Marty year.

Man, if Marty could get an 8-6 record out of Tony freakin' Banks, who we yanked off the scrap heap that year after Dallas cut him loose, he just may have done a better coaching job that year than anyone realized.

I agree. He brought us from 0-5 to 5-5 with Tony Banks. I thought that if Marty was going to stay that he should keep Banks and draft a QB, but of course Snyder went with Spurrier and it all went downhill.

[kleese]

The problem I had with Marty was simple:

After the 5-5 start, we choked. An AWFUL Dallas team came into DC and beat us in a pivotal game where we looked unprepared and sluggish. IMO, Marty got an F- for the first 5 games, an A+ for the next 5, and then the Dallas, Philly, and Chicago losses (ALL at home) broke the tie. I was underwhelmed by what Marty did here. He was 6-8 in games with playoff implications that year.

[BAFGA]

Schottenheimer has never figured out the playoff thing. His brand of football (when he was here, anyway) is as dull as day-old toast. And (when he was here, anyway) he has a very dictatorial management style. I am very glad that he is not here any more.

Well he does get wins in the regular season and gives a chance to make something happen in the playoffs. I think he would have consistently been in the playoffs here if he stuck around. I would take that right now than this garbage.

[Burgold]

Spurrier was a bust...face it...we were better off with Schotty.

Absolutely. But at the time, Spurrier was an interesting roll of the dice. He was either going to be great or a disaster. Unfortunately, he was a disaster.

[BAFGA]

Spurrier was a chance at greatness. Marty was a chance at mediocrity. Plus, there were mutinies everywhere. I don't really blame Snyder for that. Plus, after they climbed back to .500 they lost every meaningful game. They were an almost team. Banks may have had a winning record, but that offense was as painful to watch as this year's with Brunell and may have been more painful.

One thing I remember about Banks is that he could throw it deep. Brunell doesn't have that arm strength.

[ThomasRoane]

Umm did you guys forget how marty embarrassed and mistreated Darrell Green? The greatest Redskin of all time? And when he went to San Diego he did the same thing with Seau. He had a huge ego and he sucked as a GM. If you remember, Snyder wanted Santana Moss in the draft. Marty took Rod Gardner. How'd that work out for us Also, Marty's own brother wouldn't even follow him to SD.

You take away LT from San Diego and watch what happens. And for 2 years now he's got them close but they flame out. Because he wears his teams down. They have no legs by the end of the season due to his practices.

[NOVA2Tampa]

Umm did you guys forget how marty embarrassed and mistreated Darrell Green? The greatest Redskin of all time? And when he went to San Diego he did the same thing with Seau. He had a huge ego and he sucked as a GM. If you remember, Snyder wanted Santana Moss in the draft. Marty took Rod Gardner. How'd that work out for us Also, Marty's own brother wouldn't even follow him to SD.

You take away LT from San Diego and watch what happens. And for 2 years now he's got them close but they flame out. Because he wears his teams down. They have no legs by the end of the season due to his practices.

True, but he was still better than Spurrier! :laugh:

[BAFGA]

True, but he was still better than Spurrier! :laugh:

With the possible exception of Marty Morningwheg, almost every coach is better than Spurrier.

[Stew]

:whoknows:

With Campbell getting the start Sunday, the Post this morning had a spread listing all the QBs who have started at least one game for us since Gibbs left in '93. Man, there have been quite a few. Campbell will be the 17th to start a game since Gibbs left.

Only three had a winning record as a starter here, and one of the three hardly counts: Jeff Hostetler, who went 2-1 for us in '97.

Brad Johnson had a 17-10 mark. No one else on the list even came close to matching that record.

But what was most amazing to me was the only other guy with a winning record as a starter for us was: TONY BANKS. He went 8-6 in 2001, the Marty year.

Man, if Marty could get an 8-6 record out of Tony freakin' Banks, who we yanked off the scrap heap that year after Dallas cut him loose, he just may have done a better coaching job that year than anyone realized.

I thought we got him from Baltimore...

[Larry Brown #43]

Do I think Marty would have taken us to the promise land if he had never left? Probably not. But keep in mind, the NFC has been pretty lousy since he left. He might have been good enough to get us to represent the NFC in the Super Bowl. And we didn't sniff the playoffs under Spurrier.

I definitely don't think he was bad enough to be replaced after one year. People often say Marty wasn't fired--he refused to relinquish control, so they had to let him go. I don't buy that. Relinquishing control of football operations, when that's what you were hired to do, is a severe demotion. How many of us would accept a similar demotion in our jobs? Particularly if you feel you're doing a good job?

Sure, Holmgren accepted such a demotion in Seattle, but he was at least given several years to try and make it work before they downgraded him.

I don't know that Marty would have taken us all the way, but he deserved more of a chance than one year.

[jimster]

Letting Schottenheimer go for Spurrier was the second dumbest move this franchise ever made. All Schottenheimer has done is win instantly everywhere he goes.

Instantly? - He went to San Diego and took a 8-8 team and made them 4-12 and earned the #1 overall draft pick which he spent on a QB when he had Brees already on his team. - It wasn't until he hired Cam Cameron as OC and gave up the "MArty-ball" did his offense start producing.

Like NOVA said - he also seemed to be trying to run DG out of town like he did with Rodney Harrison and Seau in SD.

...and as kleese mentioned - we STILL couldn't beat a 5-11 Dallas team, who would have been 3-13 if we had.

[Larry Brown #43]

:whoknows:

I thought we got him from Baltimore...

Check your facts.

Redskins sign quarterback Banks

Elbow injury will force Broncos' Beuerlein to miss first eight weeks

The Associated Press

Friday, August 17, 2001

Carlisle, Pa. — The quarterback-depleted Washington Redskins signed Tony Banks on Thursday, two days after a bitter release from the Dallas Cowboys nearly made him quit the sport.

"One day you're on one team, the next day you're on the other," Banks said. "It's not how I pictured it, but here I am."

Banks will battle Todd Husak for the No. 2 job behind Jeff George. Banks is the only healthy veteran arm in camp George has tendinitis in his shoulder, and Husak has a strained rib muscle.

Banks, who signed a one-year deal, practiced with the Redskins on Thursday afternoon, but will not play in today's exhibition game against Atlanta. Unless Husak's condition improves, fourth-round draft pick Sage Rosenfels will start.

Banks has 61 career NFL starts over five seasons, but he has lost the No. 1 job in St. Louis, Baltimore and Dallas. He was signed as the replacement for Troy Aikman in April, but was cut after two exhibition games and rookie Quincy Carter was made the starter.

"There was a point when I was ready to give it up completely," Banks said. "It was a knee-jerk reaction, an emotional time. I thought I was playing my best football at camp."

Banks has 61 career touchdown passes and 58 interceptions. His 72.1 rating is 24th among active passers with at least 1,000 attempts.

[Burgold]

I think you guys are missing the biggest point in that article. The fourth best quarterback we've had since '93 on the basis of winning was Danny Weurfal. He was 2-2. Isn't that amazing.

[SonnyJ]

Ah, Marty revisionism. Ya gotta love it.

No talk about how Marty was the guy that turned Jeff George into a big cap number, and then cut him. How he ran Larry Centers off. How the team was HISTORICALLY BAD for the first 5 3/4 games that year and was getting BLOWN OUT, AT HOME, to a team that wound up 1-15 that season before Arrington had his shining moment (Sunday's game against the Eagles actually reminded me of those performances). Then, after getting back to 5-5, the team lost 3 HOME GAMES down the stretch to get itself eliminated from playoff contention, before cosmetically squaring the record to 8-8 by beating a couple of bottom-feeders. How he saw no need for changes at the end of the season. How the team would have needed wholesale changes because the players by-and-large despised him.

Of course, Marty, having inherited Tomlinson and Brees, has done some good things out in San Diego. But no mention of how he turned the offense over to Cam Cameron, instead of stifling it in his normal fashion. No mention of how BAD the Chargers were his first two seasons out there (turns teams around instantly?), so BAD that they had the top pick in the draft AFTER his SECOND season, so badly-perceived as a coach and organization that their top pick REFUSED to play for him. That their turnaround is pretty much attributed to finally getting stellar QB play and an offense that has been decidedly un-MartyBall-Like.

Sorry, just not buying it. Marty is a solid coach, no doubt. But it is shown that he can take a team only so far, that his core being could very well inhibit his teams from advancing further. The guy drove Joe Montana into retirement, rather than play for him.

The guy had a good 4 1/4 game run here that came up WAY short of the post-season, but people wax sentimental about him. Joe Gibbs took the team on a run that dwarfs that one, but people question him and the organization. I just don't get it :confused:.