Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Is Gibbs II a failure?

robotfire

By robotfire
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

Flowtrain

Flowtrain

Posted
Posted
Spurrier let every single positive part of the Redskins go, and it takes A LONG TIME to rebuild a team from scratch. Case in point: look at expansion teams. It takes time.

Expansion teams are pretty unique. But if you insist on using them as an example, you may wish to consider that the Jaguars and Panthers BOTH reached conference championships games in their second seasons. I'd avoid using that example in the future.

Instead, look to teams like the Jets and Saints to see what should be reasonably expected of a coach one season into taking over a terrible team that lacks talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Henry

Henry

Posted
Posted
Expansion teams are pretty unique. But if you insist on using them as an example, you may wish to consider that the Jaguars and Panthers BOTH reached conference championships games in their second seasons. I'd avoid using that example in the future.

Instead, look to teams like the Jets and Saints to see what should be reasonably expected of a coach one season into taking over a terrible team that lacks talent.

Alright already Flow, your new coach is doing a great job. There you go. :rolleyes:

But a new coach coming in and immediately turning a crap team into a playoff contender in one year is still the exception rather than the rule. Or are John Fox, Marty Schotteneheimer, Andy Reid, Lovie Smith, Brian Billick, Marv Lewis, Jeff Fischer, Brad Childress, Mike McCarthy, Gary Kubiak, Romeo Crennel, Dick Jauron, Art Shell, Denny Green, Rod Marinelli, Tom Coughlin, Mike Nolan, and Scott Linehan all lousy coaches because they didn't immediately make their respective teams great overnight?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RedskinzOwnU

RedskinzOwnU

Posted
Posted
Alright already Flow, you're new coach is doing a great job. There you go. :rolleyes:

But a new coach coming in and immediately turning a crap team into a playoff contender in one year is still the exception rather than the rule. Or are John Fox, Marty Schotteneheimer, Andy Reid, Lovie Smith, Brian Billick, Marv Lewis, Jeff Fischer, Brad Childress, Mike McCarthy, Gary Kubiak, Romeo Crennel, Dick Jauron, Art Shell, Denny Green, Rod Marinelli, Tom Coughlin, Mike Nolan, and Scott Linehan all lousy coaches because they didn't immediately make their respective teams great overnight?

The problem, at least for me, is that we're not building towards anything with Gibbs. I don't feel like each year we add a young group of core players that will, in a few years, aggregate into a great team. Each year we let some of our core players go and try to replace them with high-priced free agents that bust more often than not. We are in win-now mode every year, and as a result, we don't build a team. We can't start building this offseason because we have almost no draft picks. We'll get hopefully 1 really good guy in the draft, and have to buy everyone else. If this team truly wants to rebuild, we are precluded from even starting until NEXT offseason because we have no draft. This team is arguably worse than it was a year and a half ago, with no young talent to exploit (aside from possibly McIntosh). New coaches come in and build from the ground up. They know their plan will take a few years. What are we building towards?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Henry

Henry

Posted
Posted
The problem, at least for me, is that we're not building towards anything with Gibbs. I don't feel like each year we add a young group of core players that will, in a few years, aggregate into a great team. Each year we let some of our core players go and try to replace them with high-priced free agents that bust more often than not. We are in win-now mode every year, and as a result, we don't build a team. We can't start building this offseason because we have almost no draft picks. We'll get hopefully 1 really good guy in the draft, and have to buy everyone else. If this team truly wants to rebuild, we are precluded from even starting until NEXT offseason because we have no draft. This team is arguably worse than it was a year and a half ago, with no young talent to exploit (aside from possibly McIntosh). New coaches come in and build from the ground up. They know their plan will take a few years. What are we building towards?

I understand that. I'd rather be building through the draft too. I've never understood Gibb's aversion to drafting. But I think Gibbs has his team largely in place. It was just lousy this year. Teams, even stablished ones, in this day and age do have ups and downs. I've already mentioned Parcells with New England, but look at San Diego right now for another example, since many on this board are suddenly big Schottenheimer fans. They went 8-8 his first year, then 4-12, then 12-4, then 9-7, now 10-2. Were the players average, then bad, then good, then average, then good?

Now, you may think we just stink and we're doomed to be a 4-6 win team next year and the year after that. I'm not so sure. I think that with a few exceptions most teams have good years and bad ones. Maybe we're just mired in a bad one right now.

Or maybe we do flat-out suck. All I'm saying is we don't know yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PeterMP

PeterMP

Posted
Posted
Alright already Flow, you're new coach is doing a great job. There you go. :rolleyes:

But a new coach coming in and immediately turning a crap team into a playoff contender in one year is still the exception rather than the rule. Or are John Fox, Marty Schotteneheimer, Andy Reid, Lovie Smith, Brian Billick, Marv Lewis, Jeff Fischer, Brad Childress, Mike McCarthy, Gary Kubiak, Romeo Crennel, Dick Jauron, Art Shell, Denny Green, Rod Marinelli, Tom Coughlin, Mike Nolan, and Scott Linehan all lousy coaches because they didn't immediately make their respective teams great overnight?

Many of these coaches are not great coaches (or at least will never get to a SB much less win one). Many of the others started over with rookie QB's. If Gibbs would have come in and year one said this team is awful, and we need a new QB and in general we are going to start over and go with young players it would be a different story. Instead Gibbs seemed to think and his moves suggested that he thought he could tweak the team and get it to be a SB team. Anyway we are now in year 3 not year 1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Leonard Washington

Leonard Washington

Posted
Posted
If it wasn't for that flukey 5 game winning streak last year it would have been a bigger disaster then it looks now.

i agree. i know everyone looks at last year fondly. i do too, but we weren't that impressive---especially offensively. gw has given us 2 years of good to excellent defense (using unknowns) while the offense pretty much stayed unproductive and needed more luck than scheme to produce. offensively we have 11 pro bowl talents but we can't score a TD to save xmas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Henry

Henry

Posted
Posted
Many of these coaches are not great coaches (or at least will never get to a SB much less win one). Many of the others started over with rookie QB's. If Gibbs would have come in and year one said this team is awful, and we need a new QB and in general we are going to start over and go with young players it would be a different story. Instead Gibbs seemed to think and his moves suggested that he thought he could tweak the team and get it to be a SB team. Anyway we are now in year 3 not year 1.

You've voiced your frustration Pete. I got it.

My post noting 18 active coaches who did not see immediate success was in response to the guy who suggested we look to the two playoff contending teams to see "what should be reasonably expected of a coach one season into taking over a terrible team that lacks talent."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GaryClark4Canton

GaryClark4Canton

Posted
Posted

Gibbs is doing a horrible job and I don't see how any of you can sugar coat it. Absolutely horrendous. We look like the Lions in burgundy now. All of the indecision, bad management, horrible game-time decisions, terrible FA pickups...

You guys all know he's sucking it up but won't admit it. This is by far his worst season. That alone should tell you something.

GC

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Flowtrain

Flowtrain

Posted
Posted
Alright already Flow, your new coach is doing a great job. There you go. :rolleyes:

But a new coach coming in and immediately turning a crap team into a playoff contender in one year is still the exception rather than the rule. Or are John Fox, Marty Schotteneheimer, Andy Reid, Lovie Smith, Brian Billick, Marv Lewis, Jeff Fischer, Brad Childress, Mike McCarthy, Gary Kubiak, Romeo Crennel, Dick Jauron, Art Shell, Denny Green, Rod Marinelli, Tom Coughlin, Mike Nolan, and Scott Linehan all lousy coaches because they didn't immediately make their respective teams great overnight?

First off, there are plenty of coaches who have provided immediate turn arounds other than Mangini and Payton. But really - why lump Gibbs in with no-names like Linehan or Marinelli? I'd hope Skins fans give him more credit than that.

And in using Mangini and Payton as examples, we've got to ask - is it "unreasonable" to expect a HOF coach like Gibbs to perform similar to a rookie? Perhaps, if he's rusty. Perhaps not, if he has the unique advantage of relying heavily on free agency for quick results, rather than rebuilding.

But let's move away from the 1-year turnaround since it's not the really issue.

The most ridiculous aspect of the Gibbs evaluation is that some beg for patience, claiming that he hasn't been given enough time. 4 years, they want. It's silly because we know that MANY MANY coaches have done more with less talent in a shorter period of time. And also because one is hard-pressed to identify a sound foundation for the future, which would allow Gibbs' poor grade to be adjusted accordingly.

It often appears that the Skins are content with a dysfunctional approach, provided it allows them to bathe in a nostalgic glow with Gibbs at the helm. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Henry

Henry

Posted
Posted
First off, there are plenty of coaches who have provided immediate turn arounds other than Mangini and Payton. But really - why lump Gibbs in with no-names like Linehan or Marinelli? I'd hope Skins fans give him more credit than that.

As loathe as I am to continue to give you an excuse to take your shots, I will respond one last time.

I didn't lump Gibbs in with no-names. I provided a list of 18 active coaches who didn't enjoy an immediate turn around. That's more than half even if you don't count Gibbs (and Belichek, which I accidently left off my list.) Sure you can come up with other coaches that have enjoyed immediate turnarounds, but they would still be in the minority. And thus, your business about what we can 'reasonably expect' continues to come across as nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt a chest thumping about your own teams' current success. (The funny thing is, I like the Jets. I'm actually very very impressed with that young guy up there and what he's doing with the limited talent he's got. But when they win it's become practically a guarantee that you'll pop up and make some snide comment, which is a shame. But I digress.)

And in using Mangini and Payton as examples, we've got to ask - is it "unreasonable" to expect a HOF coach like Gibbs to perform similar to a rookie? Perhaps, if he's rusty. Perhaps not, if he has the unique advantage of relying heavily on free agency for quick results, rather than rebuilding.

I actually, earlier in this very thread, used Parcells in New England and Schoettenheimer in San Diego as specific comparisons. Both of them had excellent credientials, came back from time off and experienced up and down seasons their first three years. No doubt you think rookie coaches 12 games into one season are more relevant comparisons. I'm not so sure.

But let's move away from the 1-year turnaround since it's not the really issue.

Yes let's, since it's not the issue, and more importantly, it's complete bunk.

The most ridiculous aspect of the Gibbs evaluation is that some beg for patience, claiming that he hasn't been given enough time. 4 years, they want. It's silly because we know that MANY MANY coaches have done more with less talent in a shorter period of time. And also because one is hard-pressed to identify a sound foundation for the future, which would allow Gibbs' poor grade to be adjusted accordingly.

It often appears that the Skins are content with a dysfunctional approach, provided it allows them to bathe in a nostalgic glow with Gibbs at the helm. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Everything you said above would be spot on, except for the fact that the Redskins did actually enjoy a mildly successful season last year. If this team had gone, say, 6-10, 7-9 and was now 4-8 I would agree with you 100%. However, this team did have a pulse last year, for the first time in 6 years. For that reason, I'm willing to give Gibbs an off year before delcaring him an unmitigated failure.

But you go ahead and do it now, and enjoy your moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
steve57

steve57

Posted
Posted

Yes! No question. You simply can't compare the two, and those that keep insisting the Gibbs is Gibbs, when the team he is fielding now is the antithesis of what he succeeded with in the glory years, are drinking Snyder Kool-Aide with a beer bong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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