Skinsinparadise Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 I don't think Fassel is a disaster but at the same time I don't think he's anything special -- that's my problem with the pick. Why screw around with chemistry -- new defense and new offense for him? Be one thing for Cowher. But for a 58 year old whose last stint as a coordinator wasn't successful, no one mentions as a brilliant X and O's guy anymore -- and with arguably questionable leadership skills considering the rap on him was the team quit on him at the end -- and while he seems a nice guy -- he seems as bland and vanilla as it gets. To me its a very unexciting pick. And I agree with a lot with what Rick said in his blog expect for the "screw what the players think". This team seems to have motivational problems at times, and chemistry issues. If they don't respect this guy I think it will show on the field just as it did for the Giants in their last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Didn't his guarantee come a couple seasons AFTER they went to the Super Bowl? I know it's a minor point, but I'm just curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiveStrongSkins Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Someone please answer this question for me. No one else is going anywhere near Fassel. There is no competition for his services anywhere in the league. Why would you force your team to learn two new systems just to name Fassel head coach? If you keep Gregg around as head coach then atleast you ensure some stability on defense. If you really think Fassel is good at mentoring QB's, then hire him to take care of the offense. Trashing everyone linked to Gibbs is just an awful move in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barzy68 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 I'm not sure why everyone is so down on Fassel and so high on GW. As everyone knows, Fassel had a winning record with the Giants, GW was 17-31 with the Bills. Fassel inherited a bad team in NY and in his first year went 10-5-1. Jason Campbell is very similar in his stature to Kerry Collins, but there is a difference, JC has an excellent work ethic and good head on his shoulders, unlike Collins, who had a drinking problem for a while there. JC is big like Collins, has a big delivery ala Collins. People keep bringing up Kyle Boller and the job in Baltimore. Let's face it, Kyle Boller is not a good QB, no coach can help him become a good QB, I think Fassel takes way too much blame for Boller's failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hiro Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Well, how about the idea Bram floated in his blog that Fassel would be QB coach/OC?...that's a guy who loves O-line and running and has done great work with QBs who showed way less potential than JC. If Al is going to get the boot, Fas is geared towards what many of us here like about our O personnel.And GW as HC, R Ryan as DC? I could live with that. I'd like to point out that with Fassell as the offensive coordinator, Kyle Boller actually resembled an NFL QB at times and played pretty decently as a fill-in, which is a huge improvement over what he was when he first arrived. And the guy does have experience with working with great QBs (see Elway, John). Another thing that I've read is that the guy runs a variant of the WCO. Most people on this board would bash the idea of Jason running the WCO, but they don't realize that he's done it before and was very successful when he did. If we were to somehow hire Fassell as our offensive coordinator while retaining Gregg as head coach, and then hire Rex Ryan as our defensive coordinator, I agree with Jumbo that would be actually a great scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Didn't his guarantee come a couple seasons AFTER they went to the Super Bowl? I know it's a minor point, but I'm just curious. No it came during the 2000 season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish50 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Good post. I still think the continuity of this team is paramount to any pros and cons on hiring Fassel. We are only a player or two from taking our division and who ever starts at QB, plus the development of Jason Campbell, all play a significant role in the out come of next years team. Hire Fassel and you can toss all of that out the door. I think he'll help Campbell out but our offense will sputter and cost us games as JC will be learning yet another system. Not all players will "go along to get along". Some might be key players that will rebel against any new HC and or DC. With Rex Ryan, we switch to a 3-4 def. A whole new scheme with many players not being able to fulfill their roles at key positions. So what happens? You rebuild and that's what will happen with the entire team (coaches, position coaches, OC, DC, etc.). This team does not need rebuilding, it only needs to be tweaked here and there. Add the "continuity factor" by hiring GW and this team should be in contention for at least a division title next year. Anything or anybody else and we are starting all over, again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtandler Posted January 23, 2008 Author Share Posted January 23, 2008 Nice post. I remember him losing that team in NY, and that scares me. Good leaders fail often, but having the troops mutiny is a bad reflection on his leadership abilities. Bad kharma. I remember hating Spurriers guts for letting our team quit mid season. He lost the team during his seventh year. They responded to him extremely well in the beginning (the 6-10 to 10-5-1 turnaround) and in the "guarantee" Super Bowl season. It was time for him to go at that point, but seven years is a pretty good run before the players start to tune you out. I don't quite see the comparison to SOS losing the team about halfway through his first year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiveStrongSkins Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 He lost the team during his seventh year. They responded to him extremely well in the beginning (the 6-10 to 10-5-1 turnaround) and in the "guarantee" Super Bowl season. It was time for him to go at that point, but seven years is a pretty good run before the players start to tune you out. I don't quite see the comparison to SOS losing the team about halfway through his first year. Rich, you are a knowledgeable guy. Maybe you can help this make sense to me. There is no competition for Fassel. He is said to be wanted as a QB mentor to Campbell. Why would you want to change two systems: offense and defense for this guy? He can be had as a offensive coordinator. I dont get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtandler Posted January 23, 2008 Author Share Posted January 23, 2008 Rich, you are a knowledgeable guy. Maybe you can help this make sense to me. There is no competition for Fassel. He is said to be wanted as a QB mentor to Campbell. Why would you want to change two systems: offense and defense for this guy? He can be had as a offensive coordinator. I dont get it. I can only guess, LiveStrong, but it seems apparent that Snyder doesn't think that Gregg Williams is the right man for the job. There is ample evidence to support that point of view--I'm sure I don't have to go back over his record and the feelings of players and fans in Buffalo--and it seems that Snyder is unconvinced that Williams can/will/has changed enough to ensure that there won't be a repeat performance. So, where do you look? Do you take a chance on an assistant? Or do you take a chance on a guy with a track record that includes a winning record over seven seasons, two coach of the year awards, and a Super Bowl appearance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abu69 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Good post. I still think the continuity of this team is paramount to any pros and cons on hiring Fassel. We are only a player or two from taking our division and who ever starts at QB, plus the development of Jason Campbell, all play a significant role in the out come of next years team.Hire Fassel and you can toss all of that out the door. I think he'll help Campbell out but our offense will sputter and cost us games as JC will be learning yet another system. Not all players will "go along to get along". Some might be key players that will rebel against any new HC and or DC. With Rex Ryan, we switch to a 3-4 def. A whole new scheme with many players not being able to fulfill their roles at key positions. So what happens? You rebuild and that's what will happen with the entire team (coaches, position coaches, OC, DC, etc.). This team does not need rebuilding, it only needs to be tweaked here and there. Add the "continuity factor" by hiring GW and this team should be in contention for at least a division title next year. Anything or anybody else and we are starting all over, again. Agreed with all said here. Continuity should trump all, and that is the biggest CON that Fassel has going for him now: disrupting the good thing we have going. Far as I see it, the only PRO Fassel has is his "ability to develop QBs" which is IMHO a questionable trait. Does the QB make the coach or vice versa? Why not give Campbell another year in the same system, with the same coaches, and see if that works? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamyesme1111 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 " Jason Campbell would be learning his seventh offensive system in eight years"Correct me if I am wrong but I am pretty sure Jason hasn't even been in the league for that long. He had 4 different offensive coordinators all 4 years at Auburn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abdcskins Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 No Fassel. He's an ex-Giant for god's sake! Doesn't that mean anything to you!??!?! It would make me sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsrevival Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 I've seen a couple comments that say Jim Fassel is a good developer of QBs. Which QBs has he developed? John Elway being one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CustomApparelDirect Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Jim FASSEL was INSTRUMENTAL in the DEVELOPMENT of Hall-of-Fame QB's John ELWAY (Denver BRONCOS) and Phil SIMMS (New York GIANTS) - to name a couple!!! WHAT IF: (1.) Gregg WILLIAMS is HEAD Coach; (2.) Al SAUNDERS is ASSOCIATE Head Coach - OFFENSE/Offensive Coordinator; (3.) Joe BUGEL is ASSISTANT Head Coach - OFFENSE/Offensive Line Coach; (4.) Greg BLATCHE / Jerry GRAY is ASSISTANT Head Coach - DEFENSE; (5.) Greg BLATCHE / Jerry GRAY / Rex RYAN / Jim SCHWARTZ is DEFENSIVE Coordinator; (6.) Jim FASSEL is ASSISTANT Head Coach - OFFENSE/ QB's Coach?!? Hmmm...:logo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbodiesel#44 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 He lost the team during his seventh year. They responded to him extremely well in the beginning (the 6-10 to 10-5-1 turnaround) and in the "guarantee" Super Bowl season. It was time for him to go at that point, but seven years is a pretty good run before the players start to tune you out. I don't quite see the comparison to SOS losing the team about halfway through his first year. I'm not sure I follow your logic. If his ideas and leadership abilities had become so stale to his team that they didn't even bother to show up on the field, how are those same ideas going to become fresh and motivational to another team years later? The NFL has moved on, and Fossil has been doing broadcasting since with no further NFL experience. You don't tune out a good leader, you follow him into the fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 "I am putting my chips on the table" 34-7 in the Superbowl Last coach to lose to Steve Spurrier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clskinsfan Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Fassel may be a good coach but the biggest problem with hiring him is this. We will go into rebuilding again. That means high player turnover and Learning a new system. The 7th for Jason Campbell in 8 years by the way. If Snyder does this I hope he is prepared for a couple of suck ass seasons cause thats what coming. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Agreed with all said here. Continuity should trump all, and that is the biggest CON that Fassel has going for him now: disrupting the good thing we have going. No, continuity should not trump all. Remember when Marvin Lewis left and we promoted one of his assistants to run the defense to keep continuity? That's right, it was a disaster. I like Williams as much as anyone, but you don't just give the rubber stamp to him. As said elsewhere, he has some issues to address, and if he can't address it sufficiently to Snyder, you move on and pick someone else. And no, a new head coach doesn't mean you tear everything apart and rebuild. Dallas proved that it doesn't need to be true. If anything, Snyder should be looking for someone to take the team that has been built and build on that foundation. That's the way it usually works. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtandler Posted January 23, 2008 Author Share Posted January 23, 2008 I'm not sure I follow your logic. If his ideas and leadership abilities had become so stale to his team that they didn't even bother to show up on the field, how are those same ideas going to become fresh and motivational to another team years later? The NFL has moved on, and Fossil has been doing broadcasting since with no further NFL experience. You don't tune out a good leader, you follow him into the fire. Very few leaders have the ability to be effective for more than five or six years. Take a look around. Coughlin's style worked for a while in Jax and then the players just didn't respond to him any more. He got a change of scene, the players got a new voice and both are doing well now. If I remember correctly, less than 10% of the coaches since about 1970 have had tenures as long as seven years. I'd venture to say that since Fassel's first year as a head coach that the average tenure has been about half of what he lasted. The leaders like Lombardi are very few and far between. And, who knows, he may have packed it in because he sensed his message might become stale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 I'm not sure I follow your logic. If his ideas and leadership abilities had become so stale to his team that they didn't even bother to show up on the field, how are those same ideas going to become fresh and motivational to another team years later? The NFL has moved on, and Fossil has been doing broadcasting since with no further NFL experience. You don't tune out a good leader, you follow him into the fire. Some quotes from back at the end of 2003: "The Giants filed in for a meeting Wednesday morning, as they do every Wednesday morning during the season. Then Jim Fassel came in, and it became clear there would be nothing typical about it. Fassel told the Giants that the last two games of the season would be the last in his seven years as their coach. The players sat in silence. They, too, had heard that Fassel's job was on the line, but they thought an announcement would come later. ''The finality of him saying, 'I'm going to be fired after the next two games,' well, it was very gut-wrenching,'' center Chris Bober said. Then some of them started thinking about Fassel's timing. The Giants are 4-10. Fassel knew his job was in jeopardy, so he told the team that he was, in essence, firing himself to make his departure less of a distraction for the franchise. That only made some of the Giants admire Fassel more, even those who do not have straight-arrow personalities. ''It would have been easy for Coach to turn his back on me -- how I play, how I am,'' tight end Jeremy Shockey said. In the locker room after practice, the Giants sounded as if they were delivering a testimonial. Quarterback Kerry Collins said he would make an extra effort to play one more game for Fassel, despite his sprained left ankle. Fassel resuscitated Collins's career when the Giants signed him as a free agent in 1999. ''As an athlete and as a person, if you know somebody believes in you, that motivates you,'' Collins said. That is part of the reason many Giants were sad to hear Fassel's announcement. Although they have been torn apart by injuries and have lost six straight games, they felt as if they had let him down. ''Coming into this year, I thought he'd be safe for a couple of years,'' Bober said." .... "SEVERAL weeks ago the Giants fans were chanting, ''Fire Fassel, Fire Fassel,'' but as the Giants' 4-12 season wound down yesterday, a different chant serenaded Jim Fassel in his last game as coach. ''I think they were yelling, 'Thanks, Fassel,' '' he was saying now after the 37-24 loss to Carolina. ''Something like that.'' Thanks for the memories in Fassel's seven seasons of three playoff teams, including one trip to the Super Bowl. Thanks for his 58-53-1 record, third behind Steve Owen (153-100-17) and Bill Parcells (77-49-1) among the coaches in the 78-year history of the franchise. And thanks for easing his own departure nearly two weeks ago when, knowing he would not be retained, he told the Giants' executive vice president, John Mara, that he would coach the final two games and leave. Maybe that's when the fans who had been chanting or thinking, ''Fire, Fassel, Fire Fassel,'' realized that in the big picture, he had been a good coach. Better than most, just not quite good enough, especially when this season turned into such a disaster. ''Life moves on,'' Fassel said. ''What the players did last night was tremendous.'' What the players did was have a video done of his highlights along with the voices of Tiki Barber, Michael Strahan, Kerry Collins, Keith Hamilton and Charles Way, the former Giants fullback who is now the director of player programs. When the video ended, the entire team gave Fassel a standing ovation." .......... "Fassel seemed to have accomplished almost everything he was assigned on arrival in 1997. The Giants that Fassel inherited in 1997 were an awful, aimless team with a losing attitude and a divided locker room. The defensive players resented the team's hapless offensive unit, the league's worst. The Giants' quarterback situation appeared hopeless; Dave Brown had a long-term contract. By the dawn of the 2003 season, Fassel had not only mended the rift between the defense and the offense, but he had also helped overhaul the entire roster and had helped turn the Giants' offense into one that was feared. With Fassel's guidance, Kerry Collins, plucked off the scrapheap in 1999, had developed into a first-rate N.F.L. quarterback. In the 2000 season, Collins and two other offensive players that some had wanted the Giants to discard -- running back Tiki Barber and wide receiver Amani Toomer -- magically carried the Giants into the Super Bowl. And how had that happened? The galvanizing event was Fassel's wild-eyed, image-busting guarantee speech, a stroke of bold leadership. Outside the Giants Stadium field a few minutes after that speech, someone suggested to Fassel that he had probably just gotten himself fired. ''I don't care,'' he said. ''Sometimes the most dangerous guy in a gunfight is the guy who doesn't care if he gets killed.'' ........ I still have no real idea what I think about the possibility of Fassel being the new HC for the Redskins...but what I DO now know is that, no, every player did not hate him or mutiny on him...and, yes, he did have some notable success with the Giants, more than Marty, Spurrier, Turner and even Gibbs had with the Skins. In other words, I'm not throwing up in my mouth over the thought lol...might actually work out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsMaster88 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Shows that Fassel's accomplishments (which were long ago anyhow), aren't that great. http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=super/rankings/80-61 78. 2000 NEW YORK GIANTS 12-4 (2-1) Pts/game: 20.5 Pts/game allowed: 15.4 Rank (pts): 15 of 31 Rank (yards): 13 of 31 Rank (pts allowed): 5 of 31 Rank (yds allowed): 5 of 31 Opp. W-L: .445 Against .500+ teams: 4-4 Post. score: 68-44 Super Bowl: Lost to Baltimore 34-7 Coach: Jim Fassel Key players: QB Kerry Collins (3,610 yards, 22 TD), RB Tiki Barber (over 1700 total yards), WR Amani Toomer, OG Ron Stone, DE Michael Strahan, LB Jessie Armstead, DT Keith Hamilton Commentary: A completely uninspiring and forgettable team, which got crushed in a completely uninspiring and forgettable Super Bowl. (Wait, Jim Fassel coached in a Super Bowl? Kerry Collins took every snap for a Super Bowl team?) Nonetheless, the Giants did win the NFC (beating the Vikings 41-0 in the NFC title game when Minnesota essentially quit). The Giants were strong on D, especially against the run (allowing just 3.2 yards per carry) and did beat the Eagles three times, but won a weak conference and lacked star power (only two Pro Bowlers). Did we mention Jim Fassel was the coach? --------- For comparison, the 2007 Redskins Pts/game: 20.9 Rank (yards): 15 of 32 Opp. W-L: .555 Note the offensive figures, since Fassel is an offense-oriented coach. Add to this to the fact that he lost the team in 2003 with a 4-12 record and losing their last 8 games, and I think this is the worst coaching hiring I've seen for the Redskins (at the time of hiring). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
styx491 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Good stats, it seems like the Super Bowl season was very much a fluke, especially with his following seasons. Also, the Opp. W-L: .445 and Against .500+ teams: 4-4 speak a lot to what kind of a schedule they had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 So is getting a bad team to the Super Bowl a sign of a good coaching job?... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stophovr6 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 So is getting a bad team to the Super Bowl a sign of a good coaching job?... Maybe just the sign of a crappy NFC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.