marsbennett Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 Is there anyone who believes letting Davis go was a mistake by the Spurrier Administration? Panthers stymie Skins, 20-0 The Carolina Panthers have finally beaten the Washington Redskins for the first time in eight tries. Stephen Davis rushed seven times for 74 yards versus his former team. (AP Photo) Stephen Davis ran wild against his former team, rushing for 74 yards on seven carries, and his success led to two field goals, a 24-yarder by Shayne Graham and a 28-yarder by John Kasay, to give the Panthers a 6-0 halftime lead en route to a 20-0 victory. "I feel great," said Davis, who played seven seasons for Washington. "The offensive line and fullback did a great job blocking. We've got a long way to go. This is just the start and sets the tempo for us and helps us get ready for the rest of the season. We still have some work to do and we will go back to training camp and try to get better." The defense, ranked second in the NFL last season, posted a shutout by coming up with big plays, four sacks and four take-aways to stop Washington drives. · In the first quarter, defensive end Mike Rucker sacked Patrick Ramsey on third down and 16 from the Panthers 36-yard line to keep the Redskins out of field goal range. · In the second quarter, defensive end Kavika Pittman recovered a Rob Johnson fumble caused when linebacker Brian Allen sacked Johnson. The Redskins started the play first-and-10 on their own 48. · Also in the second quarter, defensive end Al Wallace drew a holding penalty that pushed the Redskins from the Carolina seven-yard line to the 17, where Washington's Matt Simonton missed a 35-yard field goal attempt. · On the Redskins opening second-half possession, Wallace deflected a Johnson pass that Pittman intercepted to set up the Panthers first touchdown. · In the third quarter, Wallace sacked and forced Johnson to fumble on fourth-and-goal from the Panthers four-yard line, ending another Washington threat. · Safety Deke Cooper preserved the shutout with an interception in Carolina territory on the Redskins final possession. "We came out knowing what we wanted to do," said Panthers defensive end Julius Peppers. "We wanted to match or better their intensity. That is what we did. We wanted to set the standard for the new year, and I feel we did pretty good." Chris Weinke led the Panthers to two touchdown drives in the second half, completing eight-of-11 passes for 69 yards. Rod Smart and former Redskin Skip Hicks scored the touchdowns on runs of two and four yards, respectively. Wide receiver Muhsin Muhammad had three receptions for 41 yards. The veteran receiver liked what he saw in the Panthers new-look offense. "I'm encouraged by what we did," said Muhammad. "I'm impressed with the way Stephen Davis ran the ball. I was even more impressed by the way our offensive line blocked. One thing that was steady and has always proven to be steady was the way Rodney (Peete) stepped up and threw the ball under pressure. I was fortunate enough to make some big plays and I'll be happy when Steve (Smith) is able to get back out there." For tackle Jordan Gross, the Panthers first-round draft pick, it was a good start out of the blocks. "It was nice to get out here and play against some other faces in a live situation. I had a lot of fun. Stephen Davis did a great job. He made us look good. Sometimes he hit a hole that wasn't even supposed to be there and went 30 yards. He did a great job. "I think I did a good job. All the guys in practice said a real game would be faster. It's going to be a good test next week." The Panthers travel to New York on August 15 to play the Giants. (B)Stephen Davis rushed seven times for 74 yards versus his former team. (AP Photo) ( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inmate running the asylum Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 No one is questioning the ability of Stephen Davis as a running back and I for one hated to see him go. But realistically, I realized we couldn't pay him $11 Mil either or some equally ridiculous figure. Trung fits what SS is trying to do, so I can't really criticize the FO move. Getting Trung for a guard who wouldn't make the team and a #4 pick was a pretty good deal. You also have to remember that Davis didn't have a very good season last year. He had what, one 100 yard game? Watson and Betts had two 100 yard games and hardly even played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 Wrong question. It should be: A) Davis or... B)Trung, Coles, Thomas, and Morton. I'll take B for one hundred Alex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurent Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 Davis is a great back who simply was not going to get the carries in this offense that he needs to be productive. Couple that with his $11million base salary for 2003 and the decision to relase him becomes a no brainer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panel Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 It really wouldn't matter if we still had Davis, SS would use him wrong, and not care. Davis is a wild anaimal waiting to be released, he has now found a team that is ready to used his strenths, rather than try make him a different type of back. Earl Cambell was another very speacial back similar to Davis, and if he was on our team, SS would not mold his system to fit Cambell, even though it may be beneficial. We will have to endure Davis having some of the best years of his career in a differnt uni, but hey, I geuss we had no choice given SS new system. By the way, Davis would have been willing to lower his 11million cap number to around 5million, if he had been offered it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaliforniaSkin Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 Davis may have been willing to lower his cap number for this year to $5mil but we'd still have had to pay a large signing bonus that would've come due eventually. I like Stephen Davis, I remember thinking what a steal he was when we drafted him after watching him tear up the SEC at Auburn. But the fact is he simply did not fit the system and he was too expensive. We need to figure out a way to try and resign both Champ and Lavar and we needed Coles or someone similar. There simply wasn't a way to do that and fit Davis under the cap. We hardly gave up anything for Trung and he has a ton of potential. Oh, and as for Davis rushing for a lot of yards against us, it PRESEASON and week one of preseason at that. I hope he has a great year, he was a good back for us and I wish him the best. Washington simply isn't the right fit for him right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ax Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 As has already been mentioned a million times on this board, everybody is better off now that Davis is gone. He doesn't fit SS's style, salary cap, yatta yatta yatta. And as much as I liked him while he was here, Stephen Davis NEVER reminded me of Earl Campbell. JMO from panel Earl Cambell was another very speacial back similar to Davis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 It's certainly not a mistake to have let Davis go. The mistake happened before then when Spurrier found Davis to be a detriment to his offense and couldn't really adjust the offense to suit his game better. Once Spurrier came to the conclusion that Davis' running style was not only limiting within the offense itself, but further limited the offense by the natural sway he had, being such a proven back, the only possible decision was to release him and go with another back. The question though is not Davis or Trung though. The question really is Davis or anyone. And given Spurrier's desires within the offense and film watching that showed six-yard gains that could have been big plays last year, we were better off with Betts or Watson than Davis. Trung simply offers a player who has skills suited to the offense and who gives a player who'll allow Spurrier to run plays he feels generates a successful offense. It may, obviously, come out that Spurrier's weakness here is a lack of adapatility within his basic play-calling structure such that he couldn't make use of a clearly superior running back like Davis, when he's much more excited about Trung's potential. That's a story that will be written in the coming seasons. But, given who Spurrier is, what Spurrier needs and how Spurrier calls a game in his offense, the answer here is Trung. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 Mad Mike is right, the money we'd have to pay for davis would have prevented us from signing those other players that are a better fit for the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselPwr44 Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 "It may, obviously, come out that Spurrier's weakness here is a lack of adaptability within his basic play-calling structure such that he couldn't make use of a clearly superior running back like Davis, when he's much more excited about Trung's potential."-Art.........Shouldn't this worry us about Spurrier though? A sign of a great coach is his ability to adapt his system to fit the talent he has on the roster,fit his system to his players strengths. Though I am really hoping SS succeeds,this aspect of his coaching ability bothers me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleedblue Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 Trung Canidate is not as good as Davis but alot cheaper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 Originally posted by bleedblue Trung Canidate is not as good as Davis but alot cheaper. Candidate is not as proven as Davis, no argument there, but comparing them is apples and oranges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 I for one do not understand for the life of me how people who appear to be fans of this sport can look at this move and not see it for what it is. So, I feel it my duty to inform these mooks so, MARS, pay attention, so at the very least your children won't need to be told this stuff again. Football is a BUSINESS. it is not some trading card fantasy game. There is a SALARY CAP. In order to play, you must be under the cap or be hit with heavy fines and other assorted nasty punishments. Now it's easy to say "Stephen Davis was going to be worth over 11 million dollars of our cap this year>" and leave that as reason enough. But dig a little, Mars. At the close of last season the Redskins offense had Davis (Coming off yet another late season injury.. third one in 3 years.). They had Rod Gardner. They had Jon Jansen and Chris Samuels, and Larry Moore at center. and.. uh.. that's about it. They absolutely HAD to replace both guards and their backups. They absolutely HAD to improve the speed of the WR corps. they absolutely HAD to rent 2 out of three QBs they would be using this year. And that's just the offense. They also absolutely HAD to acquire a kicker and a defensive end and a defensive tackle and a safety or even two. So, here's your choices. You can keep Davis, or you can try to fill all of those holes. Let's take the option YOU seem to think is the smart way to go, MARS. The Redskins keep Davis. Yay! We can't afford to pursue any guards of quality, so we're forced to work with Brendan Stai, now retired, and David Loverne. What this means is Davis, for all that money, would have no blocks, and would be the highest paid 700 yard rusher in the history of the game. Our young QB, while patiently waiting for the slow, plodding receivers to run routes designed for faster guys, would get sacked again and again and again, likely taking somewhere in the neighborhood of 50 to 60 sacks for the year. Wow. That would be great. Should have kept Davis. OR.. We ditch his big salary, sign 4 guards, including one of the stronger guards around in Fiore, and a pro bowler to be in Thomas. We ditch Davis' dollars and sign a safety, we sign a defensive end AND a tackle, and a kicker. Oh yeah, and let's not forget possibly the fastest receiver in the league joining on giving that young QB one of the better targets in the NFL to throw to. Overall, by ditching Davis, the team improved. If you can't see how obvious this is by now, then there's not much hope for you. And by the way. Since you seem to get such glee out of a preseason game,, how does it make you feel to know that if Ramsey had laid that bomb to Coles a little better, the Panthers huge 6 point lead is gone. If a rookie tackle isn't called for holding at the end of the half, that huge 6 point lead is gone again. And understand, while you're busy patting yourself on the back, that Jeremiah Trotter didn't play, nor did Regan Upshaw, the end who's side Davis two big runs came on. But all that said, let me leave you with one final bit of wisdom you may carry and claim as your own one day when you get to teach some other mook... IT"S A PRESEASON GAME. Don't cream your jeans over it. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleedblue Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 You guys did have a very good off-season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orlskinsfan Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 we had $11 million reasons to let davis go...i hated to see him go but we did get some great talent in here with the cap room he was taking up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 Originally posted by DieselPwr44 "It may, obviously, come out that Spurrier's weakness here is a lack of adaptability within his basic play-calling structure such that he couldn't make use of a clearly superior running back like Davis, when he's much more excited about Trung's potential."-Art.........Shouldn't this worry us about Spurrier though? A sign of a great coach is his ability to adapt his system to fit the talent he has on the roster,fit his system to his players strengths. Though I am really hoping SS succeeds,this aspect of his coaching ability bothers me. DP, A sign of a great coach isn't necessarily his ability to adapt his system to fit the talent he has on his roster and fit his system to his player's strength. Lewis is, as an example, considered a great defensive coordinator and he didn't adjust his system for his players. Bill Walsh never changed his system for his players. He got players for his system. Mike Shanahan has won Super Bowls and he is a system guy and will put players who fit his system on the roster. Mike Holmgren is another. There are two coaching schools and you can be great at either. One school says you have to devote to the system. You can't adjust. You can't yield. You can't bend. The second you do the whole thing collapses. You have to get players who fit the system and implement the system and be loyal and faithful and nurturing to the system to make it work. This has worked and made champions on a far more frequent basis than the other school. The other school is where Joe Gibbs and Bill Parcells seem to be. Guys who will adapt not only to their talent, but, within a game if necessary. They have a system, no doubt, but, that system can be ground based, passing based, or some combination thereof. Really, other than those two guys and Belichek, I can't think of another guy who's won a championship and who has won it based on adapting to his players and been happy about it. Billick obviously won the Super Bowl by adapting to his players and scaling things down. But, remember, he wasn't happy about it and is STILL trying to prove he's an offensive mastermind. Most NFL coaches aren't as flexible as Gibbs or Belichek or Parcells. Most are devoted system guys. The reason you always hear it takes time to build a winner when a new coach comes in is because he tears down what's there and develops players that fit his system. He doesn't go in and try to win with the players on hand by fitting them into what they do best as Gibbs did after a rough start. He goes in and says, "This is what we run. You're going to run it or you're gone." The fact that we had Gibbs gives us a definition of what a great coach is. And we're not wrong. It's just that we don't always realize that Gibbs was not the rule. He was the exception. A great and wonderful exception no doubt, but, an exception nonetheless. You can be a great coach if you are a devoted system guy as most coaches are. The worry isn't whether Spurrier, being a system coach, is the sort of coach who can be great. Sure, he absolutely can as so many others are and have been. The question is whether he is a coach who has a system that is a winning one. We don't know the answer to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleedblue Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 agreed by me. You guys will be contenders in a few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 Originally posted by bleedblue You guys did have a very good off-season. If the team doesnt gel and the pieces dont fall into place soon (im not saying this year mind you) then it wont seem like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 Originally posted by Oldskool If the team doesnt gel and the pieces dont fall into place soon (im not saying this year mind you) then it wont seem like it. It's sad, but true. At least in the court of public opinion (most of which don't have much of a clue.) That's because the Redskins are not allowed any time by the media to build. The media screams that the Redskins don't understand that it takes time to build a team, but then they point and scream that if we don't do it this year, it's all a failure. This team has 3 years. This year I expect more growing pains for Spurrier, more growing pains for Ramsey, and I also expect to see improvement that comes from learning the necessary lessons that time teaches you. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 Hmm ... Emmitt is still better than any RB on the Cowboy roster. Was it a mistake to let Emmitt go? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Hog Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 Originally posted by orlskinsfan we had $11 million reasons to let davis go...i hated to see him go but we did get some great talent in here with the cap room he was taking up Well stated ! ! Totally agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marsbennett Posted August 13, 2003 Author Share Posted August 13, 2003 Originally posted by Henry Hmm ... Emmitt is still better than any RB on the Cowboy roster. Was it a mistake to let Emmitt go? Given that Smith was willing to take the pay cut, HELL YES, I believe it was a bad move. He should have finished his career, at a resonable price, in Dallas...There are many of my wonderful friends at thecowboys.net that would argue with me on that one till we are all blue in the fingertips.:2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iggle in Exile Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 Bang, you made some interesting points so if you don't mind... That's because the Redskins are not allowed any time by the media to build. Is the media really that powerful? I would put some of the blame at Snyder's feet; it's hard to build when you are constantly starting over (with new head coaches). I remember after the second loss to the Eagles last year both Arrington and Spurrier made comments about the Eagles having a decided advantage because they had been together for so long. So I was very surprised when the Redskins brought in so many additional free agents. I thought that they would take a more incremental approach. This team has 3 years. This year I expect more growing pains for Spurrier, more growing pains for Ramsey, and I also expect to see improvement that comes from learning the necessary lessons that time teaches you. I have heard this before, and while I haven't looked at the Skins' cap situation, is this really true? If so, then the Skins are basically given two years to win a Super Bowl before having to dismantle and start over (I'm making the assumption that a Super Bowl is out of reach for you this year.) This seems like a very risky policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inmate running the asylum Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 Art, Excellent analysis on the two systems. :applause: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougWilliams Posted August 14, 2003 Share Posted August 14, 2003 I think Bear Bryant fit into the second mold also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.