Agree with this statement? "The short sighted moves Gibbs made over and over again KILLED this team's future"

[s0crates]

I guess if that is all you want, to simply be competitive and relevent, Gibbs was a rousing success.

I don't think its outrageous to want the Redskins not simply to be competitive, but to strive to be the best team in the league. That needs to be our goal. Otherwise we are going to continue to settle for mediocrity.

I want to win the Super Bowl every season. I take it for granted that every coach, fan, and player wants to win it all every year. However, there is something to be said for being competitive, if for years you had failed to do even that. You cannot win it all unless you get competitive first. Gibbs got us competitve. He was taking us in the right direction. The problem was that Vinny and Zorn badly regressed this team after all the progress Gibbs made.

It all comes down to this, was the 1-2 playoff record worth the past three years and counting of struggles? For me, no way in hell.

You assume that Gibbs is responsible for the last three years. I find that to be absolutely ridiculous. As I indicated a few posts back, Danny, Vinny, and Zorn are much more to blame for recent history than Gibbs is.

It was not Gibbs who hired Jim Zorn. In fact Gibbs left an ideal successor behind in Gregg Williams. Williams would go on to win the Super Bowl with New Orleans, and Zorn would go on to wreck everything Gibbs had built.

It was not Gibbs who completely botched the 2008 draft, taking mediocre WRs and a TE we did not need, when it was obvious to everybody we should draft young offensive linemen.

If we are asking the question how we got to this point, I think the answer has a lot more to do with the 2008 draft and the decision to hire Zorn than it does with Joe Gibbs. :2cents:

[The Tris]

Gibbs job was never to bail water. It was to restore faith in the fanbase and win now. He accomplished the first part and did decently in the second part, while falling short of the ultimate goals.

I agree. Joe was hired to treat the symptoms, and not the problem. That's not his fault.

But his actions did have consequences that outlasted his tenure with this team. That is why I refuse to call his tenure a success.

All in all, he did okay in his second tenure. Okay is better than anyone else under Snyder.

And that sums up my problems with the goals of this team under Snyder.

[KDawg]

And that sums up my problems with the goals of this team under Snyder.

Which is why, again, Snyder is the issue. Not Gibbs.

[The Tris]

Gibbs got us competitve. He was taking us in the right direction. The problem was that Vinny and Zorn badly regressed this team after all the progress Gibbs made.

Oh, so we were going to be a Super Bowl contender in 2008 had Gibbs stayed?

You assume that Gibbs is responsible for the last three years. I find that to be absolutely ridiculous.

What has been our biggest problem from 2008-2010?

Once you answer that, we can discuss if Gibbs had anything to do with it.

[s0crates]

Great post by bedlamVR above. My sentiments exactly.

[Darrell Green Fan]

I guess I am getting a bit off topic. I just feel like the Gibbs bashing is way out of line, and I am trying to set the record straight.

To answer your question: I do not think that it was Gibbs 2 that cost us so much as it was the decisions that were made after he left. I put the blame for our post-Gibbs failures squarely on Danny, Vinny, and Zorn, not Gibbs.

I'll give two examples. First, the decision not to hire Gregg Williams as Gibbs' successor was pretty stupid, especially when it meant hiring Zorn instead. Second, the 2008 draft was absolutely horrendous. We had a pile of picks that year and should have used them to rebuild our aging offensive line.

Oh no doubt what has taken place after Coach left is the main reason we continue to be a joke around the league. And I did not mean to turn this into a Gibbs bash, although I guess it's understandable as both camps dug in.

But you have to understand the background of all of this. In another thread HailGreen2 stated that Gibbs left the team in great shape. I objected, OK I said his post was nonsense, and the words began to fly. I never considered Gibbs 2 a failure, but as the thread title reads I maintained that his short sighted trades of high picks for unproductive players hurt us long after he was gone. HailGreen later lisgted Landry, Cooley, Moss, Alexander, Portis, Fletcher, Macintosh, Golstion and Rogers represented a solid young core. I just disagreed strongly with this sentiment. That group has only 5 good players in it and one was Fletcher who while still productive was hardly young. You don't build a solid foundation with players like Golston and Macintosh.

[The Tris]

Which is why, again, Snyder is the issue. Not Gibbs.

I mean, is no one at fault, player or coach or team executive, since Snyder bought the team?

Vinny Cerrato - he was just fulfilling the owners wish to win now - thats not his fault that the owner's plan failed, right? He was just doing what he was hired to do, just like Gibbs...

[hail2skins]

I also think one of the questions we'll probably never know the answer to involves Gibbs' decision to leave after four years instead of sticking it out for Year 5 or signing an extension for beyond. Of course, Gibbs loved his grandson and wanted to spend more time with him, and you can imagine the whole Taylor tragedy took a lot out of him as well. I wonder what would've happened if we had beaten Seattle and then had gone down to Dallas and beaten the Cowboys? Would that have prompted Gibbs to stick around for at least one more year? Or would that have been a perfect ending (assuming we lose in the NFCCG) and he would've ridden into the sunset anyway? How much of his outlook on where the 2007 Skins were competitively (i.e. how many more years do you think he felt he needed to stick around to get the team where he wanted) influenced his decsion?

[Darrell Green Fan]

Great post by bedlamVR above. My sentiments exactly.

Sorry, he lost me when he said draft picks mean nothing to him. It's not exactly a secret that every successful team built through the draft. We pissed away so many high picks during Gibbs 2 that it was insane. But I guess that was OK with you huh?

[s0crates]

Oh, so we were going to be a Super Bowl contender in 2008 had Gibbs stayed?

We will never know because a bunch of spoiled brat fans with no perspective booed Joe out of town. I think we could have made a run though. Imagine if we had drafted smart in 2008, rebuilding our offensive line instead of taking mediocre WRs and a TE we did not need. Maybe Gibbs would have done that. Even without doing that, the team Gibbs left behind started the 2008 season 6-2. I often wonder what might have been.

What has been our biggest problem from 2008-2010?

I addressed this in the post you are quoting, as well as several other posts. I will repeat myself. I think the problems from 2008-2010 had two main causes: (1) Hiring Jim Zorn. (2) Not drafting offensive linemen in 2008.

Notice neither of those decision were made by Joe Gibbs.

[ChillSkinzFan84]

Coach Gibbs made us respectable again. He got some solid and some good players on this team. We always have been in close games going back to the Norv years but coach Gibbs gave the team a toughness that we hadnt had for years. Gibbs did make some mistakes though. Trading for Duckett then not even using him was dumb, his beef with BLloyd and not letting him get on the field after trading picks for him was dumb. Trading for Mark Brunell when the whole dam league knew he was going to be released was dumb, not giving total control or taking total control in the Al Saunders situation was dumb.

But like I said he made this roster legit again. Before we were counting on Lionel Dalton and Martin Chase to be good at DT...i mean that Spurrier roster was a joke and I still say that if Spurrier had Gibbs roster then Spurrier would of did better here but thats a different discussion.

So in the end Coach Gibbs did some positive and some negative in his time here (Gibbs part 2) and thats really all that can be said. We made the playoffs twice, even though we didnt make them the way some would want us to but we did make it those 2 years. I wish he would of come back in 08 but hey I wish Sean T was with us also...things happen in life. Im still glad Coach Gibbs came back (on my birthday...one of the best days of my life at the time) he did some good for us.

Snyder is trying to do things the right way now he just chose the wrong man to give total control to. So now he's in a tough situation...if he steps in people will say "see he always has to be hands on" if he does nothing some will say " he needs to step in and get Shanny right and tell him to get his act together" so damned if you do damned if you dont.

[The Tris]

We will never know because a bunch of spoiled fans booed Joe out of town. I think we could have though. Imagine if we had drafted smart in 2008, rebuilding our offensive line instead of taking mediocre WRs and a TE we did not need. Maybe Gibbs would have done that. Even without doing that, the team Gibbs left behind started the 2008 season 6-2. I often wonder what might have been.

I'd like to see a show of hands who thinks we would have been a Super Bowl contender in 2008 had Gibbs stayed.

Without Gibbs, no one was picking us to even win the East - I doubt his presence alone would have transformed us into Super Bowl contenders.

For the record - Gibbs wasn't exactly the most adept drafter in his second stint.

I think the problems from 2008-2010 had two main causes: (1) Hiring Jim Zorn. (2) Not drafting offensive linemen in 2008.

So Jim Zorn was at fault for inheriting the second oldest roster in the NFL? We had 11 starters over the age of 30.

Was Joe Gibbs going to draft 5 OL starters in the 2008 draft?

Here's the age of the starting OL in 2008: 32, 35, 31, 32, 32. The youthful guy on there was Joe Gibbs favorite Casey Rabach. Gibbs also signed Kendall and Thomas, so you know he wasn't going to replace either one of them, nor was he even considering replacing veterans like Samuels and Jansen.

Gibbs loved his veterans, especially his veteran OL. They weren't going anywhere had he sayed on for another year.

[KDawg]

Tris,

Up until last year, what were the two constants with the Washington Redskins since 1999?

[The Tris]

Tris,

Up until last year, what were the two constants with the Washington Redskins since 1999?

Mediocrity and Dan Snyder.

[Mursilis]

We didn't go from awful to mediocre we went from clueless to respectable - In 2005 in 1 year and after 12 years away from the sport he rose the skins from a worthless joke the coaches, the team, the fans and the press had given up on (2003 - seriously look up just how bad we were) ... he drove that team of rag tags (someone said in previous post these were the kinds of guys you can find on any scrap heap at the end of the season) to finish the season with a 6 game winning streak ( including the playoffs) we didn't back into the playoffs - when we went into week 17 we controlled our own destiny we were the hot team in the NFC . ... we didn't scrape wins we destroyed teams (30 + points in the final 3 games of the season) - ask the Giants and the Cowboys fans what happened in the second games in 2005 (10-2 in the NFC, 5-1 in the NFCE)

And then look how 2006 played out - 5-11. How is such a wildly-inconsistent team (6-10 to 10-6 to 5-11 to 9-7) respectable?

Consistency is, to me, at least 2 winning seasons in a row. All the good teams do it on a regular basis, and just assume they're going to hit at least 9-7 or better from Game 1. Even with Gibbs in charge, the 'skins were never a consisently good team. Sure, they could be good at times, but not consistently good.

[KDawg]

Mediocrity and Dan Snyder.

I was more looking for Dan Snyder and Vinny Cerrato. Aside from a small portion of time.

They go hand in hand.

This is the problem with the Washington Redskins. Not Marty Schottenheimer, Steve Spurrier, Joe Gibbs, Jim Zorn... It was the two headed monster.

[s0crates]

I'd like to see a show of hands who thinks we would have been a Super Bowl contender in 2008 had Gibbs stayed.

I do not want to speculate too much, but I would remind you that we were 8-8 with Jim Zorn in 2008. I have to think Gibbs would be worth at least 2 more wins than Zorn. Like I said, it is tough to really debate a "what if" like this, but my money says Gibbs would have been better than Zorn. Do you disagree?

For the record - Gibbs wasn't exactly the most adept drafter in his second stint.

You could debate this point. Gibbs had some good picks. Sean Taylor, Laron Landry, and Chris Cooley come immediately to mind.

I would also add that nobody hits on all their draft picks. Even the best drafters miss a lot of the time. I don't think I need to remind people that every team passed on Tom Brady for 6 rounds, or that everybody expected Ryan Leaf and Heath Shuler to be franchise quarterbacks. Simply put, no matter how good you are, the draft is a gamble.

So Jim Zorn was at fault for inheriting the second oldest roster in the NFL? We had 11 starters over the age of 30.

I did not say that. However, I will tell you where I think Zorn was at fault. He is at fault when the team he inherits goes 6-2 in its first 8 games, and 6-18 in its last 24. That kind of catastrophic collapse must be blamed on the coach first.

I would also point out that you are now in a position of bashing Gibbs and defending Zorn. As I see it, this is not a strong position to be in. Do you disagree?

Here's the age of the starting OL in 2008: 32, 35, 31, 32, 32. The youthful guy on there was Joe Gibbs favorite Casey Rabach. Gibbs also signed Kendall and Thomas, so you know he wasn't going to replace either one of them, nor was he even considering replacing veterans like Samuels and Jansen.

I agree that the offensive line was the biggest problem, as I have stated elsewhere. This is something that should have been addressed in Gibbs tenure, but it also should have been addressed in 2008 and 2009, and it was not. No way you can put decisions made in 2008 and 2009 on Gibbs.

[BeefJerky]

Vinny Cerrato KILLED this team's future, not Joe Gibbs. Not saying Gibbs did everything right in part 2, But he sure as hell did not kill this teams future.

[The Tris]

I do not want to speculate too much, but I would remind you that we were 8-8 with Jim Zorn in 2008. I have to think Gibbs would be worth at least 2 more wins than Zorn. Like I said, it is tough to really debate a "what if" like this, but my money says Gibbs would have been better than Zorn. Do you disagree?

Gibbs would have been better than Zorn. Two extra wins, we would have been the sixth seed.

5 years into a win now plan, and the best we are looking at is a WC birth.

That's not a problem for you?

You could debate this point. Gibbs had some good picks. Sean Taylor, Laron Landry, and Chris Cooley come immediately to mind.

He also had some awful picks, and managed his draft picks like Vinny Cerrato.

I would also add that nobody hits on all their draft picks. Even the best drafters miss a lot of the time. I don't think I need to remind people that every team passed on Tom Brady for 6 rounds, or that everybody expected Ryan Leaf and Heath Shuler to be franchise quarterbacks. Simply put, no matter how good you are, the draft is a gamble.

Straw. Man.

I did not say that. However, I will tell you what I think Zorn is at fault for. He is at fault when the team he inherits goes 6-2 in its first 8 games, and 6-18 in its last 24.

So you think it coaching, not roster age or lack of depth was the reason the team fell apart?

I would also point out that you are now in a position of bashing Gibbs and defending Zorn. As I see it, this is not a strong position to be in. Do you disagree?

Zorn is a poor little sacrificial lamb who took a job no one wanted under the conditions layed out. I don't defend Zorn, but I do pity him.

Gibbs also took a job with challenges, but he is a HOF coach, and someone who's mistakes were much more surprising and difficult to justify than Zorn's.

If the question is "Did Gibbs fail in Winning Now?" my answer is yes.

If the question is "Did Gibbs' personnel moves hurt the team long after he retired?" my answer is yes.

Does that make him a bad coach, or someone I dislike? **** no. But he made mistakes, and some of those mistakes cost us dearly. And his successes were far too few and far between for me to overlook those costs.

I agree that the offensive line was the biggest problem, as I have stated elsewhere. This is something that should have been addressed in Gibbs tenure, but it also should have been addressed in 2008 and 2009, and it was not. No way you can put decisions made in 2008 and 2009 on Gibbs.

The offensive line was the clearest example of the bigger problem with our team - an aging roster with complete lack of depth. Joe Gibbs had a hand in passing on youth and depth for veterans.

So I do not put the decisions made in 2008-2010 on Gibbs - but the conditions and the state of the roster when he left? The coach (who has final say on all football matters) certainly shares blame for that.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

I was more looking for Dan Snyder and Vinny Cerrato. Aside from a small portion of time.

They go hand in hand.

This is the problem with the Washington Redskins. Not Marty Schottenheimer, Steve Spurrier, Joe Gibbs, Jim Zorn... It was the two headed monster.

15 pages. 219 posts as I write.

Just HOW hard is it for people to grasp this? Instead of taking cheap shots, which is now what your doing, at a man who deserves FAR better from you for the sacrifices he's made for this franchise twice over. If he'd come in with a remit to do what your accusing him of and not I'd understand, but he did just about as well as could of been asked from him on what he was hired to do under the circumstances.

Seriously, this is about the first time I can remember when the owner, who up until the past year has continually ****** this franchise and every last one of you over time and time and time again, a large percentage with his bug eyed lap dog racquetball buddy; get's a pass and the greatest man this organizations ever seen, who came back because he's one of US and cared so deeply about the comedy show we'd become; get's slated for something he wasn't brought in to do.

It honestly beggars belief the way this thread is now going.

Seriously, just HOW hard is it to comprehend KD's post above?

Hail.

[The Tris]

I'm not sure when in the blue hell I gave Snyder a pass.

But carry on - anyone who would dare point out the mistakes of Joe Gibbs must support Dan Snyder.

And yes, Joe Gibbs made mistakes, some that were insignificant in the grand scheme, some the were not.

Unfortunately, Snyder is going no where, so we need to figure out what a coach needs to do to fix this team while Snyder is the owner. I would say that the way Joe Gibbs built (or was forced to build) (or decided to build along with Cerrato) our team from 2004-2007 was not the best way.

[hail2skins]

15 pages. 219 posts as I write.

Just HOW hard is it for people to grasp this? Instead of taking cheap shots, which is now what your doing, at a man who deserves FAR better from you for the sacrifices he's made for this franchise twice over.......

I dunno GHH. These threads about whether Gibbs 2.0 was a failure or not start here about every six months or so, and usually run about the same length as this one has so far. I don't think anyone is here is being disrespectful towards Gibbs. I just think its a matter of debate people are having over whether Gibbs should've done more for the future of the franchise (i.e. perhaps jettisoning Cerrato early on) and, if the mandate was "win now," were the two winning seasons that we had under him enough. A good number of questions are out there that we'll probably never have answers to.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

I'm not sure when in the blue hell I gave Snyder a pass.

But carry on - anyone who would dare point out the mistakes of Joe Gibbs must support Dan Snyder.

Oh, you've rightly slated Snyder, but it comes with a "but ....."

A "but" that isn't there as you continue to slight Coach for something he was not employed to do. And what he was employed to do, and did do a large degree, still isn't good enough because it didn't end in a 4th Lombardi. Something we never had a sniff of before he returned since the one he last won. (And I know it was no more than a sniff, but that sniff was fricking amazing put in context to what went before for years, and the scenario he walked back into.).

But hey, you keep on man. Whatever makes you feel better.

I dunno GHH. These threads about whether Gibbs 2.0 was a failure or not start here about every six months or so, and usually run about the same length as this one has so far. I don't think anyone is here is being disrespectful towards Gibbs. I just think its a matter of debate people are having over whether Gibbs should've done more for the future of the franchise (i.e. perhaps jettisoning Cerrato early on) and, if the mandate was "win now," were the two winning seasons that we had under him enough. A good number of questions are out there that we'll probably never have answers to.

See h2s, I've zero problem with Coach Gibbs getting discussed and criticised when it's justified criticism. But when he's continually being slammed for something he wasn't even fricking hired to do, and the moves there in that were down to the bungling two-some above him; that's nothing more than a cheap shot at his expense. Which is the very LAST thing that man deserves from us of all people.

Hail.

[s0crates]

Gibbs would have been better than Zorn. Two extra wins, we would have been the sixth seed.

5 years into a win now plan, and the best we are looking at is a WC birth.

That's not a problem for you?

I would gladly take a wild card spot. Wild card teams can and do win Super Bowls.

He also had some awful picks, and managed his draft picks like Vinny Cerrato.

Perhaps so. There were some bad picks, but everybody makes bad picks (which is not a straw man, btw). Also Gibbs did trade a lot of picks, which may be against your philosophy, but is not necessarily a bad thing. Some of those trades worked out great (like Portis) and some of them did not (like Duckett).

So you think coaching, not roster age or lack of depth was the reason the team fell apart?

Yes. Coaching was definitely a major factor. The coach has to be first to blame when a team falls that far that fast. Also, I think Danny really screwed the pooch in picking Gibbs' successor.

Was coaching the only factor? Obviously not. My contention is that the other major factor was the 2008 draft, arguably one of the worst ever. With our first three picks we drafted two WRs who were garbage, and a TE we did not need. We should have gone o-line. Would Gibbs have done that? Nobody knows. What we do know is that Vinny and Zorn did not. That is their fault, not Joe's.

If the question is "Did Gibbs fail in Winning Now?" my answer is yes.

As you define failure, which is anything but winning a Super Bowl, then the answer must be yes. I contend that there is a case to be made that Joe had success in the form of progress. Ending the era of Dallas dominating us is a great example of what I am talking about.

If the question is "Did Gibbs' personnel moves hurt the team long after he retired?" my answer is yes.

I would agree that some of his personnel moves harmed us, obviously, although I have my doubts about the "long after he retired" part.

On the opposite side of the same token, some of his moves would benefit us for years to come. To give some examples: Andre Carter, London Fletcher, Santana Moss, Clinton Portis, and Laron Landry were still productive.

Like I said, I agree that Joe made mistakes, my point is that you also have to give credit where credit is due.

So I do not put the decisions made in 2008-2010 on Gibbs - but the conditions and the state of the roster when he left? The coach (who has final say on all football matters) certainly shares blame for that.

Fair enough.

I guess the main point of difference here is that I think the 2008 roster was pretty good, or at least would have been had we drafted better that offseason, whereas you do not. I think the blame primarily lies with those who let the team atrophy in 2008 and 2009 (Danny, Vinny, and Zorn), whereas you think it primarily lies with Joe Gibbs.

We will probably not come to an agreement about this part, and that seems to be the fundamental difficulty here.

[The Tris]

A "but" that isn't there as you continue to slight Coach for something he was not employed to do.

But when he's continually being slammed for something he wasn't even fricking hired to do.

"Joe, we need you to come back home. No, you are specifically NOT being hired to win a Super Bowl. All we want you to do is restore some dignity to this franchise. Again, you are NOT to set a goal to win the Super Bowl. We want you to win, and win now, but we don't expect you to win that much, nor should you expect to do that. Our goal here is mostly symbolic, and to appease the fanbase."

The ONLY reason a team tries to "win now" is to win the Super Bowl. No one tries to "win now" to get to the wild card game. I simply don't believe that was not the goal.