The Art Briles Philosophy- Why he's THE man for the Redskins. THE BRILES FILES!

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

If it makes you feel better i am catching a similar amount of flack

Saying "coach without a playbook" to me is simply a timesaver. I don't feel like typing a paragraph about unconventional approaches to the pro game taken from the college level

Thanks Zoony, that's exactly what I was referring too.  Now I've wasted 30 minutes trying to defend myself and go back and explain such lol.  

 

I honestly think people really understand the point others are getting at, but feel the need to bash others post because they didn't spell it out for him.  Exhausting process.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

This is just overwhelming...

2008 Baylor 4–8 2–6 T–5th (South)

2009 Baylor 4–8 1–7 6th (South)

2010 Baylor 7–6 4–4 4th (South) L Texas

2011 Baylor 10–3 6–3 T–3rd W Alamo 12 13

2012 Baylor 8–5 4–5 T–5th W Holiday

2013 Baylor 11–1 8–1 1st TBD Fiesta† 5 6

Baylor: 44–31 25–26

 

From a Baylor team that had finished in the bottom three of the Big12 the previous 12 years, and hadn't been to a bowl game since 1994; that's one HELL of a turnaround in that program. 

 

Hail. 

[Mania]

If we hire Briles, I can no longer be a Redskins fan

Bye bye, but don't come back when we start winning, as early as next season.

We all have opinions, we dont have to agree.

This is true. However just because Briles doesn't have an actual play book, doesn't mean he doesn't have plays on other formats, ie iPad, which he does. He is a leader of men and doesn't take any bs. He would only be hired if he were to put together an nfl experienced draft with a solid GM hiring him after interviewing other candidates. If he ends up being the best candidate and he is a very good candidate, you hire him.

[Mr. Sinister]

Why do you guys have act jerkish to everyone that doesn't share your opinion?  Because my post count is low in comparison?  Because I don't agree with every view/opinion you share on a public forum board?  

 

Funny how its always the people who have a habit of making jerkish posts over the years, that cry foul the loudest when someone says something they don't like.

 

I wasn't being a jerk to you, so please stop trying to pretend like you're a victim. It has more to do with the fact that you are right, he doesn't have a playbook, but that it means absolutely nothing when you actually stop and read up on what Briles is trying to do, and how his teams perform. All it looks like, is splitting hairs, and frankly, I wasn't very interested in seeing you attempt to use it to defend your opinion.

[RemoveSnyder]

The utilization of technology, like an ipad, scares no one currently in the 21st century. In fact it's used by many more programs that just one Baylor. For example, Oregon uses it. Guess what, so does Stanford as well. That's right folks, that fly by night charlatan David Shaw uses an ipad for his playbook at Stanford. They're just a flash in the pan. 

 

Perhaps Dickens can write a treatise to bring 'ye aged fossils in from the cold of the 1830s. I know a good chimbley sweep who can help 'ye manage the revolution, name of Oliver.

 

Welcome to the future.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

From a Baylor team that had finished in the bottom three of the Big12 the previous 12 years, and hadn't been to a bowl game since 1994; that's one HELL of a turnaround in that program. 

 

Hail. 

 

I would like to add to this...

 

None of us knows how a Briles hire would turn out. But citing his college coaching record is pretty useless to me. Did anyone know that John Harbaugh would go from leading some second-rate college teams and being a position coach in the NFL to one of the most consistent and productive new NFL coaches in the league?

 

What about his brother Jim? His years at San Diego and Stanford or his modest NFL coaching career prior to that didn't really mean much when he became the coach of the 49ers.

 

Mike Tomlin and Mike Smith also came out of nowhere in a lot of ways to have success in the NFL.

 

I don't think it really matters as long as the individual has leadership qualities and a good football mind. I also like a more modern mentality as the NFL appears to be following the college game rather than the opposite.

[nemocystem]

Can someone tell me if there has been any real indication that he would come if offered the HC position? I just don't see it. He has a 10 year contract with Baylor (9 years remaining) at $4M/year. Its a relatively low pressure situation - Baylor isn't expected to win the Big 12 on a regular basis. They just want a competitive team. He'll be well into retirement age at the end of the contract.

Briles strikes me as a proud, but humble, person. He's not a Jimmy Johnson type at all. Why would give up a secure contract to step into a situation where Schottenheimer, Spurrier, Gibbs, and Shanahan have all failed?

It has been noted at least 4 times since the Shanahan firing that he would leave Baylor "for the right situation." What that means at this point is anyone's guess, but I have read at least 1 report that suggests he is interested in the Redskins job.

I agree...it would be best that a GM comes in & makes an educated decision to hire Briles. That said...I still don't see anyone so utterly opposed to the idea pumping out valid reasons beyond simple hate & fear mongering anti-Snyder cry-babyism.

I mean...so if Snyder jumps off of RS1 & hires O'Brien, or Gruden, or Cowher, or whatever hot candidate you might favor over Briles because apparently he's the worst coach in the history of coaching options...then would you still be just as disgusted or dubious?

This logic is severely flawed to me. We need a coach, Briles is a good one, Snyder is/will be our owner for the foreseeable future, & even a broken clock is right twice a day.

If Snyder gets lucky once in spite of himself (see: Jerruh & JJ) & it gets us 1 or 2 titles...them so effing be it. I don't get the suicide talk here. We're all just as dubious, defeated, & cynical about our organization at this time....but to say a coach is bad simply because Snyder likes him is like Jesus was evil because Satan wanted him on team Lucifer.

[zoony]

Jason La Canfora doesn't write this many articles and mention Art Briles to Washington this many times with nothing behind it

I would like to add to this...

 

None of us knows how a Briles hire would turn out. But citing his college coaching record is pretty useless to me. Did anyone know that John Harbaugh would go from leading some second-rate college teams and being a position coach in the NFL to one of the most consistent and productive new NFL coaches in the league?

 

What about his brother Jim? His years at San Diego and Stanford or his modest NFL coaching career prior to that didn't really mean much when he became the coach of the 49ers.

 

Mike Tomlin and Mike Smith also came out of nowhere in a lot of ways to have success in the NFL.

 

I don't think it really matters as long as the individual has leadership qualities and a good football mind. I also like a more modern mentality as the NFL appears to be following the college game rather than the opposite.

Those are all winning organizations with very solid front office structures who do a great job with personnel

Head Coach doesn't matter nearly as much as some think. Guys like Parcells success has been illuminating because it has come more on his ability to draft well and evaluate talent in the places he's been

[longball]

Good bye then. What would be your reasoning?

  

From a Baylor team that had finished in the bottom three of the Big12 the previous 12 years, and hadn't been to a bowl game since 1994; that's one HELL of a turnaround in that program. 

 

Hail.

  

Bye bye, but don't come back when we start winning, as early as next season.

This is true. However just because Briles doesn't have an actual play book, doesn't mean he doesn't have plays on other formats, ie iPad, which he does. He is a leader of men and doesn't take any bs. He would only be hired if he were to put together an nfl experienced draft with a solid GM hiring him after interviewing other candidates. If he ends up being the best candidate and he is a very good candidate, you hire him.

That is a good turnaround for College. we've been down this road before...

1990 Florida 9–2 6–1 1st ‡ ‡ ‡ 13

1991 Florida 10–2 7–0 1st L Sugar 8 7

1992 Florida 9–4 6–2 T–1st (East) W Gator† 11 10

1993 Florida 11–2 7–1 1st (East) W Sugar† 4 5

1994 Florida 10–2–1 7–1 1st (East) L Sugar† 7 7

1995 Florida 12–1 8–0 1st (East) L Fiesta† 3 2

1996 Florida 12–1 8–0 1st (East) W Sugar† 1 1

1997 Florida 10–2 6–2 T–2nd (East) W Citrus 6 4

1998 Florida 10–2 7–1 2nd (East) W Orange† 6 5

1999 Florida 9–4 7–1 1st (East) L Citrus 14 12

2000 Florida 10–3 7–1 1st (East) L Sugar† 11 10

2001 Florida 10–2 6–2 2nd (East) W Orange† 3 3

That looks impressive now doesn't it? Should we bring him back? Because it was such a success for us then.

I would no longer support an owner and team that makes a decision in this direction. Our suckiness is a result of poor decisions over years. Everyone is killing Shanny, he has made a few bad decisions but has been an improvement to prior years.

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

From a Baylor team that had finished in the bottom three of the Big12 the previous 12 years, and hadn't been to a bowl game since 1994; that's one HELL of a turnaround in that program. 

 

Hail. 

 

Ok, let me ask you this GHH.  Look at the credentials Steve Spurrier had as a former college/NFL player and college coach before we hired him to be our head coach.  I'm not saying he was the man as a player, but he played college ball at Florida and at the pro-level at the 49ers, then TB.  

 

As a college coach, at Duke in 1988 and 89 - back to back winning seasons, an ACC championship and first bowl appearance since 1960 for the Blue Devils.  He then went on to Florida to coach where he won six SEC championships, coached them to 2 national championships (winning one).  Won at least nine games in each of his twelve seasons at Florida.  

 

Averaged more than ten wins per season. Not to mention, his teams finished in the top 5 in five seasons in final ranking and ranked 6-10 in four seasons.  The other three seasons, his teams ranked in the top 15.

 

He came to the NFL and was an absolute flop.  He was an embarrassment to the franchise and he set us back 5 years.  I was against hiring him and if any college coach had the resume, it was him.  

 

So, my question GHH - What makes you think that Briles will work and make a good fit as the head coach for the Washington Redskins?  He does not have near the body of work/resume of other candidates in the past (Spurrier, Saban, etc.).  

[nemocystem]

Lazy assumption. Ha,....wow.

Who knows,.....maybe he will be a brilliant NFL coach if hired. But I'll go with the odds and say it won't be here.

My point in contention remains...i'll go with the odds & say this would be the case for ANY HIRE WE MAKE PERIOD because until it's not...this is who we are. Saying this out loud is just vomit at this point & it doesn't hold any water.

What i would be curious...is if this is such an adamant stance of yours then please...where's the logic? Where's the counter hire? Do you believe in a candidate at all? Or did you just post here to pile on your anti-any suggestion sentiments? Are you simply trying to piss in the lemonade? Or do you have a point at all?

Please tell me...because all I see with these posts are "I hate Briles & all he stands for like the Sabre-metrics a holes who changed baseball...I'm a traditionalist who has no faith in these new-school ideals."

Or worse....you have no reason beyond disgust for anything Redskins right now & are unwilling to bring anything constructive to the conversation?

[RemoveSnyder]

You know listening to that dulcet drawl

 

You know, Briles quarterbacked against Lovie Smith in the 1973 Texas State Championship, lost though.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

It's been gone over in countless posts through this thread and not least in the OP man. It's just getting repetitive answering. 

 

But as regards Spurrier, the attitude between him and Briles, aside from what they run. is WORLDS apart. Spurrier COULD of been a HECK of a lort different if he hadn't just come here to get paid and actually put the work and effort in. 

 

There is NO comparison to be made between Spurrier and Briles. That's just a lazy ass easy comparison to suit. 

 

Hail. 

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

Funny how its always the people who have a habit of making jerkish posts over the years, that cry foul the loudest when someone says something they don't like.

 

I wasn't being a jerk to you, so please stop trying to pretend like you're a victim. It has more to do with the fact that you are right, he doesn't have a playbook, but that it means absolutely nothing when you actually stop and read up on what Briles is trying to do, and how his teams perform. All it looks like, is splitting hairs, and frankly, I wasn't very interested in seeing you attempt to use it to defend your opinion.

Like Zoony said above, its about us not liking his unconventional approach to running an offense and preparing for games that we don't agree with, nor want to see from our next head coach.  

 

I'm debating a topic on weather we should hire Briles or not.  I think its the wrong choice.  Do I know who the right choice is?  No, I don't.  None of us do.  

 

I'm not trying to get into an argument/pissing war with you Sinister and if you don't care about my opinions/viewpoints that's fine man.  I would like to think that while we all have strong opinions and clash with each other at times that at the end of the day, we can all just get along as we all are Redskins fans.  Hell, at the end of the day, I'd buy you a beer and cheer on the Skins with ya.

 

I'm really not a bad guy, just ask my 5 ex-wives (J/K of course) 

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

It's about what you inferred. Not what you said. 

 

Hail. 

[longball]

It's been gone over in countless posts through this thread and not least in the OP man. It's just getting repetitive answering. 

 

But as regards Spurrier, the attitude between him and Briles, aside from what they run. is WORLDS apart. Spurrier COULD of been a HECK of a lort different if he hadn't just come here to get paid and actually put the work and effort in. 

 

There is NO comparison to be made between Spurrier and Briles. That's just a lazy ass easy comparison to suit. 

 

Hail.

I made a strong retort to your argument without being obnoxious. Comparing Spurrier to Briles as a coach is absurd. Spurrier has been more successful either way you look at it. Its a fact of numbers, and accomplishments across multiple collegiate institutions.

But I guess now your pulling out the CAR(Coaching attitude rating) on us. Did you make that up? Thank you very much for continuing to enlighten us.

[nemocystem]

Like Zoony said above, its about us not liking his unconventional approach to running an offense and preparing for games that we don't agree with, nor want to see from our next head coach. And honestly, I could care less if you are interested in my opinion or not.

Lemme guess...you don't care for Sabre-metrics, the Red Sox, A's, Dodgers, Nationals, Tigers, or Cardinals. The Ducks, Maple Leafs, Bruins, Red Wings, or Kings. The Pacers, Suns, Spurs, Mavericks, or Blazers. All teams that subscribe to advanced Sabre-metrics.

Is it winning tons of titles in o's young existence? No, but it sure is making a ton of never were's into a bunch of maybe so's.

I'd buy that over a wing & a prayer any day.

[Mr. Sinister]

Like Zoony said above, its about us not liking his unconventional approach to running an offense and preparing for games that we don't agree with.  

 

Everything you posted suggests to me that you don't like it simply because you think it's weird, not because you can point to anything tangible as to why you think it can't succeed (not that I'm absolutely saying it can).

 

 

 

,   And honestly, I could care less if you are interested in my opinion or not

 

Well if you can, then feel free to care even less

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

It's about what you inferred. Not what you said. 

 

Hail. 

That's twice you have posted this.  I heard you loud and clear the first time Dad

 

I have a huge problem of posting angry and lazy (I'll call myself out).  I need to do better when typing my responses.  If you guys want Briles, fine.  I just don't share the same interest/opinion in hiring him.  Nor do I agree with his unconventional approach to running the offense, game planning, etc.  Nothing more, nothing less.  

 

With the state this franchise is in currently (specifically the gapping holes at multiple positions on both sides of the ball), I think bringing in a college coach with his philosophies/approach is a recipe for disaster.  

 

I'm not bitter towards you or Sinister.  And I apologize if I came across that way.  I'd buy you a beer, but shipping costs would kill me.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

I wasn't even responding to you in the quoted post lb, but thanks for the assumption. 

 

Having looked at your 'retort', it's not strong or a good comparison in the least. Aside from there being no comparison in the programs at UF or Baylor when the two men took over, there is NOTHING to suggest Briles would come to the pros with the attitude Spurrier did to just get paid and have a leisurely golfing vacation. 

 

The comparisons between the two are lazy and weak. 

 

Hail. 

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

 

So, my question GHH - What makes you think that Briles will work and make a good fit as the head coach for the Washington Redskins?  He does not have near the body of work/resume of other candidates in the past (Spurrier, Saban, etc.).

Because Briles would try, unlike Saban and Spurrier.

[Ghost of]

If we hire Briles, I can no longer be a Redskins fan

Don't come back.

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

Everything you posted suggests to me that you don't like it simply because you think it's weird, not because you can point to anything tangible as to why you think it can't succeed (not that I'm absolutely saying it can).

 

 

Well if you can, then feel free to care even less

I actually went back and edited it that.  But I don't care if people are interested in my posts or not.  I know I'm not interested in some other posters posts.  Again, I'm not trying to start any argument with you man.  

 

On topic - I don't think it will work at the NFL level, due to the complex defenses and adjustments that can be made to stop it.  Not to mention, we are going to be installing a hurry up offense that only one player understands (RGIII).  I'm not saying that our players are not capable of learning it, but what makes you think they will put in the effort to make it succeed?  You are talking about a lot of vet players that have approached the game the same way since college.  

 

Old habits die hard, see McNabb and his standout against not running their offense.  Big Al, refusing to be a NT in a 3-4.  Sure, those might not be the best examples, I admit.  Not to mention, his offense will be played against NFL defenses, not college kids.  Huge difference if you ask me.  

[longball]

I wasn't even responding to you in the quoted post lb, but thanks for the assumption. 

 

Having looked at your 'retort', it's not strong or a good comparison in the least. Aside from there being no comparison in the programs at UF or Baylor when the two men took over, there is NOTHING to suggest Briles would come to the pros with the attitude Spurrier did to just get paid and have a leisurely golfing vacation. 

 

The comparisons between the two are lazy and weak. 

 

Hail.

Just not a fan of the potential move. And you, well, you just are so we will disagree and that is fine. But Spurrier did do something at Duke and South Carolina yet you continue to turn an eye to it... Why am I even supporting Spurrier? Oh thats right I just don't like the idea of bringing in a college coach.. Especially one with Briles playbook. But you could be right, Briles might have a better CAR(coaching attitude rating). HTTR, we will agree to disagree and thats good by me.

[Ghost of]

Saying "coach without a playbook" to me is simply a timesaver. I don't feel like typing a paragraph about unconventional approaches to the pro game taken from the college level

But how is it a timesaver when its previous uses almost always were literal meanings?  How would anyone think that you guys didn't mean it literally when you gave no other context-enriching data with which to successfully parse your intended meaning?

 

Here's my take:  Everyone who has used it meant it quite literally and are simply backtracking.