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

[DC9]

He didn't come out and say that. JLC came out and suggested that he'd do well paired up with someone like that.

 

Ah.. the plot thickens.

 

So the only thing we KNOW is that Texas wants him and that he told a booster he has "nothing to worry about" last night.

 

I move for a David Shaw thread.

[IrepDC]

Say what you guys want about Briles, whether you agree or disagree hed make a good coach. But for the Briles defenders and Briles lovers, I have a question. If we were to hire Briles, wouldnt that look bad on us for kind of tailoring our coaching choice with someone that it would appear was brought in just for Robert? Even if he wasnt brought here for Robert, it would still look like it, wouldnt it?

Colts brought in one of Andrew Luck's college coaches in Indy. Dolphins brought in Tannehill's college coach in Miami. Only in Washington is catering to your young QB a bad thing.

[Taylor 36]

I agree with you, he doesn't know a thing about defense but we bashed shanny because he didn't know a thing about defense but still wanted to put his nose in the defense. So now we have a coach who already came out and said he wouldn't touch defense he would hire Greg Williams and let him do whatever he wants on that side of the ball and we're bashing him because he's neglecting the defense?

 

Which one do you guys want? Or do you just want to bash him because there's nothing else to do when we're 3-13? lol

Please don't take this as me jumping on you or trying to call you out, but I've seen this posted a few times but have not seen a source for Briles saying this.  Can you post a link or paste a tweet that has this in it?  I'm truly curious about him saying this.  And, why GW?  Do he and Briles have any connections/experience together?

[DC9]

Apparently the Redskins reached out to David Shaw through a third party 6 weeks ago per Adam Schefter on the "Sports Fix" this afternoon?

 

Well let's put a pig in the ground and get a mop.

 

It's time to celebrate!

[Taylor 36]

Colts brought in one of Andrew Luck's college coaches in Indy. Dolphins brought in Tannehill's college coach in Miami. Only in Washington is catering to your young QB a bad thing.

They didn't bring in those coaches to be Head Coach, though.  Brining in a coach to be a position coach, or even a coordinator is nowhere near the same as bringing him in to be the Top Dog.

[21 always]

Texas... Please sign Briles for the love of god!!!.. Im not sure if I can handle Rg's dad being our GM lol

[Momma There Goes That Man]

If we are being obscure...

 

How about we look at a coach that is 2-1 against the Oregon Ducks in 3 years.

 

David Shaw anyone?

 

Chip Kelly won the division, why not bring his nemesis in?  I mean, I know he's said that he's not interested, but if not for RG3 does this thread exist?

 

I think that's underselling the interest in Briles. People became enamored with Kelly when he dominated and had a high scoring offense at Oregon. The same thing with Briles. Most would be interested in him regardless. I know I would be and it has nothing to do with Griffin. 

 

I would also love David Shaw as a candidate too. He won't have the strength and size advantages in the trenches he enjoys at Stanford which has led to his success against Oregon but he does know their offense very well and is a strong candidate regardless. But his team lost a bowl game yesterday too so I guess we can scratch him off the list too. 

[21 always]

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

Colts brought in one of Andrew Luck's college coaches in Indy. Dolphins brought in Tannehill's college coach in Miami. Only in Washington is catering to your young QB a bad thing.

Yeah, not as their head coaches though.  And not after it was learned that RGIII's parents tossed Briles name around to Snyder.  That would just make things worse in my opinion.  

[IrepDC]

They didn't bring in those coaches to be Head Coach, though.  Brining in a coach to be a position coach, or even a coordinator is nowhere near the same as bringing him in to be the Top Dog.

My point was that hiring a coach to support Griffin shouldn't be seen as a bad thing. To your point, though, we don't always have to wait until another team has success with a player, coach, or strategy to try it. That's how we often end up with sloppy seconds that are past their prime.

Yeah, not as their head coaches though.  And not after it was learned that RGIII's parents tossed Briles name around to Snyder.  That would just make things worse in my opinion.  

Why?

[Mr. Sinister]

Oh, snap, so I guess I should've read the last few pages, lol. Didn't know this was discussed heavily, but I should've assumed ES wouldn't miss a thing. 

 

So, that's the reasoning, though? It was just one of the issues with Shanahan so no problem if Briles has the same issue?

 

 

Not really...

 

 

I'm mostly kidding here. Shanahan went all in on offense and I don't blame him, not in the NFL today. It's a strategy that has worked out for a lot of teams, where great offense's simply mask everything else. He may have been extreme about it but it sounds like Briles might be the same?     

 

Shanahan's issues weren't solely relegated to penalties. It also had to do with penalties being a recurring theme while he was here. It  also was a big issue because the team didn't have the players to overcome it. It was also an issue because every time he was asked about it, he wouldn't take responsibility for it (like I'm sure some people here may want Briles to take responsibility for his team) and he'd instead give you 600 reasons why things weren't working.

 

I'm not excusing anybody, but penalties are less of an issue when you have an offense like he has. Just like other teams like the Rams in the early '00s would turn the ball over, when you are a well oiled machine, sometimes it doesn't affect your team that much when you can score. 

 

Does that mean he'd do the same thing here? I don't know. I would have to see his history in regards to penalties throughout his tenure as an HC to see if it is a recurring theme or not. Right now, I can't give a legit answer on that.

[chipwhich]

Yeah, not as their head coaches though.  And not after it was learned that RGIII's parents tossed Briles name around to Snyder.  That would just make things worse in my opinion.  

 

Why the hell not, we love drama here.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

Yeah, not as their head coaches though.  And not after it was learned that RGIII's parents tossed Briles name around to Snyder.  That would just make things worse in my opinion.  

 

Thats a rumor that was denied. 

[ZRagone]

Colts brought in one of Andrew Luck's college coaches in Indy. Dolphins brought in Tannehill's college coach in Miami. Only in Washington is catering to your young QB a bad thing.

 

Let me preface this by stating that "perception" is not a reason in my mind to forgo bringing in Briles. I also had no belief that the "perception" of Mike bringing in his son was a reason to forgo bringing in Kyle. Perception is one of those things that hurts when things are going bad, but largely are non-existant if you're winning. As long as the "perception" isn't reality, I don't care. I don't think Kyle was brought in JUST because he was Mike's son, but because Mike thought he could run a successful NFL offense. I don't think Art Briles would be brought in here JUST because of RG3, but because Bruce feels he could be a successful NFL coach.

 

But those situations you just listed are different when talking about perception.

 

Take Luck first. The need to hire Pep Hamilton wasn't because of a seeming "rift" or "disagreement" between Luck and Arians. Rather, Arians got a new job and a new OC was needed for the 2nd year QB. Was Pep Hamilton brought in seemingly because of his ties to Luck, and the move actually lauded for that reason? Absolutely. However, the situation was one where Luck was a 2nd year player who...through no PERCIEVED fault of his own...just lost his OC and was already having to switch systems. As such, the notion of grabbing a system he's familiar with rather than giving him his 3rd system in 3 years was viewed as an intelligent one.

 

With Tannehill, you didn't have a previous coach. His college coach was the guy from day one. So again, you don't have the PERCEPTION of him helping to cause the "previous guy" to leave. Tannehill, coming out, was thought of as a guy with first round talent but with a lot of mixed reviews in terms of development. As such, grabbing someone familiar to him immedietely in the NFL is making good on the investment you just spent. Unlike Briles, Sherman was also someone who was a known NFL commodity having NFL OC and HC experience.

 

Rightly or wrongly, the "perception" is that the Shanahans leaving had a lot to do with them not getting along with Griffin. Rightly or wrongly, the "perception" is that when players are saying "99%" wanted Shanahn to stay that said 1% was Robert Griffin. The Shanahans, regardless of some fans here seeing him as one step down from the Devil or seeing Kyle as an incompetent silver spooner who was gifted a job, seemingly have a good reputation around the league. Thus, the perception is that they were tossed away in large part BECAUSE of Griffin. Thus, if they're then replaced with someone who is not being talked about by any other NFL team but has ties with Griffin, it looks as if Griffin "hand picked" the coach. It would be PERCIEVED, understandably so in my mind, that instead of the organization CHOOSING what they think is best for the development of their young QB they are instead cowtowing to him and letting HIM choose what HE thinks would be best for him.

 

I get the purpose of pointing to Hamilton and Sherman, but I just don't think it's a legitimate counter to the notion of the "perception" issue because the situations in which those hires happened and how a hypothetical Briles hire would happen are ENTIRELY different.

[chipwhich]

Thats a rumor that was denied. 

 

Denied by RG2 or Danny or who?  LOL.

 

Naive.

[SJValleySkinz]

I think that's underselling the interest in Briles. People became enamored with Kelly when he dominated and had a high scoring offense at Oregon. The same thing with Briles. Most would be interested in him regardless. I know I would be and it has nothing to do with Griffin. 

 

I would also love David Shaw as a candidate too. He won't have the strength and size advantages in the trenches he enjoys at Stanford which has led to his success against Oregon but he does know their offense very well and is a strong candidate regardless. But his team lost a bowl game yesterday too so I guess we can scratch him off the list too. 

 

Briles' offense is far less equiped to handle the talent parity in the NFL than Shaw's. That's one of the biggest the air raid spread was/is so hard to pull off in the NFL. Also Shaw has faced defenses that are planets better than anything the Big 12 has to offer.

[ZRagone]

I think that's underselling the interest in Briles. People became enamored with Kelly when he dominated and had a high scoring offense at Oregon. The same thing with Briles. Most would be interested in him regardless. I know I would be and it has nothing to do with Griffin. 

 

I disagree with it underselling.

 

I do think it's a bit telling that you're not hearing Briles name mentioned with any other opening. Peaking at other message boards, it's not like it seems his names being thrown out there by fans. A little bit by Houston folks due to the proximity, but that seemed to be it.

 

Someone like Shaw, until it was clear he wasn't coming out, seemed to be talked about as a hot prospect for ANY team. Similarly, O'Brien was talked about as a potential guy for multiple teams. Briles generally gets linked to Washington and that's it at the NFL level.

 

Does that mean he wouldn't be a good coach for us? Absolutely not. But I do think there's a little validity in suggesting that the primary reason he's getting attention for our coaching vacancy is that he was Griffin's college coach. While there'd perhaps be a mention or two, I kind of agree with DC9....if Griffin had gone to Texas or Stanford or A&M we would not be having an entire thread dedicated to Art Briles or have a large contingent of fans calling for him to be the coach.

 

Again, that doesn't mean he's not a good choice or that he's unqualified. Again, the parralel is masisvely with Kyle Shanahan. Briles does have legitimate credentials to make a case to be an NFL head coach. But there's still probalby something to be said for his ties to Griffin being a driving factor in him being talked about for this job at this time.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

Denied by RG2 or Danny or who?  LOL.

 

Naive.

 

Its naive to believe a rumor slandering the QB and his family in the final days of a dying coaching regime (a regime that included many anti-QB leaks in the final weeks) was incorrect? 

 

You're right. It's naive to believe these ridiculous rumors as fact. 

 

I don't believe the narrative that RG3 is a diva and his dad is calling the shots from anonymous leaks during the Shanahan regime. Nothing about either of their personalities strikes me as that way. 

[IrepDC]

Let me preface this by stating that "perception" is not a reason in my mind to forgo bringing in Briles. I also had no belief that the "perception" of Mike bringing in his son was a reason to forgo bringing in Kyle. Perception is one of those things that hurts when things are going bad, but largely are non-existant if you're winning. As long as the "perception" isn't reality, I don't care. I don't think Kyle was brought in JUST because he was Mike's son, but because Mike thought he could run a successful NFL offense. I don't think Art Briles would be brought in here JUST because of RG3, but because Bruce feels he could be a successful NFL coach.

 

But those situations you just listed are different when talking about perception.

 

Take Luck first. The need to hire Pep Hamilton wasn't because of a seeming "rift" or "disagreement" between Luck and Arians. Rather, Arians got a new job and a new OC was needed for the 2nd year QB. Was Pep Hamilton brought in seemingly because of his ties to Luck, and the move actually lauded for that reason? Absolutely. However, the situation was one where Luck was a 2nd year player who...through no PERCIEVED fault of his own...just lost his OC and was already having to switch systems. As such, the notion of grabbing a system he's familiar with rather than giving him his 3rd system in 3 years was viewed as an intelligent one.

 

With Tannehill, you didn't have a previous coach. His college coach was the guy from day one. So again, you don't have the PERCEPTION of him helping to cause the "previous guy" to leave. Tannehill, coming out, was thought of as a guy with first round talent but with a lot of mixed reviews in terms of development. As such, grabbing someone familiar to him immedietely in the NFL is making good on the investment you just spent. Unlike Briles, Sherman was also someone who was a known NFL commodity having NFL OC and HC experience.

 

Rightly or wrongly, the "perception" is that the Shanahans leaving had a lot to do with them not getting along with Griffin. Rightly or wrongly, the "perception" is that when players are saying "99%" wanted Shanahn to stay that said 1% was Robert Griffin. The Shanahans, regardless of some fans here seeing him as one step down from the Devil or seeing Kyle as an incompetent silver spooner who was gifted a job, seemingly have a good reputation around the league. Thus, the perception is that they were tossed away in large part BECAUSE of Griffin. Thus, if they're then replaced with someone who is not being talked about by any other NFL team but has ties with Griffin, it looks as if Griffin "hand picked" the coach. It would be PERCIEVED, understandably so in my mind, that instead of the organization CHOOSING what they think is best for the development of their young QB they are instead cowtowing to him and letting HIM choose what HE thinks would be best for him.

 

I get the purpose of pointing to Hamilton and Sherman, but I just don't think it's a legitimate counter to the notion of the "perception" issue because the situations in which those hires happened and how a hypothetical Briles hire would happen are ENTIRELY different.

Who's perception are we talking about? If it's the fans, I don't care. Our fans are all over the place. If it's the media, I don't care, the media just plays to our chaotic fans. I really don't get the walls that we are creating to limit our choices just because some people have "right or wrong" perceptions. If I'm the GM, I don't give a damn about perception. I'm making the move that makes the most FOOTBALL sense. Building on perception is not a good strategy in my opinion.

 

Note: I have not made a decision either way on Briles.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

I disagree with it underselling.

 

I agree with your post but I think it's unfair to be so dismissive of him and his qualifications and other's viewpoints on Briles just because of his link to RG3. Nobody would be clamoring for Mack Brown or Saban if Griffin had gone to Texas or Alabama. 

Briles' offense is far less equiped to handle the talent parity in the NFL than Shaw's. That's one of the biggest the air raid spread was/is so hard to pull off in the NFL. Also Shaw has faced defenses that are planets better than anything the Big 12 has to offer.

 

Not really. Briles doesn't have some crazy gimmick offense that requires college talent disparity to work (not saying Shaw does either). The ideas in place have worked in the NFL for a very long time. 

[ZRagone]

Who's perception are we talking about? If it's the fans, I don't care. Our fans are all over the place. If it's the media, I don't care, the media just plays to our chaotic fans.

 

 

I think when people talk perception they are largely talking about the fans/media.  Which is why I don't care too much about perception, but I do acknowledge it and it's impact. The thing is though, if you say you don't care about the perception....then why make a post trying to attack and weaken that perception by trying to point at Indy and Miami?

 

The reality is you do care, at least to a certain degree. Otherwise, no reason to try to combat the "perception" argument by bringing up Sherman and Hamilton.

 

My point was simply that...whether you care about perception or not...those two cases and this particular case are different due to the context in which they are happening.

 

The only perception I care even moderatley about is the perception in the locker room, and that's a near impossible one to know about. I say I only care about it moderately because I largely only care about it in regards to the other "foundation" players we have like Garcon, Williams, Morris, etc. With role players, if they don't like it then I'm fine with looking to replace them.

I agree with your post but I think it's unfair to be so dismissive of him and his qualifications and other's viewpoints on Briles just because of his link to RG3. Nobody would be clamoring for Mack Brown or Saban if Griffin had gone to Texas or Alabama. 

Well, don't know if I'd agree with the later part. I could definitely see that being something that would be pushed. But to your point, I don't think we'd be hearing it nearly as much as we are with Briles. On the flip side, if he had gone to A&M instead I could definitely see Sumlin getting the same treatment that Briles is getting now.

 

Why?

 

Because it's a mixture of an intriguing college system....a relative unknown commodity at an NFL level....and a relationship with the most vital part of your football team.

 

Saban probably fails to meet that same criteria because he's not an unknown commodity at that level (rather, he's left a still lingering bad taste). Brown is probably not someone viewed as having an intriguing college system. It's about having that right mixture to make the fire burn.

 

Do I think DC9 is underselling Briles some? Absolutely. I also think he's doing it with at least a part of his tongue in his cheek, as a reaction to some of those going on as if Briles is some kind of Visionary or Savant or generationally brilliant football mind. The loftier the rhetoric becomes in support for someone the more apt those who aren't a fan to go the other direction. I think that's what you're seeing here.

[SJValleySkinz]

I agree with your post but I think it's unfair to be so dismissive of him and his qualifications and other's viewpoints on Briles just because of his link to RG3. Nobody would be clamoring for Mack Brown or Saban if Griffin had gone to Texas or Alabama. 

 

Not really. Briles doesn't have some crazy gimmick offense that requires college talent disparity to work (not saying Shaw does either). The ideas in place have worked in the NFL for a very long time.

 

 

 

It's a well known fact that the air raid (Briles is a Mike Leach disciple) is predicated on creating favorable matchups in the secondary it hasn't been fully translated into the NFL because these favorable matchups are a lot harder to find. Shaw runs a PRO offense, pro as in the NFL. Non of this is my opinion BTW so take it or leave it but I promise you you're wrong.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

 think that's what you're seeing here.

 

 

I can agree with this for the most part. 

It's a well known fact that the air raid (Briles is a Mike Leach disciple) is predicated on creating favorable matchups in the secondary it hasn't been fully translated into the NFL because these favorable matchups are a lot harder to find. Shaw runs a PRO offense, pro as in the NFL. Non of this is my opinion BTW so take it or leave it but I promise you you're wrong.

 

It's been discussed many times in this thread. I'll leave it...

[darrelgreenie]

Kelly is great.  He came in with a system, and it blew up in his face.  He adjusted, found a professional QB on his roster, and the rest is history.  The next coach of the Skins will not have the luxury of discovering his QB, he will either make RG3 work or fail trying.  The odds of success in this case is low.  He will have to be a top notch NFL QB guru.  A Mike Martz.  Briles won't cut it.

lol, what does this even mean? lol Kelly's system blew up in his face.

[IrepDC]

I think when people talk perception they are largely talking about the fans/media.  Which is why I don't care too much about perception, but I do acknowledge it and it's impact. The thing is though, if you say you don't care about the perception....then why make a post trying to attack and weaken that perception by trying to point at Indy and Miami?

 

The reality is you do care, at least to a certain degree. Otherwise, no reason to try to combat the "perception" argument by bringing up Sherman and Hamilton.

 

My point was simply that...whether you care about perception or not...those two cases and this particular case are different due to the context in which they are happening.

 

The only perception I care even moderatley about is the perception in the locker room, and that's a near impossible one to know about. I say I only care about it moderately because I largely only care about it in regards to the other "foundation" players we have like Garcon, Williams, Morris, etc. With role players, if they don't like it then I'm fine with looking to replace them.

The point of my post was to enlighten some of our fans who may not have known that it's not unheard of to bring in a coach that a young QB is familiar with. I care enough as a fan to discuss it, but as I said, as a GM or coach I wouldn't be here discussing it or care what was being discussed, because perception has no real affect on the game.