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

[Mr. Sinister]

 

My point is, that Shanahan is an offensive guru in my mind and I think he brought us the best offense we've had here in a long, long time. The problem with our team was that the offense was missing a franchise QB for two of the first years and, when we got one, we were able to compete with anyone. This year, the offense had major issues for all the reasons we discussed and debated here a million times, and so the result was what it was.

 

Will Briles be the same? And why not?

 

I agree with the gist of what you are saying but the problem went beyond simply not having a QB. It extended to the o-line, receivers, and entire offense in general. Griffin (and the addition of the RO) just masked a lot of that. When he came back not 100%, not able to run that same scheme to that degree, and when the coaches tried to run a lot of the same stuff, it didn't work, and the same issues came back. And there seemed to be no attempt to find a solution, or stick to a plan that was working.

 

Would Briles do that? That would depend on whether or not he hires competent coordinators, adjusts his scheme to get better production, etc. I think with a solid assembly of coaches, certain issues would be easier to avoid. But you are right. There are no guarantees. There are plenty of what ifs. I don't think Briles would be the only one though. No matter who comes here, the same what ifs will apply.

[VRIEL1]

Some guys can be great position coaches, but that doesn't necessarily mean they would make a great HC. That's how I'm reading it. Otherwise don't you think he would have been given a shot by now?

Norv Turner comes to mind. Wade Phillips. I'm sure we can name plenty more. 

[Zazzaro703]

I'm not sure why the 'athletic mismatches' misconception is thrown out there so much. Baylor was talent poor when Briles got there. They didn't get the best recruits they did the best with what they got. If you want to talk about talent mismatches you can use that argument more appropriately at the "Big Programs" then a program pulled up by their boot straps. And projecting forward into the NFL did the Eagles had less talent with Maclin on IR then the year before Kelly got there. Other then DeSean what WR provides the atheltic mismatch you tout as critical to Briles style of offense?

This is what i was going to say, there is no athletic mismatch with Riley Cooper out there. Kelly adjusted what he does with what he has. Baylor is also trying to recruit in texas where there are plenty of other higher profile programs. Once griffin has the brace off and is full speed we will be bale to create the same secondary problems as the eagles because teams will bave to respect morris and griffin with more players closer to the line of scrimmage.

[VRIEL1]

 

My point is, that Shanahan is an offensive guru in my mind and I think he brought us the best offense we've had here in a long, long time. The problem with our team was that the offense was missing a franchise QB for two of the first years and, when we got one, we were able to compete with anyone.  

 

I've had to admit that whatever system that was brought by Shanahan was inherently going to give up a ton of INT's. Why? we went through Grossman.. INT's, we went through Beck... INT's, we went through McNabb... INT's. The only time the INT's were minimal was when the team ran the "Spread/Read Option." When they reverted back to Shanahan's WCO both RG3 and Cousins put up the same number of INT's the three previous QB's did. 

 

I say this cause I think no matter who we put in that system it would have resulted in the same outcome. RG3 is proof. It didn't matter if we had a "franchise" QB or Grossman. 

 

I just hope the next offense is not as defensive friendly. 

[darrelgreenie]

I agree with the gist of what you are saying but the problem went beyond simply not having a QB. It extended to the o-line, receivers, and entire offense in general. Griffin (and the addition of the RO) just masked a lot of that. When he came back not 100%, not able to run that same scheme to that degree, and when the coaches tried to run a lot of the same stuff, it didn't work, and the same issues came back. And there seemed to be no attempt to find a solution, or stick to a plan that was working.

 

Would Briles do that? That would depend on whether or not he hires competent coordinators, adjusts his scheme to get better production, etc. I think with a solid assembly of coaches, certain issues would be easier to avoid. But you are right. There are no guarantees. There are plenty of what ifs. I don't think Briles would be the only one though. No matter who comes here, the same what ifs will apply.

I don't think Shanahan's failure on the field has anything to do with Briles. the offense or the QB was 'the' problem with the team at all really. But that's what people tend to gravitate towards especially national media. Historically bad special teams. I said awhile back that Kyle greatest enemy was special teams. When you start within your own 20 that is gonna turn a lot of could be TD drives into FGs and a lot of FG drives into punts. The defense was pretty lousy too.

Now Shanahan's failure off the field? His relationship with Griffin?

This is what i was going to say, there is no athletic mismatch with Riley Cooper out there. Kelly adjusted what he does with what he has. Baylor is also trying to recruit in texas where there are plenty of other higher profile programs. Once griffin has the brace off and is full speed we will be bale to create the same secondary problems as the eagles because teams will bave to respect morris and griffin with more players closer to the line of scrimmage.

Can you imagine Griffin running Kelly's offense with our WRs? (We do need to upgrade the OL, but that's gonna be true regardless of HC)

[VRIEL1]

Look, personally I want Jon Gruden or Cowher. Proven HC's who can get this crap straight. But some of you want a guy who is eager and will want to be innovative to get the team to the next level if need be. Thats Briles. He wants to succeed at the NFL level, he would love to get his team to a playoff birth, he would love to win a SB, and he has not done any of those things so we know he will be hungry. 

 

The biggest complements I kept hearing out of the announcers last night was that Briles is innovative, he changes on the fly, he adapts to what the defense is doing at the time. Your not getting a system guy who is going to force feed his system up to 4th quarter and then try to make adjustments. 

[nemocystem]

I'm not afraid to admit that he's on top of mine. ..but that's not to say he's my only valid candidate. I agree that I feel the need to come on here in defense of the gall one must have to suggest such an obviously impotent HC option...

I mean the irrevocably sound logic at employ to the counter is so impenetrable against the egregiously incoherent gibberish being consistently slayed at the feet of common sense that we should be arrested for trifling others for time to even be bothered to read such drivel.

Where do we come off...sheesh.

[DC9]

I'll point out that Russ Grimm has been an NFL coach now longer than his NFL and college playing careers combined.  And that's been on the staffs of NFL teams that hold no nostalgia for him.  I'm not sure why you and others continue to denigrate his credentials as an NFL coach.  It's a weird double anti-Redskins bias going on.

 

Grimm was our o-line coach in the late 90s wasn't he?

 

And I know he went to school in Pittsburgh, so that makes sense.

 

I think he got to Arizona by way of Ken Wisenhunt (who took him from Pittsburgh).

 

I really think Grimm could put a strong, hard nosed staff together.

Don't make up yet guys!  I'm enjoying watching DC9 be forced into ripping GHH's opus over and over and over.

 

Mom always liked him better.  The offensive guys always get the love.

[Mr. Sinister]

DG I am pretty sure your sig is over the size limit.

 

You should probably call the Fire Dept 

[Momma There Goes That Man]

By RGIII.  Why would he come out and say, yeah my dad's been talking to Dan, trying to get Briles in here to coach us.  He's defending his dad.  There are also reports of how his father meddles and NFL executives were warned about RG2 prior to the draft.   

 

And we already know RGIII's strengths, so he would be running a lot.  And then we get back to my whole argument about why I don't want him as a head coach.  Either way, I really don't think we will interview him or he will be part of the staff in 2014.

 

I doubt RG3, being the image crazed narcissist so many think he is, would be dumb enough to go behind the scenes and lobby for Briles. He knows the public perception in fact it was reported that he doesn't want Briles on board because of it. Does the FO care about that or not is the question, I hope it wouldn't stand in their way of a worthy hire, but I digress. 

 

Also, Briles knowing and caring for Griffin, I doubt we would see a lot of runs since his offense doesn't require a mobile QB. He would protect Griffin and utilize his arm talent most likely with some runs sprinkled in. 

 

But anyway, it doesn't seem like he's coming. 

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I'll point out that Russ Grimm has been an NFL coach now longer than his NFL and college playing careers combined.  And that's been on the staffs of NFL teams that hold no nostalgia for him.  I'm not sure why you and others continue to denigrate his credentials as an NFL coach.  It's a weird double anti-Redskins bias going on.

 

No. It's just annoyance. The same annoyance at people who want to make Darrel Green an Assistant GM. Or who want to make Art Monk a WR coach.

 

The posters who want Grimm as an assistant probably couldn't name another offensive line coach in the league. They want him here because they want it be 1987 again. 

 

If Ken Whisenhunt were hired, I would be absolutely fine with Russ Grimm coming here. Why? Because they worked together in Pittsburgh and Arizona, and it would be a hire based on football reasons, not nostalgia reasons.

[chipwhich]

You should probably call the Fire Dept 

 

Wish I could, it was especially annoying last night, but it shrunk.

[Peregrine]

Im just not sure I can buy into that.  We have seen a LOT of college offenses that utilize the same spread, but fail to produce in the NFL.  The most basic reason for that being in college the defensive backs are far inferior to those in the NFL.  In college you can spread them out and use pure talent to take care of the one on one matchups.  The fastest players automatically revert to receiver in college, as they just dont have enough stars per team on most teams to put speed at every position.  This is NOT true in the NFL, and thats what a lot of spread offenses find out.

 

Chip Kelly has had one year in the NFL.  That isnt to say he wont work out, but, he is an aberation, a one season aberation so far to the NFL rule.  So many NFL coaches(Jim Zorn cough) can have a good stretch, but the NFL catches up to quickly.  Players can have a good season and fool everyone, so can coaches.  There are only three pass happy spread offenses in the NFL that are actually part of really good teams, and only a couple run heavy ones. The only 3 pass happy ones Im aware of this season would be Denver and New England, and New Olreans, and we know who those QBs are.  So I am of the opinion the passing spread offense needs the talent to succeed, it cant just succeed based on its own merit.  You cant take mediocre players of mediocre speed with a mediocre QB and get any good results.  And those two teams with the run heavy spread option?  Seattle and San Fran relied on their defense, not their offense to make the playoffs.  Those run spread offenses yielded 17th and 24th in the NFL.

 

Look at all the teams who were dominant this year(11-5 or better).  As pass happy as the NFL has been, the NFL has remembered one thing this year, that defenses win championships.  Out of the 9 dominant teams this year, only 1 doesnt have a top 10 defense, and thats Denver.  The other 8 are defenses #1-6 and then 9 and 10, with 7 and 8 being held by Miami, and Arizona who was a meager 10-6.  Carolina, Seattle, San Fran, New England, these are teams that dominated with their defense this year.  I'm just not convinced things are changing as much as some people think.

[RED06]

How about:

 

HC- Ken Whisenhunt or Briles

OC- Art Briles or Ken Whisenhunt or Kubiak

DC- Greg Williams or ....................

ST- Danny Smith

[TSO]

 

Would Briles do that? That would depend on whether or not he hires competent coordinators, adjusts his scheme to get better production, etc. I think with a solid assembly of coaches, certain issues would be easier to avoid. But you are right. There are no guarantees. There are plenty of what ifs. I don't think Briles would be the only one though. No matter who comes here, the same what ifs will apply.

 

Agreed, but I think a respected NFL (or even college) coach who really knows exactly who he wants to surround himself with and has a clear vision for how he wants all sides of the ball to be ran may be better for us than a Briles who would need more help, imo, finding those guys. 

 

Or, maybe I'm saying that because I'm thinking about the general health of ES, lol. In my opinion, Shanahan/Briles seem to have the same overriding principle in running a team: Offense is everything.

 

I'm not necessarily against that. And maybe that's a simplistic way of looking at it, but I think there's a lot of truth in it.  

 

That being said, if Briles can bring a consistently awesome offense and there's little doubt in Allen's mind that that will be the case, I'm honestly FOR the hiring. I think offense is everything in the NFL now. I used to be all about focusing on every aspect of the team like they're equally significant, but we've had too many recent examples of teams with great QBs and consistently good offense's winning more often than not even when the rest of their team has glaring issues. I feel like if you have a great offense you can slowly get the other phases to be good enough consistently and be in the hunt every year. 

 

Peregrine's post right above mine is a good one, and I am wondering how much what I believe is still true, though. 

[texasthunder]

How about:

 

HC- Ken Whisenhunt or Briles

OC- Art Briles or Ken Whisenhunt or Kubiak

DC- Greg Williams or ....................

ST- Danny Smith

I think you would have better luck getting Montgomery for the OC, then you will be in getting Briles to come to DC as a OC.

DC-Greg Williams or Raheem Morris, either one.

[TSO]

 

Look at all the teams who were dominant this year(11-5 or better).  As pass happy as the NFL has been, the NFL has remembered one thing this year, that defenses win championships.  Out of the 9 dominant teams this year, only 1 doesnt have a top 10 defense, and thats Denver.  The other 8 are defenses #1-6 and then 9 and 10, with 7 and 8 being held by Miami, and Arizona who was a meager 10-6.  Carolina, Seattle, San Fran, New England, these are teams that dominated with their defense this year.  I'm just not convinced things are changing as much as some people think.

 

I have to say, this year has been REALLY interesting in terms of how many solid defense's have led to winning teams. Still, I'd like to see if that'll be the case throughout the playoffs. But, yeah, maybe it isn't changing as much as we think. 

[KDawg]

For DC, I'm on the Spanos, Williams, or Phillips bandwagon. Not in any order.

[RED06]

I think you would have better luck getting Montgomery for the OC, then you will be in getting Briles to come to DC as a OC.

DC-Greg Williams or Raheem Morris, either one.

That could possibly work too. I actually forgot about Raheem Morris. Shame on me lol

For DC, I'm on the Spanos, Williams, or Phillips bandwagon. Not in any order.

Dang Kdawg I forgot about Spanos too. His defense was good when he was with the Giants. I think he got shafted with the Saints.

[KDawg]

That could possibly work too. I actually forgot about Raheem Morris. Shame on me lol

Dang Kdawg I forgot about Spanos too. His defense was good when he was with the Giants. I think he got shafted with the Saints.

You're thinking of Spagnuolo. I'm talking Lou Spanos. Our former LB coach and UCLA's DC

[4skins23]

You can keep Briles. He might be good at the college level but it doesn't mean he will be any good in the NFL. This team can't afford any more "experiments". He might end up like another Zorn.

[KuNiT21]

I'm good on Raheem Morris.  I don't know why he always gets the pass on the defense.  He has coached one of the worst secondaries in the last 2 years.  IMO he's just as responsible as Haslett is.  We keep making excuses of "well we get so and so back next year", a good defense fills players in for injured/suspended and doesn't skip a beat.  If DHall or Amerson (I'm very high on him) went down and we had to relay more on Josh Wilson, this secondary would of have set records. 

[THE HAMMER'IN HOG]

Some people know so little about the actual game of football!

[RED06]

You're thinking of Spagnuolo. I'm talking Lou Spanos. Our former LB coach and UCLA's DC

ohhhhhhh ok LOL!!! I 'm getting old....Spags is the guy I'm thinking of. Yep Lou would be good too though

You can keep Briles. He might be good at the college level but it doesn't mean he will be any good in the NFL. This team can't afford any more "experiments". He might end up like another Zorn.

Or he could end up like Bill B and the Pats. ya never know...........

[SWFLSkins]

Dan T. We can build a 11 on 11 flag team LOL!!! We could have a lot of fun

 

Those for Briles on one team, those against on another, that would make the disappointing season a win=win. Just hope I still have half the speed I used to think I had. lol.