Why Gruden got no honeymoon--

[TSO]

Clearly, someone can like Scot's competence but question Jay's -- so am not sure what you mean about the contradiction. 

 

Read it again.

 

It's not about Scot's competence (we can't really be 100% about that, yet, anyway).

 

It's about the importance of his hire and how that correlates to any HC of the Redskins. 

[Skinsinparadise]

Read it again.

 

It's not about Scot's competence (we can't really be 100% about that, yet, anyway).

 

It's about the importance of his hire and how that correlates to any HC of the Redskins. 

 

I read again 

 

And I usually follow your points, agree or disagree with them, fairly easily.  On this one, am having a hard time, sorry, is it that Scot's hire goes hand in hand with Jay's success or they are a team?

[TSO]

I read again 

 

And I usually follow your points, agree or disagree with them, fairly easily.  On this one, am having a hard time, sorry, is it that Scot's hire goes hand in hand with Jay's success or they are a team?

 

lol, okay, I guess it's my fault I wasn't clear enough, though I was intending to be a little mysterious so as to force people to think hard on it.

 

The best way for me to explain it is to pose two questions:

 

1) Do you think hiring a GM was absolutely vital to this organization's success? (I know your answer is yes, since we worked on the "Let's do something about this" thread together)

 

2) If yes, then how much of said vital importance had to do with Gruden's lack of success his first year (or any HC of the Redskins previously) as well as moving forward?

 

What I'm trying to get at is that I think it's extremely difficult to see where Gruden's foolishness starts and where the total organizational dysfunction he inherited ends. 

 

Anyone claiming to see it clearly while holding the belief that Scot's hire was HUGE in terms of competent organizational principles is, for me, holding contradictory beliefs.

 

Of course, I could be wrong and every awful thought, speculative or not, about Gruden winds up being the truth, lol. It's pretty damn easy to bet against a Redskins coach. Best bet in the house, usually.   

[Skinsinparadise]

lol, okay, I guess it's my fault I wasn't clear enough, though I was intending to be a little mysterious so as to force people to think hard on it.

 

 

 

Thanks. I am just coming off a 9 day vacation so maybe i am not at my height of penetrating thoughtfulness.

 

OK, I do get of course if you are going to complain about the guy running personnel how can you find fault with the coach that dealt with that handicap.  It's ironically sort of Chris Russell's argument on behalf of Haz -- he gets blamed but he shouldn't because how can you judge him when he doesn't have the horses.  I agree with this point in theory and in a vacuum. But I think we can make judgments (correct or not) about coaches, especially us Redskins fans considering how many we've had to observe and compare, by looking at multiple variables and considering mitigating factors, too   

 

The thing about Jay.  Neither one of us think highly of Bruce and his whole Tampa connection drill.  I think where we might depart if I recall is to me Jay is the poster child for Bruce's judgement-Tampa connection.   If you don't think much of how Bruce runs personnel or like that he brings the Tampa guys in as if Tampa was some sort of football dynasty versus the mediocre outfit they really were -- then why trust Bruce's biggest decision in his role that again has the Tampa stamp on it.

 

I am not saying my take on Jay has much to do with Bruce, it has very little.  I think I elaborated on what concerns me about Jay pretty well at least in my own mind a few posts up and I could easily elaborate on every point I made.  But to your point specifically, I can't give Jay a pass because of the perception of Bruce's incompetence -- when Jay himself potentially represents the very same thing.  If someone else hired Jay, I'd agree with your point.  

 

But this hire from what I read at least was all Bruce.  As far as Bruce am glad he's out of the GM role, I've seen enough where I don't want any more of it.  As you know I was cringing thinking him running this off season and it was fun to try to do something about it.  And I'll give him credit for hiring Scot.   For Jay at least, I'll say give him this year.  You learn a lot from your first year to the next.   And yeah to your point, no doubt an infusion of talent should help his cause.  

 

Growing up with Gibbs in the 80s, am fixated on three things that colored that tenure which I look for now.  1. a coach who outprepares the opposition and just gives a vibe of major competence.  You know when the Redskins are playing a big game they will out scheme and outprepare the opponent.  Jay doesn't give me that vibe.  Maybe he will this year or maybe (hopefully) am wrong about him.  2.  I also loved that Gibbs would hire stud D coordinators to take care of that side of the ball.    That was one of my biggest beefs with Shanny.   3.  We had Bobby Beathard who was one of the best GMs in the business.

 

That's why I love Scot's hire.  Yeah we can't say 100% its going to work out but he had a long record of success and pedigree.  no one but us wanted Cerrato.  Shanny is an offensive genius but was chased out of Denver because he was no personnel guru and his defenses stunk.  And like Cerrato -- Allen was out of work when he was hired here.  It's not shocking why things haven't worked here.  You keep hiring fry cooks from McDonalds to cook at a Steak restaurant -- yeah the odds of it working are slim.  That's why I've been so frustrated with Danny.  Am not really sweating Jay so much with Scot in the building.  If Jay doesn't work out it will play out.  But getting a real chef to me is everything and we finally got one.

[ThomasRoane]

lol, okay, I guess it's my fault I wasn't clear enough, though I was intending to be a little mysterious so as to force people to think hard on it.

 

The best way for me to explain it is to pose two questions:

 

1) Do you think hiring a GM was absolutely vital to this organization's success? (I know your answer is yes, since we worked on the "Let's do something about this" thread together)

 

2) If yes, then how much of said vital importance had to do with Gruden's lack of success his first year (or any HC of the Redskins previously) as well as moving forward?

 

What I'm trying to get at is that I think it's extremely difficult to see where Gruden's foolishness starts and where the total organizational dysfunction he inherited ends. 

 

Anyone claiming to see it clearly while holding the belief that Scot's hire was HUGE in terms of competent organizational principles is, for me, holding contradictory beliefs.

 

Of course, I could be wrong and every awful thought, speculative or not, about Gruden winds up being the truth, lol. It's pretty damn easy to bet against a Redskins coach. Best bet in the house, usually.   

 

It is obvious that the roster was crap as Scot proceeds to dismantle and rebuild.  God bless Coach Gibbs for what he did his second go round but even as great a coaching job as he did (in comparison to all the other coaches in the Snyder era) even he couldn't manage more than one playoff victory with the crappy talent and "organizational dysfunction" as you say.  You don't get to "just coach" in DC.  There has been a history of distracting bombshells that have to be addressed just before games in many cases!  You had many reporters doing their best to trip Jay up to make news.  Even Shanny was caught off guard after leaving Denver where the press wasn't nearly as vicious.

 

It gets glossed over too often that Jay didn't even get to pick his coaches!  Except for the Special teams coach and really BA had a hand in getting Kotwica.  Let's see, maybe he got to pick the RB coach.  Other than that who else?  So Jay also inherited a staff that he didn't know and who didn't really know him.  There was leak after leak and a lot of back stabbing going on.  Now that he's been able to pick his staff and the talent is better then you can say whether or not he's a good coach. 

 

If I had to bet on it I'd say that he'll be successful here.  Meaning playoff victories and keeping the team in the hunt. 

[TSO]

SIP, I'll just say why I don't think your initial points apply to Jay here. Though I completely agree with your final thoughts.

First, with regards to your comparison of Jay with Haslett and our ability to recognize poor coaching versus awful personnel, that totally fails on the sole basis that Haslett had been unsuccessful everywhere he's been prior to coming here, whereas the same can't be said of Jay.

Furthermore, Haslett had 5 years of coaching a failed defense here, way more time to judge his inability as a D coordinator. Again, same can't be said with Jay as a HC.

Second, with regards to your (potentially) tying Bruce Allen's incompetence to Jay's hire, I get that at some level because I originally didn't like the hire as well.

However, the point still fails on the sole basis that Jay had a solid resumé on his own right and was in demand at the time as well as the previous year for a HCing gig.

It's why I easily came around on the hire. Tampa connection or not, the hire was logical just based on that.

He even turned down interviews for the job in the past few years. There's little doubt that someone would've hired him.

It's important we make that distinction. A hire like Joe Barry is far more questionable and deserving of the criticism of nepotism versus one like Jay. Jay was totally in demand. Barry (and Haslett for that matter), were not.

It's also incumbent upon us to distinguish Allen's ability to hire coaches versus his ability to handle personnel. The former we don't know much about, other than he's been a big part of a lot of successful coaches' tenures in his history. The latter we know has never been a strength of his.

In summary, I just think it's too up in the air to really judge anything right now about Gruden. Yeah, he's done some foolish things and he had a miserable first year. And if you go by recent history that usually spells doom for a Redskin HC.

So, yeah, the odds are stacked against him, but at the same time it's totally possible that a legit GM along with going through that miserable learning experience is all it will take for him to resume the trajectory his career was on before he came here.

If I had to bet on it I'd say that he'll be successful here. Meaning playoff victories and keeping the team in the hunt.

One of the many reasons why I don't gamble, lol.

I agree with all of your points above thomasroane, but I just really have no idea which way this thing will go for Gruden.

But I pray you're right.

[Wildbunny]

One thing I'd like to add, as I'm with Thomas on here, and may be wrong of course, may be right as well too

 

Most are holding Jay responsible for the QB Carousel in 2014. While it's injuries and inconsistent/bad QB play that forced it and he just had to go through the pain of doing it.

 

Jay Gruden was thrown on a bad team, with bad players and bad coaches as a rookie HC in the NFL and events even were against him. That makes lots of thing to overcome. Still he seemed like turning it on toward the end of the season and since the start of the offseason Coaching swipe on the D side of the ball, even a really respected one where I suspect all these coaching moves on D where also the result of Joe Barry somehow. Adds in Bill Callahan. This is quite interesting coming out from Jay, considering all the love he's getting around here.

 

But as always here, best HC coaches elsewhere, and the best QB is in next years draft. At least. That's been an ongoing process since I lurk around here.

[Burgold]

Thanks. I am just coming off a 9 day vacation so maybe i am not at my height of penetrating thoughtfulness.

 

OK, I do get of course if you are going to complain about the guy running personnel how can you find fault with the coach that dealt with that handicap.  It's ironically sort of Chris Russell's argument on behalf of Haz -- he gets blamed but he shouldn't because how can you judge him when he doesn't have the horses.  I agree with this point in theory and in a vacuum. 

I think a good coach has the power to turn lemon into lemonade. An average coach will turn lemons into lemons (which can still be tasty in your tea or squeezed over some fish), Haslett turned lemons into vinegar. He made average players sub par and sub par players into trash.

 

Now, a great coach in his prime can actually take those lemons and make something amazing for a short time.  Look at the 87 Scab team by Gibbs. He was beating pro teams with a bunch of castoffs and rookie free agent never would bes. You can also make the argument that he did it again with the Vinny assembled teams.  He found a way to make them just good enough, tough enough, and mistake free enough that they could make the playoffs twice. It took every drip of lemon juice those guys had and he wrung them out and grated them out so by the time they reached the playoffs they were already done, but he did it.

 

It's too soon to tell what Gruden can do with lemons or prime rib.  Last year, he took lemons and for the most part the offense looked like lemons. The running game regressed, the o line didn't overcome, and the while each of the QBs had moments overall... it was very sour. This year, he's got a new buyer and he gets one more chance, perhaps his last chance, to show his kitchen skills.

 

I very much would like him to come through. Right now, he's still has to prove that he himself isn't the lemon.

[Skinsinparadise]

SIP, I'll just say why I don't think your initial points apply to Jay here. Though I completely agree with your final thoughts.

First, with regards to your comparison of Jay with Haslett and our ability to recognize poor coaching versus awful personnel, that totally fails on the sole basis that Haslett had been unsuccessful everywhere he's been prior to coming here, whereas the same can't be said of Jay.

Furthermore, Haslett had 5 years of coaching a failed defense here, way more time to judge his inability as a D coordinator. Again, same can't be said with Jay as a HC.

Second, with regards to your (potentially) tying Bruce Allen's incompetence to Jay's hire, I get that at some level because I originally didn't like the hire as well.

However, the point still fails on the sole basis that Jay had a solid resumé on his own right and was in demand at the time as well as the previous year for a HCing gig.

It's why I easily came around on the hire. Tampa connection or not, the hire was logical just based on that.

 

 

I recall debating you some on this point as to the degree for Jay being in demand.  John Keim has covered this well and actually even reiterated the point last week on the radio, the reaction of football insiders and in John's case personnel people who talk to him off the record was mixed about Jay hire.  Some liked it, some didn't, few loved it.  I'd sum him up as a prospect as a B hire.  Yeah there was some interest around the league but not overwhelming interest.  

 

Few were jumping up and down saying the Redskins landing a gem but conversely few were saying he would be a bomb.  there was one prominent NFL insider type who said he would be a bomb and it was an abysmal hire, I wish I could remember who it was because I recall the interview about a week or so after the hire.  you might recall some Bengals media types and fans actually were happy to see him go.

 

now to the degree that it was out of left field like the Zorn hire.  Yeah definitely not.  Jay was a legitimate prospect.  But my opinion on that is so what?  It's rare for ANY new head coach not to be a good prospect.  Now for a head coach to be a great prospect, that's rare, and I see no evidence that Jay fit that category.  But yeah if we were talking purely about Jay the coordinator, I'd say based on buzz he was considered a good coordinator, not a great one.   Actually, Norv had more hype as to being an elite coordinator at the time of the hire. And sticking with Norv, he's one of many examples that being a good coordinator and being a good head coach are apples to oranges.

 

The typical NFL head coach that bombs was once a good coordinator.  It's rare to almost never for a mediocre coordinator to get promoted to head coach.  As you know as head coach you aren't just running one facet of the team like you are as a coordinator.  You are in charge of everything as opposed to being a soldier for someone else.   Everything is your responsibility.  You got to lead.  You got to motivate.  You got to deal with the media.  You got to run the full time on game day.  All in a much more intense way than anything a coordinator does.   

 

 Having said that like I said in my prior post, I didn't think Jay should be fired.  You can learn a lot from your rookie coaching year to year 2.  Do I think he will surprise us this year, and we got one of the better coaches in the league, just give him time -- my gut is no.   And for none of the reasons you and me are discussing but its about what I said a few posts ago.  It's not to me about Bruce Allen and no his previous pedigree in Cincy doesn't bring me any excitement or for that matter discouragement -- but I look for the Joe Gibbs go the extra mile-competence-out work the opposition mindset, I just don't see it with him, yet.  Granted I only know what I see in his interviews and what reporters say about him but yeah none of it give me the vibe that in a big game, Jay is going to be the guy who is going to outprepare the opponent.  

 

Heck, if you want to give him credibility for Cincy read the reaction about the playoff games they were in, some took him to task for Cincy's offense looking inept and unprepared and shut down by better game plans by the opposing defensive coordinators.  It's not that Jay is a dummy, really nobody who coaches in the NFL is but he strikes me as a B level coordinator and B level preparation guy that unfortunately will get outwitted by the sea of A level coordinators and A level preperation guys in the league.

[megared]

What I'm trying to get at is that I think it's extremely difficult to see where Gruden's foolishness starts and where the total organizational dysfunction he inherited ends. 

 

Gotta disagree with that.  Gruden did plenty last season for anyone to reasonably question his competence.

 

Calling out QB through media/publicly calling your best offensive player a 'terrible blocker'

Calling out players to the media after losses with zero accountability

QB carousel

Abandoning run game repeatedly

nonexistent situational coaching

sub par game planning 

bottom of the league in penalties

zero improvement from QBs over the course of the season

 

Fuzzier to me is:

 

Decision to hire an inexperienced OC

Decision to not have a QB coach

Delegation of defense to Haslett

 

And this is with the assumption that he had nothing to do with personnel.  

[Mania]

It certainly didn't help that he kept this guy

 

[nemocystem]

I think i'm on record for not being enamored with the hire at the time. I felt, & still feel that the whole interview process was a sham, & that BA signed the guy he knew he wanted all along. That's where most of my frustration for the hire stems from. I'm also not impressed with how his offense performed either in crunch time, bright lights, or vs strong Defenses...though i am willing to concede that he did have Andy Dalton as his QB...of whom i am also not enamored with.

The good things i SAW were his ability to communicate to the players, & to instill belief, & retain accountability. I believed those to be his strong points, & so i put myself on the "wait & see" side of the fence.

As it stands now...i am not particularly impressed, but i am still straddling that side of the fence. Maybe he's learned some lessons. Perhaps the roster was just that bad, & the media + organizational disfunction is just that frustrating, & in turn...that detrimental to one's sanity. I'm sure that most would agree that he fumbled the RGIII situation...no matter what side you're on (unless your side is the one that wants to put Rob in a corner & flog him with cat o' nine tails), & that his offfense was a model of inconsistency.

I get that the ball moved with some regularity while KC was at the helm, & save for his mental breakdowns his offense might not be all that bad. Except, then he became unwilling, or the team became unable to run the ball with any consistency.

As it stands...Jay, Robert, & the rest of this organization not named Scot McCloughan, Trent Williams, or Ryan Kerrigan needs to step up & prove that they can perform at their pay-rate. Speaking only on Jay though, i feel that all is not lost, but that he is definitely sitting on a very warm seat that could heat up real quick if he doesn't show leadership & overall improvement this season. I also feel that the coaching staff acquisitions put Jay in a sort of no more excuses situation. I mean...if you look at our offseason, & add to that ecen just a C+ draft, we should at least add 2 more wins against last season's epic calamitous failure.

I mean...think about all that we went through, all the disfunction, all the roster holes, the inadequate depth, the new system, new coach, & the injuries. If the coach does his job even just plainly satisfactorily, then simply coaching up the improved roster, & keeping a tight ship should get us to 6-7 wins. But it's also about how we look during the losses. What Jay can't have is more disfunction, more ineptitude, & an inability to control the chaos. If he fails at that while posting similar results, then i don't see how Scot can justify keeping him around.

If he's able to have a quiet, & even moderately improving 6-10 season...i say it could still be a success. As long as we don't fall into all of the same old traps & ravines, i think Jay will have his leash extended & he will be given the opportunity to succeed with the staff he has assembled.

We shall see...

[skinny21]

^^ what he said.... as well as the previous two posts.

I was against retaining Jay as I didn't see him as a coach that could surmount the personnel issues. With Scot on board though, I find myself in the wait-and-see group.

I still believe it was a poor hire in the first place, but I can't really blame that on Gruden. It's interesting that the person I do blame (Allen), has redeemed himself by hiring Scot and stepping aside. Of course, if Griffin goes elsewhere (with a coach/system that is more beneficial to him) and succeeds, then I'll have Allen on the deficit side of the ledger again.

[Epochalypse]

This seems as good a place to stick this as any...

 

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2015/aggressiveness-index-2014

 

Gruden was ranked the 6th most aggressive coach in the league last year according to their metrics.

[ThomasRoane]

Gotta disagree with that.  Gruden did plenty last season for anyone to reasonably question his competence.

 

Calling out QB through media/publicly calling your best offensive player a 'terrible blocker'

Calling out players to the media after losses with zero accountability

QB carousel

Abandoning run game repeatedly

nonexistent situational coaching

sub par game planning 

bottom of the league in penalties

zero improvement from QBs over the course of the season

 

Fuzzier to me is:

 

Decision to hire an inexperienced OC

Decision to not have a QB coach

Delegation of defense to Haslett

 

And this is with the assumption that he had nothing to do with personnel.  

 

Five out of eight of your points can be related to QB.  Those who favor Robert will never give Jay a break unless he manages to lead the team to the Super Bowl. 

[skinny21]

Five out of eight of your points can be related to QB. Those who favor Robert will never give Jay a break unless he manages to lead the team to the Super Bowl.

Hyperbole aside, it's a fair point that QB issues/handling are a major part of the criticisms of Jay. A little concerning though given that Gruden's best selling point was "look at how well he brought along a young QB (Dalton)".

Side note: it's also concerning that Gruden had HC experience and yet seemed fine with a rookie OC and not bringing in a QB coach... though to be fair I have no idea if the Arena League uses QB coaches, or if he was both HC and OC with the Tuskers and therefore didn't foresee a problem (even though conventional NFL wisdom says otherwise).

[Skinsinparadise]

Let's be realistic here; We scape goat Snyder time and again laying blame on the coaches, we had 2 coaches who had won 5 super bowls between them, and they looked like they had no business coaching football at any level during their tenure...I don't think people understand how bad the talent has been on this team under Snyder, specifically the O-line, you cannot run any type of productive offense without a good offensive line, you need a very good/great O-line...couple that with a QB who has no idea what he is looking at downfield unless he's playing backyard football out of the pocket,,, who could succeed under those circumstances?

 

 

Gibbs just seemed behind the times as an X and O's guy when he came back.  But that's natural considering he was away from the game for so long.  But still was a great leader and heck now in retrospect those 2 playoff runs were almost glory years compared to what came next.

 

I give Shanny zero out for personnel issues.  He wanted full control over personnel.   If you read the articles about why he was let go from Denver it was that the dude can run a great offense but the team questioned his GM abilities and his overseeing of the defense.   It's not as if he came here and it came out different, it was pretty much exactly what went down in Denver.  He took a bad offense and made good.  He took a good defense and made it bad.  And personnel was hit and miss at best.

 

I don't mind taking swipes at Danny but the way I blame him here is giving both Gibbs and Shanny control over personnel in the first place, neither one built their reputation as Gm's.  It's like hiring a good mechanic to rework your home's electrical wiring.  Instead of that, why not do what the good teams do.  Have the mechanic fix the car and a real electrician do your homes wiring.  

 

As much of a reputation both Gibbs and Shanny have, I doubt anyone would hire them to be their GM.  Some would probably even laugh at the thought.

[s0crates]

There is a lot that bothers me about Jay, but I think this single point will suffice: he was hired on the idea he could develop quarterbacks, and all three of our quarterbacks regressed last season.

[megared]

Five out of eight of your points can be related to QB.  Those who favor Robert will never give Jay a break unless he manages to lead the team to the Super Bowl. 

 

Honestly don't care whether RGIII takes another snap for this team.  But don't get hired by selling yourself as someone to develop QBs, then bench him the first opportunity you get.  He was supposed to be able to 'fix' Griffin, and I can't think of one aspect of his game that has improved.  Same for Cousins, and for McCoy.  

 

More inexcusable is the terrible game planning we witnessed.  The 'brilliant' thought process of having Colt-freaking-McCoy throw the ball 47 times against the Colts...the genius of giving #46 the ball 8 times against the Rams.  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to game plan keeping the ball out of Andrew Lucks' hands...it doesn't take a film guru to understand that the Rams defensive line is pretty good.  

 

What can anyone say that Gruden did well last season?  

[TSO]

Gotta disagree with that. Gruden did plenty last season for anyone to reasonably question his competence.

Well, the issue was not about whether or not we can reasonably question his competence. Questioning is one thing. The judging that is done with so much finality here is another.

(Rest isn't directed at you necessarily)

I think my initial point has gotten lost in this discussion. I wasn't attempting to relieve Gruden from all criticism, or to say that no criticism of him is valid. It's frustrating to see some present their ideas like that's what was in question.

My point was that you cannot simultaneously understand the significance of hiring a legit GM like Scot while believing Gruden has no redeeming qualities or is simply a failure of a Head Coach. That is a contradictory stance because there has to be some level of acceptance that Gruden's failures were at least partly due to the lack of one.

So either you think Scot's hire is not that significant and isn't really a difference-maker, OR you're saying that you have the incredible talent of discerning exactly what a coach has done right or wrong without witnessing his day-to-day responsibility handling and/or the environment he's placed in.

Common points usually missing from critiques of Gruden (even when they have mostly legitimate criticisms) that cause me to question the poster's objectivity on the matter:

1) No legit GM whose strengths relate to the title, namely personnel-acquisition.

2) No 1st round pick.

3) Starting QB who took vast majority of reps and developmental time got injured within the first 5 minutes of the second game of the year for an extended period of time. (This one often perplexes me since it's almost never mentioned along with the "QBs regressed under him" criticism)

4) Large amount of failed staff members retained based on presumption the organization was selling that "it was all Shanny". Also, financial considerations were very likely a significant cause of this as well (based on Vinny Ceratto's comments on the matter in 2013 right before Shanny was fired).

5) Offensive personnel largely built for a specific scheme (ZBS) not his own.

Again, the point of this isn't to alleviate Gruden of everything that happened last year. He clearly made a lot of mistakes that lead to the team only winning 4 games. Could he have overcome the poor environment he was clearly placed in better? How much so? I think it's too arrogant a viewpoint to assume anyone of us knows exactly or with any confidence.

[Wildbunny]

Gotta disagree with that.  Gruden did plenty last season for anyone to reasonably question his competence.

 

Calling out QB through media/publicly calling your best offensive player a 'terrible blocker'

Calling out players to the media after losses with zero accountability

QB carousel

Abandoning run game repeatedly

nonexistent situational coaching

sub par game planning 

bottom of the league in penalties

zero improvement from QBs over the course of the season

 

Fuzzier to me is:

 

Decision to hire an inexperienced OC

Decision to not have a QB coach

Delegation of defense to Haslett

 

And this is with the assumption that he had nothing to do with personnel.  

 

You sure have an agenda.

Strange that people complain about him for calling out Jay in the Media and calling him for saying he was please with our effort when we lost and look awful. That's opposite. On another note, what he said regarding RG3 and DeSean was right at the time being. And I don't see anything wrong to tell the truth. I'm pretty sure they both were warned also. That is a non story.

QB Carousel have nothing to do with Gruden, but injuries and inconsistent/bad qb play have. Criticizing him for it, is just plain bull****. I'm wondering what everyone criticizing him for this would have done? Played RG3 with a dislocated ankle? Sticked to Cousins til the end of time?

Penalties are more on players than coaches. I'll check with the mods, but I'll have a subject regarding it for next season.

Abandoning the run, well I'll go back to there with your second post.

McVay was here before he camed and is seen as a genius throughout the league or so.

Haslett, is probably not is choice.

Btw, RG3 did improved after his benching.

 

Honestly don't care whether RGIII takes another snap for this team.  But don't get hired by selling yourself as someone to develop QBs, then bench him the first opportunity you get.  He was supposed to be able to 'fix' Griffin, and I can't think of one aspect of his game that has improved.  Same for Cousins, and for McCoy.  

 

More inexcusable is the terrible game planning we witnessed.  The 'brilliant' thought process of having Colt-freaking-McCoy throw the ball 47 times against the Colts...the genius of giving #46 the ball 8 times against the Rams.  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to game plan keeping the ball out of Andrew Lucks' hands...it doesn't take a film guru to understand that the Rams defensive line is pretty good.  

 

What can anyone say that Gruden did well last season?  

 

Now I'm seriously questioning if you're either being honest with your posts or if you've seen the game.

Luck was torching our inexistent secondary the whole day throwing 5 TD. His receivers were walking freely on the field with our DBs nowhere to be seen. Rams have been nailing us 24-0 where we never existed once again. Now regarding the Rams game you can't complain that we're abandonning the run repeatedly and say we were foolish to run AlMo 8 times against the Rams DLine. Or use the the run more against the Colts when Luck scored 5 TDs in 27 attempts for 370 yards with Moncrief and Fleener scoring 79 and 73 TDs in 3 and 4 receptions. Colts even had a 49 yards TD Run. Running more wouldn't have helped as we were chasing from behind since early in the game.

 

McCoy is a vet back up, with no arm strenght. Cousins had only 2 awful games in fact and was moving the offense pretty nice rest of the time.

[Skinsinparadise]

So either you think Scot's hire is not that significant and isn't really a difference-maker, OR you're saying that you have the incredible talent of discerning exactly what a coach has done right or wrong without witnessing his day-to-day responsibility handling and/or the environment he's placed in.

Common points usually missing from critiques of Gruden (even when they have mostly legitimate criticisms) that cause me to question the poster's objectivity on the matter:

Again, the point of this isn't alleviate Gruden of everything that happened last year. He clearly made a lot of mistakes that lead to the team only winning 4 games. Could he have overcome the poor environment he was clearly placed in better? How much so? I think it's too arrogant a viewpoint to assume anyone of us knows exactly or with any confidence.

 

I think most opinions are just that opinions. No rights or wrongs.  But I think when it comes to just about anyone on this board, agree or disagree with their take, their opinions about a head coach are colored by lots of variables.   This isn't like we are trying to assess what kind of guy EJ Biggers is, that's an issue where we aren't working with much info.  With this one, we've had plenty to observe and encode on multiple fronts. 

 

For Jay, I doubt with most of his critics, its simply well they lost so its Jay's fault, enough said. Or I like RG3, Jay doesn't and that's the whole story.  With Jay or any head coach for that matter we are working with lots of information, lots of variables that we are observing, lots of moving parts, and we've all been around the block where we can factor in context, too.  Now is there more to a story sure.  We aren't privy to what's going behind the scenes so instead we got to trust or not trust the media insiders who talk about it.  And they can be wrong.

 

We've read about Jay in Cincy.  We've likely seen Jay speak a few hundred times or so.  We watched all the games and sometimes more than once.  We've read hundreds of articles about Jay.  We've listened to tons of people who cover the team talk about what they've observed about Jay.  And from that soup of information we form an opinion.  Not to mention all the observations we've made about prior Redskins coaches and other coaches we've witnessed for some of us for over 20 years of watching football -- as a contrast.

 

And this isn't directed at you because I gather you are unsure about Jay and not in the category of Jay defender.  But, I've noticed the core of Jay's defense is more hitting back at those that critique him than actually providing a real defense of him as if we aren't being smart consumers so to speak and are being flip and not thoughtful about our assessment about him.   And personally I don't think its the case.   

 

And I've been waiting for a good passionate defense of Jay's prospects as being a good head coach and maybe I've missed it but haven't seen one yet.  The defense seems to be centered on hitting back his critics or yeah maybe he looks like he stunk but let me go over the excuses for why.

 

For me as I said I am not ruling him out.  I've just seen base-fundamental issues (in my mind) about him that I don't like -- and context has no bearing on that one way or another on those base issues.  And I get you aren't sold on him either and are simply saying give the guy a break and let the movie play out.  I am half way with you.  I am not sure about the give the guy a break part but I do agree he deserve a chance to let the movie play out with better personnel and one years learning experience.

 

I guess will see how it plays out.  I'll let go of your leg on Jay after this one.  I truly hope am on the board in Dec saying am wrong, and how we found the next Gibbs.      Doubt it though 

[megared]

You sure have an agenda.

Strange that people complain about him for calling out Jay in the Media and calling him for saying he was please with our effort when we lost and look awful. That's opposite. On another note, what he said regarding RG3 and DeSean was right at the time being. And I don't see anything wrong to tell the truth. I'm pretty sure they both were warned also. That is a non story.

QB Carousel have nothing to do with Gruden, but injuries and inconsistent/bad qb play have. Criticizing him for it, is just plain bull****. I'm wondering what everyone criticizing him for this would have done? Played RG3 with a dislocated ankle? Sticked to Cousins til the end of time?

Penalties are more on players than coaches. I'll check with the mods, but I'll have a subject regarding it for next season.

Abandoning the run, well I'll go back to there with your second post.

McVay was here before he camed and is seen as a genius throughout the league or so.

Haslett, is probably not is choice.

Btw, RG3 did improved after his benching.

 

His being candid to the media was a zero sum game.  I don't believe it lost us games, but it also probably didn't make him friends in the locker room, nor was it professional.  It just seemed petty.  To invite a media storm over stuff coaches usually say in private to their players...just seemed unnecessary.

 

Yea, Gruden had no say about benching a healthy Cousins after 5 starts.  Had no say about benching a healthy Griffin after 3 starts. Then McCoy after two starts.

 

And just because McVay was seen as a promising coach doesn't mean you give him his shot with a rookie HC.  I don't care about his career more than I care about the Redskins winning.  Between Gruden wearing the hats of HC, quasi-OC and QBs coach, how did anyone expect him to do any or all of it successfully?  My one sliver of optimism is that he'll get better because he'll be able to focus on doing his job...and not what should be 3 peoples' jobs.  

 

What improved about RGIII?  His footwork?  Accuracy?  Understanding of the offense?  He isn't going into this season as the undisputed starter, so any improvements were minimal at best.  He hasn't been developed into a viable starter...he could be off the team in a calendar year.    

 

Now I'm seriously questioning if you're either being honest with your posts or if you've seen the game.

Luck was torching our inexistent secondary the whole day throwing 5 TD. His receivers were walking freely on the field with our DBs nowhere to be seen. Rams have been nailing us 24-0 where we never existed once again. Now regarding the Rams game you can't complain that we're abandonning the run repeatedly and say we were foolish to run AlMo 8 times against the Rams DLine. Or use the the run more against the Colts when Luck scored 5 TDs in 27 attempts for 370 yards with Moncrief and Fleener scoring 79 and 73 TDs in 3 and 4 receptions. Colts even had a 49 yards TD Run. Running more wouldn't have helped as we were chasing from behind since early in the game.

 

McCoy is a vet back up, with no arm strenght. Cousins had only 2 awful games in fact and was moving the offense pretty nice rest of the time.

 

 

The most important thing was he looked to be in over his head.  Game planning for Colt McCoy to throw the ball 47 times is not a path to winning a football game.  We started that game off abandoning the run.  In the first quarter, we ran 3 times and passed 9 times.  1st quarter ended with us down 3-7.  2nd quarter, 3 runs, 14 passes...we ended the half down 10-21.  Luck didn't start bombs away until the 2nd half.  

 

Is that thought process from the Gruden school of logic?  Game planning for the Rams:  "We're facing a good defensive line...so I won't make their jobs difficult by running the ball.  I'll let them pin their ears back and pass rush every down.  Despite the fact that my O-Line is trash at pass blocking and I have a very limited QB under center..."  How much sense does that make?  

 

I suppose you could find some kind of silver lining in the stinker we played against the Bucs also. To me it's a systemic pattern of our team not looking ready, not executing, and therefore not winning.  They aren't losing games despite some stellar coaching.  And I totally disagree about penalties...when you have guys lining up on the wrong side of formations, and looking confused as to where they should be lining up, that means the coaches didn't prepare the players to run those looks.  When guys are constantly making mental mistakes all over the team, you have to look at the people preparing them to play.  

 

We can talk about how Gruden's offense only went for 30+ twice (against terrible defenses)...or how we single-handedly made the Giants' season look a lot better than what it was by providing them with 33% of their wins.  Or how even when our QBs had 'good' statistical games and his offense is 'working', we were still losing.  

[Jumbo]

If people have been reading my posts over the last 18 months, they should have a decent idea of where I'm at and where I'm not on Jay.

 

That said, before I post another blurb on Gruden and our ST issues, I want to mention that when I posted that previous piece, I also posted a few comments in a "mod talk" thread in our staff forum.

 

<old devil smiley>

 

There, I stated that though this thread had been dormant and showing no signs of resuscitation any time soon, any posting of even mild positives on Jay (like that lightweight piece from Clark offered) would draw immediate negative responses, and I called my draft on this with SIP going in the first 3 and he was exactly #3 - (just having fun), but I also called redkins55 to go in the top 5 and he dropped to #7. 

 

 

 

Here's one lowbrow  comment from that staff-thread post:

 

 

 "jeez, you can almost hear certain panties bunch clear across the forum any time anyone says anything the least bit positive about jay"

 

 

 

I do want to also give SIP a shout-out on his great line about "encoding multiple variables"  ...yeah, amigo, i think that's what we all do 

 

And to give kudos, SIP, while you've written a gazillion critical words on jay and repeated them about that many times, I thought you have never made a more reasonable and even succinct summation (worded in your own way, of course) than this: 

 

When it comes to me about Jay, the cliff notes version is he seems to be winging it a bit too much for my taste where he is giving B effort in a league with overachieving A students.

 

 

 and this:  

 

But his reputation was-is that he's a good offensive coordinator but not  rock star status-elite X and O's guy.  

 

 

 

 

And another thing besides a solid level of football acumen that I give you credit for SIP is your conduct.

 

 

As to the value of my appreciation as far as some are concerned, I imagine if you'd add $5 to it, it would be worth $5. 

 

 

 

I'm interested in fresh Gruden stories and particularly intrigued (as well as concerned of course) about how this HC will play out, and for a variety of reasons and from different perspectives---#1 always being a devout Redskins fan, of course. So I figure I'll (and anyone else so moved) just use this thread, rather than start new ones as I find stuff to post.

 

 

Re: below--I've been thinking of our ST situation  and while it's not getting much attention on the board (comparatively, and understandably) it's worthy. Maybe someone will get motivated to start a meaty thread on that topic. This piece also focuses on injuries, and that's another matter I've addressed in a number of posts, but I think gets short shrift as to how much they hurt progress last year. And I know every year everyone deals with injuries, just sayin' (as they say).

 

From Hap in BRBN:

 

(Tarik El-Bashir)

 

 

http://www.csnwashington.com/redskinsblog/gruden-stability-special-teams-key-redskins-15

 

Gruden: 'Stability' on special teams is key for Redskins in '15

 

 

 

In Gruden’s estimation, the units’ progress in Kotwica’s first season was stunted by a rash of injuries to defensive starters, which created a chain reaction throughout the lineup. In addition to the roster shuffling necessitated by those injuries, several players acquired specifically to help on special teams (i.e. Akeem Jordan, Darryl Sharpton and Duke Ihenacho) hardly played due to their own injuries.

 

The result was a depleted special teams lineup that had to be tweaked from week-to-week.

 

“When we had all of our injuries on the defensive side of the ball, a lot of our core special teamers were moved into starting defensive players, and then we had to move practice squad [players] up to be special teamers,” Gruden said. “Coach Kotwica had a new key player every week, whether it was a flyer, whether it was a protector, whatever it was, he was having to deal with a lot of change. Hopefully, we just get some stability back there in the second year.”

 

Linebacker Adam Hayward is one player Gruden expects to play a key role in helping the units take that elusive next step. Selected as a unit team captain during his first season in Washington, Hayward was lost for the season in mid-November after suffering a broken bone near his right knee.

 

Despite missing five games, Hayward finished second in special teams tackles with 11 (behind Trenton Robinson’s 15). Gruden indicated Hayward is fully recovered.

 

“He’s good,” he said. “He’s going to be fine.”

 

Gruden added: “When we lost Hayward, that really hurt. He was a captain back there. He really holds a high standard for all of our players. Having him back as a captain, having some other guys…in their second year with Coach Kotwica, we’ll be good.”

 

Gruden also said he’s comfortable with his specialists, particularly punter Tress Way and long snapper Nick Sundberg. Way led the NFL in average (47.5 yards per punt) as a rookie, while Sundberg is as reliable as snappers come. Kicker Kai Forbath, meantime, was eighth in field goal accuracy (88.9) but inconsistent on kickoffs.

 

“I think moving forward, with our punter and kicker situation, our punter is as good as any punter in the NFL, I believe. We feel good about that,” Gruden said. “And our long snapper is excellent.”

That's a solid foundation. But it's also just a start.

 

“Now we have to make sure we continue to add our depth and [get] the pieces we want,” Gruden said. “If you’re not a starter on the football team, you have to be very active on special teams, and that’s the approach we have to take.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Mania]

I think i'm on record for not being enamored with the hire at the time. I felt, & still feel that the whole interview process was a sham, & that BA signed the guy he knew he wanted all along. That's where most of my frustration for the hire stems from. I'm also not impressed with how his offense performed either in crunch time, bright lights, or vs strong Defenses...though i am willing to concede that he did have Andy Dalton as his QB...of whom i am also not enamored with.

 

ding ding ding....we have a winner.