Is this Norv Turner 2.0?

[Aireskoi]

1 minute ago, Gibbs Hog Heaven said:

 

Gruden: "I don't know how to react. I didn't know it was possible to tie. There was a tie last week I was like 'how heck did they tie?'"

 

I think your being VERY generous to him in how you're interpreting that personally. 

Hail. 

I heard it live, it never crossed mind that he was saying he didn't know a tie was part of reality, but that in reality no damn way could a game end in a tie.

It's the way he talks.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

16 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

.....

No big deal. Joe Gibbs didn't know it was a penalty to call two TO in a row to ice a kicker. .....

 

Quoting you mate because that always narks the living piss out of me when that get's brought up on Coach. Seriously, was ANYONES head in that Buffalo game after the week leading up to it and the pre-game tributes to 21? I know I certainly watched in it a blur and honestly wasn't arsed whether we won or not that game.

I think it's fair to give anyone close to the situation who'd gone through that emotionally draining time having to pull the whole team together a pass for making a mental error in the midst of all that. 

 

4 minutes ago, Aireskoi said:

I heard it live, it never crossed mind that he was saying he didn't know a tie was part of reality, but that in reality no damn way could a game end in a tie.

It's the way he talks.

 

Again, taking that at face value from him I'd then be throwing that contradictory B/S right back at Gruden as he settled for a darn tie. 

It's embarrassing as Hell to me whatever he was trying to say. 

Hail. 

[Wildbunny]

10 minutes ago, Gibbs Hog Heaven said:

 

Quoting you mate because that always narks the living piss out of me when that get's brought up on Coach. Seriously, was ANYONES head in that Buffalo game after the week leading up to it and the pre-game tributes to 21? I know I certainly watched in it a blur and honestly wasn't arsed whether we won or not that game.

I think it's fair to give anyone close to the situation who'd gone through that emotionally draining time having to pull the whole team together a pass for making a mental error in the midst of all that. 

Hail. 

Oh it most probably took its toll on anyone in the team at that time one way or another. And frankly, I forgot it happened in that game. In both case that's no big deal to me, really. I don't care much if he knows that can end in a tie or not. As Compton said, we play to win, nothing else.

[Koolblue13]

Let's not be ridiculous. Gruden obviously knows that you can end a game with a tie.

And hell, I think a tie is a good description of this team.

I'm also starting to think the Zorn comparison isn't that far off. 

[Aireskoi]

Yes, Redskins coach Jay Gruden knows games can end in a tie. Gruden said after the game that "I didn't think it was possible to tie...I know there was a tie last week in Arizona but I was like, 'how the heck did they tie?'" But his point, which seemed clear at the time and which he later stated again before leaving, was that it's very hard and rare to end in a tie. Indeed, it's the first time since 1997 that two games ended in a tie -- including one involving Washington.

John Keim, ESPN Staff Writer

http://www.espn.com/espn/now?nowId=21-0584707458778274482-4

So why did the 100 other media sources screw this up so bad?   Hmmm...

[Skinsinparadise]

I don't know if Norv is a good description.  I'd go more with Gibbs Part 2, though they are also different in key ways, too.  But the similarities to me are in his 2nd stint, Gibbs was still a good leader and got the team to rise with adversity.  Jay seems to have that in him, too.  (Norv IMO did not) but there was a sloppiness about Gibbs in his 2nd stint including with clock management and there seemed to be a lack of killer instinct in games where they couldn't put their opponents away -- the opponents would come back and games would be nail bitters.  Conversely, with Norv we'd seem to lose many nail bitters.  He didn't seem much of a leader.  Reporters who covered the team said Norv would blame everyone else when it came to explaining a loss. 

For the last 2 seasons, we've actually done pretty well in nail bitters-close games.  I was critical of Jay his first season.  The aspect about him that grew on me is by most accounts he is a people guy and connects well with players. Guys that have played the game like Ryan Clark say its the most important quality for a coach to possess.  Shanny for example by most accounts didn't connect well with players.  I have doubts about Jay at times so I am far from dug in on his behalf.  But what I like about him is similar to what I like about Kirk -- he seems open minded about getting better and learning.  And he's outspoken about where he screwed up and what he would do next time, etc.   So with Jay I don't get the vibe that he's a finished product.   

The thing that annoys me the most about him at the moment is him saying every game will be a grind and be close.  My thought hearing it is dude you got a gazillion weapons, you guys put up a ton of yards.  If you figure out how to score in the red zone -- yeah you can pull away from your opponents, every game doesn't have to be a grind.   I don't like that its the mindset from the outset of each game.  To get a little Zen-sports psychology on this, if that's what you expect then that's what you'll get -- but IMO it doesn't have to be that way.

Norv is a brilliant play caller but a guy who isn't a leader of men and according to people who covered him said he almost pathologically blamed others for the teams failures versus putting it on his shoulders and learning from it -- usually that is a recipe for failure as to being head coach.  By most accounts, a head coach is more about leading and managing personalities than X's and O's.

 

[TSO]

40 minutes ago, Aireskoi said:

So why did the 100 other media sources screw this up so bad?   Hmmm...

 

They're smart aholes. It's clickbait for an all too willing fanbase to go for it since it's a convenient excuse to lay into him. 

The only good thing that came out of it was the significant amount of backlash these journalists/reporters got on Twitter for putting it out there knowing he was saying it with his usual humor. 

[Thinking Skins]

I'll just comment that first I was very young with Norv, and was very upset at him with how he treated former Gibbs players and couldn't quite get over the feeling of seeing Gary Clark play for another team in the division, along with hiring a former Cowboys coach, along with firing Richie, all that left me with a sour taste in my mouth regarding Norv.

All that said, I have a completely different feel for Gruden. I think (hope) that he has a similar ability to develop QBs. I've seen Cousins grow under him which is definitely promising. Right now I'd probably rank Cousins above Gus Ferrotte, but below Trent Green in terms of raw ability. Thats not using any grading system - just remembrance so feel free to disagree with me. I can't say much about Nate, but he did look good in preseason. And Colt McCoy has looked his best in his career under Gruden. I won't put that up there with Norv's record of Aikman/Rivers/Bradford*/Bridgewater/Ferrotte/Green, but I do think he has shown potential.

While Norv's offenses were good though, Gruden's seem to be dynamic. To the point where we have the potential to lead the league. Norv was all about a big bruising running game and a QB that didn't kill you. Now its about a passing attack and a running game that can change the pace. Maybe thats simply the change in the league, coaches since then (namely Zorn and Spurrier) have tried to no avail. Gruden is really looking like his offense has the ability to be better than Norv's.

But in other areas, namely defense, I think Gruden is leaps and bounds above Norv. I know its neither of their preferance, but it seems that Gruden goes into Barry's office and says to him that whatever he's doing isn't working and things change. I note that Barry seemed hesitant to play man coverage and then "something" happened, and suddenly we're playing man. He was hesitant to blitz, "something" happened and we're blitzing. This could be a number of factors including Barry just realizing the logic behind these changes, or they could come from higher ups. But for the sake of this thread I'll think that these changes happened after a conversation with his boss and peer in Gruden. This is something that Norv never did and his best years were with Mike Nolan as his DC who was still horrible.

Also, there needs to be the comparison of Casserly to Scot. I've always thought that Casserly wasn't a bad GM and that he had his share of hits in lower rounds, but it seems like the level of talent on this team (compared to the rest of the league) now vs then is just totally different. Back then we couldn't draft a legit #1 WR. We kept finding RBs. Couldn't find a DL for anything, or any LBs. Found Champ late but nobody else (remember Chris Dishman?) Our OL and Green were good but otherwise I can't think of anybody that we could argue about being pro bowl deserving. While now there are legit arguments about the QB, TE, LT, RG, RT, OLBs, and CB. So that may change the scope of the argument.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

It's funny, I think this could be the most similar version of the team since the Norv days, but I don't mean that as a negative. 

We have an offensive-minded coach who has implemented an offense that clearly works. Our defense isn't at our offense's level, which is also similar. We are very close to establishing ourselves as a relatively steady team (remember Norv started by improving the team by 3 games each of his first three years - going from 3-13 to 9-7). I thought of the 8-7-1 season of 1997 too (which coincidentally followed a 9-7 season). 

Honestly, many times since 2000 I've wished we could rewind to being in that spot again. We had a nice team with a young core. We weren't great at all, but we were in most games and won our share. From 1996-2000 Norv went 9-7, 8-7-1, 6-10, 10-6, and 7-6 (before being fired). We haven't had a run of consistency like that since. 

Here are why we should feel confident that we might exceed that with this regime:

1) We have a more solid QB in Cousins (over Gus or Heath)

2) We have a more solid GM in McCloughan (over Casserly)

3) Gruden seems like wishy-washy and more respected by the players and other coaches

We'll see, but if you tell me that last year's team was essentially starting where the 1996 Redskins were, I would take that in a heartbeat with the upgrades I mentioned above and see where it takes us. 

[NewCliche21]

I always think that Norv gets a really bad rap here.  That 1999 team truly could have won the Super Bowl, and then Dan introduced himself to the world by crushing ours.  Thoughts or feelings on him now are irrelevant (I think he's been doing a much better job since Shanahan was fired); he was indisputably terrible when he first bought the team.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

50 minutes ago, NewCliche21 said:

I always think that Norv gets a really bad rap here.  That 1999 team truly could have won the Super Bowl, and then Dan introduced himself to the world by crushing ours.  Thoughts or feelings on him now are irrelevant (I think he's been doing a much better job since Shanahan was fired); he was indisputably terrible when he first bought the team.

 

I'd LOVE him as the OC right here, right now. Swear down this offense would be elite with his calling that side of the game. 

He always has been an outstanding OC and offensive mind. It just tends to fall down when he has the added responsibility of everything as a HC. But I do agree his time here is looked upon far more harshly than it should be given the absolute **** show of a franchise from top to bottom he was working in at the time and why he actually did manage to achieve through that. 

Hail. 

[NoCalMike]

To be honest, the Norv Turner era was the last time the franchise truly did a long-term rebuild instead of going for a quick fix.  By the time 1999 came around the team was damn good and fell into some very bad luck in the playoff loss to Tampa.  Then Snyder bought the team and it immediately ruined what had been built for nearly a decade.  I don't think Norv was HC material, he didn't seem to have it in his DNA to be one. Was a great X's & O's guy.  There was nothing exciting about that style of offense, but it got the job done if you had the personnel.  

Jay Gruden, I'd say his grade so far is an incomplete for now because for me it's obvious this franchise finally has a Football guy in charge of personnel, so I am willing to ride it out with Jay until the defense gets resources put into it and we see a balanced team on the field.  I am not necessarily happy with Gruden, but I don't think he is the problem either necessarily.

[skins4eva]

I don't think this is Norv 2.0.  We've already won too many close games for that to be the case.  People must forget that the hallmark of Norv's teams were great opening drives followed by nothing for three quarters.  I think Gruden has some good intangibles as it relates to people that Norv never had.  The thing that I worry most about with Gruden is whether his upside as a coach will ever be high enough to get us where we want to go.  With that said, there's something Gibbsian about Gruden too.  He kind of has an "aw shucks" demeanor, but I think it masks a fierce competitiveness.  

I'd certainly give him another season.  But for the first game of the season which was a real disappointment, we've been very competitive this year and still haven't played our best football.

[SkinsPassion4Life]

This reminds me of Norv in many ways.....we moved the ball up and down the field with Norv, but would self destruct

The last time we had back to back winning seasons was under Norv...9-7 and then 8-7-1....last year we went 9-7..this year 8-7-1 seems about right.

If our goal is to go deep in the playoffs, I don't think this is the coaching staff to get it done.

[Rocky21]

Not taking the sure 3 points and going for it on 4th down in the first half (and ultimately not converting) seems awfully Norv-like. 

Hey I know you'd like 7 here.  Who wouldn't?  But take the ****ing points!  Did it figure into the end result?  Yeah.  It did.   

What a bone headed decision. 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

5 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

To be honest, the Norv Turner era was the last time the franchise truly did a long-term rebuild instead of going for a quick fix.  By the time 1999 came around the team was damn good and fell into some very bad luck in the playoff loss to Tampa.  Then Snyder bought the team and it immediately ruined what had been built for nearly a decade.  I don't think Norv was HC material, he didn't seem to have it in his DNA to be one. Was a great X's & O's guy.  There was nothing exciting about that style of offense, but it got the job done if you had the personnel.  

Jay Gruden, I'd say his grade so far is an incomplete for now because for me it's obvious this franchise finally has a Football guy in charge of personnel, so I am willing to ride it out with Jay until the defense gets resources put into it and we see a balanced team on the field.  I am not necessarily happy with Gruden, but I don't think he is the problem either necessarily.

I've been saying this for years - maybe it's Stockholm Syndrome, but I'm almost to the point where I yearn for those innocent days of the mid-1990s when you could see a plan in place and enjoy watching progression most years. 

From 1994 through 1996 we went 3-13, 6-10, and 9-7. We basically matched that in 1997 at 8-7-1 before sliding back to 6-10 (starting 0-7) in 1998. The second half of 1998 through the first half of 2000 was our peak under Norv. We were a combined 22-11 in that stretch, won a division, won a home playoff game, and were on track for another post-season run before injuries and missed FGs derailed the Fortune .500 team. 

I would love to see us get to that level with Gruden and McCloughan, and do believe we can. 

1 minute ago, Rocky21 said:

Not taking the sure 3 points and going for it on 4th down in the first half (and ultimately not converting) seems awfully Norv-like. 

Hey I know you'd like 7 here.  Who wouldn't?  But take the ****ing points!  Did it figure into the end result?  Yeah.  It did.   

What a bone headed decision. 

See, this is what's tough to digest with fans. On one hand, I'm seeing people blame Gruden for playing for the FG late in OT (which personally I find ridiculous). Then I see people complaining that he should have played it more conservative earlier in the game and gotten 3 instead of going for 7 on 4th-and-short (even though the play would have netted the first if RK didn't slip). 

We can't have it both ways - it's easy to second-guess everything that doesn't work, but if our kicker nails a PAT-distance chip-shot FG, we are 5-3 and have a pretty big comeback win in our pocket. 

Right now, we aren't efficient - we gain yards but don't turn that into points like we should. I still believe that will come. I think we are developing into a good team. 

[Aireskoi]

 

1 hour ago, Thinking Skins said:

I'll just comment that first I was very young with Norv, and was very upset at him with how he treated former Gibbs players and couldn't quite get over the feeling of seeing Gary Clark play for another team in the division, along with hiring a former Cowboys coach, along with firing Richie, all that left me with a sour taste in my mouth regarding Norv.

...

Darrell Green spoke about the situation when Norv took over.

“When Norv Turner came here from Dallas, I was the lone wolf of the old guys, and he brought about five has-been Cowboys. I didn’t hear any of y’all in the media, true Redskins fans, say anything. I didn’t hear a thing.

“The Cowboys. We brought their coach and a bunch of their players and we were jacked up. But nobody said a word. And I’m sitting there on the team, about 38 years old or whatever, just staying quiet, working hard.”

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2016/05/20/darrell-green-rips-deion-sander-former-redskins-coaches/

[kleese]

As always, I have a VERY different take on the end of the Norv era. He 100% and without question should have been fired after 1998. We started that season 0-7 and finished 6-10. This coming on the heels of two seasons in 96 and 97 where we choked down the stretch. After five seasons, that should have been it for Norv. 

But the Cooke's loved him and that off season the team was being sold. By the time Snyder took over it was really too late to make a coaching change. Then 1999 comes along and we make what I maintain was a bad trade for Brad Johnson when we could have just keep and equal or superior player in Trent Green. 

The 1999 was OK, nothing special. It was an AWFUL year in the NFC. Worse than 2015. TWO 8-8 teams made the playoffs in the NFC that year. We lost every game in 99 against good teams or games where we could have secured a bye or home field. Our defense was bad. Our offense was on fire for about 6 games and then cooled. 

Brad Johnson and the offense crapped the bed in Tampa. Our terrible defense actually had a good day until the end of course. 

In the off season the moves we made prior to 2000 generally worked. Jeff George was better than BJ. Norv should have pulled that trigger earlier. Our defense I believe went from 28th in 99 to 4th in 2000. We blew 2000 because Norv was lost and BJ was terrible. The moves Snyder made that year worked-- after that is when he started going bonkers for several years with the changes and lack of continuity etc. 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

1 minute ago, Aireskoi said:

 

Darrell Green spoke about the situation when Norv took over.

“When Norv Turner came here from Dallas, I was the lone wolf of the old guys, and he brought about five has-been Cowboys. I didn’t hear any of y’all in the media, true Redskins fans, say anything. I didn’t hear a thing.

“The Cowboys. We brought their coach and a bunch of their players and we were jacked up. But nobody said a word. And I’m sitting there on the team, about 38 years old or whatever, just staying quiet, working hard.”

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2016/05/20/darrell-green-rips-deion-sander-former-redskins-coaches/

Eh - that happens whenever you hire a coach from another team. To me, that isn't on Norv for bringing players and coaches that he trusts. If the Redskin/Cowboy thing was an issue, then the owner shouldn't have hired this particular coach. 

1 minute ago, kleese said:

As always, I have a VERY different take on the end of the Norv era...

It is what it is - but the results were the results. It's not a stretch to say that a couple breaks could have had us in a championship game. We basically averaged two 11-5 seasons from the second half of 1998 through the first half of 2000. That was with a couple different QBs and mostly due to Turner's good offense. 

I don't think we were a serious dynasty contender and I would hope our current ceiling is a little higher with a stronger personality at coach, a better player at QB, and a more proven GM. But if on Halloween of 2018 I'm looking back at the second half of this season, next year, and the first half of 2018 and we've won twice as many games as we've lost, I think I'll figure out a way to enjoy that. 

[NoCalMike]

For me 2016 is shaping up to be a "stay the course" kind of season.  The results aren't going to be what people want as far as wins go, but you can see that in the big picture the team is still moving in the right direction.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Just now, NoCalMike said:

For me 2016 is shaping up to be a "stay the course" kind of season.  The results aren't going to be what people want as far as wins go, but you can see that in the big picture the team is still moving in the right direction.

Well put, and I think a lot of us predicted that we might feel like a better team but win fewer games. 

[Darth Tater]

1 hour ago, NoCalMike said:

To be honest, the Norv Turner era was the last time the franchise truly did a long-term rebuild instead of going for a quick fix.  By the time 1999 came around the team was damn good and fell into some very bad luck in the playoff loss to Tampa.  Then Snyder bought the team and it immediately ruined what had been built for nearly a decade.  I don't think Norv was HC material, he didn't seem to have it in his DNA to be one. Was a great X's & O's guy.  There was nothing exciting about that style of offense, but it got the job done if you had the personnel.  

Jay Gruden, I'd say his grade so far is an incomplete for now because for me it's obvious this franchise finally has a Football guy in charge of personnel, so I am willing to ride it out with Jay until the defense gets resources put into it and we see a balanced team on the field.  I am not necessarily happy with Gruden, but I don't think he is the problem either necessarily.

Snyder was the owner when we went to the playoffs in 1999.  1999 team did have the advantage of a full on loser schedule (that was still a thing then) and a weak NFC east.  It was also the first time a Norv team did not get critically injured up for multiple games.  We had a good kicking game and it was the only season that Westbrook even came close to being worthy of his draft status.  The 1999 Detroit Lions were nowhere near as good as the 2015 Green Bay Packers and were coming of a 4 game losing streak at the end of the regular season, they had actually backed into the playoffs. With hindsight, the 1999 team was a mediocre team that got a few lucky breaks.

[Panninho]

2 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

They're smart aholes. It's clickbait for an all too willing fanbase to go for it since it's a convenient excuse to lay into him. 

The only good thing that came out of it was the significant amount of backlash these journalists/reporters got on Twitter for putting it out there knowing he was saying it with his usual humor. 

I also saw an interview with Mike Pereira where they discussed Newton's and Norman's rant about the referees. But they cut the video after Norman said that the referee sucked. They then only talked about how every of his illegal hands to the face was the right call. And that they have no idea what he is upset about.

That Norman said he spoke on behalf of the locker room and that they were most pissed about the missed facemask call against crowder while the same referee flagged a facemask against the Redskins that wasn't even shown on replay was not even mentioned. Everyone who did not watch the full interview now thinks that Norman is just whining about him being flagged.

I mean it's Fox, so you do not really expect something. But this is just bad journalism. Just for the sake of creating stories...

[Heisenberg]

4 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

Let's not be ridiculous. Gruden obviously knows that you can end a game with a tie.

And hell, I think a tie is a good description of this team.

I'm also starting to think the Zorn comparison isn't that far off. 

Sorry, I find that comparison to be absolutely absurd. Zorn peaked early before the league figured him out and he showed he had no idea wtf he was doing. He had lost the team by the end of year 1. Meanwhile this team is trending up and the majority of players clearly have a lot of respect for Jay.

[Cliffmark1]

I think you keep Kirk and tell the coaching staff bye. Allow gmsm to pick a coach and we are a legit contender.