Jay Gruden: Buy or Sell

[skinfan2k]

Just now, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Jay and Kirk are tied at the hip.  We are riding the Jay and Kirk train wherever it takes us. 

 

I appreciate Jay's honesty when admitting the team is outcoached, but it's a bit troublesome that he's said it so often.  At times, I think his happy go-lucky players coach mentality is a detriment to a roster that really isn't that good.  I also realize the guy is learning on the job and has to be himself in order to have the respect of the team.  I'm not sure we have any choice but to keep both Jay and Kirk around and hope for the best.  I simply don't have the patience to wait for another coach and QB.

 

Agree.  Outcoaching is simply him taking the blame for the talent on this roster.  This franchise will take at least 4-5 years to actually build a legit roster. People dont get it and he still has them competing for a playoff spot 2 out of the 3 years. 

[Veretax]

I thought Jay was going to cry in his postgame presser.  I really wonder how much of this has been coaching and how much is players with issues, and not being pros.

 

But after Monday Night, I wonder if we'd be doing him a favor in letting him go, to a team that can actually build a complete team around him.

 

 

(I don't want to get rid of Jay jsut yet, but there are some mental mistakes he's made over the year that make me consider that he's not a long term answer.

)

[Rex Tomb]

18 minutes ago, skinfan2k said:

 

Agree.  Outcoaching is simply him taking the blame for the talent on this roster.  This franchise will take at least 4-5 years to actually build a legit roster. People dont get it and he still has them competing for a playoff spot 2 out of the 3 years. 

 

It's a pretty simple formula - if we fix the defense (get more talent - players and DC), we win at least 3 of the games we lost this year due to the crappy defensive game planning.  Shore up the middle of the defense (line, LBs and safety) and get someone who is a fiery up and comer to coordinate them, and I think we've got a legitimate contender next year.  We have to get more push up front from the inside linemen against a QB like Dak (who is the class of the division at this point - as much as I hate to admit it) to disrupt their offense.  

[skinfan2k]

14 minutes ago, Veretax said:

 

But after Monday Night, I wonder if we'd be doing him a favor in letting him go, to a team that can actually build a complete team around him.

 

 

 

We are building a team. You guys don't realize this team is worse than a expansion team. After years and years of avoiding the draft, our roster was terrible.  McC focused on the offense in years 1-2 because he wanted to stabilize the QB position and its the quickest way to win games fast.  A dominant defense takes much longer to build.

[Voice_of_Reason]

25 minutes ago, skinfan2k said:

 

Agree.  Outcoaching is simply him taking the blame for the talent on this roster.  This franchise will take at least 4-5 years to actually build a legit roster. People dont get it and he still has them competing for a playoff spot 2 out of the 3 years. 

Yes and no. Let's take our offense vs. Panther's defense on MNF.  We were out-coached, but we ABSOLUTELY have the talent to compete better than we did.  Did all of the players play up to standard? No.  But you have a top 10-15 QB at worst, a pro-bowl LT, good RG/RT, 3 legitimate WRs in DJax, Crowder and Garcon, and at least a good receiving TE (most of the time) in VDavis.  (Reed shouldn't have played.  We'll get into that in a minute).  Not to mention a tough RB in Fat Rob, and a pretty good change of pace guy in CT.  That's enough talent to win.  And the proof is that they've been moving the ball up and down the field on just about everybody all year. 

 

The Panther's defensive coaching staff bamboozled McVay/Gruden.  Again.  They did it last year.  They did it again this year.  The Panther's defense is also very good.  It's strength vs. strength.  They dropped their safety 30-40 yards back, and we had virtually no answer.  We were completely out-coached, out-schemed, out-adjusted. 

 

Defensively, we have no players, but we also have the village idiot as the DC.  The players that we do have aren't even in the right place.  I can live with players losing 1-1 battles because they are not big/fast/strong enough.  Fine.  But the number of times our guys are just completely lost, that's coaching.  Figure out what our guys can do, and get them to do it.  If that means playing a base 4-3 tampa 2 or cover 3 on every damn play, because that's all we can do, fine, so be it. 

 

But we're doing too much, the players don't know what they're doing, can't adjust, and we're just leaving GAPING holes in the secondary, and we can't stop the run. 

 

If we have so many inexperienced players, then you've got to simplify and cut down on big mistakes.  And decide to take SOMETHING away, and make the other team beat you doing the other thing.

 

For example, if I was the DC, this week, I'd say, "I'm not going to let the Bears running game beat me.  Period.  If their crap-ass backup QB can beat us, fine.  But I'm not going to let them run the ball for 5 yards a pop 40 times in the game."

 

So I would devise 5-6 plays and drill them all week to stop the run, and aggressively going after the QB with those guys in the event that it's a pass.  Put 8-9 guys up in the box, and bring pressure all the time. If Barkley and the receivers beat you, so be it.  That's because we have crap safeties and regressing DBs. But at least our players will know their responsibilities and what to do. 

[50yrSKINSfan]

Just now, Wildbunny said:

I didn't make a statement, I asked a question. Perhaps you didn't notice the question mark.

 

Now Brian Billick have a winning record mostly due to his defense, and even with that, it's up and down if you check his career.

Also, the great Belichick is something like 41-55 without Tom brady as a QB, and 195-60 with him. Think about that.

Another one that I always like to bring up in such speach, is the Tom Landry case, who was 9-28-3 in his first three season (and didn't had a winning season until his 7th year as a coach.

 

And Norv Turner was 18-30 in his first full 3 seasons...

 

 

Bunny, first I answered your question and then I asked "would you rather have Lombardi or Jay?" You never answered. The statement, or at least it looks like a statement, that I am referring to is the " I mean.....Brian Billick have ring" sentence. I assume you were trying to compare Jay to Billiak without checking the facts of which you have no case if you check the stats I supplied. Then you go off on some strange rant about Belichick not being as good without Brady but this year he was 3 and 1 without Brady. This was another weak point as I think you will find there are not many, if any, head coaches in NFL history that will have a better record with their back up QB, for any length of time.  And last but not least you bring up Landry and you forget to mention he took over a expansion team with his first 7 years. Do even know what a expansion team is? Tom Landry is one of the greatest coaches of all time and I would not put Jay Gruden in the same galaxy as Landry and even with the expansion team stats, Landry has a .605 winning % to Jay's .466%, so again, you have no case. Did you forget to mention the fact that Landry was awarded a new contract during his first stint even with the loosing record as the Cowboys knew they had a great coach. 

[50yrSKINSfan]

Just now, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

That's true, but no cap favored about 10 teams...just the way there are Haves and Have Nots in MLB now. 

 

Overall, I am still very excited about having Gruden here. I would love for McCloughan, Gruden, and Cousins to stick together for another 5 years. I honestly believe that, if that happens, we will have gone through a pretty exciting 5-year stretch here. 

The non cap in the old days did not favor anyone. The NFL had the nationwide T.V. contract in which every team shared the same amount of money. It was up to the owners on how to spend it. Some spent it on their teams and others kept it. MLB did not have a contract like that so a team like the Yanks had more money to spend on players than say a smaller market team. Next, there are no HAVES in MLB today. There is a thing called the luxury tax. That means if the Yanks want to spend 400mil on players this year, they have to pay the poorer teams a fee for every penny they spend over I think 200 mil.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

28 minutes ago, 50yrSKINSfan said:

The non cap in the old days did not favor anyone. The NFL had the nationwide T.V. contract in which every team shared the same amount of money. It was up to the owners on how to spend it. Some spent it on their teams and others kept it. MLB did not have a contract like that so a team like the Yanks had more money to spend on players than say a smaller market team. Next, there are no HAVES in MLB today. There is a thing called the luxury tax. That means if the Yanks want to spend 400mil on players this year, they have to pay the poorer teams a fee for every penny they spend over I think 200 mil.

 

But some owners were just wealthier than others. If JKC didn't mind spending $50M to have a team of starting-caliber backups, he had the resources to do so. Not every team's owner did. 

[50yrSKINSfan]

Just now, KingGibbs said:

I've been on the Gruden bandwagon, but watching the body language of the players and the lack of tenacity on Monday was really disappointing. They seemed ill-prepared and were clearly out-coached.

 

It's really perplexing as to why Gruden continues to defer the coin toss and guaranteed to be playing from behind from kickoff.

 

He also needs to get rid of Barry. Period. Details not needed. 

I am not crazy about Gruden because without checking, it seems to me that he never beats a real good team when he has to. Just my gut feeling. I thought the players were playing hard for him but Mon night they had nothing and we needed that game bad. Now good teams have a way of making you look bad but can anyone tell me if we beat any real good teams when we had to, in the last 3 years besides a beat up Packer team? Next point, coin toss. I was thinking the same thing. Why would you put your worse team on the field first? GHA would always put his D on first if he could but that was because he had a better D than his offense. Third point. No need to comment. 

[SWFLSkins]

1 hour ago, KingGibbs said:

I've been on the Gruden bandwagon, but watching the body language of the players and the lack of tenacity on Monday was really disappointing. They seemed ill-prepared and were clearly out-coached.

 

It's really perplexing as to why Gruden continues to defer the coin toss and guaranteed to be playing from behind from kickoff.

 

He also needs to get rid of Barry. Period. Details not needed. 

Ashburning ‏@johnnylocal  3s3 seconds ago

It's really perplexing as to why Gruden continues to defer the coin toss and guaranteed to be playing from behind from kickoff ,but #HTTR

1 hour ago, Veretax said:

I thought Jay was going to cry in his postgame presser.  I really wonder how much of this has been coaching and how much is players with issues, and not being pros.

 

 

 

 

You know who makes you a professional? The boss, he either does or does not hold you to his standards that he either does or doesn't have. 

[tshile]

i still can't figure out how i feel about jay.

 

i think he'd be fun as **** to go drinking with.

 

on that note, if i were to get into a bar fight, i be jay having your back would be a good thing. he just looks like that guy that would knock someone out quickly in that situation.

 

he seems like a great players-coach. probably the perfect guy to be in the lockeroom monday-saturday.

 

i cannot figure out how much of the offense scheme and playcalling is his and how much of it is mcvay's. gruden's rep is as a good O cordinator, so that's what I have to go on.

 

there are entirely too many bad/shaky decisions made on sunday. i try very hard to be objective about it and try hard to make sure i'm not determining whether a decision is good/bad based solely on whether it worked out or not.

 

[Wildbunny]

4 hours ago, 50yrSKINSfan said:

Bunny, first I answered your question and then I asked "would you rather have Lombardi or Jay?" You never answered. The statement, or at least it looks like a statement, that I am referring to is the " I mean.....Brian Billick have ring" sentence. I assume you were trying to compare Jay to Billiak without checking the facts of which you have no case if you check the stats I supplied. Then you go off on some strange rant about Belichick not being as good without Brady but this year he was 3 and 1 without Brady. This was another weak point as I think you will find there are not many, if any, head coaches in NFL history that will have a better record with their back up QB, for any length of time.  And last but not least you bring up Landry and you forget to mention he took over a expansion team with his first 7 years. Do even know what a expansion team is? Tom Landry is one of the greatest coaches of all time and I would not put Jay Gruden in the same galaxy as Landry and even with the expansion team stats, Landry has a .605 winning % to Jay's .466%, so again, you have no case. Did you forget to mention the fact that Landry was awarded a new contract during his first stint even with the loosing record as the Cowboys knew they had a great coach. 

Ok, you just don't seem to get it, or may be I explained myself poorly, who knows...

 

Your question was stupid first, as I tend to take what I have not what  I could have. But if you want an answer, I'm gonna go with Jay since Lombardi has passed away so long ago now...

Now, your narrative is about canning Jay because he's no Vince Lombardi and have never won anything and never will besides a few playoffs games like Norv Turner. That's where I threw the Brian Billick name, where I could have also send names like Barry Switzer, or have an argument with Mike Shanahan, and who knows, maybe Jason Garrett in a few months. I was not comparing him to Jay Gruden, but to Lombardi in terms that, you don't have to be Lombardi to win a Superbowl. Some average coaches have won Some superbowl due to HoF players or stuff like that, more than them being real smart. Hence my answer to your post regarding Jay.

 

Now, it's not a strange rant regarding Belichick. Your point is that a 3 year HC in the NFL have to be compared to longtime HC or some that are near the end of their career.

That's just not fair. You just cannot do this, because well, Bill Belichick had a crappy record in his first stint in Cleveland, Pete Carroll also wasn't great at first, Don Coryell was bad, Chuck Noll, Bill Parcells, Marv Levy, Mike Ditka, Jimmy Johnson, all those guys took a year or two, if not more before getting it. Bill Parcells first three years were 3-12-1, 9-7, 10-6. If we win the last two games, Jay will have the exact same record as Parcells after 3 years. See the problem in your thinking?

 

Now, to get back on Landry, it gets back to your narrative as Jay should get canned because he just can't coach. What's the point of the expansion team argument here? That means those players sucked badly at that time? OK, so it's fine for Landry to have time because his players sucks, but it's Jay's fault if his do... Once again, it's not fair. And you can make the argument of the expansion, for the first 3 years, but after that? it's not elevant anymore...

 

At worst, your argument about Landry and the expansion team should tell you that it's more about players than coaching, which goes against your own narrative.

 

You just can't take arguments as they suits your narrative and wash them away if they don't. You have to take them into account in both cases.

[TouchdownSkin]

17 hours ago, 43LarryBrown said:

I'm not sure...but I am starting to get sick of the same kinda confused look on his face and his passive sideline demeanor...

 

I couldn't agree more.  I'd like to see him show more fire.  He reminds me of Charlie Brown.

 

I''m fine if he stays....just get rid of Barry.

[Mr_ Skinshead]

8 hours ago, tshile said:

i still can't figure out how i feel about jay.

 

i think he'd be fun as **** to go drinking with.

 

on that note, if i were to get into a bar fight, i be jay having your back would be a good thing. he just looks like that guy that would knock someone out quickly in that situation.

 

he seems like a great players-coach. probably the perfect guy to be in the lockeroom monday-saturday.

 

i cannot figure out how much of the offense scheme and playcalling is his and how much of it is mcvay's. gruden's rep is as a good O cordinator, so that's what I have to go on.

 

there are entirely too many bad/shaky decisions made on sunday. i try very hard to be objective about it and try hard to make sure i'm not determining whether a decision is good/bad based solely on whether it worked out or not.

 

In a bar fight I'll take Chucky but Jay is running for the door crying for his mama. The guy is soft and cognitively outgunned on the football field. 

 

 

 

[Leonard Washington]

This is the closest we've had to building something since we had Norv and Brad Johnson.  Jay is learning on the job and so is Kirk. I think we have a 4-6 year window of respectable football.

[Wildbunny]

19 hours ago, Leonard Washington said:

This is the closest we've had to building something since we had Norv and Brad Johnson.  Jay is learning on the job and so is Kirk. I think we have a 4-6 year window of respectable football.

4-6 years of respectable football is a good start to me.

I'm fine with that right now.

 

Baby steps.

[veteranskinsfan]

If the Bears fire Head Coach Fox and Defensive Coordinator Vic Fangio I would bring in Fangio as the defensive coordinator whom we were considering hiring before they ended up getting the current defensive coordinator, Joe Barry.  If the Skins still want to keep Barry then put him as a linebackers coach so he can learn from Fangio for a couple of years or fire Barry if he only wants to be defensive coordinator.  Then we have our General Manager in the offseason get better defensive players and spend most of our money on improving the defense.  Allow Gruden and current offensive coordinator to stay next year and see what kind of overall record we have and if we make the playoffs then retain them for the next few years.

[Warhead36]

2 minutes ago, veteranskinsfan said:

If the Bears fire Head Coach Fox and Defensive Coordinator Vic Fangio I would bring in Fangio as the defensive coordinator whom we were considering hiring before they ended up getting the current defensive coordinator, Joe Barry.  If the Skins still want to keep Barry then put him as a linebackers coach so he can learn from Fangio for a couple of years or fire Barry if he only wants to be defensive coordinator.  Then we have our General Manager in the offseason get better defensive players and spend most of our money on improving the defense.  Allow Gruden and current offensive coordinator to stay next year and see what kind of overall record we have and if we make the playoffs then retain them for the next few years.

What's the obsession with Fangio? The Bears D is just as bad as ours if not worse. And you can say "Fangio doesn't have players", well neither does Barry.

 

Harbaugh was the reason those 49ers Ds were great.

[TheCoach22]

Gruden coaches in a different NFL than most of the historic examples noted.... this is a league of parody, and most games are decided by a score and the last couple of possessions. Most teams are flawed to a degree, and fair or not coaches don't usually get a second contract without winning in their first.

 

This season mind screws me. On the one hand, our defense is so poor, we're lucky to be in the mix for the playoffs heading into week 17. On the other hand, we absolutely blew games against Dallas, Detroit and Cincy, or we'd be playing for the top seed. We are respectable, but we still crapped the bed on two MNF contests and looked like amateurs in the process.

 

Jay has done nothing over three years to make me think he is the guy to bring home a Lombardi someday... I also can't say he has done anything to warrant anything less then the full five years of his contract to be sure. He must fire Barry at the end of the year, as no winning franchise can have that loser in the DC role.

[skinzplay]

7 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

What's the obsession with Fangio? The Bears D is just as bad as ours if not worse. And you can say "Fangio doesn't have players", well neither does Barry.

 

Harbaugh was the reason those 49ers Ds were great.

 

That's how I see it, too. Fangio without Capers or Harbaugh is like Wannstedt or Norv without Jimmy. I'll pass.

 

One thing, though -- I think Olivadotti is gone after this season, and Manusky might get another shot somewhere as a DC, so there should be a LB coach opening should Jay decide to keep Barry, and if Barry decides to accept the demotion. He might as well. Nobody else in the league is going to hire him as a DC.

[justice98]

If they're a 8-9 win team again next year, some stronger conversations are going to need to be had about the head coach.  While 3 straight non-losing seasons is a dramatic improvement for this franchise, 8-9 wins would also speak to a ceiling Gruden would have.  Of course, they said the same thing about Jason Garrett.

 

Now, we don't know what the offseason holds in terms of improvements and changes on and off the field, but I doubt Vegas is gonna have us at anything above 10 wins, max.  

 

But, as the saying goes, that's why they play the games.  We'll see.

[skinfan2k]

3 minutes ago, justice98 said:

If they're a 8-9 win team again next year, some stronger conversations are going to need to be had about the head coach.  While 3 straight non-losing seasons is a dramatic improvement for this franchise, 8-9 wins would also speak to a ceiling Gruden would have.  

 

Now, we don't know what the offseason holds in terms of improvements and changes on and off the field, but I doubt Vegas is gonna have us at anything above 10 wins, max.  

 

But, as the saying goes, that's why they play the games.  We'll see.

 

It's going to be hard to win more than 11 when all 4 teams in the NFC east are back and legit.  

[Commander -JB-]

2 hours ago, justice98 said:

If they're a 8-9 win team again next year, some stronger conversations are going to need to be had about the head coach.  While 3 straight non-losing seasons is a dramatic improvement for this franchise, 8-9 wins would also speak to a ceiling Gruden would have.  Of course, they said the same thing about Jason Garrett.

 

Now, we don't know what the offseason holds in terms of improvements and changes on and off the field, but I doubt Vegas is gonna have us at anything above 10 wins, max.  

 

But, as the saying goes, that's why they play the games.  We'll see.

Can't fire Jay Gruden.  The Redskins need stability.  You can't justify firing Gruden after the hand he was dealt 3 years ago.  If anything, the team has performed above expectations.  Going from 4-12 year one to 9-7 in year two was quite impressive.  Now, another winning season and fighting for a playoff spot.  To talk about firing the man, at this point, is ridiculous.

[konga2145]

On 12/4/2016 at 9:49 PM, hail2skins said:

This is his third season here, and hopefully we actually make the playoffs this year.  I'm not that concerned about "early exits" yet.

 

For all the Gibbs worship (and he is a great coach), but that was during the era of no salary cap.  I didn't see Joe make any deep runs from 2004-2007.

same fans praise gibbs wanted his head when he returned  most skins fans ive noticed have the what have u done for me lately attitude. 3 years ago we would been content just be playoff team then everyone wants coaches head because they dont go superbowl

[konga2145]

On 12/21/2016 at 10:10 AM, 50yrSKINSfan said:

I am not crazy about Gruden because without checking, it seems to me that he never beats a real good team when he has to. Just my gut feeling. I thought the players were playing hard for him but Mon night they had nothing and we needed that game bad. Now good teams have a way of making you look bad but can anyone tell me if we beat any real good teams when we had to, in the last 3 years besides a beat up Packer team? Next point, coin toss. I was thinking the same thing. Why would you put your worse team on the field first? GHA would always put his D on first if he could but that was because he had a better D than his offense. Third point. No need to comment. 

well nobody else seems be able beat this beat up packer team have they vut we did by 20 pointgs