UKskins

OC - Scott Turner incoming

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:


 

The dude has done nothing. Zero. Called 11 games in his life: 32nd ranked passing offense. Second worst record in the NFL. A bust as a QB when he played. Lasted 1 year. Nothing special about him.  You only care about him because Haskins likes the way he coddles him and doesn’t challenge him.  Ron is going to hire a coach not an enabler...


As opposed to someone who is available for hire because they were fired? 
 

Granted, sometimes you get a good guy, but even someone with experience has been a failure on some level. 
 

Im not for or against KOC, to be honest. But a spade is a spade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, KDawg said:


As opposed to someone who is available for hire because they were fired? 
 

Granted, sometimes you get a good guy, but even someone with experience has been a failure on some level. 
 

Im not for or against KOC, to be honest. But a spade is a spade.


KOC has only been a failure.  He has 1 year of experience. The other coaches have a resume and body of work that spans years. Some good some bad. There is no evidence whatsoever KOC can have a good year, because he never has. You can try to extrapolate play calling in 2 games against losing teams but that’s pretty flimsy. If you are an offensive coach like Andy Reid, you might consider bringing him as someone to mentor. No defensive head coach would hand him the reigns with his limited experience. None.

 

Ron is straightforward. He specifically said “don’t draw me a map if you haven’t been there before.” He values experience. KOC doesn’t have it. Doesn’t make him a bad person or stupid or anything else. He simply is too inexperienced for Rivera’s taste. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:

 Ron is going to hire a coach not an enabler...

 

Rivera may hire KOC or may choose someone else, who knows.  But if KOC is so obviously unqualified, think about what that implies. 

 

Rivera interviewed him.  If Rivera already knows KOC is not the guy and the only reason he would hire him is due to Snyder's meddling (as you previously suggested in other posts), that means Rivera is a weak willed yes man who let Snyder pick his OC right after a press conference about how it's a coach centered approach.  

 

If Rivera already decided to part with KOC before the interview, then the whole interview is a sham.  And Rivera is doing KOC disservice by keeping him in limbo without any intention of seriously considering him while other jobs continue to get filled.  Neither of those scenario puts Rivera in a very flattering light.

 

Of course there's always the third option.  KOC is well regarded by many for a good reason and Rivera is giving him a serious consideration due to what Rivera sees in KOC.  But that wouldn't fit the narrative now would it?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:

Haskins likes the way he coddles him and doesn’t challenge him. 

This is the part you are making up and have zero information about. NONE. Haskins verbally endorsed him. That has nothing to do with your constantly parroted whining. 

 

This is also the only part anyone is really disagreeing with. I like KoC. Do I think he's proven anything more than the potential for hopefulness? No.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, bearrock said:

 

Rivera may hire KOC or may choose someone else, who knows.  But if KOC is so obviously unqualified, think about what that implies. 

 

Rivera interviewed him.  If Rivera already knows KOC is not the guy and the only reason he would hire him is due to Snyder's meddling (as you previously suggested in other posts), that means Rivera is a weak willed yes man who let Snyder pick his OC right after a press conference about how it's a coach centered approach.  

 

If Rivera already decided to part with KOC before the interview, then the whole interview is a sham.  And Rivera is doing KOC disservice by keeping him in limbo without any intention of seriously considering him while other jobs continue to get filled.  Neither of those scenario puts Rivera in a very flattering light.

 

Of course there's always the third option.  KOC is well regarded by many for a good reason and Rivera is giving him a serious consideration due to what Rivera sees in KOC.  But that wouldn't fit the narrative now would it?


 

Rivera interviewed him as a courtesy to Dan. None of KOC’s people are on staff. If KOC were to be hired It’s because Dan forced it but he’s being setup to be dismissed.  I doubt he’s the hire. 

3 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

This is the part you are making up and have zero information about. NONE. Haskins verbally endorsed him. That has nothing to do with your constantly parroted whining. 

 

This is also the only part anyone is really disagreeing with. I like KoC. Do I think he's proven anything more than the potential for hopefulness? No.


Haskins has lobbied to keep him. KOC said Haskins did not have a sense of urgency or prepare properly when interviewed early in the year. Guess what? It was KOC’s job to get him to prepare and handle himself like a pro. Instead he coddled him and cried like a girl after they beat a losing team. Act like you have been there before. Cry after the super bowl. Not beating a scrub team.

 

 

Edited by SoCalSkins
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:


 

Rivera interviewed him as a courtesy to Dan. None of KOC’s people are on staff. If KOC were to be hired It’s because Dan forced it but he’s being setup to be dismissed.  I doubt he’s the hire. 


Haskins has lobbied to keep him. KOC said Haskins did not have a sense of urgency or prepare properly when interviewed early in the year. Guess what? It was KOC’s job to get him to prepare and handle himself like a pro. Instead he coddled him and cried like a girl after they beat a losing team. Act like you have been there before. Cry after the super bowl. Not beating a scrub team.

 

 

You are still making things up. You've created a narrative that you allow to make you upset and then aren't able to think things through and feel your posts are more important than others. It happens to all of us.  

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that KOC is still in the running (given we haven’t heard anything to the contrary), but 1) he’s not the clear number 1 choice for Rivera, and 2) whether or not it winds up being KOC, Rivera wants his OC surrounded by guys he (Rivera) is comfortable with.  


So either Rivera is waiting on someone (presumably they are either under contract or asked for some time to think about it before accepting), or he’s torn between KOC and someone else and is working on the decision.  Could be he wants the new offensive staff’s input before making his decision if it’s the latter.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:


 

Rivera interviewed him as a courtesy to Dan. None of KOC’s people are on staff. If KOC were to be hired It’s because Dan forced it but he’s being setup to be dismissed.  I doubt he’s the hire. 

 

That's still a bad approach.  If all the talk of coach centered approach was genuine and if Rivera had zero intention of hiring KOC, he should've said no to the interview instead of a courtesy meeting.

 

Now, even taken to most charitable lengths, if Rivera position on KOC was "I doubt it, but I'm willing to be proven wrong in an interview" and if the interview didn't change his mind, then you thank him for the interview and let him know you're moving in a different direction.  You don't string along a interviewee you have no intention of hiring, especially in a business where jobs are musical chairs and openings get filled quickly. 

 

To me, the more likely answer is that Snyder is not meddling off the bat during the honeymoon phase and Rivera is giving due consideration to KOC, regardless of whether KOC ultimately gets the job or not.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

You are still making things up. You've created a narrative that you allow to make you upset and then aren't able to think things through and feel your posts are more important than others. It happens to all of us.  


Im not making anything up. It’s all factual,

 

You are the one who can’t think things through. You are so doubtful about Haskins that you worry taking away KOC might make him regress so instead of wanting what is best for the Redskins and Haskins long term, you contort yourself that the dude with 1 year of experience who helped get his last 2 bosses fired is somehow the most qualified coach to be OC. It’s really pathetic actually.

 

Edited by SoCalSkins
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:


KOC has only been a failure.  He has 1 year of experience. The other coaches have a resume and body of work that spans years. Some good some bad. There is no evidence whatsoever KOC can have a good year, because he never has. You can try to extrapolate play calling in 2 games against losing teams but that’s pretty flimsy. If you are an offensive coach like Andy Reid, you might consider bringing him as someone to mentor. No defensive head coach would hand him the reigns with his limited experience. None.

 

Ron is straightforward. He specifically said “don’t draw me a map if you haven’t been there before.” He values experience. KOC doesn’t have it. Doesn’t make him a bad person or stupid or anything else. He simply is too inexperienced for Rivera’s taste. 


None of this means KOC can’t succeed. It means he hasn’t had a (good) opportunity yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:


Im not making anything up. It’s all factual,

 

You are the one who can’t think things through. You are so doubtful about Haskins that you worry taking away KOC might make him regress so instead of wanting what is best for the Redskins and Haskins long term, you contort yourself that the dude with 1 year of experience who helped get his last 2 bosses fired is somehow the most qualified coach to be OC. It’s really pathetic actually.

 

Nope. I'm not doing that and I think it's safe to say nobody else is either. It's all in your head. It's an imaginary opinion, used to make yourself angry and feel more important.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, KDawg said:


None of this means KOC can’t succeed. It means he hasn’t had a (good) opportunity yet.


His only opportunity was a failure. He has been nothing but a failure so far. That’s his resume. There is no tangible evidence he can succeed. There is tangible evidence he can fail. Pretending he can succeed is wishful thinking:. It’s a small sample size but that in itself disqualifies him to be handed the reigns under a defensive focused coach.

 

 

Edited by SoCalSkins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:


His only opportunity was a failure. He has been nothing but a failure so far. That’s his resume. There is no tangible evidence he can succeed. There is tangible evidence he can fail. Pretending he can succeed is wishful thinking:. It’s a small sample size but that in itself disqualifies him to be handed the reigns under a defensive focused coach.

 

 


So someone with talent (presumably given were not inside) has no potential for success? 
 

So no one should ever be promoted to gain experience and we should only go with retreads? Your point that he doesn’t have a resume is valid, in my opinion. He doesn’t. 
 

But that doesn’t mean he can’t be successful. And we, on the outside, have no idea.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:


His only opportunity was a failure. He has been nothing but a failure so far. That’s his resume. There is no tangible evidence he can succeed. There is tangible evidence he can fail. Pretending he can succeed is wishful thinking:. It’s a small sample size but that in itself disqualifies him to be handed the reigns under a defensive focused coach.

 

 

Simple yes or no question...was there ANY improvements as an offense towards the end of the season?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, SoCalSkins said:


His only opportunity was a failure. He has been nothing but a failure so far. That’s his resume. There is no tangible evidence he can succeed. There is tangible evidence he can fail. Pretending he can succeed is wishful thinking:. It’s a small sample size but that in itself disqualifies him to be handed the reigns under a defensive focused coach.

 

 

 

So do you just hate KOC? Did he kick your dog or something?

 

Let me see if I can list your arguments against him, as they have changed numerous times:

1. Hiring KOC would only be done because Haskins lobbied for it, which would undercut Rivera as the new HC.

2. Hiring KOC would only be done because Snyder wanted it done, which would undercut Rivera as the new HC.

3. KOC's brief stint as THE guy calling the plays (which has been widely reported as the last 3 games) was, in your words, an abysmal failure.  Therefore, he is an abysmal failure that should not be given a shot because there is no way he can learn from mistakes.  

 

You saying all of this does not make it true, nor does it make it factual.  Get out of your own head and try to see things from other people's perspectives.  But, in the end, that doesn't quite fit your narrative.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, wunderhill said:

Simple yes or no question...was there ANY improvements as an offense towards the end of the season?


There was improvements to Haskins play from his previously putrid self. The offense against the Eagles in game 1 was superior. So no there was not an improvement. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SoCalSkins said:


There was improvements to Haskins play from his previously putrid self. The offense against the Eagles in game 1 was superior. So no there was not an improvement. 

 

LOL you are so stuck in your own argument that you can't see any others.  There is no point in debating this with you any longer.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rex Tomb said:

 

LOL you are so stuck in your own argument that you can't see any others.  There is no point in debating this with you any longer.  


Then stop quoting me. Go back to ignorance. It’s supposed to be blissful...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SoCalSkins said:


Then stop quoting me. Go back to ignorance. It’s supposed to be blissful...

 

"True knowledge is knowing the extent to which you know nothing." ~ Socrates

 

You think you know all of these things for sure, and yet, you have really just made it all up in your head.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SoCalSkins said:


There was improvements to Haskins play from his previously putrid self. The offense against the Eagles in game 1 was superior. So no there was not an improvement. 

So it's ok to say the body of work in 1 game "game 1" is a large enough sample size to be judged, but the 3 games he had total control of the offense that showed improvements such as game planning, adjustments and "improvements to Haskins" is considered a "failure"?

 

As a Redskin fan what did you want to see out of Haskins? Improvement? You got it...just maybe KOC had something to do with that? Maybe he's not as inexperienced as you say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Rex Tomb said:

 

"True knowledge is knowing the extent to which you know nothing." ~ Socrates

 

You think you know all of these things for sure, and yet, you have really just made it all up in your head.  

This quote pretty much sums it up for most if not all of us regarding knowing who Rivera will hire as his OC or how good of an OC O'Connell is and will become. All we know is what we read and what are eyes tell us when we watch. I know this, Rivera will watch film on DH, likely with O'Connell, and he'll have to decide if he sees progress and potential or not. If I'm Rivera I'm finding a way to keep him in some capacity even if it does mean making him the OC. Don't mess with something if it's working and getting results. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, wunderhill said:

So it's ok to say the body of work in 1 game "game 1" is a large enough sample size to be judged, but the 3 games he had total control of the offense that showed improvements such as game planning, adjustments and "improvements to Haskins" is considered a "failure"?

 

As a Redskin fan what did you want to see out of Haskins? Improvement? You got it...just maybe KOC had something to do with that? Maybe he's not as inexperienced as you say?


The 32nd ranked passing offense is a failure. The second worst record in the NFL is a failure.
 

I was asked if there was improvement in the offense from the beginning of the season to the end. My answer is no. 

 

KOC called 11 games. Had the OC title under the thumb of offensive head coaches for a single year. That’s the body of his work. Period. If you don’t consider that inexperience you have a very different definition of the word..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kingdaddy said:

This quote pretty much sums it up for most if not all of us regarding knowing who Rivera will hire as his OC or how good of an OC O'Connell is and will become. All we know is what we read and what are eyes tell us when we watch. I know this, Rivera will watch film on DH, likely with O'Connell, and he'll have to decide if he sees progress and potential or not. If I'm Rivera I'm finding a way to keep him in some capacity even if it does mean making him the OC. Don't mess with something if it's working and getting results. 

 

And I'm not disputing that, it just seems that SoCal is so entrenched in his KOC is a failure mantra that he is truly making it out to be a fact.  He's arguing in circles.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Rex Tomb said:

 

And I'm not disputing that, it just seems that SoCal is so entrenched in his KOC is a failure mantra that he is truly making it out to be a fact.  He's arguing in circles.  


It is a fact. He is a failure. That’s all he has been. Maybe he can be something else but so far he has only been a failure. The only people who need to go in circles and contort themselves are the ones that refuse to accept that basic fact. 
 

 

Edited by SoCalSkins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SoCalSkins said:


It is a fact. He is a failure. That’s all he has been. Maybe he can be something else but so far he has only been a failure. The only people who need to go in circles and contort themselves are the ones that refuse to accept that basic fact. 
 

 

 

So tell me this - what percentage of the play calling was KOC's alone between games 1-13?  By many reported accounts, it was not much.  For most of those games, it was Gruden and then Callahan making the decisions.  KOC was an OC in name only. How does that make KOC a failure?  When he had total control, we saw a much more productive offense that scored touchdowns and played to Haskins' strengths (i.e. taking snaps from the shotgun to allow him to survey the defense more quickly).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.