bulldog Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 I know there were a number of threads on the board several weeks ago about who was interested in Spurrier in '02 and how he ended up with the Redskins. For what it's worth the WTEM guys Pollin and Czaban, down in Houston for the SB, said on their afternoon show they talked to officials from the Panthers about Spurrier and were told that yes, the team did talk to Steve and owner Jerry Richardson ultimately met with him to talk about the Carolina opportunity. According to what was said, Spurrier came to the meeting and Richardson was shocked to discover that the OBC wasn't at all familiar with the Panthers, in fact he didn't even know what the team's record had been during the 2001 season. He also couldn't name the team's starting quarterback at the time. Richardson passed on making Spurrier an offer and the OBC ended up taking the job in Washington. The other item for what it is worth is that according to a discussion the WTEM guys had with Charley Casserly that around the NFL it was common knowledge that only the Redskins had offered Spurrier a contract, the other teams to show interest had not moved as far forward as Snyder did in completing their evaluations of him and his potential to improve their clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 They also said the we've had NO impact players in the later rounds of the draft in years. I was screaming ROCK AND McCants over and over. But whatever. They want the Skins to be bad or they don't have any news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted January 30, 2004 Author Share Posted January 30, 2004 would you really call Rock and Darnerian 'impact' players at this stage Bufford? to me an impact player is a back that goes for 1,100 yards or a receiver that catches 60 balls. I think both players have promise and now that Gibbs and staff are here we may see them develop. But they are not there yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 I'm not a big SS fan, but there were plenty of teams that would have loved to have him as a HC. This is just another example of journals bashing Snyder & the Redskins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 ok, they didn't use IMPACT. They basically said nothing to note in those rounds. Either way, they were wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted January 30, 2004 Author Share Posted January 30, 2004 I don't think it was meant as a bash at Snyder. Rather I think the discussion was more in light of Spurrier's abrupt departure and whether the Skins had given him enough time and support. The guys seemed to be implying that Spurrier would not have been successful here or with other clubs at the NFL level due to his lack of adequate preparation for the job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 Sounds kind of revisionist to me. Funny how you hear this stuff after it doesn't work out. Would we be hearing this if he had been a smashing success? For all we know, he turned Carolina down, and the Panthers are trying to show how smart they were about the guy. They made it to the Super Bowl, so they look like geniuses now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TC4 Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 I remember at the end of the 2001 season watchuing highlights of the Panthers last game of their 1-15 season, a 38-6 loss to of all teams, the New England Patriots in Charlotte, and a Panthers fan was holding up a sign begging Steve Spurrier to come to the Panthers to coach then BOY, what they would be saying down there now if he had :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posse81 Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 The information by Pollin and Czaban underscore two big issues with the Snyder front office, which some here dispute. It is obvious that: a) Snyder does not know how to handle a search for a new head coach. I give him all the credit in the world for Gibbs but that was a no-brainer. That is why we ended up with Marty, Spurrier and almost Ray Rhodes. The drafting in the middle to low rounds has been dreadful since Snyder took over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heavy Jumbo Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 This has been said countless times before, but if we didn't get Spurrier but got someone like Fox, we wouldn't have Gibbs. I'm willing to accept that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiskeypeet Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 According to what was said, Spurrier came to the meeting and Richardson was shocked to discover that the OBC wasn't at all familiar with the Panthers, in fact he didn't even know what the team's record had been during the 2001 season. He also couldn't name the team's starting quarterback at the time. But the Redskin offense under SS was making great strides last year......we would have been far better off holding on to him only for the sake of consistency.:doh1: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted January 30, 2004 Author Share Posted January 30, 2004 can't argue there. those 0-27 and 7-31 outbursts at the end of the season showed what explosive potential we were developing here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 I see the Panthers learned from Stephen Davis on how to change facts :laugh: Spurrier resigned, Gibbs is back.......... let it go people, move on already:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted January 30, 2004 Author Share Posted January 30, 2004 there is only one fact that counts in the NFL, won-loss record all the rest is rationalization, excuse, fluff, posturing, or bias :laugh: we know Lou Holtz, Bud Wilkinson, Dan Devine, Spurrier and a host of other college turned NFL coaches were poor because their records reflected that assessment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 Originally posted by bulldog there is only one fact that counts in the NFL, won-loss record all the rest is rationalization, excuse, fluff, posturing, or bias :laugh: we know Lou Holtz, Bud Wilkinson, Dan Devine, Spurrier and a host of other college turned NFL coaches were poor because their records reflected that assessment :laugh: okay whatever gets you through the night:rotflmao: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted January 30, 2004 Author Share Posted January 30, 2004 just don't pee down my back and tell me it's raining Spurrier was 12-20. That was the worst winning percentage of any coach for the Skins that was here for more than one season since the mid-1960's :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 and whose the coach of the Skins :confused: that era is over......leave the past in the past and move forward:thumb: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 Just add fuel here, I also heard Bryan Burwell (former local guy, now writing in St. Louis) on 980 the other day talking about this, and he said that according to people familiar with Spurrier's interview with Carolina, the two things they were struck and scared off by were Spurrier's takes on pass protection and assistant coaches. Obviously, you have to take any second or third hand report like this with a grain of salt, but I have never known Burwell to be a loose cannon or spout off just to hear himself talk. He made it sound like Carolina knew straight away that SS was not what they were looking for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 I don't think Burwell is the reactionary type as the guys on WTEM are, but it still smells funny. I find it hard to believe that nothing about this came out until now. What were two of the biggest beefs about Spurrier? He didn't protect the passer, and his assistant coaches were greener than the turf at FedEx Field. Carolina was catching a lot of grief about not snatching up Spurrier. It seems that an organization in that position would have done a subtle leak explaining itself AT THAT TIME. As Om said, you gotta take this stuff with a grain of salt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 Spurrier was offered 4 million by Carolina, was what was reported by several sources at the time. but again..... let it go and move forward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 Like Posse said Carolina had a "Real" interview with him while Danny just had dinner and tea and just talked about local golf courses and how much money $$ Doesn't anyone wonder why when ever they were talking about our interviews they were very detailed about what happened however with other teams they were very quiet :doh: At least Danny did good by keeping quiet about the Gibbs deal WTEM was also the first group that reported the buyout money as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie5 Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 This is complete horse-hockey. The Bucs were so distraught that b/c they were waiting on Parcells they missed out on SS that they paid a ridiculous price for Gruden. Fact is also that our draft record now is much better than it was under Casserly and it is far too much to ask that we get "impact" players in the later rounds. If you get a starter or two and some solid role players, you did pretty well. I wish we'd done better (I wish Casserly did more with all the Ditka picks), but we've done pretty well. Pollin and Czaban adore bashing the local teams -- in a really moronic smug way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 Originally posted by Ernie5 it is far too much to ask that we get "impact" players in the later rounds. why is that?? NE has the 3, 4, and 5th round players this year playing bigtime roles. The fact is we are not good at drafting in the middle to late rounds. What is sad is our second round picks these last couple of years have not been a factor at all, this day and age and when we don't have a lot picks that is not a good sign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 I wanna thank carolina for saying no because spurrier's performance and resignation led to Joe Gibbus Maximus desire to put the band back together and steer the ship clear of Icebergs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie5 Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 I'm not overjoyed with our drafting in the later rounds, but I think we batted about average. The Patriots hit it out of the park -- one of the reasons they are where they are. All I'm saying is we've done OK, especially if you throw in a couple of our RFAs last season and some rookie FA signings. This has been an area of some concern since Beathard left DC b/c Casserly wasn't as good at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.