Parcells or Gibbs?

[Dirk Diggler]

Art brought up an interesting point in an earlier post:

There is no coaching tree that developed off Gibbs. This is very rare. Coaches with the type of success Gibbs had generally breed other coaches who make it in the league. Gibbs hasn't. The few guys who've had chances have failed. While that doesn't mean Gibbs didn't always have great people around him, it does mean that Gibbs was more central to the success of the Skins than Parcells has turned out to be without Belichick.

It seems that Cowboy fans like to give Parcells credit for "making" Belicheck or Bill Walsh for "making" a Dennis Green or Mike Holmgren but doesn't one hand wash the other?

I mean, it's been pointed out ad nauseum that Parcells hasn't been to a Super Bowl without Belicheck, yet he's been to 2 (and won 2) without Parcells. As Art points out, you look at Joe Gibbs and the fact that virtually none of his assistants went on to do anything without him speaks volumes about just how tantamount the big guy was to the success of the Skins.

Does coaching over a Belicheck or a Mike Shannahan (in the case of Walsh) make Parcells a "better" coach? If the job of a coach is to breed future coaches and you believe that the Tuna "trained" Belicheck, then it's something to be considered.

But if it's onfield results we're judging these 2 cats by, then it's still tilted towards Gibbs. As mentioned, Gibbs was virtually the "whole show" in DC and that only further drives home the argument that he is the shiznit.

[newsbroker]

Originally posted by Art

You are correct, facts are facts, NB. And you lack facts.

Haha. I lack facts, huh? Listen, I'll play along with this, as long as you stay nice. But don't insult me. You don't know what I know in regards to football, and I never made an insidious comments suggesting your "lack of facts."

I'm willing to have a warm, healthy, cheerful yet serious debate here during this time of complete football boredom (may). We root for the same team. But if your gonna play games, then forget it. I'd rather do it over the phone and we'll see who really knows what.

Stating, as you have, essentially that Parcells is superior to any coach who has not coached in the cap era

I never said that. Lie #1.

The record of Parcells against Gibbs has been brought up here repeatedly over the last several months.

I don't care if it has. I'm new here. I'm responding to THIS THREAD. You understand? THIS THREAD. That's what I see. That's what I know. And it wasnt there.

You have systematically ignored the facts that wildly favor Gibbs over Parcells in terms of historical rankings as coaches.

Instead of wasting my time telling me what I missed, what facts I lack, how I lack this or that or any more of the BS you feel you HAVE to pepper your messages with (if you want a real debate on this, do it in real time, and we'll see who's left standing and I won't *need* to insult you or pepper my comments with the same style that you reduce yourself to doing) why dont YOU tell ME what this thread is about. Because I think honestly we may differ on what this is supposed to be all about.

To my knowledge, it's not about "historical rankings." The question was asked, simply put, WHO . IS. BETTER. Parcells or Gibbs and use any criteria you wish (which is *all* I did).

Yes, maybe Gibbs beat the Phoenix Cardinals and others of the NFL better than Parcells did way back in the 1980's. Maybe that is the case. It doesn't mean I feel Gibbs is the better coach than Parcells now strictly because of it.

Trite little comments like winning percentage doesn't really count because Gibbs coached pre-cap. This, of course, ignores that Gibbs won with three different QBs and three different lead runners and a team with a high number of free agent players in general.

And Parcells won with TWO different QBs and TWO different runners Because Gibbs accomplished that feat once more than Parcells, I'm supposed to use that as the be all end all of why Gibbs is better than Parcells?? That's trite, actually.

If were throwing out little tidbits of information, records, facts and other non-primary reasoning, then I'm allowed to do the same with the following:

When deciding who is better, Parcells or Gibbs, keep in mind that of those 3 championships Gibbs won (with all the different QBs and RBs, and whatever else you wanna throw in), he only accomplished in ONCE on parcells watch. 1987. Once. I deciding who is better, remember Gibbs only had to go through a Parcells-coached team ONCE during a season to get to a championship.

Meanwhile, Parcells went through a Gibbs-coached team TWICE to his championships. (here's that 3 times to two times ordeal again, only in *MY* example it actually pits the two in MORE direct comparison). In fact, of the two championships, Parcells team actually LITERALLY went through the Redskins led by Gibbs in one of the title games in a 17-0 rout. A huge, defining piece of this argument puzzle.

It ignores the fact that Gibbs won when things were there least stable.

And so did Parcells.

Anything that favors Gibbs really is inconsequential.

Wrong. That is YOUR point of view regarding Parcells.

However, when one judges loyalty,

This is NOT about loyalty! If it is change this thread to which coach has the bigger heart for his city of first employment as a Head Coach and I'll agree with you.

It's about who is better, Parcells or Gibbs, and Parcells has whipped Gibbs-coached teams to a 11-6 record including a 17-0 whitewashing rout in the NFC title game. Those are FACTS.

When you stop throwing in little comments and act appropriately and have a good natured debate, I would be inclined to take you even more seriously. When you are forced to pepper your comments with little *******************TRITE************* comments about me and what I'm saying (you don't think I feel the same about some of things your saying? I just dont want to pepper my comments becuz it's not cool and not neccessary), it says it all, in my book. Got to do this in real time. We'll find out who's lacking what knowledge.

[Dirk Diggler]

Since Newsbroker lovers the asterix, I have to put an asterix next to this "fact" :

And Parcells won with TWO different QBs and TWO different runners

Yes, technically Hostetler was on the field for the playoffs that year but Phil Simms played the first 13 games of that season I believe. So it's more like 1 1/2 different QBs.

[newsbroker]

Originally posted by Dirk Diggler

Since Newsbroker lovers the asterix, I have to put an asterix next to this "fact" :

And Parcells won with TWO different QBs and TWO different runners

Yes, technically Hostetler was on the field for the playoffs that year but Phil Simms played the first 13 games of that season I believe. So it's more like 1 1/2 different QBs.

Oh please. If you're going to say that, Im allowed to say what someone else said "STUPID LOGIC"

In REALITY.......that was probably MORE DIFFICULT than the 1987 Redskins championship which started with Shroedor but taken over by Williams early in the season because first shroedor got hurt and later he stunk.

Simms had guided the giants almost ALL season to a great season and here on the brink of the playoffs (i.e. no time to really get ready, with a QB not exactly as accomplished in professtional football as Williams was) they had to start the playoffs with a different guy.

That was actually MORE DIFFICULT circumstances!

[Dirk Diggler]

Are you going to tell me that the Giants would have been better off had Hostetler played the entire season? Please.

If that's the case, then it's a struggle just to make the playoffs and you can kiss your Super Bowl chances good-bye.

Did it make things more difficult? Yes. But the Giants were all about defense and running the football. So while the Simms injury stung, a guy like Hos - who was in his 5th year and had taken snaps before - was a good player to step in.

Props to Parcells for keeping the ship righted but this is not the 1999 Rams where Kurt Warner takes the reigns and leads a team out of nowhere to a title. Like I said, it's 1.5 different QBs.

[Henry]

Originally posted by newsbroker

Oh please. If you're going to say that, Im allowed to say what someone else said "STUPID LOGIC"

In REALITY.......that was probably MORE DIFFICULT than the 1987 Redskins championship which started with Shroedor but taken over by Williams early in the season because first shroedor got hurt and later he stunk.

Simms had guided the giants almost ALL season to a great season and here on the brink of the playoffs (i.e. no time to really get ready, with a QB not exactly as accomplished in professtional football as Williams was) they had to start the playoffs with a different guy.

That was actually MORE DIFFICULT circumstances!

Actually, this I have to disagree with. Under your criteria I could simply point to Timmy Smith as a counter to Jeff Hostetler. There's alot more to the 'three SBs with three different QBs and three different RBs' arguement thatn that. It signifies Gibbs' abilities to completely alter his system from season to season to fit his skill position players and still win at the highest level. He basically had to do this four times, once for each starting QB. Parcells started Simms for seven of his eight seasons with the Giants. Walsh started Montana for ten of his twelve with the 49ers.

This is what most coaches do. They settle on a QB and ride him to success or failure. The GOOD coaches find the good QBs. Sticking a backup into an established system and keep it going for a few games is nice and all, but it's not the same as reworking a scheme for a new starter every three seasons and STILL winning every year. NO coach has ever done that. Well, one has.

[skinsfanforlife]

Originally posted by newsbroker

Haha. I lack facts, huh? Listen, I'll play along with this, as long as you stay nice. But don't insult me. You don't know what I know in regards to football, and I never made an insidious comments suggesting your "lack of facts."

I'm willing to have a warm, healthy, cheerful yet serious debate here during this time of complete football boredom (may). We root for the same team. But if your gonna play games, then forget it. I'd rather do it over the phone and we'll see who really knows what.

I never said that. Lie #1.

I don't care if it has. I'm new here. I'm responding to THIS THREAD. You understand? THIS THREAD. That's what I see. That's what I know. And it wasnt there.

Instead of wasting my time telling me what I missed, what facts I lack, how I lack this or that or any more of the BS you feel you HAVE to pepper your messages with (if you want a real debate on this, do it in real time, and we'll see who's left standing and I won't *need* to insult you or pepper my comments with the same style that you reduce yourself to doing) why dont YOU tell ME what this thread is about. Because I think honestly we may differ on what this is supposed to be all about.

To my knowledge, it's not about "historical rankings." The question was asked, simply put, WHO . IS. BETTER. Parcells or Gibbs and use any criteria you wish (which is *all* I did).

Yes, maybe Gibbs beat the Phoenix Cardinals and others of the NFL better than Parcells did way back in the 1980's. Maybe that is the case. It doesn't mean I feel Gibbs is the better coach than Parcells now strictly because of it.

And Parcells won with TWO different QBs and TWO different runners Because Gibbs accomplished that feat once more than Parcells, I'm supposed to use that as the be all end all of why Gibbs is better than Parcells?? That's trite, actually.

If were throwing out little tidbits of information, records, facts and other non-primary reasoning, then I'm allowed to do the same with the following:

When deciding who is better, Parcells or Gibbs, keep in mind that of those 3 championships Gibbs won (with all the different QBs and RBs, and whatever else you wanna throw in), he only accomplished in ONCE on parcells watch. 1987. Once. I deciding who is better, remember Gibbs only had to go through a Parcells-coached team ONCE during a season to get to a championship.

Meanwhile, Parcells went through a Gibbs-coached team TWICE to his championships. (here's that 3 times to two times ordeal again, only in *MY* example it actually pits the two in MORE direct comparison). In fact, of the two championships, Parcells team actually LITERALLY went through the Redskins led by Gibbs in one of the title games in a 17-0 rout. A huge, defining piece of this argument puzzle.

And so did Parcells.

Wrong. That is YOUR point of view regarding Parcells.

This is NOT about loyalty! If it is change this thread to which coach has the bigger heart for his city of first employment as a Head Coach and I'll agree with you.

It's about who is better, Parcells or Gibbs, and Parcells has whipped Gibbs-coached teams to a 11-6 record including a 17-0 whitewashing rout in the NFC title game. Those are FACTS.

When you stop throwing in little comments and act appropriately and have a good natured debate, I would be inclined to take you even more seriously. When you are forced to pepper your comments with little *******************TRITE************* comments about me and what I'm saying (you don't think I feel the same about some of things your saying? I just dont want to pepper my comments becuz it's not cool and not neccessary), it says it all, in my book. Got to do this in real time. We'll find out who's lacking what knowledge.

did it take you an hour to write this?

good point and all but what a waste of time.

again since you wanna stick to this "thread" , it simply states gibbs or parcells. Does not say "Gibbs vs Parcells" so you see u just wasted your time and space in this thread.

U seem like a bright guy. you shouldve figured it out that gibbs or parcells does not mean compare the two head to head.

you are the one changing the topic of this thread.

know the difference.

[jrfriedm]

Originally posted by newsbroker

It's like saying who's the better fighter, hagler or hearns, and looking at a million different things EXCEPT taking a peek at what they might have done in a fight against one another.

So you must think that James "Buster" Douglas, is a better boxer than Mike Tyson. :doh:

[Art]

NB,

I will stop throwing out comments as I do the moment you stop stupidly saying things like EVERY fact favors Parcells. As I stated in my initial reply here something of an argument can be made for Parcells. That reasonable people know such an argument is a losing one is not really the point. You could make an argument that supports Parcells if you are inclined.

The fact that you make your argument by ignoring or dismissing or diminishing the vast advantages Gibbs has as a head coach in the NFL. I have not done the same thing. I have given Parcells the credit he is due and recognize an argument (though one on the lower end of the scales of fact) could be made in support of him.

So, attempting to say I have ignored the advantages of Parcells is ludicrous. Especially when YOU wrote, as you did, "Everything, I'm afraid, when u put down your bias and be honest about it, points to Parcells."

Only you have resorted to hyperbolic bluster like that sentence and repeated references to "case closed" to make your point. You, therefore, deserve the rightful reply you've been given. If you were more thoughful and cautious in what you are stating, I wouldn't have to mock the manner in which you state things.

The fact is, everything is not in favor of Parcells, though, it's true, some things are. The fact remains that the majority of how you evaluate a head coach favors Gibbs. Again, from winning percentage, to losing less (three Parcells seasons have had double-digit losing records), to loyalty, to winning titles, to playoff excellence, to innovation and Xs and Os genius.

Parcells happens to be the sort of coach who matches up well with Gibbs and he has had his teams ready for and able to beat Gibbs teams 11 times compared to six. You continue to beat this one factual advantage Parcells has as the reason he is superior and, again, others are attempting to let you know that there's more to it than just that.

You don't even START with that when measuring who's the better NFL head coach. Though not as dramatic, it's similar to saying when the Redskins swept the Cowboys during their Super Bowl year that the Redskins were really the better team. That's absurd, obviously. Just as your reasoning is.

The totality of the situation comes into play here and in more ways than not, that totality favors Gibbs as of this moment in time. It may turn to favor Parcells in a couple of years. But we're not being predictive. We're looking at the facts and they are clear and unquestionably in favor of Gibbs. Even as you struggle to ignore all of those and assign EVERYTHING in Parcells' favor, telling others they are biased if they don't see it your way, your case keeps getting reopened due to new evidence that overturns your verdict time and again.

[newsbroker]

Originally posted by Art

NB,

I will stop throwing out comments as I do the moment you stop stupidly [/b/]

"stupidly"?

saying things like EVERY fact favors Parcells.

Well, not every one. Of course. The main ones do though. So we disagree.

The fact that you make your argument by ignoring or dismissing or diminishing the vast advantages Gibbs has as a head coach in the NFL.

I'm not ignoring them. I've read them. I've known forever the stories of the 3 QB junk and all that. But in terms of answering the question "who is better, Parcells or Gibbs" those "advantages" (all the ones I've read here) in my opinion are inferior to the advtanges of the argument that favors Parcells. It's my opinion. This is extremeskins.com so I don't expect there to be an ounce of unbiased opinion, just as the first replier in this thread stated.

I have given Parcells the credit he is due and recognize an argument (though one on the lower end of the scales of fact) could be made in support of him.

Would you stop patting yourself on the back for half a second to realize that BECAUSE you "recognize an argument that is on a lower scale" is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. The arguments I've made (several of them) I feel are the more justifiable arguments in this "debate" which makes me favor Parcells.

Who's better. I mean, c'mon. Parcells has owned Gibbs. Start there. End there. Everything else is filler. Everything else is circumstantial evidence. They all have weight. But not as much.

The fact is, everything is not in favor of Parcells, though, it's true, some things are. The fact remains that the majority of how you evaluate a head coach favors Gibbs.

And, again, I disagree with that. It's not "how I evaluate a head coach" It's "who's better: Parcells or Gibbs". My answer doesn't change.

Parcells happens to be the sort of coach who matches up well with Gibbs

Oh, is that how we're gonna excuse off the difference? "joe gibbs is so gosh darn great at nearly everything, but it just so happens that parcells just so happens miraculously somehow to be the type of coach who , oh my goodness I cant believe Im saying this about Lord Gibbs, but Parcells happens to match up with him good. But that's all though."

This is a copout. Face it, Parcells has WHIPPED Gibbs. I see people in this thread concentrating on ONE GAME. The Super Bowl. Is that ALL we're going to go on? One game played in January vs. some OTHER coach?

If we are, why not concentrate on the NFC Title game, Gibbs' Redskins vs. Parcells Giants. Hey, that was one game two. An elimation game, too. Only it DIRECTLY involved both. 17-0 rout.

Let's talk about that? Oh yeah, doesnt fit the theme of the website. Let's be fair here.

We're looking at the facts and they are clear and unquestionably in favor of Gibbs.

Dude, not for nothin', but it has come to my attention you are a "moderator' of this website. I'm sorry but your opinion is so dipped in burgandy and gold it wouldnt have chance to be fair. Let's open this up OUTSIDE this website and see where impartial fans, or even some cowboy/gians fans stand. At least an equal amount. I dare you.

[Henry]

Newsbroker, it's ok to think Parcells is better. Really. I think I've said as much in my first post in this thread. What I don't like, particularly, is your need to bash this entire board simply because there are some who disagree with you.

What do Cowboy fans think? Read this thread again. Three of them have chimed in with their opinions. One said Parcells, the other two said too close to call. In fact, your

Parcells 11-6 vs. Gibbs. Parcells 1-0 vs. Gibbs in the playoffs, a 17-0 rout. Parcells TWO SB championships while Gibbs was on his schedule. Gibbs ONE SB championship while Parcells was on HIS schedule.

It's Parcells. Case closed.

chant began after a Redskin fan called it a push, which is the same as what two of three Cowboy fans said.

Don't pretend this has to do with some crusade on your part to enlighted us all from our 'anti Redskin bias.' This has to do with your opinion, and the fact that you don't like it questioned.

So go ahead and argue the points all you want, but leave the board out of it. If you want the opinion of another board, by all means go there. Otherwise, I suggest attacking the entire community because not everyone agrees with you on this one subject does little to serve your cause.

[Art]

NB,

I would tend to imagine in a national poll people would generally consider Parcells a better coach than Gibbs. That's only natural. Parcells has coached eight years recently while Gibbs was racing cars. He is, therefore, known to them -- especially the younger audience -- in a way Gibbs can not be at this point in time.

Through it all, however, people who know the facts know better. Perhaps you are too youthful or simply didn't follow football well enough to know Gibbs when you state the things you do, as you do. Those of us who do recall those years, whether fans of the Skins or not, know where the advantage lies in terms of which guy, Parcells or Gibbs, is the better NFL head coach.

There is just too great a number of advantages for anyone to discount the way you have saying as you have, with immense stupidity, that everything favors Parcells. Further, it seems a bit of a stretch for you to ask me to quit patting myself on the back for recognizing the advantages you've largely ignored. Why does it seem so? Because in a number of posts you simply ended with "case closed" as your declaritive victory.

I came to believe you were of the mind, given your own words, that such style was meaningful. Apparently, though, you prefer to utilize that style but bristle when others copy. That's bad form chief.

I've seen gentlemen of your type before. The sort of fan who pretends he's unbiased while rating players better than others despite not even knowing the names of the players he rates better and who claims knowledge others could not comprehend in support of his ignorant statements. It is often the case that such people are actually fans of other teams playing a role, or, in the remainder of the cases, simply fans jaded by years of losing and far too willing to set aside reason and resort to hysterical rants.

In either case, when you put down on a sheet of paper all that which Gibbs has accomplished and you do the same with Parcells, one sheet will contain more information and that sheet doesn't have the smell of Tuna.

There's no bias in that statement as Parcells is among my favorite people in the whole of football. I happen to even like his style better than I like Gibbs. I just know who's been better to this point in their careers in the league.

My guess is you do as well.

[Dirk Diggler]

It's obvious that NB is a young fan. Whether he is a Skins fan or not, I don't know. But he is definitely young. When he makes statements like "Parcells used to whip Gibbs" - it shows his youth.

Sure you can pull up a career head-to-head and see 10-6 vs. Gibbs, 11-6 if you like to include the playoffs.

But 6 of those Giants wins were by a TD or less. In 1988 and 1989, the Giants won by 7, 1, 3, and 3. True whippings, I tell you. The only whippings Gibbs could be said to have received at the hands of Tuna was 17-0 in the playoffs and 37-13 in 1984. The Skins had 2 blowout wins of their own in 83 and 87 so that evens things out.

Those games in the 80s were classic grudge matches virtually every single time out - Grudge matches that the Giants won more often than not. But they were never, ever whippings. The Giants style would just seem to grind and wear out the Skins who were often more of a finesse defense and Simms and Co. were generally excellent at keeping the Washington offense on the sideline. Was that great coaching? Sure. But it was more about matching up well.

And NB, you still ignore my Buddy Ryan analogy. Ryan's teams were so strong along the defensive line that they were able to completely stifle the Giants running game. They matched up wonderfully with the Giants, as did the Bears who used to beat down Parcells. Was that great coaching? Was Ryan a better coach than Parcells?

[Chachie]

Madden! (doh!) I mean......Gibbs!

[newsbroker]

Originally posted by Art

Through it all, however, people who know the facts know better.

Here you go with your assumptions again. I've seen good posters here. And I've seen bad. You sir, are the worst. You *THINK* you know what you're talking about, but because you are so deeply rooted in a biased Redskins-fan mentality, that you don't have a clue about taking on this discussion honestly.

You've described me with a certain insulting taste first. So allow me to respond in kind. You are the worst poster I've seen in here so far. The one that THINKS he knows what he's talking about, but in reality doesnt have a clue.

I've said it several times, and I'll say it again....you want to step up to the plate. Lets continue this discussion in real time. Let's stop telling the other who knows what and who is operating with "immense stupidty" and whatever else, and let's step it up in real time and see who knows what. I know I'm game to find out. You're not in my knowledge league.

Perhaps you are too youthful or simply didn't follow football well enough

Wrong #1.

Wrong #2.

More assumptions. That's all you got. Assumptions.

Those of us who do recall those years, whether fans of the Skins or not, know where the advantage lies in terms of which guy, Parcells or Gibbs, is the better NFL head coach.

No they don't. Again, another assumption. That's all YOU GOT. Is assumptions. Prove it. Prove that the OTHER FANS know Gibbs is the better coach. You can't. All you can do is state it as a fact when it's not.

At least I said "I bet I can find more supporters to my side" I offered it as a challenge to open this up to more outside opinions.

But you are ONLY capable of stating your assumption as FACT and expecting to twist my arm to believing it. I'm not that "insanely stupid", son. I'll put up with you with football knowledge any day of the week. Bring it on in real time. That's what I thought.

Further, it seems a bit of a stretch for you to ask me to quit patting myself on the back for recognizing the advantages you've largely ignored.

That's not why I said to quit to quit patting yourself on the back. Now you're resigning to just out and out lying and/or making stuff up. This is getting pathetic on your part. You don't even realize that your down to just assumptions and lies as your defense; you're getting worked over.

I've seen gentlemen of your type before. The sort of fan who pretends he's unbiased while rating player

Yeah, blah, blah, blah. Tell me when you get back on topic of this post.

In either case, when you put down on a sheet of paper all that which Gibbs has accomplished and you do the same with Parcells, one sheet will contain more information and that sheet doesn't have the smell of Tuna.

Your completley uneccessary literary style (smell of tuna) besides........

I disagree. I've never seen Joe Gibbs take over 3 different losing organizations and completely change their future. Never. I'm not gonna say one guy is the better coach than the other just because he won one more Super Bowl, and that's it. Parcells owned Gibbs straight up. His team wrecked Gibbs' team in the NFC title game. He's been a winner through more eras of the NFL. He's done more with losing organizations than Gibbs has ever tried to do.

My guess is you do as well. [/b]

Yep, Parcells.

[Chachie]

Did a waterboy just call Art the worst poster? Go get some water, boy!

(edit)- Where the heck is "Lavar Is Coming" when we need him?

NB- I am SO kidding you, man. I've read some of your posts and you seem pretty cool. I just think it's crazy to mess with Art.

(2nd edit)- Wait. I just read your posts for this thread in detail. Go get some water.

[JKS1414]

I know almost all of us here are Skins Fans, but if I have to look at it without bias:laugh: .......yeah right!!!

No really, Gibbs has won more rings in a shorter number of years than the Tuna......in the end, that is all that matters.......that and at least Gibbs didn't sell his soul to Jerry Jones and the Dallas Cowgirls. I mean come on!!!! How could any coach who has coached a team in the NFC East ever coach another NFC East team??

And here's an oh by the way....... Gibbs is in the Hall of Fame......I know Bill will be too, someday, but he aint there yet!!!

:wewantd:

:dallasuck :eaglesuck :gaintsuck

[Art]

NB,

I have little doubt that, to you, I am the worst poster you've seen. I understand, completely the rationale you would have for stating such. You see, unlike many, I actually hold people accountable for what they say. Therefore, when you dumbly state that everything points to Parcells, it opens the door for an series of posts that should serve to educate you. Yet, not enjoying or appreciating dealing with someone who knows more, better and states it more clearly, you are left angered and perhaps betrayed by your own inadequacies which causes you to be compelled to take it out on me.

I'm not the enemy though my boy. Your own foolishness making statements that everything favors Parcells and when coming off that statement to say, sure, not everything does, but the major things do, you fail to realize just how dopey you seem to someone who doesn't share that trait.

A major factor between Parcells and Gibbs is winning percentage. You've dismissed that, seeming to suggest only those who've coached in the cap era should be considered when evaluating coaching performance. Yet, your attempted write off of winning percentage as a major factor leaves others wondering what you're on about.

When you suggest Super Bowl victories and appearances isn't a major factor, or, as you put it, that Gibbs Super Bowls don't count as much, you seem to be struggling to create a point you can't support through evidence.

It's not an assumption that Gibbs has a better winning percentage that Parcells or that he has been to more and won more Super Bowls. I'm not assuming Gibbs has never had a double-digit loss season while Parcells has had three. I'm not making an assumption to say Gibbs has been a dramatically superior playoff coach. These, among so many others, are part of the historical record.

This is proof of precisely what I said. Anyone with knowledge of the sport could not build a passable case for Parcells. Not with the factual advantages Gibbs has that outweigh those of Parcells. And we haven't even addressed the more subjective portions of the debate that also factor Gibbs. Things like acknowledged excellence as an Xs and Os guy that universally place Gibbs ahead of Parcells in terms of the often misused term of genius when it comes to utilizing the pieces.

It's the weight of this, plus so many more facts, that tilt the balance in any conversation -- at this moment in time -- to Gibbs when making an evaluation as to the relative merits of various coaches.

If it comforts you to think I'm not in your knowledge league, then, be comforted. Many people find comfort in denial of reality and find a warm blanket of security in false beliefs that are rendered so by simple errors like not knowing the name of a player you say you know enough about to rate more highly than another, or, as shown in this thread, that you can't make a positional debate without statements you have had to correct like "everything" favors Parcells.

If working someone over, in your view, is repeatedly stating 11-6 trumps all else, well, then, really, I'll be worked over frequently in your mind while in the end, maintaining clear superiority. Kind of like Gibbs over Parcells.

[ATCRedskin82]

Wasnt 87 a 15 game season??? SO we cant count that as an entire season???? WTF!!!!ALso back to 82 being only a nine game season.....everyone had the same chance to come up and win with less games to do it in. So the superbowl counts. To validate my previous statement we belonged there because we returned to the superbowl the following season.

[newsbroker]

Parcells Giants vs. Gibbs Redskins: 10-6 in regular season

Parcells' Giants vs. Gibbs' Redskins in the ALL IMPORTANT SHOWDOWN GAME, the NFC TITLE GAME: 17-0 rout by the Giants.

Number of Super Bowl titles Gibbs won when having to deal with Parcells in the league: one.

Number of Super Bowl titles Parcells won when having to deal with Gibbs in the league: two.

Proven the ability to turnaround 3 moribund franchises, a skill extremely unique in the NFL: Parcells.

Who has a MEDIOCRE lifetime record against the NFC EAST (if you take the Phoenix Cardinals out of the numbers, a team that is no longer in the division and was of high school caliber when they were?: Gibbs.

Who has won more division championships? Parcells. (hey, if you can say one coach won a whole WHOPPING one more Super Bowl than the other which is the case despite the fact that two of his titles came when parcells wasn't EVEN coaching, then I can use the same pathetic logic)

So, I'm ready to make some concessions. Here's what I'll concede. If you need a guy to take on those pesky Phoenix Cardinals of the league, Joe Gibbs is your guy. And if you want a HC during a strike shortened (9?!?!?!?!?) game season or someother oddity that requires the FRONT OFFICE to play larger roles than in normal seasons, that again, I'll go with Joe Gibbs.

For everything else, including one vs. the other, I'll take Bill Parcells and he's shown it. 17-0 NFC Title game.

Which leaves only 2 questions left for me:

#1 - Who has the more talented roster in the 2004 season, the Redskins or the Cowboys? (I did my own unscientific rating of that a week or two ago you might remember, and of course, as predictable, you found only the "negative" numbers of the Redskins something that was amiss and therefore needing to be commented on as about predictable as can be since everything is rosy red in your ultra-biased eyes; even though the totality of my numbers indicating the Skins having a superior roster of talent)

#2- When the Cowboys win at least one game if not both games this year against the Redskins, what will be the excuse for that happening. I ask only because I want the excuse on file now. Because Dallas will win once at least against the Redskins because Parcells is a better coach than Gibbs.

[Touchdown Portis!]

Originally posted by Bufford 3.3

I don't know if that's true.

Maybe its just that Parcells is an easier hire for NFL teams. I mean, he's with his 4th Franchise has HC already.

I know the Panthers AND Falcons both tried to get Gibbs to come out of retirement. I wouldn't be shocked to hear other South East teams tried also.

Gibbs is loyal, Parcells whores himself around the league!

[newsbroker]

Originally posted by Touchdown Portis!

Gibbs is loyal, Parcells whores himself around the league!

Nooo....Parcells enjoys taking on 'almost impossible' projects. Coaches are motivated differently. Some are motivated by new challenges to attempt. Others maybe by serving a certain community.

p.s. gibbs was real loyal to the atlanta falcons last year too, after turning down a similar position with the redskins a couple of years b4. he was also real loyal for the past 11 years, leaving the game when the team was headed for some of its darkest days (new thing called a salary cap, old players, way over the upcoming cap when he left through '93).......yeah........actually now that I think about it, maybe Gibbs thinking is that he felt a little awkward the way he left the redskins when they were such ill-prepared for the cap era and that's one of many reasons why he decided to come back.

[RW31]

Originally posted by redskns56

That's a weak argument and you know it RW31. Do you know why Gibbs hasn't had success with any other team? I do, because he hasn't tried to. He is far more loyal than Parcells who dumps his teams quite often. I think that in the end you will find more players loyal to Gibbs simply because he wouldn't quit on them.

[.

Hmm well lets see here. You used the argument that parcells never had the same success with another team, knowing that Gibbs never even tried. What am I to do? I use the same argument, regardless.

[Dirk Diggler]

Can any of the Parcells lap dogs answer the "diminishing returns" fact as it relates to PArcells?

That being that each team he has moved on to has achieved less success? Aren't coaches supposed to get smarter and better in their old age?

[SkinsLover]

Originally posted by newsbroker

Nooo....Parcells enjoys taking on 'almost impossible' projects. Coaches are motivated differently. Some are motivated by new challenges to attempt. Others maybe by serving a certain community.

p.s. gibbs was real loyal to the atlanta falcons last year too, after turning down a similar position with the redskins a couple of years b4. he was also real loyal for the past 11 years, leaving the game when the team was headed for some of its darkest days (new thing called a salary cap, old players, way over the upcoming cap when he left through '93).......yeah........actually now that I think about it, maybe Gibbs thinking is that he felt a little awkward the way he left the redskins when they were such ill-prepared for the cap era and that's one of many reasons why he decided to come back.

I sure came in late on this discussion...you sure sound like an idiot. Especially when you try to challenge Art and think you will come up a winner.... you just end up a wiener.

If I recall, it was Gibbs health and the love of his family that forced him to leave our beloved Redskins, he didn't run away to various teams like Parcells. He was missing out on both of his sons lives, and he wanted to make up for lost time that he spent sleeping on a cot in the office watching film, building plays etc. Oh, and while I am not a racing fan, I do believe that while Joe was out of football commission, he built one of the most sucessful racing teams in Nascar history, another attribute to his genius and multi dimensional success. What was the Tuna doing while not coaching??? Looks like just eating donut after donut.

Also pretty sure Joe had part ownership in the Falcons because he was and still is very close friends of the owner. Was talked to about coaching the Falcons, but in the end said the only place he could coach football was in DC.

I just think if you would put down that crack pipe for 5 minutes you could see how there is no comparison between Joe and Bill

Joe wins hands down.