Pete Posted January 7, 2002 Share Posted January 7, 2002 Now I may not be the brightest light in the string, but I don't understand why so many think if Spurrier came to DC that we would be rebuilding for 2 or 3 seasons. Sure he would want the team to have "his stamp", but I don't think he would actually change very much. We expect changes to the O weather Marty is here or not, so that's a wash in my book. The D needs very little at this point to be a top unit. If I can see that, I would think Spurrier would. He likes to win, and would not change the system so drasticly as to screw his chances of being successful right out of the gate IMO. I think we have a much better chance to go all the way with Spurrier over Marty. Marty has done a great job, and deserves to return. I see the Skins in a "no lose" situation right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted January 7, 2002 Share Posted January 7, 2002 Yeah, that's kind of a chicken little response. Obviously, whenever a new coach is brought in, there's an adjustment period. If Spurrier were to come coach here, it's altogether possible that he would do worse than Marty would with the team next season. But 2-3 years? Billick won in his second season. He knew he had a killer defense, and crafted an offense to suit it. Why couldn't Spurrier adjust to his team, as well? The guy is pretty competent, and his ego (and therefore the need to make the team in his own image) is certainly no bigger than Billick's. I'm not saying Spurrier will win a Super Bowl in two years, just pointing out a valid, recent example of an offensive coach coming in and working with the personnel he has, not tearing down and rebuilding. Certainly, Spurrier is a bigger gamble than Marty, who is a known quantity. But with greater risk, comes greater reward. If Marty is going to be stubborn about his offensive philosophy (and history indicates this is so), then, if you want to retain him, you have to accept the fact that you will probably not win a Super Bowl. Spurrier is boom or bust. ANYONE who says they know which he is going to be is full of it. I KNOW I want to see the Redskins playing for the Super Bowl... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted January 7, 2002 Share Posted January 7, 2002 I don't know that the defense would require rebuilding. We've all said that no matter who's coaching next year, we'll need 2 d-linemen, and perhaps a LB and a SS. But Spurrier's never paid any attention to the defense as a college coach (whether that changes as a NFL head coach and, God forbid, player personnel director, who knows). It's the offense that I wonder about. For my money, there are only 3-5 players on offense whose jobs would be virtually untouchable, those being Jansen and Samuels, Davis, Gardner, and perhaps Alexander. But I could also see Spurrier deciding to carry out a Hershel-esque trade of some of our premium skill players to build the offense in his image. We're built for power running, something Spurrier's never really done. And don't forget that the most important position in a Spurrier offense, and the most difficult position to successfully fill and/or develop talent at - QB - is a total question mark. Our offense needs work anyway, but it's more than halfway to being a good power running - play-action passing offense. If it's to be turned into a 3 or 4 WR passing offense, like what the Rams run, we'll need pretty extensive changes to be made. That's where the rebuilding comments come from. ------------------ <IMG SRC="http://www.thelocker-room.com/images/RedskinLogo.jpg" border=0> "Loosen up, Sandy baby. You're just too damn tight!" - John Riggins to Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted January 7, 2002 Share Posted January 7, 2002 good points......hadn't thought of that angle..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pga Posted January 7, 2002 Share Posted January 7, 2002 Great post redmen, I agree 100%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted January 7, 2002 Share Posted January 7, 2002 But how do you know Spurrier won't come in and work with what is already in place, and, over time, eventually getting to where he wants to be? A Herschel-esque trade will not happen with the salary cap in place. The team couldn't eat Davis' or Lavar's signing bonus in one fell swoop. Spurrier would have no choice but to work in his preferred personnel over time. The question is, will he be Gibbs-like in using his personnel to maximum advantage? Or, will he be Norv/Marty-like in making the personnel fit to his vision of offensive football? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted January 7, 2002 Share Posted January 7, 2002 I've pretty much stayed away from the Spurrier ruminations, because frankly there's so durn much of it that most of the points I would raise have been covered exhaustively ... and then some. One thing that I've not seen talked about very much, though, and that I mentioned on another thread, is that one serious reservation (among many) that I have about Spurrier in DC is trying to imagine his current offensive philosophy working in the NFC East. Anyone else wonder just how effective a passing-based, fast-break offense would have looked in the slop yesterday? I don't even know how Warner & Marshall and the boys in St. Loo would have fared yesterday. If and when Spurrier were to come here, wouldn't the very thing that excites us about him most on some level, i.e., bringing an explosive, big-play offenses here, be the very thing that makes us nervous based on what we KNOW to be the soundest approach for where our team plays? We'd all be quietly hoping he'd adapt his approach -- both philosophically and personnel-wise -- towards the kind of smash-mouth, power-running play-action based offense that we already know works in the snow and mud of late season NFC East division warfare. We'd be wanting him to subsume the very thing he does best in order to suit his new environment. At the very base levels, it's a marriage that just doesn't seem to fit. Not unless Snyder is planning to build a dome ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted January 7, 2002 Share Posted January 7, 2002 This is nonsense Marty is staying and you can take that to the bank. ------------------ Take A Sip of the Marty KoolAid and Believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.