As a Gibbs loyalist, it pains me to ask...

[VetSkinsFan]

Gibbs never let Saunders call all the plays; he said so himself.

Not true! If you think it is, provide a link.

I can remember him saying on more than one accation that Saunders called the plays and they discuseed what to do in the red zone. Gibbs was the HC and AS the OC. It isn't uncommon for a HC to influence the play calls in important situatuions.

THere was a press conference after a game where we stalled in the red zone. The one where Portis was pulled for Betts and he didnt' make it in on the left side three times. I know someone here will remember that(memory escapes which team it was). He said in his press conf that HE (meaning JG) called those plays in the red zone.

[Fios]

Gibbs never let Saunders call all the plays; he said so himself.

Not true! If you think it is, provide a link.

I can remember him saying on more than one accation that Saunders called the plays and they discuseed what to do in the red zone. Gibbs was the HC and AS the OC. It isn't uncommon for a HC to influence the play calls in important situatuions.

THere was a press conference after a game where we stalled in the red zone. The one where Portis was pulled for Betts and he didnt' make it in on the left side three times. I know someone here will remember that(memory escapes which team it was). He said in his press conf that HE (meaning JG) called those plays in the red zone.

Home loss to the Giants* ... ... not the last bad decision either. Gibbs made it clear that Saunders sent down suggestions but it was up to Gibbs to give the yay or nay before the play went to the quarterback and Gibbs said nay quite a few times. I'd still call it Saunders' offense, but not wholly Saunders' offense.


*edit ... duh

[SkinsFreak]

I recall that happening in the 3rd game of the season against the Giants. They had the ball on the one yard line and ran Betts, unsuccessfully, several times in a row to the left side. Nevertheless, I don't think that style of play calling was very smart. I can understand Gibbs making the final decision on 4th downs, but if he brought in Saunders to be the play caller, then Gibbs should have given up that responsibility entirely. Be a part of the game planning, but let one guy select the plays during game time.

[fleetus]

I disagree that it's too early to label the draft any kind of success.

It's true that we don't know exactly how the players will perform, but based on value perceived at the time, and how we accrued picks throughout the draft you can say it's successful, and encouraging for the future.

Ok so we had a successful draft based on Mel Kiper's predraft grades. Woo-hoo.

You can't possibly be serious about this. If our first three picks are out of the league by 2010 are you still going to argue that it was a successful draft?

It might be the best draft for the Redskins ever, but you have to judge this two or three years down the road and see how your picks panned out. Success by any other standards is completely meaningless.

IMO you can't look at it that way. Hind sight is ALWAYS 20/20. Waiting 2 years then saying those draft picks sucked. What good is that? According to that, every team had a bad draft back when Tom Brady was taken in the sixth round and all other 31 teams passed on him. Wow, that was really bad of our front office to pass to Tom Brady that year, that was a horrible decision by them.


Right now as of today and until the start of the season, It was the best draft we have had in a long, LONG time. We have 9 picks that alone is better than we have done in the last ten years.

What these picks turn out to be, is nothing more than an educated guess, and any 6 rounder that turns out to be a HOF QB like Tom Brady, is nothing more than luck. And no matter how you look at it, hind sight is 20/20. Right now, we can go back and look up the picks from 2005 and say what we should have done, whats the point? We have to move forward not backward to make this a better team.

Yes hindsight is 20/20 and that is the point. Until those pick have had a chance to perform and produce, their potential is just that, potential. Two years down the road, speculation can then be replaced by results or lack thereof.

The number of picks has NOTHING to do with whether the draft was successful or not

You could have 20 picks, and if none of them become star players or every down starters....was it a successful draft? Measure that by a team who has 6 picks and three become stars.

With draft picks, it is pure speculation as to how they will perform at the NFL level. Only time will tell.

If Thomas and Kelly become solid starters....very good draft....if they turn out to be Desmond Howard and Michael Westbrook...a lousy draft.

This is a dumb argument. Everyone knows the NFL is a year by year thing. You can opine on draft picks anytime you want, it will always change anyway. Right now, some of us are enjoying this rare moment when our FO, for the first time in a long time, kept all of their picks, traded down strategically (we're used to seeing them throw away picks to trade up!) and added a 10th pick in addition to getting several players that most analysts graded as 1st to upper 2nd round talent. If you haven't figured it out yet, there is a whole separate game involved in drafting well, trading picks well and figuring out the strategy of the other teams in the draft. Some of us enjoy this part of the NFL in addition to the game played on the field.

So, if you don't want to give an opinion on the draft picks, fine, we don't require your opinion on the subject right now. We can wait to hear from you in 2011. Peace.

You can't use the Giants draft last year as an example either, because using your own logic, it hasn't been long enough to judge them either, ONLY 1 YEAR! Half of those picks might suck this year or get hurt or both. Same thing next season, the status of most of these players will change yet again. We drafted Gus Frerotte in the 6th or 7th round. He became our starter and looked pretty darn good for a season or two. Then another couple of years later he can't get a starting gig anywhere. Now he is moving to backup a different QB every year. So how would you grade him? Doesn't matter whether you wait one, two or ten years, it will be different every time. So, I'll say it again, some us are discussing how we think this draft went, based on what these players did in college, based on their combine workouts and based on what 20 NFL experts are telling us. If you think it is too early to judge them, then I guess we don't need to hear any more out of you until 2011.

[fleetus]

Gibbs never let Saunders call all the plays; he said so himself.

Not true! If you think it is, provide a link.

I can remember him saying on more than one accation that Saunders called the plays and they discuseed what to do in the red zone. Gibbs was the HC and AS the OC. It isn't uncommon for a HC to influence the play calls in important situatuions.

No matter who called the plays, it was obvious that Gibbs and Saunders didn't mesh in terms of what they wanted to do. Instead of having a Gibbs offense or a Saunders offense, we saw an ineffective combination of both of their offenses. Portis has talked about how Gibbs ran the running game and Saunders the passing game in terms of game planning. Gibbs himself has said that he played a large roll in determining what plays to run inside the 20, and I'll have to go back and check but I believe that I read in an article that it was actually Gibbs that called the plays on that goal line stand in the loss to the Giants this season. Gibbs should either have never hired Saunders or given him 100% control over the offense.

I think this may have been part of the reason he retired. If he was effective at play calling and just felt AS was not working out, he might have stayed. I think Joe knew that now was the time to go because he had built a foundation, but the team needed a coach in his prime.

[fleetus]

Gibbs inherited a team that was pretty poor. As with any new coach (besides Herm Edwards), you are going to want free agents to come in and play in positions where you can't find players in the draft. Gibbs was too old to wait years through drafts to rebuild for decent team. There was a very small window for him to win. He had to go the free agency route and he missed on some free agents.

He also inherited a pretty poor front office. Dan Snyder was doing all the wrong things as an owner. He fired almost the entire front office, he was a meddling owner, he blew through coaches etc. etc. etc. Gibbs came in taught him to hire the best personel, with the best character, and trust them to run the organization. You now see that happening. He elevated Cerrato and he elevated Scott Campbell to head scout hired Zorn as coach and stayed out of their hair. He brought in Zorn and you hear him with the same attitude. He's going to let his assistants coach. Hands off.

Gibbs brought in a great base of character players. So good that the team didn't feel the need to pick up any free agents in the offseason. He positioned the team to build through the draft. He taught Dan how to be an owner.

His legacy on this team should read...
Character
Hard work
Hire the best possible employees/coaches (another example is his Napcar team)
Instill a hands off approach
To build through the draft

I agree, good point. Gibbs, whether he is a decent personnel guy or not, was in a situation where he and the owner wanted to win NOW. So they threw money (often too much) at veteran free agents and some of those panned out, some of them didn't.

In the end, there is no doubt that we benefited (including Snyder and Cerrato) by having a Gibbs II era.

[SkinsJock]

I disagree that it's too early to label the draft any kind of success.

It's true that we don't know exactly how the players will perform, but based on value perceived at the time, and how we accrued picks throughout the draft you can say it's successful, and encouraging for the future.

Ok so we had a successful draft based on Mel Kiper's predraft grades. Woo-hoo.

You can't possibly be serious about this. If our first three picks are out of the league by 2010 are you still going to argue that it was a successful draft?

It might be the best draft for the Redskins ever, but you have to judge this two or three years down the road and see how your picks panned out. Success by any other standards is completely meaningless.

IMO you can't look at it that way. Hind sight is ALWAYS 20/20. Waiting 2 years then saying those draft picks sucked. What good is that? According to that, every team had a bad draft back when Tom Brady was taken in the sixth round and all other 31 teams passed on him. Wow, that was really bad of our front office to pass to Tom Brady that year, that was a horrible decision by them.


Right now as of today and until the start of the season, It was the best draft we have had in a long, LONG time. We have 9 picks that alone is better than we have done in the last ten years.

What these picks turn out to be, is nothing more than an educated guess, and any 6 rounder that turns out to be a HOF QB like Tom Brady, is nothing more than luck. And no matter how you look at it, hind sight is 20/20. Right now, we can go back and look up the picks from 2005 and say what we should have done, whats the point? We have to move forward not backward to make this a better team.

Yes hindsight is 20/20 and that is the point. Until those pick have had a chance to perform and produce, their potential is just that, potential. Two years down the road, speculation can then be replaced by results or lack thereof.

The number of picks has NOTHING to do with whether the draft was successful or not

You could have 20 picks, and if none of them become star players or every down starters....was it a successful draft? Measure that by a team who has 6 picks and three become stars.

With draft picks, it is pure speculation as to how they will perform at the NFL level. Only time will tell.

If Thomas and Kelly become solid starters....very good draft....if they turn out to be Desmond Howard and Michael Westbrook...a lousy draft.

This is a dumb argument. Everyone knows the NFL is a year by year thing. You can opine on draft picks anytime you want, it will always change anyway. Right now, some of us are enjoying this rare moment when our FO, for the first time in a long time, kept all of their picks, traded down strategically (we're used to seeing them throw away picks to trade up!) and added a 10th pick in addition to getting several players that most analysts graded as 1st to upper 2nd round talent. If you haven't figured it out yet, there is a whole separate game involved in drafting well, trading picks well and figuring out the strategy of the other teams in the draft. Some of us enjoy this part of the NFL in addition to the game played on the field.

So, if you don't want to give an opinion on the draft picks, fine, we don't require your opinion on the subject right now. We can wait to hear from you in 2011. Peace.

You can't use the Giants draft last year as an example either, because using your own logic, it hasn't been long enough to judge them either, ONLY 1 YEAR! Half of those picks might suck this year or get hurt or both. Same thing next season, the status of most of these players will change yet again. We drafted Gus Frerotte in the 6th or 7th round. He became our starter and looked pretty darn good for a season or two. Then another couple of years later he can't get a starting gig anywhere. Now he is moving to backup a different QB every year. So how would you grade him? Doesn't matter whether you wait one, two or ten years, it will be different every time. So, I'll say it again, some us are discussing how we think this draft went, based on what these players did in college, based on their combine workouts and based on what 20 NFL experts are telling us. If you think it is too early to judge them, then I guess we don't need to hear any more out of you until 2011.

and what does all this have to do with Gibb's?

Having Gibbs be a part of the team was very helpful in my opinion and we seem to have a plan to use both the draft and still stay aggressive when the right free agents or trades can be made. As long as these guys do not use draft picks to acquire players we will be fine.

Gibbs as a coach was okay but Gibbs' offensive plays were too predictable and I feel we will be better served with this new system - Gibbs did not hurt his lagacy and he definetly put us on the path to continued success. His last 2 games against the hated pukes and giants and all the circumstances of finishing the season with those 4 wins were fantastic.

[BnGhog]

To me there are so many factors that go toward making him a NFL starter between now and then, that you can't judge Vinnys sucess by how well the draft pick does years later. You are using future info, that we didn't have at the time of the draft.

So if Kelly has great potential, and his knee does blow out at camp, and is is never able to become a starter. You saying that is Vinnys lack of picking talent? That is no way to judge how well Vinny and the FO did there job.

Or what if our coaches can't teach him, like he needs to be? Then, he gets bought by another team in FA and they teach him, and he becomes a star, is that too, Vinnys lack of picking talent?

WHAT IF? WHAT IF? Do you just want to argue? If so, by all means go for it. But get my statements straight and don't put words in my mouth.

I said SUCCESSFUL DRAFT not Vinny's ability to judge talent, and no one would consider an injury the fault of a GM or anything that could be anticipated. I won't even address the nonsense about coaches failing to teach.

I said "To Me" This is my opinion. I don't know how LESS argumentative I can state my opinions. If you got offensive, thats your problem, I had the impression we were having a DISCUSSION. Just stating my opinions thats all.

That is the type of info Vinny did not have at the time of the draft, but this is info you will use judge him a year or two down the road.

With the knowlege he had at the time of the draft, he did a good job. You can only take that away by using hind sight. And if you do that and bash him for that, then you will have to bash every other teams FO's for the same mistake.

First, where did I even mention Vinny in my post...? But to answer this simply...YES. YES YES YES YES that is how GM's are judged. By results. Get it? EVERYONE has the same information...or the opportunity to get that information, and the ability to assess that information and make good decisions is their job. Anyone can pick draft picks based on "expert" analysis of potential talent, and yes, every year FO's all over the NFL make bad picks. You judge their overall success based on the ratio of good - bad picks. Nobody expects to pick 9 and have all 9 become starters or even make the team. But you'd better have a high % of your early picks work out well, otherwise you are not very good, or not very lucky.

As far as the other teams go....there are some who consistently do well...and that's why they consistently field winning teams. Likewise there are others who consistently chose poorly and that shows up on the field too.

You didn't mention Vinny. But we were talking about the draft and everyone is stating how great Vinny is supose to be at finding talent in the draft, plus the fact he is pres of players personnell right? Wouldn't that make it his job. Falling on his sholders. Wasn't you that said doing a bad job at drafting is how GMs get fired? So, that in itself would point back to Vinny. His title may not be GM, but that's still Vinny.

That's why there is a draft, and why the vast majority of players aren't even drafted. The GM's job is picking the players that do HAVE IT. And there WILL BE players that make teams, and even become starters, even stars that were drafted from every round. The real genius is in picking solid players in the late rounds. And there are charts regarding draft picks and what percentage of them "should" make various levels from each round.

Common sense would tell you that the % of players that make the team should be much higher from the 1st, and 2nd rounds than players from the 6th and 7th rounds..

I don't dissagree, nor did I say that I did disagree with that.

The truly superior GM's maintain a high success rate with their early picks, and an above average success rate with their late picks. That's what separates the great ones from the not so great.

So, if we have a high success rate (a couple of years from now) Vinny did a good job. But I thought you said you weren't talking about Vinny, or are you, Im losing track.

[BnGhog]

That is such nonsense. No, every team does not make AA moves. Your statement itself proves my point. Why would the Redskins pick a FA safety that can't cover, pay him the largest salary ever given to a Safety, and then expect him to do what he can't do? Did the Redskins not know what defense they run?

Because Pearson Prioleau (SP?) got hurt. It is known that he was going to be a big part of the D that year, until he got hurt. He was most likely going to be the cover guy. Go back and look it up on THN, it was all over this board back then.

[BnGhog]

It is a dumb argument.
I am a Gibbs supporter, and I was orginally supporting that Gibbs left us in good shape with all these draft picks. And that Vinny did a good job thus far. I do feel FO problems we NOT Gibbs at least not all anyway. I think he made some bad choices, but most if not all the choices made, had all the coaches involved I would think. Much like this years draft. It is known, that Blache strongly wanted a DL and Zorn strongly wanted a WR, but their picks were based on the talent they see, not just makeing a DL pick because Blache wanted, or picking a WR because Zorn wanted.

[RayNAustin]

That is such nonsense. No, every team does not make AA moves. Your statement itself proves my point. Why would the Redskins pick a FA safety that can't cover, pay him the largest salary ever given to a Safety, and then expect him to do what he can't do? Did the Redskins not know what defense they run?

Because Pearson Prioleau (SP?) got hurt. It is known that he was going to be a big part of the D that year, until he got hurt. He was most likely going to be the cover guy. Go back and look it up on THN, it was all over this board back then.

Nonsense. Are you trying to tell me that the Redskins signed AA to that mega blockbuster contract to play part time safety on running downs?

How ridiculous. And if that was the sentiment "all over the board back then" it was ridiculous back then too.

[BnGhog]

Here is a quote and Link to one thing I found in a quick little search.

Prioleau, 29, was going to start Washington's 2006 opener ahead of highly-touted free agent signee Adam Archuleta. However, Prioleau suffered a season-ending knee injury on the opening kickoff. Archuleta bombed and the Redskins wound up starting the aging Troy Vincent and career special teamer Vernon Fox on the strong side in the second half of the season after neither had even been in More camp with the team.

http://www.the-hogs.net/forum/viewtopic. ... light=adam

[skinsfan#33]

I recall that happening in the 3rd game of the season against the Giants. They had the ball on the one yard line and ran Betts, unsuccessfully, several times in a row to the left side. Nevertheless, I don't think that style of play calling was very smart. I can understand Gibbs making the final decision on 4th downs, but if he brought in Saunders to be the play caller, then Gibbs should have given up that responsibility entirely. Be a part of the game planning, but let one guy select the plays during game time.

Gibbs did call those plays or so it seamed fromt he post game presser.

That was two plays in a row that Betts ran.
1st down - spike to stop the clock (and to get in heavy Jumbo)
2nd down - PA pass to Sellers. The pass was a little low and behind Sellers, but he still dropped a TD. (fault - execution not play call)
3rd Down - Betts doesn't follow Sellers block; dashes for what he thought was an open hole; Giants LB makes an outstanding play and stops him. Had he followed the block, he would have scored (fault - ececution not play call)
4th down - Yoder and Kendall (my boy) are late off the ball. Giants penetrate and Sellers trips and Betts trips over Sellers leg. Betts would have scored if he had not tripped over Sllers legs. (again the fault was execution and not play call)

So Gibbs sent in three plays in a row and all three should have scored. You can maybe credit the Giants on stopping Betts first run, but Betts took the wrong hole.

So I really don't know what to learn from that. Maybe it is, if your coach sends in three plays in a row that should have scored and you goon all three up, you just don't deserve to win!

[CanesSkins26]

3rd Down - Betts doesn't follow Sellers block; dashes for what he thought was an open hole; Giants LB makes an outstanding play and stops him. Had he followed the block, he would have scored (fault - ececution not play call)
4th down - Yoder and Kendall (my boy) are late off the ball. Giants penetrate and Sellers trips and Betts trips over Sellers leg. Betts would have scored if he had not tripped over Sllers legs. (again the fault was execution and not play call)

So Gibbs sent in three plays in a row and all three should have scored. You can maybe credit the Giants on stopping Betts first run, but Betts took the wrong hole.

Why was Betts in the game when Portis had scored on that very same play call earlier in the game? This goes back to the "interchangeable" nonsense that we heard from Gibbs about CP and Betts.

[BnGhog]

3rd Down - Betts doesn't follow Sellers block; dashes for what he thought was an open hole; Giants LB makes an outstanding play and stops him. Had he followed the block, he would have scored (fault - ececution not play call)
4th down - Yoder and Kendall (my boy) are late off the ball. Giants penetrate and Sellers trips and Betts trips over Sellers leg. Betts would have scored if he had not tripped over Sllers legs. (again the fault was execution and not play call)

So Gibbs sent in three plays in a row and all three should have scored. You can maybe credit the Giants on stopping Betts first run, but Betts took the wrong hole.

Why was Betts in the game when Portis had scored on that very same play call earlier in the game? This goes back to the "interchangeable" nonsense that we heard from Gibbs about CP and Betts.

I agree, the playmaker should have been on the field. If I remember correctly CP had a pretty big run or screen, shuffle pass or something to get us there right before that and took himself out of the game. But, I could be remebering a different time.

[fleetus]

and what does all this have to do with Gibb's?

When I started this thread I was saying that I think Vinny had a great draft. Some overly argumentative people latched on to the idea that there is no such thing as a good draft until three years later. We all understand that players have to develop over the years, but the discussion was really about comparing the FO now (and how they drafted) vs. the FO before. We judge the teams' draft constantly, just like we judge the players themselves, from the moment they are drafted every year until they retire. So to pluck some time limit out of the air is silly. (Okay, it's been 1 year since we drafted Landry. We can't say anything about him yet, but on April 26, 2010 we will declare him either good or bad! ) So, as it is pertinent to the discussion, we are talking about how good we think this draft was, by using all 9 picks and even adding a 10th plus trading down and still getting top tier talent with those 3 2nd round picks.

I agree on your points about Gibbs.

[fleetus]

Here is a quote and Link to one thing I found in a quick little search.

Prioleau, 29, was going to start Washington's 2006 opener ahead of highly-touted free agent signee Adam Archuleta. However, Prioleau suffered a season-ending knee injury on the opening kickoff. Archuleta bombed and the Redskins wound up starting the aging Troy Vincent and career special teamer Vernon Fox on the strong side in the second half of the season after neither had even been in More camp with the team.

http://www.the-hogs.net/forum/viewtopic. ... light=adam

Yep, pretty common knowledge. They knew early on that AA was not going to be a full time starter. He must have stunk it up in camp (I hope anyway) because otherwise, they gave him all that money knowing he wold split the duties.

[SkinsJock]

The old adage is that it takes years to determine if a draft was successful or not is primarily because most of the players drafted do not develop into solid NFL players for about 3 years. In many cases it is easy to see the effects almost immediately.

A couple of years ago many thought the Texans made a big mistake in not taking Reggie Bush - that now looks like Casserly and the Texans knew a lot more than all the so called "know it alls" There is no way you would rather have Bush than the force that Williams is becoming for that defense. Bush is a bona fide star BUT he is just a stats case - Williams makes the whole Texans defense look better.

[yupchagee]

The old adage is that it takes years to determine if a draft was successful or not is primarily because most of the players drafted do not develop into solid NFL players for about 3 years. In many cases it is easy to see the effects almost immediately.

A couple of years ago many thought the Texans made a big mistake in not taking Reggie Bush - that now looks like Casserly and the Texans knew a lot more than all the so called "know it alls" There is no way you would rather have Bush than the force that Williams is becoming for that defense. Bush is a bona fide star BUT he is just a stats case - Williams makes the whole Texans defense look better.

I'm not sure he qualifies as a bonafide star. He has averaged 3.7yds/run & 7.2/catch. He has caught a lot of passes, but not for that many yards. Last yr he had <1000 yds running & receiving. OK, but not a star.

[Gnome]

I was thinking about starting a new thread - but in light of the request about new threads, this one is sorta close to my thinking in these dog days between Skins news. So hopefully someone reads my post!

After reflecting on Gibbs 2.0 I think it went as good as it could have gone. Actually, better than good.

If you busted out the crystal ball and told me on the day Gibbs returned that during Gibbs 2.0 -

A running back will set the new franchise single season rushing mark.

A wide reciever will set the new franchise single season recieing mark.

A QB will set a league record for straight completions in a single game.

A franchise QB will be drafted.

Two franchise Safeties will be drafted. RIP Sean.

The defense will rank as a top tier defense 3 of 4 seasons.

They will hand Dallas one of their most humiliating defeats in their history on Monday Night Football (when MNF still mattered) on the night the triplets names went into the Dallas ring of fame.

They will hand Dallas two more crushing loses at Fed Ex.

The team will make the playoffs for the first time since 1999, make the playoffs twice in four years, and win a playoff game.

The team will overcome a true tragedy in the loss of a future hall of famer and go on the most inspired late season run in team history.

Dan Snyder will stay in the background and let football pros run the franchise.

A foundation for winning will be built that will turn around the disaster he inherited from Spurrier, and Marty before the 'ol ball coach, a disaster that could have turned the franchise into decade long bottom dweller.

And most of all, the team will play hard - fight their guts out - every game no matter the stakes.

Not to mention that two Skins from the Golden Era will be inducted into the Hall of Fame.

- if you had told me that was going to happen, I would have been on cloud nine. Of course, the loss of Sean still hurts. But the rest of it is fantastic. And after the dismal years before Gibbs, with the team being an league wide joke, I would have seen it as total victory.

So some suspect player moves went down, but more fantastic moves happened than bad - by far.

And we didn't win the division or a superbowl.

But by the force of his will he righted a sinking ship. And brought us some all time memories, that win at Dallas on Monday night is still sweet. And restored pride to a franchise that had none.

I doubt any other coach could have done better given what he inherited in the toughest division in the NFL.

Gibbs 2.0? Huge success. IMO.