The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

From ESPN.com:

The Hall of Fame coach knows a few things have changed since he won his three Super Bowls, but he's already out to defy one modern-day NFL axiom. At a Thursday night team dinner, he planned to let the players know his feelings about the notion that a core group can't remain intact for a long period under free agency.


"I don't think that's true. I've done the homework on it, and you can," Gibbs said. "I'm going to tell them what I'm going to look for is somebody (who) wants to be a core Redskins guy."

Do you think that this is a reasonable idea in this day of free agency/backloaded player contracts? I gotta believe Gibbs but I've also gotta wonder at how long we can really keep even a core group of Redskins together. . . a season ago I would have told you that Bailey would probably be a Redskins for a good number of years to come. . so I'm just not sure how confident I can really be about this. (Someone give me some assurance here)

From the Boswell article talking about players staying with one team for a career:

"I hope I'm one of those guys," said tackle Chris Samuels of the "core Redskins" concept. "Guys were laughing and joking around before the meeting last night. When he came in, everybody shut up. . . . He's a disciplinarian coach and that's what we desperately needed here.


If Coach Gibbs can inspire that kind of reaction after one practice, I don't think he will have a problem keeping a core group.

FanfromAnnapolis wrote:

Do you think that this is a reasonable idea in this day of free agency/backloaded player contracts? I gotta believe Gibbs but I've also gotta wonder at how long we can really keep even a core group of Redskins together. . . a season ago I would have told you that Bailey would probably be a Redskins for a good number of years to come. . so I'm just not sure how confident I can really be about this. (Someone give me some assurance here

)

You must remember that Champ wanted out and I can't blame him. This organization has been in such disarray for years. It is possible to keep a core group...the only thing is using the draft to replace the talent you can't afford to keep. Everything will be fine.

Do I believe Joe Gibbs?

Yes.

He doesn't look for guys who want to be a one-man team. He looks for players who want to win, long-term, for a long time.

Go back, and you'll see lots of good players on Joe Gibbs teams, and all of them were more effective with him than on their own. Very few were individual stars, but they did better for themselves because they put the team first. Sure, that sounds paradoxical, but look how long each of the Hogs played. Then consider the linebackers -- Kubin, Coleman, Milot, Kauffman, Olkiewicz -- hardly a big-name star all-pro, any one. Coleman had three SB rings, the others got two, and none were fancy first-round draft choices.

Gibbs discards the guys who play for themselves alone, and he keeps the winners, and the winners learn that they will habve a longer, ultimately richer, career following Joe Gibbs lead.

if you remember the article about Gary Clark's agent begging him not to go see Gibbs because he was afraid Clark would be talked into a smaller contract to stay with the Skins, and he did. So yes here too.

And Gibbs was talking about 16 to 17 guys stay with the team over the next ten years. That's only 2/3 of a starting lineup (offense and defense) so that really shouldn't be hard to do.

Yes I do, and yes it can be done. It can be started by C-Sam renegotiating that contract now. After all, Ramsey is settled down, if he was ever even riled up.

Does a fat baby fart?
Does a bear sh!t in the woods?
Is the Pope Catholic?

Ahhhh YES!

DEHog, you sound like my boss. . .

Yes, I understand that the kind of guys that Gibbs is looking for would be team players first. It just seems a bit harder to do in todays NFL since free agency can be such a lure. The problem is that, especially when the players play better under Gibbs than they would be as individuals, they would start asking for salaries that are overpriced for how good they actually are.

Then again, Gibbs did talk Clark into a lower salary. . .and who won't want to stick around for another couple of years once we start winning the Lombardi trophies again.

As of now, I want to believe Gibbs, it's just that I can't be sure that any players exist who will excell and then not ask for the salary to back up their skills (as much as those skills might come from being on Gibbs' team). Loyalty of that type doesn't seem to be considered a virtue anymore in the NFL. Perhaps Gibbs will trailblaze in that area.

If Clinton told me that he did not have sexual relations with that woman, I wouldn't beleive him. If Joe Gibbs told me, I'd beleive him.

Joe Gibbs could tell me that the world was going to end tomorrow, and I'd beleive him.

So, do I beleive Joe Gibbs when he talks about his "core" group of Redskins? Y-E-S

I, myself, am not so blindly loyal. I am a "bottom line" guy. I am "results-oriented". I should be living in the "Show Me" state.
I believe that a run-producer should have a bat in his hands, folks.
Joe Gibbs has gone park three times. Once, it looked like he might do it again (against the Raiders), but it bounced off the rail. Still, that's got to count for something.
That's good enough for me.

Fan from Annapolis said, with justifiable scepticism,

As of now, I want to believe Gibbs, it's just that I can't be sure that any players exist who will excell and then not ask for the salary to back up their skills (as much as those skills might come from being on Gibbs' team). Loyalty of that type doesn't seem to be considered a virtue anymore in the NFL.

Recall that the Gibbs teams rarely had all-pro players. The SB 17 team had Theisman, Riggins, and Butz, each of whom had been somebody else's first round pick, they had Mark May, and they had Monk -- who helped get them to the playoffs, but was hurt in the last regular season game. The rest of the team was made from 10th rounders and undrafted free-agents. Ah, yes, and Dexter Manley was about a 4th round pick. I have the broadcast tape, and I remember that one of the announcers, maybe Merlin Olsen (how's that for a name from the past?), said, with as gasp, "this is a team full of strays and free agents and castoffs!"

OK, does that matter?

Maybe, yes, it still does.

- Gibbs never lets anyone know how good he is. Bill Walsh was the self-proclaimed genius of the '80s, and Gibbs was "that other guy"...

- It rubs off. It's leadership by example, rather than boss-ness. The players come to imitate Gibbs in attitude.

- Even in pro-sports, professional respect counts, often more than individual $. I expect that the Redskin players will begin to play for Gibbs's respect and praise. If Champ Bailey wants money more than he wants respect from the best coach in pro-football, then that's a character defect.

- Gibbs-Petibon-Bugel chose players like Bostic, Big Joe J., Charles Mann, and kept guys like Don Warren, Olkiewicz and Monte Coleman. All were good, but none of them were flashy players at flashy positions. Even the great players at the glamor positions fit the Gibbs way. Compare Darrell Green to Neon Deion, or to Champ Bailey. Who would wyou want in a big game?

- Those players fit into the Gibbs/Petibon/Bugel system, which starts from the offensive and defensive lines. Those positions are more likely to have workmen players, who have a typical salary below the glitzy backs. That's hopeful.

C'mon, Welch. Where do you really stand here ?

You're one of my few favorite posters here. Nice job, presenting your view.

I agree - very articulate Welch - your posts are a pleasure to read. Although you did forget to include a linebacker in one of your previous posts: Pete Wysocki. (Yes, he did get on the field a few times other than special teams and was considered one of the core Redskins)...

nick giaquento

tcwest10 wrote:C'mon, Welch. Where do you really stand here ?

You're one of my few favorite posters here. Nice job, presenting your view.

::pouting:: and here I thought you like my posting ::sniff::



I like what you wrote as well Welch - I am just thrumming with excitement to see what Gibbs can do - did you hear him talking about the undrafted FA after the draft - they already have assignments for people to go get people... I love it.

it seems that what it comes down to is that guys enjoyed playing for joe so much, that they made an effort to stay with the team. it was less about "how much money could i get if i shopped my services around?" and more about "i'll do whatever it takes to play for joe gibbs". i think we'll start to see that loyalty from players once the season starts....IF the season ever starts. DAMMIT, WHY WON"T THE SEASON START ALREADY?!?!??!

ahem, sorry, lost it there for a moment.

I'm very new here but just had to chime in because I'm a resounding ... YES!!! Joe can do this and he WILL, just watch. Remember that he said "core group" ... of course we'll lose a guy here or there, that's reality. But as far as keeping a "core" of guys together, you better believe that Gibbs' confidence is warranted.

Just look how guys have been following Parcells around ... they'll do the same for Gibbs, if not moreso. These guys want to play for a winner ... Gibbs and Parcells are just that. We will soon see the return of the Redskins/Cowboys division dominance and rivalry.

THIS is gonna be FUN!

(Thanks for compliments...any spares accepted!)

Wysocki:

I just couldn't remember if Pete Wysocki had played for Gibbs.

I remember him as one of George Allen's favorite special teamers, and I remember that Jack Pardee "discovered" that Wysocki was good enough to start at LB. In fact, I remember something from the Redskins victory over the Cowboys in their first meeting during Pardee's 10-6 year. Something about Wysocki proudly lighting up a cigar after the game, after he had knocked the Cowboys inside-out.

I checked the records and Pete's last year was 1980, so he didn't play for Gibbs...nice memory of Pardee/Pete...