Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

So, the defense is back and it is run totally by GW. The offense goes through Saunders, but if we have the lead then Gibbs greatly influences the playcalling to be more conservative. If GW is calling all the defense, and Saunders calls the plays until we get a lead, that begs the question: Are we 4-2 because of Joe, or in spite of him?

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

I think this is a good thread. IMO we are 4-2 because of him, but NOT because he's doing a good job on Sundays. I think his premium on character and intelligence in players, along with his disciplined approach has greatly improved the stability of the team/organization. And as far as game preparation goes, he's second-to-none. He has gotten The Danny to almost completely disappear from the day-to-day stuff, which is also good for stability. And as great as Williams has been, does anyone think he or guys like Bugel and Saunders would be here if it weren't for Gibbs? Again, I don't think Coach Joe does a great job during the actual game itself. But as far as building a stable organization, a good locker room, and a great group of coaches, that's directly his doing.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

In every single thread I read Saunders is calling the plays, but then when we start doing shitty it's because Gibbs just decided to start calling plays at that moment and take our team down the drain. I highly doubt the Gibbs takes over playcalling at random moments and singlehandedly causes all of our second half collapses.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

We are 4-2 because of GW.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

Pretty much irrelivant of him. He's definately made some downright wrong game decisions, but he's well respected in the locker room and by a majority of fans.

There are coaches out there who are better than Gibbs, but no one nearly as important to the history of this franchise. Plus, there are a ton of coaches out there who don't command respect like Gibbs does.

We're 4-2. Joe Gibbs happens to be our coach. That's about as well as I can put it.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

We are 4-2 because of Gibbs. Who do you think calls the shots from the draft to the game plan. Do you credit our 3 SB's to Richie Petitbon (sp)? It's a team effort, ultimately the head coach is the one held accountable. He's responsible for the players he picked, his handpicked coaching staff, etc. Just ask Scott Linehan the Rams coach.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

I say it is because of Coach Joe but it has nothing to with his playcalling or any other gameday duties.Gibbs is the ultimate NFL CEO. He has final say in shaping the roster and determining the makeup of the coaching staff. He stayed the line w/ GW when a lot of people were blasting the D and he allowed JC to develop a little before rushing him in like most of us wanted. During Gibbs 1.0 he was hands off D and ST and the same is true today.
He trusts people to do their job and he butts out.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

I think it is because of him.

Think about the years "BG" : Between Gibbs.

What did we have, one playoff year in 12?

Now we are looking at possibly being in the playoffs for the 2nd time in 3 years.

Also,the caliber of picks in recent years (a topic of a recent thread), has given GW the players that are making the D what it is today.

Where would we be this season WITHOUT Sean Taylor, London Fletcher, Fred Smoot, etc.?

Just my 2-centavos.

J-Dawg.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

I know a lot of people are frustrated with Gibbs, but if 60% of your starting offensive line goes down I don't know how many teams in the NFL would fare much better.

Not to mention how many games has Jason Campbell started now? How many qbs become dominate in their first real season in action - I would guess it probably take 2-3 years of actually game experience to fully develop into a bonified QB.

What we forget to remember is who was repsonsible for bringing in Greg Williams in the first place? - last I remember Gibbs was the one on Redskin One flying to Buffalo - in fact this was his first "mission" - getting Williams to revamp the defense. Gibbs than went out and got some of the most experienced coaches money could buy - not a bad move if you ask me.

Yes the decision making as far as player acquisition is quite debatable - in fact I have posted on here before in favor of bringing in a seperate, proven GM because I am of the belief that a coach thinks more short term while a GM often takes a longer term forecast as far as player acquisition goes - hence this is why we traded away a lot of draft picks for immediate results with Llyod, Duckett and so on. I hope that we move away from this way of doing business, because draft picks outside of the 1st round are often the lifeblood of your team.

I think Gibbs as Coach is just fine. Gibbs as GM - well that is a whole seperate thread that has been beaten into the ground on this board already.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

[QUOTE=jgalecpa;368303]Where would we be this season WITHOUT Sean Taylor, London Fletcher, Fred Smoot, etc.?[/QUOTE]

I always thought Taylor and Fletcher were GW's moves.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

We're 4-2 because of Joe Gibbs.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

We've won 4 games because of Joe Gibbs, Gregg Williams, Al Saunders, Dan Snyder, Louis Riddick, Vinny Cerrato, Jerry Gray, Joe Bugel, Greg Blache, Jason Campbell, Santana Moss, Clinton Portis, Shawns Springs, Andre Carter, Khary Campbell, Rock Cartwright, and so on

We've lost 2 games because of Joe Gibbs, Gregg Williams, Al Saunders, Dan Snyder, Louis Riddick, Vinny Cerrato, Jerry Gray, Joe Bugel, Greg Blache, Jason Campbell, Santana Moss, Clinton Portis, Shawns Springs, Andre Carter, Khary Campbell, Rock Cartwright, and so on

Team effort. You can pin all the wins and losses on just one person.

However, one man signs all their checks so...We are 4-2 because of Dan Snyder ;)

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

Taylor and Fletcher were GW moves. If memory serves correctly Gibbs wanted Winslow, but GWill talked him into Taylor.

Since as fans we have no clue who is responsible for game plans, half time adjustments, playcalling, etc. I feel I can't answer the question. It's in spite of whoever turns our offense off at half time.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

Both.. He's brought a level of order, discipline and professionalism that was lacking before he got here that has permeated the organization.. He also has brought conservatism and a mentality of fearing turnovers and playing not to lose that has resulted in a tough loss vs. the Giants..

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

Looking at the specifics of game-day stuff, rather than the overall organizational stuff, I think we are 4-2 because of him, but we might be 6-0 if he'd back off a bit on the ball-control with the lead thing, and give Campbell some more room to improvise and throw. But we could be 2-4 for the same reason. It's a tough call--hence the endless discussions.

On redskins radio (skins.com) today, he had a few questions about why he doesn't pass more. He said what he always does: what he likes is balance. And I don't think that's a bad thing the way our (healthy) team is built--with Portis and a strong o-line, we should be able to cram it down the Cardinals or Packers throat, score a last TD on a back-breaking time eating drive, and keep these pass-happy attacks off the field. But we don't have that o-line now, and Portis hasn't really flashed anything on his own (nor has Betts). Given that, we should throw more, but did that work in GB? We threw way more than we ran in the second half there, and lost it.

I think the balance philosophy is actually very good--if we can execute it. One: we have a good D: keeps opponents scores down. Two: you do not want to get into a bombs away shootout with the likes of Brady, etc. Three: a dominate run game forces safeties into the box, allowing for play-action (see, for example, the missed TD pass in Philly: that was classic Gibbs to me, though we missed it). Four: if you get more plays on offense than the other team, you tend to win. Five: it takes the pressure off of JC--not a bad thing until he's got some seasoning (people love to forget this one, especially given Brady. BUt most QBs need some time to grow).

We need to execute, though, to make this work. But I really do think it's the best strategy in the long run for stopping these high-powered offenses. The Key is 3rd down conversions on O, especially 3rd and short--that stat has been telling for us this year.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;368319]We've won 4 games because of Joe Gibbs, Gregg Williams, Al Saunders, Dan Snyder, Louis Riddick, Vinny Cerrato, Jerry Gray, Joe Bugel, Greg Blache, Jason Campbell, Santana Moss, Clinton Portis, Shawns Springs, Andre Carter, Khary Campbell, Rock Cartwright, and so on

We've lost 2 games because of Joe Gibbs, Gregg Williams, Al Saunders, Dan Snyder, Louis Riddick, Vinny Cerrato, Jerry Gray, Joe Bugel, Greg Blache, Jason Campbell, Santana Moss, Clinton Portis, Shawns Springs, Andre Carter, Khary Campbell, Rock Cartwright, and so on

Team effort. You can pin all the wins and losses on just one person.

However, one man signs all their checks so...We are 4-2 because of Dan Snyder ;)[/quote]

Well said.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

I think Gibbs (and every other Redskin) should always get credit for every win.

Dan Snyder is always responsible for the losses.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

[QUOTE=GMScud;368281]I think this is a good thread. IMO we are 4-2 because of him, but NOT because he's doing a good job on Sundays. I think his premium on character and intelligence in players, along with his disciplined approach has greatly improved the stability of the team/organization. And as far as game preparation goes, he's second-to-none. He has gotten The Danny to almost completely disappear from the day-to-day stuff, which is also good for stability. And as great as Williams has been, does anyone think he or guys like Bugel and Saunders would be here if it weren't for Gibbs? Again, I don't think Coach Joe does a great job during the actual game itself. But as far as building a stable organization, a good locker room, and a great group of coaches, that's directly his doing.[/QUOTE]

ALL great points and I agree with you 100%!!! Aside from last season, Gibbs has put the Washington Redskins back on the NFL map!

And I'll throw this in about Al Saunders and the belief that Gibbs takes over playcalling or at least has his thumb on Al when we get a lead, there's a reason why Priest Holmes and LJ had so many carries and yards while he was there...Al does like to run the ball!!! It's just they had a stellar O-line in KC that made it effective, and ours has shown glimpses of that as well (when they're not on IR) and with the 2 backs we have, I think that he thinks they can get it done, that the backfield talent is better than the WR/QB talent right now. That being said, I think you'll see 60/40 ratio of pass/run this Sunday....provided the game is somewhat close.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

With the offensive line as it is we cannot consistantly run....or pass the ball. The only route to go is ultra conservative and rely on the defense. If they call one pass after another or deeper pass plays to make the fans happy Campbell will spend the afternoon running from D-lineman or on his butt. The injuries to the offensive line are killing this teams offense at the moment. We have a total of one guy starting on the O-line right now who started last season...how many other teams would be 4-2 in such a difficult situation? Gibbs ball control offense relies more on a stout offensive line then most. Balanced O and ball control wins in the playoffs in most cases...this is a time tested formula for success.

Get the O-Line healtier or the back ups up to par and the offense will show some life. Until then do whatever you can to win ball games.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

Any time your the leader you get credit for wins and losses.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

In spite of Gibbs. I'd like to see Gibbs get out of the way and let AS do his thing.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

I really think Gibbs influences the playcalling when we get a lead. I believe he steps in and dictates whether we run or throw the ball. Do I have any hard evidence of this? Nope. What really irritates me is how poorly the clock is managed and replay challenges are handled. For example, at the end of the Giants game I don't think anyone had a clue what was going on, it looked like a team that never ran a 2 minute offense.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

[quote=SBprimetime;368294]In every single thread I read Saunders is calling the plays, but then when we start doing shitty it's because Gibbs just decided to start calling plays at that moment and take our team down the drain. I highly doubt the Gibbs takes over playcalling at random moments and singlehandedly causes all of our second half collapses.[/quote]

No one can make me believe that Gibbs doesn't have major impact on AS playcalling. JG may not call the plays but he controls the theme of the game, no doubt.

I say let Al free. We brought him here, let him do his thing.

We're 4-2 b/c of both.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

[QUOTE=SmootSmack;368319]We've won 4 games because of ... Shawns Springs...

We've lost 2 games because of ... Shawns Springs...[/QUOTE]

Sorry Double S, had to do it...

It's a collective effort among coaches, players and other staff. Everyone is held accountable, so why single one person out, even if it's the head coach? Just be glad to be 4-2, and not 0fer like the 'phins and Rams.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

Personally I doubt that Gibbs overrules Saunder's play calling during a game, if he does I think it's pretty rare. Does he influence the game plan heading into the game? Of course, after all he is still heavily involved with the offense.

And as someone already pointed out, despite Saunders' reputation as being this high flying offensive guru, his offenses have produced some pretty hearty running games over the years, and that's one of the reasons that Gibbs went out and recruited Saunders.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

Gibbs has got the organization on the right track, even Peter King agrees w/that.

Let's be happy that he's brought some stability & although we got our hopes up after the 05 playoffs & thought we had a contender, things take a while. He's helped to undo some bad moves & bad practices. Of course, he also had a hand in moves like getting B.Loyd, but I'll take that along w/the positives.

I share the feeling of many here that Gibbs seems too worried about losing leads which has in turn led to doing just that. I think he'll see the light w/the situation now though. This o-line is better at pass blocking than run blocking. JC is a good qb & we have a decent wr corps & nice TE.

I expect to see the ball in the air a lot on sunday. We'll set up the run w/the pass like we did in Detroit. That's our only hope IMO. I'd be absolutely shocked if we could pound the ball on NE in the first half.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

For those of you who want Gibbs to let Saunders have complete autonomy in the offensive gameplanning, do you remember when he first came here and they were running about thirty reverses a game? Gibbs is the overwhelming yin to Saunder's yang.

Yes, I said yang, not wang.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;368426]For those of you who want Gibbs to let Saunders have complete autonomy in the offensive gameplanning, do you remember when he first came here and [B]they were running about thirty reverses a game?[/B] Gibbs is the overwhelming yin to Saunder's yang.

Yes, I said yang, not wang.[/quote]


I could go for that gameplan against NE. :)

Randel El, Moss if he holds onto the ball, Portis, heck even Lloyd could run those plays well.

On the other plays, we either throw long bombs or hand it to Big Mike.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

Oh, Because of Gibbs is my answer. :)

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

[quote=Buster;368431]I could go for that gameplan against NE. :)

Randel El, Moss if he holds onto the ball, Portis, heck even Lloyd could run those plays well.

On the other plays, we either throw long bombs or hand it to Big Mike.[/quote]

I would actually really like Sellers to get a good amount of carries. I'm talking maybe 10-15.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection;368426]For those of you who want Gibbs to let Saunders have complete autonomy in the offensive gameplanning, do you remember when he first came here and they were running about thirty reverses a game? Gibbs is the overwhelming yin to Saunder's yang.

Yes, I said yang, not wang.[/QUOTE]

IMO, Gibbs help AS and GW keep from killing each other. I think if Gibbs ever stepped down then either GW or AS would go because I just dont think they could work together. Gibbs is the buffer

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

gibbs is building something here, a future dynasty, it might not work for now but in the future it will. he is teaching dan synder his staffing secrets. we don't know but this will be a team to reckon with in the future.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

We are 4-2 because of gibbs, but we also have two losses because of gibbs. We should still be undefeated..

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

I think the question is moot. What does it matter if it is because of Gibbs or in spite of Gibbs that we are 4-2. The real question is how are we going to do for the rest of the season? We are facing adversity and I want to know how we will react.

We are 4-2, there are no excuses and there is no need to speculate, we are our record. We have 10 games left. When the season is over u can ask the same question and it may be more appropriate, b/c thats the time for retrospective analysis.

Re: Are we 4-2 because of Gibbs, or in spite of him?
 

No doubt, we're here because of him.

Think of where we'd be if we still had Spurrier...

*Shudders at the thought*