Why Doesn't "Gibbs' Football" Work for the Redskins?

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

The game has changed dramatically over the past 10-15 yrs.. For example:
-Rule changes have made the game siginificantly tilted to the passing game.. The illegal contact rule, the emphasis on roughing the passer tends to protect QBs more, defensive holding is called much more than ever before..
-Exotic defenses change the way offense is called.. You'd hardly ever see 8 in the box before the past 15 years.. The 3-4 wasn't around, you would NEVER see some of the defensive formations the Pats do (1 down linemen, 4 LB and 6 DB) and as a result offenses have gotten more aggressive to exploit those defenses. Gibbs has not shown any innovation in his game plan or philosophy since his return..
-Players today are bigger, stronger, faster, more athletic than ever before.. While not diminishing any players of before (I am a child of the 70's and 80's so I saw all of the same ones you mentioned play) for every Lawrence Taylor, I give you Shawn Merriman or Brian Urlacher. For every Ronnie Lott, I give you Brian Dawkins or Ed Reed.. Today's players are more athletic, run faster and hit just as hard..

Yesterday's players were probably smarter, but overall today's game is different. By that I mean the game is tilted to what coaches can maximize their teams talents by suiting their gameplan to his team's strengths rather than teach a team to fit into their system.

A perfect example is Tony Dungy. His background is old school Chuck Noll, run the ball, take some shots downfield and play great defense. He turned TB from the NFL dregs to a powerhouse with that formula because he had those type of players.. When he got to Indy, he had a great QB, great WR and a bad defense.. Rather than force his philosophy, he let the offense continue to air it out (against his background) while trying to improve the defense. He's going to the Hall of Fame because he knew how to and was willing to adapt to the strengths of his team rather than stubbornly stick to 'his system'.

Gibbs seems like he's trying to fit square pegs into his round hole and that's why it's not working..

There were nickel and dime defenses back in the 80's and yes, there was the 3-4 defense back in those days as well, so I'm not buying that the defenses has changed that much. As far as the rule changes, I do agree, they do favor the passing game more, but there are also defensive schemes that counter act that...such as the bump and run and the blitz packages.

And further more, it's good that you brought up Tony Dungy. Sure, he had to change his philosophy when he came to Indy. HOWEVER, notice the Colts didn't win their Super Bowl until they had a defense that was reliable, and they ran the football more.

Remember. Joe Gibbs' philosophy really isn't conservative football. He came out of the mold of Don Coryell...."Air Coryell". He molded his offense with the type of players he had in the 80's. In the early to mid 80's, the offense centered around John Riggins. In the second half of the 80's and early 90's, it focused a lot on the Posse' (Monk, Clark, Sanders,) while maintaining and strong running game.

It's all about what type of team you have....the type of players you have. Gibbs philosophy deals with the type of team he has. If he has a young, inexperienced QB, he's going to run more. If he has Mark Rypien or Doug Williams under center he's going to air it out, but he's going to do so when the quarterback is experienced enough to take the team on his back. Jason isn't there yet. But, people would be blind to not see that we are giving Campbell more opportunities to go down field.

There's nothing wrong with Gibbs' philosophy. If there was, over half of the current head coaching staff in the league wouldn't have jobs.