Lloyd's Sideline Hissyfit

[joekes]

Originally Posted by hooskins

Um maybe the way the organization works is wrong for a proven offense.... The reason we went to the playoffs last year, is because we had one losing year with Gibbs, and Danny boy did not give him the ax. Keeping similar systems tends to lead to winning in the NFL.

So why did we change systems to Saunders' stuff. Yes it's a proven winning system, but its NOT a proven CHAMPIONSHIP system. Ball control is a proven championship system year after year.
There is a reason Payton Manning hasn't won a super bowl- Finnesse wins regular season games - Intimidation (defense, running and playaction) wins Championships.
There was no reason to add Saunders after last year. Gibb's system was making progress - like you said, why change a proven system.
Gibbs = 3 super bowls.
Saunders = 0
It's not about winning in October, I'm sure after one or two more years Saunders giant playbook can give you an 11-5 season, but I'll guarantee it won't give you a super bowls. Why wait 2 years to be back where we were last year, when this season could have been special.
HUGE MISTAKE

[hooskins]

Originally Posted by joekes

So why did we change systems to Saunders' stuff. Yes it's a proven winning system, but its NOT a proven CHAMPIONSHIP system. Ball control is a proven championship system year after year.
There is a reason Payton Manning hasn't won a super bowl- Finnesse wins regular season games - Intimidation (defense, running and playaction) wins Championships.
There was no reason to add Saunders after last year. Gibb's system was making progress - like you said, why change a proven system.
Gibbs = 3 super bowls.
Saunders = 0
It's not about winning in October, I'm sure after one or two more years Saunders giant playbook can give you an 11-5 season, but I'll guarantee it won't give you a super bowls. Why wait 2 years to be back where we were last year, when this season could have been special.
HUGE MISTAKE

First of all, read the rest of my post that you are ignoring. our offensed SUCKED in the playoffs, why? Because there were not enough plays, only several recievers, and the play calling was very conservative. That is why we lost against Seattle, and should have agaisnt Tampa. The point? Defenses pick up easy and basic offenses, like ours last year. It wasnt gonna work this year, we needed change, everyone wanted it, now it we got it. So just shuttup and stick with it until next year then start bitching.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by joekes

So why did we change systems to Saunders' stuff. Yes it's a proven winning system, but its NOT a proven CHAMPIONSHIP system. Ball control is a proven championship system year after year.
There is a reason Payton Manning hasn't won a super bowl- Finnesse wins regular season games - Intimidation (defense, running and playaction) wins Championships.
There was no reason to add Saunders after last year. Gibb's system was making progress - like you said, why change a proven system.
Gibbs = 3 super bowls.
Saunders = 0
It's not about winning in October, I'm sure after one or two more years Saunders giant playbook can give you an 11-5 season, but I'll guarantee it won't give you a super bowls. Why wait 2 years to be back where we were last year, when this season could have been special.
HUGE MISTAKE

You might want to take a closer look at things, G. Williams defense has been carrying this team for the last 2 years, Gibbs offense was pathetic, we were getting better on offense? Theres a joke, take a look at our last 3 games last season, if thats your idea of progress than you will never understand the game.

Saunders was the guru behind the greatest show on turf, and I do believe they won a SB. Just because he may not be cut out as a head coach doesn't mean he can't be a tremendous O-coordiantor. Kind of tough to run an offense when your hamstrung with a QB that Gibbs can't part ways with in Brunell, Saunders turned a bag boy in Warner into an MVP he knows how to deal with QB's. In which right now he doesn't have one.

[joekes]

Originally Posted by offiss

Saunders was the guru behind the greatest show on turf, and I do believe they won a SB.

Uhmmm No, Saunders was not the "guru" of the Rams Super Bowl team. Mike Martz was the O-coordinator and Vermeil was the Coach. Saunders was.... drum roll... wide recievers coach.. not really the hardest job when your receivers are Torry Holt and Isaac Bruce in their primes.
Why does everyone want to ball wash Saunders so much? and with wrong information?
He wasn't a "guru"
yes he was O-coordinator at KC and they racked up a bunch of yards, but let's check the Chiefs playoff record in Saunders five years there.
Hmm. ONE playoff game- ONE, and they lost- That's NO playoff wins in five years-
NONE
We don't need that crap.
His is NOT an offense designed to win playoff games.
The kind of Offense you run affects what kind of defense you have. His offense sets a tempo that the defense has to follow and the defense gets exhausted and gives up big plays. That's one big reason KC's defense was always terrible.
The concept of Ball control is foreign to Saunders.
He can take his fancy playbook and shove it up his A$$ - that is if there's any room up there next to all you guys who love him so much.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by joekes

Uhmmm No, Saunders was not the "guru" of the Rams Super Bowl team. Mike Martz was the O-coordinator and Vermeil was the Coach. Saunders was.... drum roll... wide recievers coach.. not really the hardest job when your receivers are Torry Holt and Isaac Bruce in their primes.
Why does everyone want to ball wash Saunders so much? and with wrong information?
He wasn't a "guru"
yes he was O-coordinator at KC and they racked up a bunch of yards, but let's check the Chiefs playoff record in Saunders five years there.
Hmm. ONE playoff game- ONE, and they lost- That's NO playoff wins in five years-
NONE
We don't need that crap.
His is NOT an offense designed to win playoff games.
The kind of Offense you run affects what kind of defense you have. His offense sets a tempo that the defense has to follow and the defense gets exhausted and gives up big plays. That's one big reason KC's defense was always terrible.
The concept of Ball control is foreign to Saunders.
He can take his fancy playbook and shove it up his A$$ - that is if there's any room up there next to all you guys who love him so much.

not to mention, it's much easier to call plays and look good when you've got 2 HoF players on your o line. after losing both tackles, larry johnson isn't exactly looking like he-man any more.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by joekes

Uhmmm No, Saunders was not the "guru" of the Rams Super Bowl team. Mike Martz was the O-coordinator and Vermeil was the Coach. Saunders was.... drum roll... wide recievers coach.. not really the hardest job when your receivers are Torry Holt and Isaac Bruce in their primes.
Why does everyone want to ball wash Saunders so much? and with wrong information?
He wasn't a "guru"
yes he was O-coordinator at KC and they racked up a bunch of yards, but let's check the Chiefs playoff record in Saunders five years there.
Hmm. ONE playoff game- ONE, and they lost- That's NO playoff wins in five years-
NONE
We don't need that crap.
His is NOT an offense designed to win playoff games.
The kind of Offense you run affects what kind of defense you have. His offense sets a tempo that the defense has to follow and the defense gets exhausted and gives up big plays. That's one big reason KC's defense was always terrible.
The concept of Ball control is foreign to Saunders.
He can take his fancy playbook and shove it up his A$$ - that is if there's any room up there next to all you guys who love him so much.

Funny wherever Saunders has been the teams offense is phenomonal, St.Louis, San diego, and KC, his problem has been lack of defense, has Martz done anything significant before or after Saunders was with him? No. and yes Saunders was also assistant head coach to Martz when Vermeil left. The fact is we had more 3 and outs last year than I can ever remember seeing, that is why the team was running on fumes at the end of the year, our entire team relied on the defense. Your not paying attention if you think we have a quick strike offense, or a high scoring offense which doesn't control the ball, which is what you are saying Saunders is, everything he has run is designed to control the ball and eat the clock because Brunell can't get the ball downfield, it's not his fault if Brunell continues to throw to the first guy he see's in a Skins uniform regardless of yards neeeded or pressure. I guess Williams is a problem as well if he could deliver more 3 and outs the offense would eventually score, regardless of how well Williams has proven he knows how to coach defense. Personel and Brunell are the problems with this team not Saunders.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by offiss

Funny wherever Saunders has been the teams offense is phenomonal, St.Louis, San diego, and KC, his problem has been lack of defense, has Martz done anything significant before or after Saunders was with him? No. and yes Saunders was also assistant head coach to Martz when Vermeil left. The fact is we had more 3 and outs last year than I can ever remember seeing, that is why the team was running on fumes at the end of the year, our entire team relied on the defense. Your not paying attention if you think we have a quick strike offense, or a high scoring offense which doesn't control the ball, which is what you are saying Saunders is, everything he has run is designed to control the ball and eat the clock because Brunell can't get the ball downfield, it's not his fault if Brunell continues to throw to the first guy he see's in a Skins uniform regardless of yards neeeded or pressure. I guess Williams is a problem as well if he could deliver more 3 and outs the offense would eventually score, regardless of how well Williams has proven he knows how to coach defense. Personel and Brunell are the problems with this team not Saunders.

four points:

1. KC (backup QB) and detroit (crappy crappy team) are doing better than us right now.
2. the rams in 2000 (he was the WR coach, NOT the HC, NOT the OC) had tory holt (HoF), marshall faulk (HoF), Isaac Bruce, etc... he had great RBs and OL in KC (like insanely good - roaf and shields = winning). maybe we just don't have that kind of talent here.
3. they had better QB play.
4. at the end of last year, we were playing without a QB, yet still finished 11th in offense. that's not bad and if brunell wasn't playing hurt and worn out at the end maybe we could have done better.