Gibbs Alludes to Mark Rypien

[Beemnseven]

Boy, I really hate bringing this up, but Andy Polin had a good question regarding Gibbs and personnel moves as it relates to this conversation:

Would Gibbs be more or less likely to continue playing guys who under-perform if he weren't the one making the decision to bring them here? The question was posed when someone asked if anyone other than Portis had fumbled twice in one half if they would see the field for the rest of the day.

In the Bobby Beathard days, Gibbs would have no personal interest in any player, play the guy who gives his team the best chance to win, bench the players who f up, and have no guilt about it. But now, there could be a tendency to prove a point, by trying to confirm that the players he has acquired are the right guys no matter what they do or how badly they play.

I think it's a legitimate question considering the personnel structure we have here.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Boy, I really hate bringing this up, but Andy Polin had a good question regarding Gibbs and personnel moves as it relates to this conversation:

Would Gibbs be more or less likely to continue playing guys who under-perform if he weren't the one making the decision to bring them here? The question was posed when someone asked if anyone other than Portis had fumbled twice in one half if they would see the field for the rest of the day.

In the Bobby Beathard days, Gibbs would have no personal interest in any player, play the guy who gives his team the best chance to win, bench the players who f up, and have no guilt about it. But now, there could be a tendency to prove a point, by trying to confirm that the players he has acquired are the right guys no matter what they do or how badly they play.

I think it's a legitimate question considering the personnel structure we have here.

How do you explain Lloyd and Archuleta then?

[Beemnseven]

But see, even with Lloyd and Archuleta, those were guys reportedly suggested by Saunders and Gregg Williams respectively. Not Gibbs, so again, he had no personal connection with those guys.

Would Gibbs have put up with two fumbles from one running back in such a short span if it were any other player? Can't we agree that he never would have stood for that back in the heyday?

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

But see, even with Lloyd and Archuleta, those were guys reportedly suggested by Saunders and Gregg Williams respectively. Not Gibbs, so again, he had no personal connection with those guys.

Would Gibbs have put up with two fumbles from one running back in such a short span if it were any other player? Can't we agree that he never would have stood for that back in the heyday?

Really I don't know.

But I'm not going to lie, I don't hold anything Polin or Czaban (was he doing the show with Czaban?) opine with much respect. They've proven to me over and over again to be petty people. It's personal.

[Beemnseven]

Alrighty then. I think there could be something to it. For the record, I'm against calling for any of the coaches to step down, I just think there needs to be a change with the personnel structure.

It was the Sports Reporters on SportsTalk 980. Czaban I can understand, because he can be scathing with his opinions. Polin though, seems more level headed, not as vicious; but he's not afraid to call it like he sees it.

The thing to remember though is that they are both fans. Just highly critical fans -- basically the opposite of the kool aid types.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Boy, I really hate bringing this up, but Andy Polin had a good question regarding Gibbs and personnel moves as it relates to this conversation:

Would Gibbs be more or less likely to continue playing guys who under-perform if he weren't the one making the decision to bring them here? The question was posed when someone asked if anyone other than Portis had fumbled twice in one half if they would see the field for the rest of the day.

In the Bobby Beathard days, Gibbs would have no personal interest in any player, play the guy who gives his team the best chance to win, bench the players who f up, and have no guilt about it. But now, there could be a tendency to prove a point, by trying to confirm that the players he has acquired are the right guys no matter what they do or how badly they play.

I think it's a legitimate question considering the personnel structure we have here.

Saying Gibbs wouldn't have any personal interest in any player back in the Bobby Beathard days is just plain out incorrect. Gibbs had a large say so in player personal back in the glory years as BB or CC.