I think Jim Zorn is a great head football coach.

[44Deezel]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

Joe Gibbs 1 was a great football coach. Bill Walsh was a great football coach. Bill Belichick is a great football coach. Jim Zorn is not a great football coach, he may not even be a good offensive coordinator. The jury is still out.

Seriously. I don't care how bad the O line was, 12 points a game over the last 8 is putrid. How can anyone see signs of greatness in last year's performance?

Reasons he may not even be a good offensive coordinator:

1) Couldn't get production out of the rooks when other teams were doing it all over the league. If the Eagles could get almost 1000 yards from that knucklehead Desean Jackson, Zorn should have been able to get more out of Davis, Kelly and Thomas. Don't tell me they can't read playbooks. They read playbooks well enough to be high draft picks in the NFL. Simplify if need be, and get the guys to produce on the field.

2) The running game - 342 carries for a guy who's best run went for 31 yards? The best running teams use multiple weapons out of the backfield. We had good enough talent, but Zorn chose to run Portis into the ground instead of developing weapons out of the other guys.

3) Passing game - weak and uncreative. Like someone else said, where were the no huddle plays? The trick plays? The roll-outs to give Campbell more time to throw? Teams like the Chargers and Dolphins regularly threw to their running backs for huge gains. Our RBs were non-existent in the passing game, making it all that much easier to defend the offense.

4) Mike Sellers on the goal-line. I don't care what he says, Zorn gave those carries to Sellers, because he was miffed with Portis. He let his personal feelings get the better of him. Not what great coaches do.

5) Nobody else wanted him even as an offensive coordinator. Are we supposed to think the FO knows something the rest of the league doesn't? Why? Because of their stellar track record?

I am one who thinks the 6-2 start last year was more of a fluke than an indication of what Zorn can do on a long term basis with a healthy team. I believe other teams figured him out once there was enough film to be studied and he was unable to adjust. There were some first year coaches that did show signs of greatness last year (Harbaugh, Sparano, Smith). Unfortunately, Zorn wasn't one of them (In my opinion).

But I hope you guys are right. I'd gladly eat crow over this one.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by 44Deezel

Seriously. I don't care how bad the O line was, 12 points a game over the last 8 is putrid. How can anyone see signs of greatness in last year's performance?

Reasons he may not even be a good offensive coordinator:

1) Couldn't get production out of the rooks when other teams were doing it all over the league. If the Eagles could get almost 1000 yards from that knucklehead Desean Jackson, Zorn should have been able to get more out of Davis, Kelly and Thomas. Don't tell me they can't read playbooks. They read playbooks well enough to be high draft picks in the NFL. Simplify if need be, and get the guys to produce on the field.

2) The running game - 342 carries for a guy who's best run went for 31 yards? The best running teams use multiple weapons out of the backfield. We had good enough talent, but Zorn chose to run Portis into the ground instead of developing weapons out of the other guys.

3) Passing game - weak and uncreative. Like someone else said, where were the no huddle plays? The trick plays? The roll-outs to give Campbell more time to throw? Teams like the Chargers and Dolphins regularly threw to their running backs for huge gains. Our RBs were non-existent in the passing game, making it all that much easier to defend the offense.

4) Mike Sellers on the goal-line. I don't care what he says, Zorn gave those carries to Sellers, because he was miffed with Portis. He let his personal feelings get the better of him. Not what great coaches do.

5) Nobody else wanted him even as an offensive coordinator. Are we supposed to think the FO knows something the rest of the league doesn't? Why? Because of their stellar track record?

I am one who thinks the 6-2 start last year was more of a fluke than an indication of what Zorn can do on a long term basis with a healthy team. I believe other teams figured him out once there was enough film to be studied and he was unable to adjust. There were some first year coaches that did show signs of greatness last year (Harbaugh, Sparano, Smith). Unfortunately, Zorn wasn't one of them (In my opinion).

But I hope you guys are right. I'd gladly eat crow over this one.

great point. it's the staff's job to get these guys to learn the plays. i remember doc walker killing the staff about this last year. but last year is done with so let's hopefully see improvments this year.

[joethiesmanfan]

Originally Posted by 44Deezel

Seriously. I don't care how bad the O line was, 12 points a game over the last 8 is putrid. How can anyone see signs of greatness in last year's performance?

Reasons he may not even be a good offensive coordinator:

1) Couldn't get production out of the rooks when other teams were doing it all over the league. If the Eagles could get almost 1000 yards from that knucklehead Desean Jackson, Zorn should have been able to get more out of Davis, Kelly and Thomas. Don't tell me they can't read playbooks. They read playbooks well enough to be high draft picks in the NFL. Simplify if need be, and get the guys to produce on the field.

2) The running game - 342 carries for a guy who's best run went for 31 yards? The best running teams use multiple weapons out of the backfield. We had good enough talent, but Zorn chose to run Portis into the ground instead of developing weapons out of the other guys.

3) Passing game - weak and uncreative. Like someone else said, where were the no huddle plays? The trick plays? The roll-outs to give Campbell more time to throw? Teams like the Chargers and Dolphins regularly threw to their running backs for huge gains. Our RBs were non-existent in the passing game, making it all that much easier to defend the offense.

4) Mike Sellers on the goal-line. I don't care what he says, Zorn gave those carries to Sellers, because he was miffed with Portis. He let his personal feelings get the better of him. Not what great coaches do.

5) Nobody else wanted him even as an offensive coordinator. Are we supposed to think the FO knows something the rest of the league doesn't? Why? Because of their stellar track record?

I am one who thinks the 6-2 start last year was more of a fluke than an indication of what Zorn can do on a long term basis with a healthy team. I believe other teams figured him out once there was enough film to be studied and he was unable to adjust. There were some first year coaches that did show signs of greatness last year (Harbaugh, Sparano, Smith). Unfortunately, Zorn wasn't one of them (In my opinion).

But I hope you guys are right. I'd gladly eat crow over this one.

I agree 100% percent, at the end of the year I was mad at Zorn but over the off season I have mellowed out and kinda like the guy. But if he don't learn how to adjust he needs to go. It took over 4 weeks before he learned how to beat that tactic used by the Steelers "overload one side". The solution to that problem made me throw up, and showed arrogance on Zorn's part. Running one wide receiver screen against Baltimore and that was the last time that tactic was used against our offense. No brainer, but not part of his system. That fast every other team we played took notice of our adjustment. We need to be just as swift. I think he now understands why Gibbs slept at the office. If not, he can play golf with the Ole ball coach.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by 44Deezel

Seriously. I don't care how bad the O line was, 12 points a game over the last 8 is putrid. How can anyone see signs of greatness in last year's performance?

Reasons he may not even be a good offensive coordinator:

1) Couldn't get production out of the rooks when other teams were doing it all over the league. If the Eagles could get almost 1000 yards from that knucklehead Desean Jackson, Zorn should have been able to get more out of Davis, Kelly and Thomas. Don't tell me they can't read playbooks. They read playbooks well enough to be high draft picks in the NFL. Simplify if need be, and get the guys to produce on the field.

2) The running game - 342 carries for a guy who's best run went for 31 yards? The best running teams use multiple weapons out of the backfield. We had good enough talent, but Zorn chose to run Portis into the ground instead of developing weapons out of the other guys.

3) Passing game - weak and uncreative. Like someone else said, where were the no huddle plays? The trick plays? The roll-outs to give Campbell more time to throw? Teams like the Chargers and Dolphins regularly threw to their running backs for huge gains. Our RBs were non-existent in the passing game, making it all that much easier to defend the offense.

4) Mike Sellers on the goal-line. I don't care what he says, Zorn gave those carries to Sellers, because he was miffed with Portis. He let his personal feelings get the better of him. Not what great coaches do.

5) Nobody else wanted him even as an offensive coordinator. Are we supposed to think the FO knows something the rest of the league doesn't? Why? Because of their stellar track record?

I am one who thinks the 6-2 start last year was more of a fluke than an indication of what Zorn can do on a long term basis with a healthy team. I believe other teams figured him out once there was enough film to be studied and he was unable to adjust. There were some first year coaches that did show signs of greatness last year (Harbaugh, Sparano, Smith). Unfortunately, Zorn wasn't one of them (In my opinion).

But I hope you guys are right. I'd gladly eat crow over this one.

1. All over the league? I think you may be generalizing just a bit. I guarantee there were many more rookies that struggled vs. those that made a smooth transition and contributed meaningful numbers in their first years.

2. & 4. You're contradicting yourself here. First he pounds Portis into the ground and then he's miffed at him and takes away goal line carries? If he was so miffed at him why did he give him 342 carries? And CP still had a respectable 9 TDs, so these points really make no sense.

3. If you can't master the basics you probably shouldn't be running gimmicks. Besides, not sure how tossing it to the backs would have made the offense any more "creative".

5. There are plenty of coaches that are off the league's radar that turn into fine coaches, just as there are plenty of hot prospects that flop.

[ronnieo]

I like Zorn, but unfortunately good coach or not, he will be replaced at the end of the season. Too many high profile coaches out there for DS to sink his teeth into and he will not be able to resist unless we make the Super Bowl this yea!!!!!!

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by ronnieo

I like Zorn, but unfortunately good coach or not, he will be replaced at the end of the season. Too many high profile coaches out there for DS to sink his teeth into and he will not be able to resist unless we make the Super Bowl this yea!!!!!!

If Zorn takes the team to the playoff, his job will be safe.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

1. All over the league? I think you may be generalizing just a bit. I guarantee there were many more rookies that struggled vs. those that made a smooth transition and contributed meaningful numbers in their first years.

2. & 4. You're contradicting yourself here. First he pounds Portis into the ground and then he's miffed at him and takes away goal line carries? If he was so miffed at him why did he give him 342 carries? And CP still had a respectable 9 TDs, so these points really make no sense.

3. If you can't master the basics you probably shouldn't be running gimmicks. Besides, not sure how tossing it to the backs would have made the offense any more "creative".

5. There are plenty of coaches that are off the league's radar that turn into fine coaches, just as there are plenty of hot prospects that flop.

We did some things pretty well until the o-line started falling apart. To add more plays and gimmicks to a team that was struggling with learning a new offense, a rookie receiver who wasn't running the correct routes half the time, and 2nd string o-linemen playing out of position, would have made us look more like the Keystone Kops out there than a professional football team IMO. Once that happened, I would have probably wanted to fire Zorn myself. We always talk about how we wouldn't mind taking a losing season or two, if it would get us on the right track and make us stronger in the long run. Well? Hopefully that is what's happening.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

1. All over the league? I think you may be generalizing just a bit. I guarantee there were many more rookies that struggled vs. those that made a smooth transition and contributed meaningful numbers in their first years.

2. & 4. You're contradicting yourself here. First he pounds Portis into the ground and then he's miffed at him and takes away goal line carries? If he was so miffed at him why did he give him 342 carries? And CP still had a respectable 9 TDs, so these points really make no sense.

3. If you can't master the basics you probably shouldn't be running gimmicks. Besides, not sure how tossing it to the backs would have made the offense any more "creative".

5. There are plenty of coaches that are off the league's radar that turn into fine coaches, just as there are plenty of hot prospects that flop.

Ditto

[KLHJ2]

Originally Posted by 44Deezel

Seriously. I don't care how bad the O line was, 12 points a game over the last 8 is putrid. How can anyone see signs of greatness in last year's performance?

Reasons he may not even be a good offensive coordinator:

1) Couldn't get production out of the rooks when other teams were doing it all over the league. If the Eagles could get almost 1000 yards from that knucklehead Desean Jackson, Zorn should have been able to get more out of Davis, Kelly and Thomas. Don't tell me they can't read playbooks. They read playbooks well enough to be high draft picks in the NFL. Simplify if need be, and get the guys to produce on the field.

2) The running game - 342 carries for a guy who's best run went for 31 yards? The best running teams use multiple weapons out of the backfield. We had good enough talent, but Zorn chose to run Portis into the ground instead of developing weapons out of the other guys.

3) Passing game - weak and uncreative. Like someone else said, where were the no huddle plays? The trick plays? The roll-outs to give Campbell more time to throw? Teams like the Chargers and Dolphins regularly threw to their running backs for huge gains. Our RBs were non-existent in the passing game, making it all that much easier to defend the offense.

4) Mike Sellers on the goal-line. I don't care what he says, Zorn gave those carries to Sellers, because he was miffed with Portis. He let his personal feelings get the better of him. Not what great coaches do.

5) Nobody else wanted him even as an offensive coordinator. Are we supposed to think the FO knows something the rest of the league doesn't? Why? Because of their stellar track record?

I am one who thinks the 6-2 start last year was more of a fluke than an indication of what Zorn can do on a long term basis with a healthy team. I believe other teams figured him out once there was enough film to be studied and he was unable to adjust. There were some first year coaches that did show signs of greatness last year (Harbaugh, Sparano, Smith). Unfortunately, Zorn wasn't one of them (In my opinion).

But I hope you guys are right. I'd gladly eat crow over this one.

I can see your point of view on most of your sentiments and some I agee with and some I don't.

Having said that I want to focus on the items that I bolded in your post.

First of all running trick plays is a little more difficult than people think. To be able to run trick plays you have to be able to execute your basic plays on a regular basis. The defense has to believe and commit to what they see to bite on a trick play. Plain and simple, we couldn't execute basic plays, there was no chance for a trick play.

Second involving your backs in the passing game requires the one element that we didn't have last year...time. The running back in a passing play is usually the 3rd read or later in the QB's progression. The exception to that rule is the screen play. I believe that we could use some more of these. JC didn't have enough time to hit his hot reads on many occasions; how in the world was he supposed to hit the 3rd, 4th, or 5th reads?

Essentially both of these areas can be inproved upon with improved pass protection and offensive execution in general.

[Lotus]

Unless the team utterly flops this year, I hope that we stick with Zorn and don't get impatient. I think that Zorn can be a very fine head coach, whether that is clearly evident this year or not, and this team needs continuity.

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Unless the team utterly flops this year, I hope that we stick with Zorn and don't get impatient. I think that Zorn can be a very fine head coach, whether that is clearly evident this year or not, and this team needs continuity.

That's what I'm screaming. The one thing that this team has lacked on offense is consistency. I think that DS has to give Z some time. If he doesn't, none of the other "proven" coaches will have the comfort of knowing they'll not be fired after two seasons. DS has to live down his reputation. I think three to four years should be long enough for any coach to turn a team around, not one or two.

[skinsnut]

Originally Posted by Trample the Elderly

I think three to four years should be long enough for any coach to turn a team around, not one or two.

Note:
Jim Zorn inherited a playoff team...there wasn't much to "turn around"
He only needed to do as well or 2 wins better to be considered a good coach...not to mention, he didn't touch the defense, special teams...and even the runnning game.
That is a pretty light load for a new head coach, but understandable considering how light of a rookie he was.

Ask yourself this question...if Gibbs had this team with a 6-2 start, would they have missed the playoffs?....doubtful...I don't care who is injured....he'd probably make seller a RT to make it happen...it would be ugly...and he'd be launching deep passed to Moss to make it happen...but it is rare that a great coach wins 75% of his games only to finish 500.

[44Deezel]

Originally Posted by skinsnut

Note:
Jim Zorn inherited a playoff team...there wasn't much to "turn around"
He only needed to do as well or 2 wins better to be considered a good coach...not to mention, he didn't touch the defense, special teams...and even the runnning game.
That is a pretty light load for a new head coach, but understandable considering how light of a rookie he was.

Ask yourself this question...if Gibbs had this team with a 6-2 start, would they have missed the playoffs?....doubtful...I don't care who is injured....he'd probably make seller a RT to make it happen...it would be ugly...and he'd be launching deep passed to Moss to make it happen...but it is rare that a great coach wins 75% of his games only to finish 500.

The Skins used to have a "system" much like the Patriots have today. Guys put on the Pats jersey and somehow play better than they did with the jersey they wore the year before. That's how they can overcome truly "devastating" injuries like losing Tom Brady (losing line men is something most teams have to deal with every year). The Skins used to be the same way. Lose the starting QB and still make it to the Super Bowl. Take marginal talents like Ricky Ervins and Ricky Sanders and turn them into Super Bowl legends. Guys like Rypien and Gary Clark would go to different teams and wouldn't be near the players they were when they were with the Skins.

If Zorn can build a system like that, one that gets the most out of its players, one that can overcome injuries, and one that wins championships, he will be great.

Of course, Gibbs didn't have Cerrato and Snyder to deal with

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by 44Deezel

The Skins used to have a "system" much like the Patriots have today. Guys put on the Pats jersey and somehow play better than they did with the jersey they wore the year before. That's how they can overcome truly "devastating" injuries like losing Tom Brady (losing line men is something most teams have to deal with every year). The Skins used to be the same way. Lose the starting QB and still make it to the Super Bowl. Take marginal talents like Ricky Ervins and Ricky Sanders and turn them into Super Bowl legends. Guys like Rypien and Gary Clark would go to different teams and wouldn't be near the players they were when they were with the Skins.

If Zorn can build a system like that, one that gets the most out of its players, one that can overcome injuries, and one that wins championships, he will be great.

Of course, Gibbs didn't have Cerrato and Snyder to deal with

Nor did he have to deal with a salary cap and Free Agency

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsnut

Ask yourself this question...if Gibbs had this team with a 6-2 start, would they have missed the playoffs?....doubtful...I don't care who is injured....he'd probably make seller a RT to make it happen...it would be ugly...and he'd be launching deep passed to Moss to make it happen...but it is rare that a great coach wins 75% of his games only to finish 500.

If it was Gibbs AND Gregg Williams, I don't think they would have missed the playoffs.