Len Pastabelly on Gibbs' Retirement: "Just An Ordinary Joe"

[irish]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I posted this in another thread, but I thought people might want to compare our starters, pre and post Gibbs.

OFFENSE

LT = unchanged
LG = Dockery to Kendall
C = Moore to Rabach
RG = unchanged
RT = unchanged
TE = Zeron Flemister to Chris Cooley
WR#1 = Coles to Moss
WR #2 = Gardner to ARE
RB = Trung Canidate to Clinton Portis
FB = Bryan Johnson to Mike Sellers

DEFENSE

LE = Wynn to Daniels
DT = Noble to Montgomery
DT = Dalton to Griffin
RE = Upshaw to Carter
OLB = Arrington to McIntosh
MLB = Trotter to Fletcher
OLB = Armstead to Washington
CB#1 = Bailey to Springs
CB #2 = Smoot to Smoot/Rogers
FS = Ohalete to Taylor*
SS = Bowen to Landry

Aside from the Bailey/Springs and Dockery/Kendall swaps, we are in much better position today than we were 4 years ago. Of the 22 starters Spurrier left Gibbs with, 11 are not even playing in the NFL (Ohalete, Bowen, Armstead, Arrington, Noble, Dalton, Upshaw, Moore, Flemister, Johnson, and Canidate). That's 50% of the team. Moreover, most of those guys are out of work due to poor play, not age or injury.

In short, we did NOT have a good roster in 2003. We appear to have a nice one in 2007.

Good comparison, Thanks. The flaw in all this better off talk is that it assumes the team has been "fixed". Unfortunately an NFL team is not like a broken car, a NFL team is never fixed. Players & coaches come & go. Injury happen. The team is always being tweaked, patched, etc. Its an ongoing process that is never done. Gibbs did some good things while he was here but he's gone now and his "fixes" will only last until the next tweak.

[SmootSmack]

So basically you're saying no team can ever be better off.

[BDBohnzie]

There is always room for improvement. However, the progression from before Gibbs to after Gibbs is going in the right direction.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by irish

Call me old fashioned but I think football people should be making football decisions and owners should make ownership decisions.

Well, what constitutes an "ownership" decision? He owns the team so, arguably, who he employs is ultimately an ownership decision., whether they be a player, coach or FO person.

What you really want, as many do, is for Snyder to be an open checkbook for, say Floyd Reese, as he was for Joe Gibbs. Essentially, you want him to cede control of his enterprise to a general manager/team president/ceo, etc. because you believe him to be (as many others do) incompetent in the personnel/talent evaluation phase.

I can't believe I am saying this but, and this is a big big "but", if he has learned patience and discarded his fantasy football ways, Snyder could do fine in the talent aquisition phase. Certainly when it comes to running the cap, the current FO arrangement has allowed some flexibility despite consistent projections of gloom and doom.

Again, the question remains - Do we get the the talent aquisition of the Smoot/Fletcher year or the Archuletta/LLoyd/Duckett year? If the former, Snyder is fine by me. If the latter, well, call me when he sells the team.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by irish

Good comparison, Thanks. The flaw in all this better off talk is that it assumes the team has been "fixed". Unfortunately an NFL team is not like a broken car, a NFL team is never fixed. Players & coaches come & go. Injury happen. The team is always being tweaked, patched, etc. Its an ongoing process that is never done. Gibbs did some good things while he was here but he's gone now and his "fixes" will only last until the next tweak.

Huh? Did Gibbs' "teak[s], patch[es], etc." improve the team? From a personnel point of view, and based on SGG comparison, I would say most definitely. Further, it appears you are conceding (which Lenny P does not) that Gibbs has improved the team.

The statement I bolded seems to assert that the moment anyone "teak[s], patch[es], etc." the Redskins then all of the work done by Gibbs will be wiped out. That simply if far to broad a statement to be given credibility.

On the other hand, if you are merely asserting that it is possible that the next coach will completely unravel Gibbs good work b/c Snyder will simply go back to his old ways, fair enough. That could happen. But that scenario is more than a mere tweak or patch.

Preliminarily, by making the bolded assertion you inherently concede that Gibbs HAS improved the team. The only question is whether or not the improvements he made will survive without him being present.

Essentially, it devolves back to the question that we all have and that only time will answer: Did Gibbs teach Snyder patience and will Snyder be able to be patient without Gibbs presence. IF SO then, I believe, we will be fine. If not, then God help all 'Skins fans.

[#56fanatic]

Originally Posted by SkinEmAll

I guess the more I read about our two blind, deaf and dumb fellow members,(by the way the blind deaf and dumb remark is not a personal attack, just an observation), My question to myself and everyone else here is.....why bother? Seriously, if these two and anyone else who is in agreement with them, cant see the difference in this team pre and post Gibbs II, well then to hell with em. I almost feel like they are doing it just for attention. I mean can someone really be that, blind, deaf and dumb?

unbelievable for someone to post this crap. is it seriously needed, brother? Because some people look at the overall win loss record of the proof for change is not wrong.
i look at this two sided. 1 side - we are no better now than when Gibbs first got here 4 years ago. wins and losses ultimately make you or break you in the NFL. Yes we have made the playoffs two of the four years. great!! i love it. however, it took two miracle runs of 5 and 4 in row to go to the playoffs. if we have to make those kind of runs every year to make the playoffs, we may end up on the short end of the stick from time to time. When marty left we were 8-8, when spurrier left he was 12-20 overall, 8 games under 500. when Gibbs left, 5 games under 500. So, honestly wins and losses we are still the same team we were 8 years ago.

side 2. we are better off in terms of chemistry, draft picks for next year (minus a 4th rounder?) younger talent, making the Redskins matter again, making us feel more like a family. we are better off looking at it this way. Hopefully the Danny will learn patience, make the right move with the next coach (GW). if he hires someone else, Carroll, Cowher this roster will likely be blown apart to fit his style and that is 2 or 3 years of moves for us to compete. it all rests on one single move. the head coach. we need continuity, GW or Al is the only way we keep that, hopefully The Danny will realize this.

[SkinsFanSince91]

This guy is obviously mad at the Redskins for something. He has been all hate for the Skins on all levels since I have been reading his writing.

I propose that from now on, we dont mention his name on the warpath, since we know he will just be trying to stir "hater-ade."

Anyone second that motion?

[SkinsFanSince91]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I posted this in another thread, but I thought people might want to compare our starters, pre and post Gibbs.

OFFENSE

LT = unchanged
LG = Dockery to Kendall
C = Moore to Rabach
RG = unchanged
RT = unchanged
TE = Zeron Flemister to Chris Cooley
WR#1 = Coles to Moss
WR #2 = Gardner to ARE
RB = Trung Canidate to Clinton Portis
FB = Bryan Johnson to Mike Sellers

DEFENSE

LE = Wynn to Daniels
DT = Noble to Montgomery
DT = Dalton to Griffin
RE = Upshaw to Carter
OLB = Arrington to McIntosh
MLB = Trotter to Fletcher
OLB = Armstead to Washington
CB#1 = Bailey to Springs
CB #2 = Smoot to Smoot/Rogers
FS = Ohalete to Taylor*
SS = Bowen to Landry

Aside from the Bailey/Springs and Dockery/Kendall swaps, we are in much better position today than we were 4 years ago. Of the 22 starters Spurrier left Gibbs with, 11 are not even playing in the NFL (Ohalete, Bowen, Armstead, Arrington, Noble, Dalton, Upshaw, Moore, Flemister, Johnson, and Canidate). That's 50% of the team. Moreover, most of those guys are out of work due to poor play, not age or injury.

In short, we did NOT have a good roster in 2003. We appear to have a nice one in 2007.

Sheriff, you should send this to Lenny "fats" and see what he has to see after this obvious upgrade, 2 playoff appearances, one playoff win, and a galvanizing of a distraught team after the death of Sean Taylor are not feats made by anyone who is average.

[irish]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Well, what constitutes an "ownership" decision? He owns the team so, arguably, who he employs is ultimately an ownership decision., whether they be a player, coach or FO person.

What you really want, as many do, is for Snyder to be an open checkbook for, say Floyd Reese, as he was for Joe Gibbs. Essentially, you want him to cede control of his enterprise to a general manager/team president/ceo, etc. because you believe him to be (as many others do) incompetent in the personnel/talent evaluation phase.

I can't believe I am saying this but, and this is a big big "but", if he has learned patience and discarded his fantasy football ways, Snyder could do fine in the talent aquisition phase. Certainly when it comes to running the cap, the current FO arrangement has allowed some flexibility despite consistent projections of gloom and doom.

Again, the question remains - Do we get the the talent aquisition of the Smoot/Fletcher year or the Archuletta/LLoyd/Duckett year? If the former, Snyder is fine by me. If the latter, well, call me when he sells the team.

I think his fantasy football ways will be worse because he thinks that he has been "taught" by Gibbs.

I dont want him to cede control of his enterprise, I want him to listen to people who know football and football talent.

[irish]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Huh? Did Gibbs' "teak[s], patch[es], etc." improve the team? From a personnel point of view, and based on SGG comparison, I would say most definitely. Further, it appears you are conceding (which Lenny P does not) that Gibbs has improved the team.

The statement I bolded seems to assert that the moment anyone "teak[s], patch[es], etc." the Redskins then all of the work done by Gibbs will be wiped out. That simply if far to broad a statement to be given credibility.

On the other hand, if you are merely asserting that it is possible that the next coach will completely unravel Gibbs good work b/c Snyder will simply go back to his old ways, fair enough. That could happen. But that scenario is more than a mere tweak or patch.

Preliminarily, by making the bolded assertion you inherently concede that Gibbs HAS improved the team. The only question is whether or not the improvements he made will survive without him being present.

Essentially, it devolves back to the question that we all have and that only time will answer: Did Gibbs teach Snyder patience and will Snyder be able to be patient without Gibbs presence. IF SO then, I believe, we will be fine. If not, then God help all 'Skins fans.

What I am saying is that a lot of folks on this board make it sound like Gibbs fixed a broken team and now all it need is to be left alone so it can win. What I am saying is while Gibbs was here he did his best to make changes that in some cases helped and in some cases didnt. When the new guy gets here some of the changes will stay, some wont. An NFL team is a constantly changing thing.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by SkinsFanSince91

This guy is obviously mad at the Redskins for something. He has been all hate for the Skins on all levels since I have been reading his writing.

I propose that from now on, we dont mention his name on the warpath, since we know he will just be trying to stir "hater-ade."

Anyone second that motion?

What so everyone needs to agree with what you are saying to not be a Redskins Hater. I guess your talking about 56fanatic or maybe even me?

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I don't think anyone would disagree that Gibbs left this organization better than when he arrived but I believe that allot of people (myself included) fell that he feel short in winning us game and making a run to a SB.

I think a lot of Redskins fans had very high expectations for Joe Gibbs, maybe even unrealistic expectations. Even though he didn't turn the team into the New England Patriots while he was here, the things he has done is quite an accomplishment. I believe a lot of people didn't realize how horrible this team was when Gibbs came back to Washington.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by irish

I think his fantasy football ways will be worse because he thinks that he has been "taught" by Gibbs.

I dont want him to cede control of his enterprise, I want him to listen to people who know football and football talent.

He may well have learned from Gibbs. Perhaps, one of the things he learned was to listen to the right people concerning talent. Unlike like you, I do not think this is an impossibility.

That, I think is the crux of our disagreement - You have no hope that the post-Gibbs Snyder will be better than the pre-Gibbs Snyder. I have hope that he will.

Originally Posted by irish

What I am saying is that a lot of folks on this board make it sound like Gibbs fixed a broken team and now all it need is to be left alone so it can win. What I am saying is while Gibbs was here he did his best to make changes that in some cases helped and in some cases didnt. When the new guy gets here some of the changes will stay, some wont. An NFL team is a constantly changing thing.

I don't think anyone is asserting that "all [the team] need[s] is to be left alone so it can win". Rather, we are asserting [hoping] that Gibbs fundamentally changed Snyder's fascination with aquiring bright, shiny new toys (re: players) and trying the quick fix, and, instead, taught Snyder that continuity, commitment and high quality team players are the ways to build a championship.

If Danny has truly learned that lesson, then a new guy is not going change it and Gibbs positive influence will be felt lonnnngggg after Gibbs' departure.

[irish]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

He may well have learned from Gibbs. Perhaps, one of the things he learned was to listen to the right people concerning talent. Unlike like you, I do not think this is an impossibility.

That, I think is the crux of our disagreement - You have no hope that the post-Gibbs Snyder will be better than the pre-Gibbs Snyder. I have hope that he will.



I don't think anyone is asserting that "all [the team] need[s] is to be left alone so it can win". Rather, we are asserting [hoping] that Gibbs fundamentally changed Snyder's fascination with aquiring bright, shiny new toys (re: players) and trying the quick fix, and, instead, taught Snyder that continuity, commitment and high quality team players are the ways to build a championship.

If Danny has truly learned that lesson, then a new guy is not going change it and Gibbs positive influence will be felt lonnnngggg after Gibbs' departure.

Nothing is impossible but I wouldnt bet my house on it.

[JoeRedskin]

Fair enough. Neither will I.

How about a six pack?