D.C. Examiner: Zorn's job in jeopardy? (not so fast he's coming back)

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

That one play definitely was unbelievable. How in the world do you send in the backup center to play LT and leave him on an island against a fierce pass rush? That just blew my mind.

This is the kind of stuff that is going to happen to a rookie HC who has never even been a coordinator before, who has not only taken on the role of HC, but also OC and QB coach. I think he's got too much on his plate.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I've seen a few posts in this thread, from SS and skinsfan69 in particular, stating unequivocally (and I'm paraphrasing here) that you don't get rid of Zorn after one season under any circumstances.

I could not disagree with you more.

If Zorn guides this team to wins against the Bengals and Niners, finishing at 9-7, then he certainly deserves to keep his job. I want to make that very clear first and foremost.

But if we drop all 3 remaining games? Lose to the Bengals and the 49ers? Collapse down the stretch? Start to lose the locker room? Finish 7-9 after making the playoffs last year while keeping the same defense and the same running game? No thank you, that's ineffective leadership.

Leadership positions are not the kind where you need to learn on the job. You either have a clue how to lead men or you don't. Offensive schemes, sure, they take time. But not leadership. You don't lose the locker room if you're a good leader.

But should offensive schemes even take all that long when all you have to do is install a passing offense? I'm willing to give Zorn two years to produce a passing offense worth a darn, a la Matt Hasselbeck. But he better get this locker room back in a hurry, or all the offensive scheming in the world won't matter. If you can't lead men then you can't be a head coach in the NFL.

Zorn needs to stop saying things like "we just didn't execute" in the papers. If you keep selling your players out like that and deflect the criticisms of yourself, you're going to lose the players' respect.

I don't like kneejerk reactions applied to coaching changes, but there are times when waiting and being patient reaches the point of diminishing returns. Once we found out Spurrier couldn't lead men, we wanted him out and couldn't wait until it happened. Zorn is NOT at that point, but if he doesn't get the locker room back and beat the sorry ass Bengals and Niners, he might be.

Leader first, scheme second.

If we set the Cleveland game as the benchmark for the start of our current consistent level of play, then we have beaten ALL of the teams we are supposed to beat since then. I still think St. Louis was a fluky game (I'm guessing we won't lose on a Guard fumble ever again).

People (and apparently, some players too) are getting driven up the wall because we don't have a quality victory since week 5. We are 0-4 against quality opponents in that time span. Which is disappointing yes, but does it really speak to a deeper problem in which I would expect the team to come out and underachieve against Cincinnati? I don't believe it does.

I think Zorn does have to keep the team playing hard here to keep his job, but he's kept them competitive to this point, I can't really fathom a result that causes Snyder to fire him.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by YellowBirdy

I’m starting to think that maybe one of the reasons Gibbs used a more conservative Offense with max blocking schemes was because he had a more realistic assessment of the talent (or lack of it) on the O Line when it came to pass protection.

If that was the case, then in 4 years as not only HC but also team president, why did we not bring in more O-line talent through the draft and free agency?? You may be right I don't know, but if you are, it's further evidence of the ineptitude of our FO.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

If we set the Cleveland game as the benchmark for the start of our current consistent level of play, then we have beaten ALL of the teams we are supposed to beat since then. I still think St. Louis was a fluky game (I'm guessing we won't lose on a Guard fumble ever again).

What a strange premise off which to build a logical argument. Why in the world would we set the Cleveland game as the benchmark? Given that we kept the same running game, defense, starting lineup, and assistant coaching staff, shouldn't last year's performance (9-7) be the benchmark?

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

People (and apparently, some players too) are getting driven up the wall because we don't have a quality victory since week 5. We are 0-4 against quality opponents in that time span. Which is disappointing yes, but does it really speak to a deeper problem in which I would expect the team to come out and underachieve against Cincinnati? I don't believe it does.

I don't believe so either. Beating Cincinnatti is expected. But if you lose this one, coach Zorn, the chatter will get much louder.

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I think Zorn does have to keep the team playing hard here to keep his job, but he's kept them competitive to this point, I can't really fathom a result that causes Snyder to fire him.

I think he'd at least consider it if they go 7-9. But it's not worth worrying about until we see what happens over the final three games.

[CRedskinsRule]

I don't think it is Snyder who needs to show he has patience, I think we as fans need to show we can disregard blatant fear/hate mongering and (probably) baseless rumors.
Zorn, or any 1st year coach that does not go 1-15, deserves a chance to re-group, and learn. Every great coach has had growing pains.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by GMScud

This is the kind of stuff that is going to happen to a rookie HC who has never even been a coordinator before, who has not only taken on the role of HC, but also OC and QB coach. I think he's got too much on his plate.

You got wonder though how much of it is due to him saying (as I believe he did this summer at one point), "Ok Buges, the line and running game. That's your responsibility so you take care of that." And then Zorn not properly overseeing that

[A10sROCK]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

But did management really have interest in "building a new program" in the first place? I mean they kept the defense, kept the same rushing attack, kept nearly all the starters, traded picks for an aging Jason Taylor...

It seems to me they were just trying to build off what Joe Gibbs had already built. If the coach is incapable of carrying Gibbs' leadership torch, then I think their intention is (and should be) to get someone who can.

Gibbs II had a losing record. They brought Zorn in [first] because he was going to develop Jason Campbell to the maximum level.

Then they liked his ideas, drive and personality for the top job. If you give up on a guy after only a year - what coach will come here? Snyder would forever gain the Oakland-type management stink.

Snyder will stay with Zorn to show his perseverance. He was going to keep Gibbs and Spurrier - why would he suddenly change with Zorn?

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I've seen a few posts in this thread, from SS and skinsfan69 in particular, stating unequivocally (and I'm paraphrasing here) that you don't get rid of Zorn after one season under any circumstances.

I could not disagree with you more.

If Zorn guides this team to wins against the Bengals and Niners, finishing at 9-7, then he certainly deserves to keep his job. I want to make that very clear first and foremost.

But if we drop all 3 remaining games? Lose to the Bengals and the 49ers? Collapse down the stretch? Start to lose the locker room? Finish 7-9 after making the playoffs last year while keeping the same defense and the same running game? No thank you, that's ineffective leadership.

Leadership positions are not the kind where you need to learn on the job. You either have a clue how to lead men or you don't. Offensive schemes, sure, they take time. But not leadership. You don't lose the locker room if you're a good leader.

But should offensive schemes even take all that long when all you have to do is install a passing offense? I'm willing to give Zorn two years to produce a passing offense worth a darn, a la Matt Hasselbeck. But he better get this locker room back in a hurry, or all the offensive scheming in the world won't matter. If you can't lead men then you can't be a head coach in the NFL.

Zorn needs to stop saying things like "we just didn't execute" in the papers. If you keep selling your players out like that and deflect the criticisms of yourself, you're going to lose the players' respect.

I don't like kneejerk reactions applied to coaching changes, but there are times when waiting and being patient reaches the point of diminishing returns. Once we found out Spurrier couldn't lead men, we wanted him out and couldn't wait until it happened. Zorn is NOT at that point, but if he doesn't get the locker room back and beat the sorry ass Bengals and Niners, he might be.

Leader first, scheme second.

I agree with you 100%. If the guy can't lead men then he must go. But all this losing the locker room stuff could be a bunch of BS. Who really knows? We're not inside Redskins Park. He's probably lost Portis and CP is Snyder's guy.

[724Skinsfan]

The tone of this thread seems to assume that we're going to lose to Cincinnati. Naturally, I don't suppose 99% of the people on this board really believe we will lose but close to the same wouldn't be all that surprised if we do drop the game. Aside from St. Louis, haven't we beat the teams we were supposed to beat? Haven't we lost to teams that were supposed to beat us? We're not playing good offensively. What a shocker! A first time play-caller and HC, who just so happen to inhabit the same body, needs time. I will say this, Zorn must evaluate his ability to adapt the way he wants to play with the hand that is dealt to him. The whole square peg/round hole crap applies here.

I agree that Zorn needs to show he can lead this team when the going gets tough but, in reality he hasn't failed that test yet.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

You got wonder though how much of it is due to him saying (as I believe he did this summer at one point), "Ok Buges, the line and running game. That's your responsibility so you take care of that." And then Zorn not properly overseeing that

GREAT point.

And to all this losing the locker room thing, veteran players need to have a meeting with Zorn this week, air whatever frustrations they have, get on the same page as Zorn and the coaches, then go back to the rank and file and tell them to STFU and get with the program....especially Portis, very good back, but I've had about enough of his mouth on the JT show and elsewhere. Get a thicker skin and stop being a baby. He needs to take a look at the number of zeros on his paycheck, shut up and just make plays. We don't need anymore drama at this point.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I've seen a few posts in this thread, from SS and skinsfan69 in particular, stating unequivocally (and I'm paraphrasing here) that you don't get rid of Zorn after one season under any circumstances.

I could not disagree with you more.

If Zorn guides this team to wins against the Bengals and Niners, finishing at 9-7, then he certainly deserves to keep his job. I want to make that very clear first and foremost.

But if we drop all 3 remaining games? Lose to the Bengals and the 49ers? Collapse down the stretch? Start to lose the locker room? Finish 7-9 after making the playoffs last year while keeping the same defense and the same running game? No thank you, that's ineffective leadership.

Leadership positions are not the kind where you need to learn on the job. You either have a clue how to lead men or you don't. Offensive schemes, sure, they take time. But not leadership. You don't lose the locker room if you're a good leader.

But should offensive schemes even take all that long when all you have to do is install a passing offense? I'm willing to give Zorn two years to produce a passing offense worth a darn, a la Matt Hasselbeck. But he better get this locker room back in a hurry, or all the offensive scheming in the world won't matter. If you can't lead men then you can't be a head coach in the NFL.

Zorn needs to stop saying things like "we just didn't execute" in the papers. If you keep selling your players out like that and deflect the criticisms of yourself, you're going to lose the players' respect.

I don't like kneejerk reactions applied to coaching changes, but there are times when waiting and being patient reaches the point of diminishing returns. Once we found out Spurrier couldn't lead men, we wanted him out and couldn't wait until it happened. Zorn is NOT at that point, but if he doesn't get the locker room back and beat the sorry ass Bengals and Niners, he might be.

Leader first, scheme second.

Finishing 7-9 after a 6-2 start is definitely the kind of stuff that gets guys fired all the time in this league. And the bigger issue like you mention is if he's lost the confidence of the players, forget about it. Snyder will be on the horn with Cowher in no time.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

You got wonder though how much of it is due to him saying (as I believe he did this summer at one point), "Ok Buges, the line and running game. That's your responsibility so you take care of that." And then Zorn not properly overseeing that

Yeah I mean you've got to wonder how much he really got involved with the run game. How do you integrate those two things- a power run game run by a departed coach with a previously unknown (to the players) WCO passing game? How involved are Zorn and Bugel in their gameplanning? It's worth noting that we have a new RB coach, a new OC and HC, all needing production from an O-line run by a guy who none of them have ever worked with.

And it's not like we had a legendary running game. Sure it was solid under Gibbs, but that doesn't mean Zorn couldn't have implemented at least some of his running packages.

I think to a degree the situation has been unfair to Zorn. We kept nearly every major coach (aside from GW leaving and S.Smith and Stump coming in), and never really let Zorn go through the process of building a staff. I think the hiring process has hindered Zorn more than him being given the job itself.

He interviewed for - and won - the OC position. Then suddenly he gets offered the HC position?? Of course he's gonna accept, and he wasn't gonna bitch about a staff either, especially with how late it was getting as far as coaching placement throughout the league.

[atomicnixon]

Originally Posted by YellowBirdy

I’m starting to think that maybe one of the reasons Gibbs used a more conservative Offense with max blocking schemes was because he had a more realistic assessment of the talent (or lack of it) on the O Line when it came to pass protection.

Great post, I never thought of it that way. Even in the 80's and early 90's when the run game was their "bread and butter" they had a really prolific passing attack. It was odd that Gibbs went to such conservatism, but I think you're right, he made a great assessment on our pass protection.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

GREAT point.

And to all this losing the locker room thing, veteran players need to have a meeting with Zorn this week, air whatever frustrations they have, get on the same page as Zorn and the coaches, then go back to the rank and file and tell them to STFU and get with the program....especially Portis, very good back, but I've had about enough of his mouth on the JT show and elsewhere. Get a thicker skin and stop being a baby. He needs to take a look at the number of zeros on his paycheck, shut up and just make plays. We don't need anymore drama at this point.

EXCELLENT POST!!!

[GMScud]

Pretty good stuff from Boswell's article:

There's a world of difference between a coach who never tells a lie (Gibbs) and a coach who gives himself the prerogative to tell the truth (Zorn). The first illustrates character. The second borders on being foolhardy.

Long ago, Walter Lippmann wrote, "The genius of a good leader is to leave behind him a situation which common sense, without the grace of genius, can deal with successfully."

A little more common sense, and a little less self-indulgent honesty, might have prevented it.