Spagnuolo is supposed to interview for the Redskins coaching job on Tuesday. He did a tremendous job with his defense this past year especially in the playoffs. I don't really know much about the guy but what I find interesting is that he seems like the hot name right now. Last year, you would hear a lot about Ron Riveira but his name never really surfaced for any of this year's job openings.
Bottom line is that for me it doesn't really matter who the coach is. I will wait until a decision is made and even then it is what it is. I can only judge and comment once they are on the job and see how they perform. I will say that I don't really want Fassel but the other guys (Meeks, Spagnuolo, Mariucci) I don't have feelings one way or the other so it would just be judge on the results.
I will say Spagnuolo did a tremendous job with his defense this year...particularly in the post season and especially in the Super Bowl.
23 comments:
Danny Boy could salvage the coaching search debacle and hiring Spag in order to appease the fans.
However, Spag may just be the latest flavor of the month. The Giants front 7 are just beasts and while I am sure that Spag is a good defensive coach the Giants D has a lot of very good players.
I am not really even sure the Redskins need a defensive coach - they really need an offensive coach given their inexperienced offensive coordinator, their young QB, and the fact that they are going to implement a new offense.
Besides that, Spag would not be able to bring in his own coordinators or coaches and his authority would be diminished because of it.
If he is hired, I am sure he will make clear that he wants to have the option to hire his own staff after this year.
Spag would appease the fans but again, is it about appeasing the fans?
Again, for me, it just doesn't matter. I'm sure everyone will have their opinion when a coach is named but we can't judge him until they get a chance to set up their system and work with the players and see what the results are.
You know this, RobsObs but fans are going to always be critical unless there is success. No matter who is named coach, there will be plenty of people that will complain but SHOULD that individual have success, than those very same people will be more than happy to cheer and support that coach. That's a fact.
Again, I will just sit back and wait and see what the results are.
I think Danny Boy has botched the whole process and has alienated a good part of the fan base. So now he is trying to figure out how to appease the fans.
Personlly, I don't think it matters who the coach is because I think the front office is a mess. The whole idea of hiring an OC, DC, and a team of coaches without actually hiring a head coach is ridiculous.
What we do know is this - they were insincere about the whole notion of building on the foundation of Gibbs.
What we can reasonably speculate on is that Fassel was going to be the coach but then Danny Boy didn't pull the trigger when he realized how angry the fans were. You would think that an owner would have more convictions than to just abandon his choice because fans are angry, but that is Danny Boy for you.
It seems to me that at this point Fassel should be hired because they need an offensive coach and Zorn is his guy. However, Danny Boy may view Spag as a more palatable head coach for fans and may end up hiring him instead. Then, a year from now, when things don't go exactly right, Zorn and/or Blache will be fired and a bunch of new coaches will be brought in.
I don't think we can say that we know that he was insincere about the whole ntion of building on the foundation of Gibbs. I assume you mean that they should have hired Gregg Williams. One, is it not inconceivable that they wanted to give him the job but after 4 interviews they just did not see eye to eye? Who is to say that Gregg was going to be a great head coach? His track record was not that great. Keep in mind, Gregg would have been my first choice unless I just didn't feel right about picking him. Two, we are trying to hold on to all of the position coaches so there is still continuity. It's not like it's a whole new staff.
I don't know what happened with Fassel. Without either one of us knowing any details, that scenario that you painted is a little bit easier for me to believe.
Again, we can only wait to see who the coach ends up being (I assume a decision will be made within a week) and judge him on his record. Again, I know people do it but I just don't like when people cry about the replacement but will cheer if they have success. You cried about Saunders 700 page playbook and made fun of him and the 'Skins for that but then you cry that he was let go. You just can't have it both ways. Accept the 700 page playbook or be happy that he and his 700 pages are gone as you thought they were ridiculous in the first place. Don't waffle.
I am not the one waffling. Danny Boy talked all about maintaining consistency and building on the foundation. Personally, I am fine with all new coaches, but then don't argue that you are building on any foundation provided by Gibbsy.
When you hire a new head coach, OC, and DC, you are fundamentally changing your organization. I have never heard of a team maintaining consistency and changing the three top coaches. The new coaches are certainly going to want to get their own kind of players in to run their own systems. I would not be surprised to see more than 20 new players on the team this year.
If the various stories are to be believed, Double G wanted some authority on player decisions and wanted Al Saunders back as the OC. He wanted the playbook streamlined, but he wanted Al back. The latter (and I am sure some of the former) was the deal breaker for Danny Boy.
You know, Danny Boy knows football better than anyone. That is why he has hired an OC and DC without actually hiring a head coach. The head coach should thank Danny for installing a brilliant coaching staff.
I did not read any reports of Gregg wanting to keep Al and streamlining the offense. If that was the case, I would have actually agreed with him.
Don't expect much to change with the defense in terms of personnel and schemes as Blache is basically an extension of Williams.
I imagine the offense will change...hopefully for the better.
I think you are missing my point. Maybe Snyder wanted consistency, maybe he wanted Williams to be the coach and he gave him multiple opportunities to become the coach. Maybe Snyder was disappointed that after the interviews, he just wasn't satisfied with Williams and even though he wanted him before and gave him many opportunities to take over, he just couldn't give it to him because he wasn't comfortable. Then he would be being honest in trying to maintain consistency. Snyder is trying to retain all/most of the position coaches so again he is trying to maintain consistency. Even though Williams is leaving, Blache should keep things consistent on defense as again, he seemed to share the same philosophy as Williams. The players seem comfortable with him too so I don't envision much change there.
Saunders seemed like he was going to be gone regardless so there would be consistency there.
I agree that the hiring of coordinators before a head coach is a little weird but I believe you are arguing consistency. If I am wrong, then correct me. If I am right, then I think that, as I mentioned above, the intention was to have even more consistency but regardless it appears that their is quite a bit of consistency.
Two points. The offense played remarkably well given the injuries and the fact that they were essentially playing with a rookie QB. Certainly JC was making progress and at the end of the year when there was a system QB with experience it showed what the offense could do. Now there will be an all new offense, with different terminology, that will be put in. Expect some growing pains.
Second, you are giving Danny Boy way too much credit in my opinion. What could Double G possibly say in 4 10 hour waterboarding sessions - that Danny Boy did not know already? I heard very clear support coming from the team for Double G, but the owner knows better? Unless Double G never spoke to Danny Boy in 4 years it is hard to understand what he could have said that was so shocking and so upsetting to Danny Boy.
There will be some consistency on D, but there has to be some changes, especially if a defensive coach becomes head coach. For sure, there will be significant changes on offense. I think it is pretty silly to argue that with a new head coach, OC, and DC that there will be consistency. But we can wait and see.
That being the case - (which is fine but
You are too funny. You always try and spin things to take shots at the 'Skins. Before you were all too happy to complain about Saunders and his 700 page playbook. You were all over him and made fun of him to no end and thought he was a mistake. During Collins run, you indicated that it was just exceptional play by a journeyman QB. Now you seem to indicate that Saunders is intelligent and that Collins is a system QB that could thrive as the QB in the Saunders system. Essentially Saunders is smart and Collins should be QB. No question Collins played well but he is a 36 year old career backup for a reason. The Redskins offense never materialized into the offensive juggernaut that was the St. Louis Rams or K.C. Chiefs. Now whether that was a function of Saunders hands being tied or players not understanding the system or what who knows? I do feel badly for JC as he will have to learn a new system but for whatever reason Saunders didn't seem like the right fit in D.C. We just don't know all the reasons why it didn't work out (although you probably think that you some how know why it didn't work).
I don't think that you are giving Danny Boy ANY credit. I know you hate him. I don't have any feelings for him. I think he has made mistakes but I don't think there is an owner out there more committed to winning (I know you disagree on that - we've been down that road). If Danny Boy was not intent on hiring Gregg than why waste everyone's time by conducting 4 interviews with the guy? Danny Boy probably hoped he could be the guy but there were maybe some sticking points they just couldn't get past. Who knows? You don't know? We can speculate but we just don't know.
We all hoped the entire staff would be back and we would have to worry about any of this stuff but when Gibbs retired and a new head coach is needed, of course there will be some changes. I agree that the offense will change but I really don't think that is all that bad (see above). If Gregg wasn't going to be head coach, it is reasonable to expect him to be gone. That said, Blache is an extension of Williams. The players support him and I don't think too much will change in terms of scheme/personnel.
Many of the position coaches will remain the same. I may be giving Danny Boy too much credit but you certainly give him none.
For the umpteenth time, if I were in charge of the Redskins I would change my entire front office, the coaching staff, and many of the players. But I am not and that is not the point.
For some reason, you cannot understand my very simple point. I wasn't the one proclaiming that Gibbs had built a strong foundation and that the Redskins were going to maintain consistency - DANNY BOY WAS! Then within days of saying that, he made huge changes. That made him look like the fool that he is and that is what really angered (rightfully so) the fans.
I argue that this whole process has been a debacle and is another example of his B.S. At the very least, I would think you would agree that he certainly has not maintained consistency. But for some odd reason you want to argue that he is maintaining consistency.
I have never, ever, ever, heard of a case where the head coach, OC, and DC were replaced in an effort to maintain consistency. Those kind of changes indicate that an organization is going in a completely new direction.
If Danny Boy had said right from the start, "Thanks Joe for all of your effort, we will now evaluate our organization and coaching staff to try to make improvements" he would not have been lying to the fans. Instead, he tried to say that little would change right before he made wholesale changes.
Whoever the new coach is and whenever he gets here, that coach is going to want to get players to match his system and he will want to eventually hire his own coaches for his staff. So this year will be a rebuilding year as they change offensive systems (and defensive philosophies if a guy like Spags is hired). Then, next year you can bet that the coach will change out some of the coaching staff again next year.
I say you will see a whole lot of change over the next 2 years in terms of coaches and players. You say they are being consistent.
Let's see who is right.
Let me say something else about Saunders and Double G.
Double G is a very good defensive coach. He did a lot for Washington and they unceremoniously tossed him out. They didn't fire him face-to-face, they issued a press release and then to make matters worse, there were plenty of reporters who wrote negative stuff about Double G that were attributed to Redskins' front office personnel. Double G's agent actually complained about the lies that were being printed and accused the Redskins front office of unethical behavior. It was very unprofessional, but par for the course for the Redskins under Danny Boy.
I'm sure Double G will be fine, but I'm sure he has a lot of resentment about how he was treated. There are rumors that he could end up in Dallas or with the Giants if Spag leaves, so he may come back to haunt the Redskins regularly.
As for Saunders, I always thought it was a bad move for the Redskins because they had a veteran team that was built on power running when they hired him. It did not make any sense to bring him here with his complicated system and then to neuter him by not allowing him to properly implement his system.
Saunders was successful with the Rams and the Chiefs because he was allowed to run his system. He was never allowed to do that in Washington because his system is so different from what Gibbs' philosophy was. So, hiring him here made no sense whatsover.
I think he is a terrific coach who has proven himself over many years. He just was a very bad choice for a Joe Gibbs team. I am quite sure he is going to go to the Rams, rebuild their offense, and have success.
I don't know why you always say, "for the umpteenth time..." I get it. All I am saying is that maybe the intention was to have consistency when he made that statement. Seemed like that statement was sincere. By interviewing Gregg so many times, it gives an indication that he may very well have expected him to become the coach but something just didn't work out. All I am saying is AGAIN perhaps the intention at the time of the statement was to keep things largely intact.
I am not sure if Saunders ever had a shot at staying. However, I think the hope was that things would work out with Gregg. For whatever reasons, they didn't. Perhaps Danny Boy was upset that it couldn't work out and achieve the consistency that he stated at the time of Gibbs retirement. Again, the intention may very well have been to keep things intact and he would have been genuine in making that statement. Even though Gregg is gone, Snyder seemed to have done his best to keep the defense largely the same by promoting Blache and keeping all of the position coaches. For what happened, I think he is doing what he can to realize consistency.
As far as a coach being hired to a team that already has a staff and you "never, ever, ever" having seen it before, it happened with Gruden several years ago. He was hired by the Bucs and they had many of their staff already in place. He ended up winning the Super Bowl in his first year there.
I am not saying it is right or that I agree with what has taken place. I am pointing out where it has happened before.
No question Gregg is a fine coach. You disparaged him a couple years ago saying that he had too big of an ego and that he had blackballed Lavar. I kept saying that we don't know the full story but you were quick to come to Lavar's aid and side with him and blame Gregg. I seem to remember you came down pretty hard on him for that. Now you flip flop and agree with me in saying he is a very good coach.
I cannot comment on Gregg's dismissal and the articles because I am unaware of them. I am not saying that it's not true only that I am not aware of them.
Same thing with Saunders. You were critical of his hiring and you are critical now that he leaves. There were a number of reports on the Redskins offense and who was running what but we don't know the truth. I think it's good for everyone that he leaves. I think we did have too many cooks in the kitchen and hopefully with Gibbs and Saunders gone and Breaux hopefully having a limited role, the offensive game planning/play calling will be streamlined.
I do feel bad for JC in that he will have to learn his 7th system in 8 years. It's hard to progress with so many changes.
Geez you don't have any clue about what I am arguing with respect to consistency.
OK, you think he is trying to maintain consistency. I think he has blown up the team.
Gregg wanted to keep Al. Danny Boy didn't want to. That isn't maintaining consistency.
The Gruden example is just flat out wrong with respect to what I said. First of all, a bunch of coaches left with Dungy. Second, go back and look at what I said. "I have never, ever, ever, heard of a case where the head coach, OC, and DC were replaced in an effort to maintain consistency." Tampa Bay wasn't trying to maintain consistency. They wanted change to take them to the next level. That is different from what Danny Boy claimed he wanted following Gibbsy's exit.
Geez, I do understand what you are saying.
I believe Saunders never had much a chance at returning. However, outside of him, at the time Snyder made his statement of consistency, I think it was hoped by Snyder that Gregg would become coach and he would keep all the remaining coaches. That said, I think that is trying to keep consistency. Thus, he was genuine in making that statement at that time.
Whatever. I love how agitated you get over such silly nuances.
If you really understood my points about consistency you wouldn't keep saying what I thought about the coaches in the past (Double G and Al) - that is irrelevant to the discussion.
If Danny Boy truly wanted consistency he would have had it. He knows Double G from 4 years of working with him. He just didn't want him because Double G doesn't get along with Vinny and didn't want to take his (and Danny Boy's) crap.
I will say this. You are literally the only person I have heard on the radio, TV, or that I have spoken to that actually thinks Danny Boy tried to maintain consistency. I don't think I have read anyone's comments (out of literally hundreds) that has yoiur viewpoint. I'm excluding folks who are on Danny Boy's payroll like Gibbsy and Larry Michael.
I am not begrudging you, that is your right and I say good for you. We just have to disagree. We'll see how this all plays out.
First, I am not saying that it he has shown 100% consistency. You apparently are not following what I am saying. I said that it appeared that Saunders was gone regardless. However, at the time of his consistency comment, it seemed that Danny Boy wanted to keep everyone else intact. That shows some consistency.
Clearly, it didn't work out with Gregg so they took the closest thing to him and selected Blache who is just an extension of Gregg. All the position coaches remain intact. Again, I'm not arguing that he had total consistency. That's obvious. However, he seemed to want to have quite a bit of consistency instead of a complete overhaul of the coaching staff.
Second, your comment about me being the only person that argued that he was consistent (which is not true since you couldn't follow what I was saying), is funny because you are always in the minority in your views (Rexy, Norv, etc.).
I said I don't begrudge you because of your position. While I may be in the minority, I literally do not know or have heard or have read a piece by a SINGLE person who holds your view.
You are the ONLY one that I know of who wants to argue that there is even partial consistency.
Everyone else can see that there is a complete overhaul taking place.
When I say "everyone," I literally mean "EVERYONE!"
I'm getting into this a bit late, but I have to chime in. I agree with RobsObs's first comment that Spag may have been the benefactor of having such great talent in the Giants' front seven. When your guys can flat-out win their one on one battles like that, it's easy to look good as a coach.
Regarding the coaching search...Call it a debacle if you want, but I see it this way. Double G was given serious consideration and attempts were made to maintain continuity. He was interviewed four times for crying out loud. He didn't get the job because of some sort of character flaw that hinted to Danny Boy and Vinny that he still wasn't cut out for the HC job. So be it. I really don't think Double G was going to make a great HC anyway.
Saunders tried for two years to install his offense in D.C. There have been many reports that instead of adjusting his offense to his players, he expected the players to adjust to his offense. That type of self-righteousness has no place in a game where so many people have to come together to achieve a common goal. Good riddance.
Hiring an OC and a DC before the HC seems ass-backwards, but consider this. Jim Zorn is considered to be a highly creative and intelligent leader. Greg Blache is an experienced DC with a great deal of success to show on his resume. Why not lock in talent if you can? Why wouldn't an HC who has his priorities in order not want great talent on his staff? Danny Boy knew the HC search would take a while and the risk of losing these talented coaches was too high. I say good job. If the HC has a problem with either of these two guys, they should have their head examined.
Continuity will exist on defense with Blache. Keeping key players is another source of continuity, but the truth is purging some overpaid players is in order. If guys like Lloyd, Daniels, Brunell, etc. don't fit into the long term plans, this year is a good time to take the cap hit and move on. I don't expect much out of this upcoming season other than to establish a solid base with a new staff to build upon for the future.
Complete overhaul would be getting rid of ALL of the coaches. They are trying to keep all of the position coaches and Blache is not that different from Williams. To me, that shows some sort of consistency.
Offense will be different and I think it is for the best. For a variety of reasons, Saunders didn't work. As always, you will blame a player's or coach's lack of success with the Redskins on them being blackballed. You cried loudly that Gregg had blackballed Lavar and the Gregg had a huge ego but you will cry even louder that he didn't become the coach. I know, I know. You don't care about that as you only care about the consistency. I just find it funny how you will always come to the defense of the ousted player or coach even when you disparaged the same person earlier. I don't know how you can do that without knowing all the facts. Yes, you will claim you know because you follow LaCanfora's blog or whatever but to truly understand and make an objective decision, you have to be on the inside. It's like if you hear one side of a married couple's argument, you will be swayed to their side. To truly understand and make a decision, it is only fair to hear both sides.
Whatever. I know that there has been some changes. That is obvious. I don't necessarily agree with hiring coordinators before the head coach. Although Blache is not coming in from the outside and installing a new system so there isn't much change there. All I am saying is that at the time of Snyder's comment on consistency, perhaps his intention was to hire Williams, keep the overall direction of the team the same, the defense would be the same, and probably change the offensive scheme. That to me is being fairly consistent. Now of course we now know that Williams didn't work out. I am just saying at the time he made the statement, it seemed like the intention was to hire Williams and keep all of the position coaches and probably lose Saunders. I just think that that is being fairly consistent.
That's fine. I don't think changing your offense is trying to maintain consistency.
By all accounts, the Redskin players were behind Double G and because he and Vinny don't get along Danny Boy decided to go a different direction. To me that is not maintaining consistency.
Finally, looking at the salary cap situation and the fact that there will be a new head coach and two new coordinators, I would guess that there will be at least 20 players on the active roster who turn over. Not exactly maintaining consistency.
But hey, at least Danny Boy was truthful for about 3 days about his commitment to consistency.
How do you know that Gregg just didn't get the job because he didn't get along with Vinny? How do you know what took place in the interviews? I have heard the same that Vinny and Gregg didn't get along but I have also heard that that isn't true. I have heard that a Giants (the organization you so highly respect all of a sudden) executive thinks highly of Cerrato. I know a lot of people don't think much of Cerrato. The point is that so much is out there but unless you are actually in the middle of it and involved with it, how do you know?
Whatever. I know the 'Skins have issues but I have come to realize that there is no winning with you when it comes to the Redskins. In your eyes, they do everything wrong and the least bit of success can be attributed purely to luck or some strange cosmic "anomaly."
I read what is reported in the paper and I think for myself. Gregg was well liked by the players - offensive and defensive. He was in Washington for 4 years. What could he have possibly said that Danny Boy didn't already know.
I am quite sure that Danny Boy told Gibbsy that he did not want to hire Gregg while they were discussing Gibbsy's resignation. That is why Gibbsy did not endorse Gregg at his final press conference. In fact, Gibbsy said that he knew Dan would make the decision on who the coach would be when he was asked if he supported Gregg Williams.
Danny Boy wants Vinny to be comfortable because Vinny makes him comfortable. So what about the other players and whether it is actually a good way to do things.
If Danny Boy got rid of Vinny and put a real football person in place, I would not be so hard on the Redskins. It is all of the B.S. that he pulls and the fact that he has ruined a once great organization that I don't like.
The answer to your original question is - NOPE!
Post a Comment