Al Saunders on the way out?

Saunders would be happier if JC played like TC.

I won't be surprised if Saunders gets dumped especially if GW takes over. Let's face it, other than the 4 game streak his offense was disappointing to say the least.That's not Saunders though. That's us not having a running game, or the ability to block for one.

That's not Saunders though. That's us not having a running game, or the ability to block for one.

Regardless, he didn't do what he paid him to do. We paid him to put up a top flight offense and we got an inconsistent, mediocre one. It happened on his watch.

Regardless, he didn't do what he paid him to do. We paid him to put up a top flight offense and we got an inconsistent, mediocre one. It happened on his watch.

but did gibbs have some cuffs on saunders hands, not letting him call the offense he was brought here to call ?

Regardless, he didn't do what he paid him to do. We paid him to put up a top flight offense and we got an inconsistent, mediocre one. It happened on his watch.Okay, so?

Look, if the money was really a problem, we shouldn't have given him a lot of it to bring him here. If we were expecting some magical ability just because we paid him a lot, I don't know what to tell you.

I think he's done just fine, and that if you were measuring anyone in his position against the value of their contract, there is no way anyone could ever live up to that much money. It's just not possible.

Regardless, he didn't do what he paid him to do. We paid him to put up a top flight offense and we got an inconsistent, mediocre one. It happened on his watch.

No, it happened on Gibbs watch. He (Gibbs) made it very clear that, ultimately, this was Gibbs offense. While I haven't been impressed with Saunders, I don't think it fair to blame him for ALL the offensive woes. Gibbs may have "relinquished" the playcalling but, IMHO, this was a modified Gibbs offense.

We constantly harp on the naysayers for blaming Gibbs and crediting others. Sorry, in converse, Gibbs get the credit but also gets the blame.

Okay, so?

Look, if the money was really a problem, we shouldn't have given him a lot of it to bring him here. If we were expecting some magical ability just because we paid him a lot, I don't know what to tell you.

I think he's done just fine, and that if you were measuring anyone in his position against the value of their contract, there is no way anyone could ever live up to that much money. It's just not possible.

Not saying the money was the problem, just saying he didn't produce. Hence, he didn't do what he paid him to do. Were you happy with the results of his offense?

I think the skins need to give al 1 more year.There were times during games when I felt like I could really tell when Gibbs would take over play calling.I cant give any specific examples unfortunatly, its just a gut feeling. It felt like we would run two different offenses during some games.I believe Saunders should get a chance to run the offense without a lot of influence from the head coach, whoever that may be.If at the end of next year nothing changes then it is time to part ways.

More often than not, we heard about Gibbs handcuffing Saunders' offense. Which I always found rather reedycholuz (that's for you Brud) to say when the offense faltered it was Gibbs, but when it performed it was "look what the Al Saunders can do."

I think what happened was that their philosophies maybe weren't as closely matched as they had thought. Yet, as we saw for example in the Bears game, Gibbs' max protect, motion schemes can coexist with Saunders' aerial attack.

But bottom line, with Gibbs out of the picture now (feel weird saying it like that), there should be no confusion that it's Saunders' offense. So I think we need to keep him one more year and let him prove his full worth here.

And I think to further emphasize it's his show we need to pare down the coaching staff. You've got Saunders as Assoc. Head Coach-Offense. Bugel as Assistant Head Coach-Offense (at least you know he's an offensive line svengali), Don Breaux as Offensive Coordinator (what's his role exactly), and Jack Burns as Offensive Assistant (and his role?)

More often than not, we heard about Gibbs handcuffing Saunders' offense. Which I always found rather reedycholuz (that's for you Brud) to say when the offense faltered it was Gibbs, but when it performed it was "look what the Al Saunders can do."

I think what happened was that their philosophies maybe weren't as closely matched as they had thought. Yet, as we saw for example in the Bears game, Gibbs' max protect, motion schemes can coexist with Saunders' aerial attack.

But bottom line, with Gibbs out of the picture now (feel weird saying it like that), there should be no confusion that it's Saunders' offense. So I think we need to keep him one more year and let him prove his full worth here.

And I think to further emphasize it's his show we need to pare down the coaching staff. You've got Saunders as Assoc. Head Coach-Offense. Bugel as Assistant Head Coach-Offense (at least you know he's an offensive line svengali), Don Breaux as Offensive Coordinator (what's his role exactly), and Jack Burns as Offensive Assistant (and his role?)
I think for the first time all season, I agree 100% with you.. It'd be ridicules I think to get rid of Saunders without seeing what he can do with TRULY full reign to call the games for a season.