Why the hate towards Fassel?

I wanted to keep Williams because I like having GOOD defenses. Prior to his arrival there were a lot of years with BAD defenses. I guess in a way, he was a victim of his own success. If the powers that be were a little more emotionally connected to the George Edwards led defense of 2003 in all its ineptitude, they might have been a little more hesitant to send Coach Williams on his way.

So, that would distinguish him from Fassel.

Didn't Marvin Lewis have some good defenses too?!

Arrington had like 12 sacks one year they played him down in the three point stance. I'm wondering how much our offense will change with Zorn, he's a great coach.

As has already been mentioned several times, the writing was on the wall from the outset. Not a word from Joe as to how the organization would proceed upon his departure. No endorsement for GW. Big RED flag (although I did not notice). In retrospect, OBVIOUSLY there was a problem between GW, and DS, or whoever. Not to be........as this happens all the time and his protege is in house,and on staff.
At this point in time, DS seems to be taking his time to make the best decision possible. I have no problem with any of that.

Post is reporting Williams has interviews now? Of course he does, let it go!

Just curious why people are so strongly against bringing in Fassel, yet are pro Mariucci. Just wondering what the big difference is? Is it just because Mooch is on TV and is a likable guy?

I think the hate comes from the disappointment of it not being GW. If we don't get GW as HC, then I think anyone isn't good enough in the fans eyes.

There are some good answers here. I'll agree w/Rypper11 as the best one; the anti-fassel sentiment was more pro GW than anything. Now that we know GW is out, I wonder what the reaction would be to Fassel if his name just surfaced like Mooch's did.

I like Mooch & think he's a good fit, but after this thread it's made me think a bit more. Maybe Mooch is just the flashier candidate & there isn't much difference between the two in terms of overall ability.

Someone jokingly said something earlier about his bitter beer face. In all serious, looks might have a lot to do w/it. I know a lot of us would never consciously be aware of that, but it's a factor just as it is in running for office. Ugly candidates start w/a disadvantage.

There are some good answers here. I'll agree w/Rypper11 as the best one; the anti-fassel sentiment was more pro GW than anything. Now that we know GW is out, I wonder what the reaction would be to Fassel if his name just surfaced like Mooch's did.

I like Mooch & think he's a good fit, but after this thread it's made me think a bit more. Maybe Mooch is just the flashier candidate & there isn't much difference between the two in terms of overall ability.

Someone jokingly said something earlier about his bitter beer face. In all serious, looks might have a lot to do w/it. I know a lot of us would never consciously be aware of that, but it's a factor just as it is in running for office. Ugly candidates start w/a disadvantage.

Then how the hell did Norv Turner EVER get a job?

Then how the hell did Norv Turner EVER get a job?

LOL, I was thinking that maybe fassel reminded people too much of him, w/the pock face, O coordinator & coming from a division rival.

There must've been some ugly dudes interviewing when Norv got his job. I think overall Mooch is just more presentable & as Matty said he's on tv so we get a chance to see that. He's sharp & polished publicly, whether that means he's the better coach or not I don't know. I think he's percieved as more the alpha male than Fassel could ever be.

Those same qualities are what I fear about Mooch, that maybe he's all window dressing but doesn't do enough. Someone said his style was to get in & out of practice & not put in much extra. While there's no perfect way to prepare, I believe coaches like Gibbs spend so much extra time w/game plans because they're driven that much to figuring out every detail they can.

Are you a psychologist? That makes perfect sense to me. But I never liked Fassel period. I think it's his face, anybody remember the bitter beer face commercials? Thats what i think of when i think of fassel, oh yeah and losing too. Way to get fired by the ravens fassel...the ravens?!?

bitter beer face w/a hint of Norvelle Turner!

LOL, I was thinking that maybe fassel reminded people too much of him, w/the pock face, O coordinator & coming from a division rival.

There must've been some ugly dudes interviewing when Norv got his job. I think overall Mooch is just more presentable & as Matty said he's on tv so we get a chance to see that. He's sharp & polished publicly, whether that means he's the better coach or not I don't know. I think he's percieved as more the alpha male than Fassel could ever be.

Those same qualities are what I fear about Mooch, that maybe he's all window dressing but doesn't do enough. Someone said his style was to get in & out of practice & not put in much extra. While there's no perfect way to prepare, I believe coaches like Gibbs spend so much extra time w/game plans because they're driven that much to figuring out every detail they can.

Fassel is Tom Cruise compared with Norv!

Tell me this why should Jim Fassel be the new head coach of the Redskins?

He hasn't proven really nothing in his career. One Super Bowl in which he lost and didn't coach at all last year. Has he proven himself as a solid NFL coach enough to come in and get use back to the Super Bowl and win, I don't think so?