Gibbs vs. Spurrier -- stats about even?

[Luxorreb]

Spurrier was a joke. Gibbs is a legend. No matter how Gibbs' tenure figures there is NO comparison. Sorry folks, none. 'What have you done for me lately' is shortened to 'what have you done'. End of discussion.

[VTSkins897]

ramsey just needs a new home. i'm willing to bet that he could revive his career with another franchise. certainly he's no mark brunell... but the ravens, lions, jets, dolphins, and maybe some others could use him. i don't think the nfl has seen the last of Ramsey as a starter.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by Luxorreb

Spurrier was a joke. Gibbs is a legend. No matter how Gibbs' tenure figures there is NO comparison. Sorry folks, none. 'What have you done for me lately' is shortened to 'what have you done'. End of discussion.

amen...

[djnemo65]

Originally Posted by FirstandTen

I'll never forget what Spurrier said on his last Coach's Radio Show on 980am.. The last question he was asked was :

"Coach is there anything optimistic you can say to the fans for next year?"

OBC "Welp..............not much"

I remember hearing that with my dad on the way down to their final game. We looked at each other and said that doesn't sound like a guy who's coming back next year.

[djnemo65]

Another thing to consider is that under Spurrier the team regressed from year one to two in spite of ostensibly improving its talent level, whereas with Gibbs the team has definately gotten better in spite of losing several key players. So I think its misleading to look at the aggregate two year stats for both coaches and act as if they are equal, when clearly the coaches moved the teams in different directions during season two.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

I remember hearing that with my dad on the way down to their final game. We looked at each other and said that doesn't sound like a guy who's coming back next year.

Yeah, but the thing about that comment was that it turned out to be true. The Skins did one game better after he left. That's grasping for optimism if you ask me.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

Another thing to consider is that under Spurrier the team regressed from year one to two in spite of ostensibly improving its talent level, whereas with Gibbs the team has definately gotten better in spite of losing several key players. So I think its misleading to look at the aggregate two year stats for both coaches and act as if they are equal, when clearly the coaches moved the teams in different directions during season two.

I don't know that the Skins were all that much improved talent wise from 2002 to 2003, the two game difference proves that. If you look at the stats from each of the two years that TAFKAS posted, you'll see that Spurrier suffered from a bad defense especially when Marvin Lewis left.

One more thing, season two for Gibbs isn't over yet...

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by jamf

Im tired of hearing about the ruining of patrick ramsey. WTF!!! was he joe montana or john elway and spurrier became coach and made him patrick ramsey?

the irony is that spurrier put everyone in a passing route while gibbs is putting everyone to block and they both are about even statistically.

Those are the best points of this thread. Everybody said that Ramsey was basically poisoned by Spurrier, and now, suddenly, it turns out that maybe PR just isn't a good quarterback.



To me, the pass protection similarities are the most disturbing of all. By this point, shouldn't the offensive line have established itself as one of the most dominant in the league? Or would that be an "unrealistic expectation" ??

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by jamf

I personally fell in love with ramsey during the titans game his rookie year. we were behind big and ramsey comes in and takes monster shots but keeps tossing the ball around. He is Tough and Strong. Unfortunately he is as dumb as dog shit.

There's my vote for quote of the year.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

To me, the pass protection similarities are the most disturbing of all. By this point, shouldn't the offensive line have established itself as one of the most dominant in the league? Or would that be an "unrealistic expectation" ??

I didn't really expect them to be a top 5 oline... but I sure thought they'd be doing a bit better than what i've seen. Sometimes there are monster plays, other times, samuels just quits blocking midplay and oops... sack.

It took a year to fix our crappy kick coverage issues... maybe it another year before our oline turns it on full force?

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

I don't know that the Skins were all that much improved talent wise from 2002 to 2003, the two game difference proves that. If you look at the stats from each of the two years that TAFKAS posted, you'll see that Spurrier suffered from a bad defense especially when Marvin Lewis left.

One more thing, season two for Gibbs isn't over yet...

The only way Gibbs and Spurrier's ultimate stat (W-L) is even after two years is if we lose out. Man, you have no faith in this team.

[djnemo65]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

I don't know that the Skins were all that much improved talent wise from 2002 to 2003, the two game difference proves that. If you look at the stats from each of the two years that TAFKAS posted, you'll see that Spurrier suffered from a bad defense especially when Marvin Lewis left.

One more thing, season two for Gibbs isn't over yet...

That's some backwards logic: you can't say they lost two fewer games in spite of more talent because the fact that they lost two fewer games proves that they didn't have more talent.

I think the additions of Coles, Randy Thomas, Dave Fiore, Chad Morton, Jesse Armstead, and John Hall were pretty significant (am I forgetting anybody?). Although Trung didn't turn out to be anything resembling an upgrade for Davis, you would have to fault Spurrier for that because he ran Davis out of town - a player who turned around and rushed for 1400 while taking his team to the superbowl that year. While it is clear in retrospect that George Edwards was not an adequate replacement for Marvin Lewis, we made enough upgrades on offense at the time for us to have reasonably expected them to give a better performance than we got.

But this whole thread is ridiculous. Anyone who seriously argues the teams are equal under the two coaches probably hasn't actually seen many games. And no, I am not a Gibbs apologist...

[That Guy]

under spurrier 12-20
under gibbs 12-16

but beyond the records, gibbs team is trending upwards, SS's went downhill. JG's team doesn't point fingers, has better talent evaluation, etc. I don't know why this even came up.

[LRT]

Wow. I would not have imagined there would be so much debate on this topic. To me, it is clear that Gibbs in the superior coach and that the team is doing better now than under Spurier. And I think there are clear reasons to believe so:

First, Spurier inherited a fairly disciplined .500 team that had been trending in the right direction under Shottenheimer. Gibbs inherited an undisciplined below .500 team that was falling apart at the end of the Spurier era. I don't think we can underestimate how much Gibbs had to undo to get this team anywhere close to where he wanted it to be.

Second, Spurier's first 7-9 season, which held some promise, was largely ghost-written by Marvin Lewis. Once Lewis left, not only did the defense sour, but the team seemed to lose whatever discipline it had had the year before. As good a college coach as Spurier may be, it just flat out looked over his head in the NFL and without Lewis on the sidelines, that became very obvious in the second season. I remember seeing Spurier on TV looking confused, lost and even disinterested during games. Add to that reports from Lavar Arrington that players were "casual" about loses and didn't seem to care. Contrast that with the discipline, determination and the general sense of calm professionalism that comes from this team, even in the face of adversity.

Third, Spurier's version of the Skins tanked in the second year, rapidly losing ground from the year before. Gibbs' team, however, has improved steadily. It did so at the end of last season and has done so this season. In Spurier's second year, the team felt like an out-of-control car heading for a wreck. Does anyone really get that feeling from this team?

In my humble opinion, Spurier took over a decent team on the right track when he replaced Shottenheimer (Synder's biggest mistake, I think, was firing Shottemheimer after one season) and wrecked it. Gibbs, however, took over a broken team (think of the Cardinals or Lions) and is steadily rebuilding it.

[irish]

The biggest difference between JG and OBC is that JG has front office support and trust, OBC did not. I think if OBC had this kind of support he would have been successful.