Jump to content

Coaching move that makes me sick


nfoligno

Recommended Posts

Just saw that, while maybe not official, Carroll may have just hired Alex Gibbs to run the OL in Wash. That disgusts me. I have wanted to add him for years, and he would have been a tremendous addition. He was a FA, so to speak, and it just sucks that we could not get one of the best OL coaches in the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just saw that, while maybe not official, Carroll may have just hired Alex Gibbs to run the OL in Wash. That disgusts me. I have wanted to add him for years, and he would have been a tremendous addition. He was a FA, so to speak, and it just sucks that we could not get one of the best OL coaches in the game.

 

He doesn't have the Lovie connection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Until the 3 stooges are gone (or at least the bottom 2), very little top quality will come our way...

 

Just saw that, while maybe not official, Carroll may have just hired Alex Gibbs to run the OL in Wash. That disgusts me. I have wanted to add him for years, and he would have been a tremendous addition. He was a FA, so to speak, and it just sucks that we could not get one of the best OL coaches in the game.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just saw that, while maybe not official, Carroll may have just hired Alex Gibbs to run the OL in Wash. That disgusts me. I have wanted to add him for years, and he would have been a tremendous addition. He was a FA, so to speak, and it just sucks that we could not get one of the best OL coaches in the game.

 

Just playing devil's advocate a bit, but wouldn't his zone blocking scheme have to fit in with the offensive scheme - and we don't have an OC yet to make that determination yet?

 

If we'd gotten Bates as OC, sure Gibbs would've been someone to go after, but not knowing who to OC is going to be, or what kind of scheme he's going to run, then there is no point in pursuing position coaches.

 

It would be like Hiring Marinelli to coach the D-line for a team running a 3-4 defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just playing devil's advocate a bit, but wouldn't his zone blocking scheme have to fit in with the offensive scheme - and we don't have an OC yet to make that determination yet?

 

If we'd gotten Bates as OC, sure Gibbs would've been someone to go after, but not knowing who to OC is going to be, or what kind of scheme he's going to run, then there is no point in pursuing position coaches.

 

It would be like Hiring Marinelli to coach the D-line for a team running a 3-4 defense.

 

Excellent Point!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice point, but at the same time, I would offer this. You can use his blocking scheme for most offenses, IMHO. What I like is his high success rate developing OL, and greating an effective blocking scheme. I find it hard to believe such a successful scheme could not be incorporated into whatever overall offensive scheme we choose to run.

 

Just playing devil's advocate a bit, but wouldn't his zone blocking scheme have to fit in with the offensive scheme - and we don't have an OC yet to make that determination yet?

 

If we'd gotten Bates as OC, sure Gibbs would've been someone to go after, but not knowing who to OC is going to be, or what kind of scheme he's going to run, then there is no point in pursuing position coaches.

 

It would be like Hiring Marinelli to coach the D-line for a team running a 3-4 defense.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice point, but at the same time, I would offer this. You can use his blocking scheme for most offenses, IMHO. What I like is his high success rate developing OL, and greating an effective blocking scheme. I find it hard to believe such a successful scheme could not be incorporated into whatever overall offensive scheme we choose to run.

 

I disagree that any offense would work with that blocking scheme. The blocking scheme defines the entire offense.... how many step drops for passing plays, where the blockers create holes on running plays... etc.

 

BTW - Any support for the idea that blocking schemes are interchangable with different types of offenses?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me just say this. For years, I have screamed about our blocking system, and how it never seemed appropriate for our talent.

 

With Benson, we had a scheme more similar, though a lesser version of, a zone blocking system. It was a drop step system that would seem to most benefit quicker, speedier backs, as the hole would not necessarily be determined until the RB took the handoff. Then we dump Benson, and get Forte. He seemed like a solid fit for this system, but what do we read about in the offseason. We are trying to get bigger and stronger, and plan to go w/ a more power blocking technique. This was not only ill-suited for our OL, but also for Forte.

 

But beyond the inconsistencies of talent to scheme, here is the real fun of it. It wasn't ever really effective. TJ did well, but much of that was his making something out of nothing. Forte did well year one, statistically, but his weak ypc average showed the overall stats were a bit misleading. Point is, regardless how we tried to do it, we never could.

 

Alex Gibbs is considered one of the best OL coaches in recent history. Sure, he has a system, but has also done an incredible job of developing players into and within that system. Sound like something we could use here?

 

And speaking of matching talent w/ scheme, Gibbs's system was the one used in Denver. You know, where Cutler did so well. Forte would also seem a good fit for such a blocking system.

 

Hey, I am practical enough. I am not saying we should have hired our OL coach before we hired our OC. I have seen teams go this route, and rarely does it work well. No, my being upset is more general. Gibbs is an OL coaches I have begged for us to go after for year. He was available, but another team was simply quicker on the draw than we. Again.

 

I disagree that any offense would work with that blocking scheme. The blocking scheme defines the entire offense.... how many step drops for passing plays, where the blockers create holes on running plays... etc.

 

BTW - Any support for the idea that blocking schemes are interchangable with different types of offenses?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me just say this. For years, I have screamed about our blocking system, and how it never seemed appropriate for our talent.

 

With Benson, we had a scheme more similar, though a lesser version of, a zone blocking system. It was a drop step system that would seem to most benefit quicker, speedier backs, as the hole would not necessarily be determined until the RB took the handoff. Then we dump Benson, and get Forte. He seemed like a solid fit for this system, but what do we read about in the offseason. We are trying to get bigger and stronger, and plan to go w/ a more power blocking technique. This was not only ill-suited for our OL, but also for Forte.

 

But beyond the inconsistencies of talent to scheme, here is the real fun of it. It wasn't ever really effective. TJ did well, but much of that was his making something out of nothing. Forte did well year one, statistically, but his weak ypc average showed the overall stats were a bit misleading. Point is, regardless how we tried to do it, we never could.

 

Alex Gibbs is considered one of the best OL coaches in recent history. Sure, he has a system, but has also done an incredible job of developing players into and within that system. Sound like something we could use here?

 

And speaking of matching talent w/ scheme, Gibbs's system was the one used in Denver. You know, where Cutler did so well. Forte would also seem a good fit for such a blocking system.

 

Hey, I am practical enough. I am not saying we should have hired our OL coach before we hired our OC. I have seen teams go this route, and rarely does it work well. No, my being upset is more general. Gibbs is an OL coaches I have begged for us to go after for year. He was available, but another team was simply quicker on the draw than we. Again.

Al that to say you were wrong. I'll never get those 2 minutes back...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It took you 2 minutes to read that? Might invest in a speed reading program:)

 

Not saying I am wrong by any stretch. I just hate that our process is taking time, and meanwhile, quality assistants like Gibbs are lost.

 

Al that to say you were wrong. I'll never get those 2 minutes back...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It all makes a difference who's running the circus. Our big top is run by the clowns obviously, vs a real ringmaster...

 

Candidates are seeing through the last PR debacle. They know what's going on. Lame duckiness = suckiness. How's that for brilliant dialog! :P

 

It took you 2 minutes to read that? Might invest in a speed reading program:)

 

Not saying I am wrong by any stretch. I just hate that our process is taking time, and meanwhile, quality assistants like Gibbs are lost.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...