• Welcome to BGO! We know you will have questions as you become familiar with the software. Please take a moment to read our New BGO User Guide which will give you a great start. If you have questions, post them in the Feedback and Tech Support Forum, or feel free to message any available Staff Member.

Tracy Porter and Chris Chester Are Gone

Going my own direction on this.... :) .... sure...there was talent....but in the end...it was the system Joe Gibbs installed - the scheme and concepts he imprinted on the game or modified from Coryell. the receivers were inter-changeable to some degree. yes....we lucked out and found great to near greatness, but it was Joe Gibbs who wove the tapestry.
 
He was much better than 'an excellent #2', and a #3 without Monk - that flies in the face of the numbers he put up for a very long stretch. And Monk benefitted equally from Clark's presence - so that argument while obviously true isn't relevant when comparing the two. Maybe I should have said that Clark was my favorite WR since Taylor as that probably more accurately reflects what I meant. You'll never hear me diminish anything Monk did. But Clark was a special player. He'd have been a star on any team.
 
The mark of a truly great team is when the sum is greater than the parts, and argue whatever you want about the other teams of the 80's, but Joe Gibbs got more out of less than anybody else, imo. When thinking about these great WRs, remember who they had throwing them the ball. Not exactly consistent HOFers, eh? If Monk or Clark switched places with Jerry Rice and had Montana throwing him the ball for 10 years, either guy very well could be in the argument for the GOAT at the WR position.

Both incredible talents, and like Henry said, they made each other better. That kind of perfect meshing of talent is something you dream about. Unless you're the opposing D-Coordinator I suppose.
 
Bill Parcells always said #84 was the player on the Redskins he feared the most because he made plays even against alignments designed to limit him.
 
The thing is, monk was usually the guy who went up against the #2 corners and clark was the guy teams schemed against. I love art monk, I still have a monk jersey that people look at me funny when I wear it, but without clark to take the top off defences monk would have just been a possession guy, with clark there, monk ended up being an all around receiver
 
Boone said:
He was much better than 'an excellent #2', and a #3 without Monk - that flies in the face of the numbers he put up for a very long stretch. And Monk benefitted equally from Clark's presence - so that argument while obviously true isn't relevant when comparing the two. Maybe I should have said that Clark was my favorite WR since Taylor as that probably more accurately reflects what I meant. You'll never hear me diminish anything Monk did. But Clark was a special player. He'd have been a star on any team.
Click to expand...

Cleveland?
 
fansince62 said:
Going my own direction on this.... :) .... sure...there was talent....but in the end...it was the system Joe Gibbs installed - the scheme and concepts he imprinted on the game or modified from Coryell. the receivers were inter-changeable to some degree. yes....we lucked out and found great to near greatness, but it was Joe Gibbs who wove the tapestry.
Click to expand...

"The system"?

"Interchangeable Wide Receivers"?

"we Lucked Out"?

Redskins couldn't have won squat without those players, a simple fact you must begin with as the foundation for winning. The coach and his system are entrusted to get the most out of the players, but it was the coaching staff and Joe that brought it together, which you allude to. The system is always going to be changed to suit the skill player, it wasn't a plug and play offense. Its hardly luck.

And besides, the defense was rather very very good.

Gruden's got a system too, but not the horses to make it work. Plugging Robert in, isn't going to work as we have seen. When Gruden makes his adjustments, and tailor his game plan to the strength of his players, then we'll see progress. The premium is on coaching here, not the system.
 
Last edited:
micks113 said:
"The system"?

"Interchangeable Wide Receivers"?

"we Lucked Out"?

Redskins couldn't have won squat without those players, a simple fact you must begin with as the foundation for winning. The coach and his system are entrusted to get the most out of the players, but it was the coaching staff and Joe that brought it together, which you allude to. The system is always going to be changed to suit the skill player, it wasn't a plug and play offense. Its hardly luck.

And besides, the defense was rather very very good.

Gruden's got a system too, but not the horses to make it work. Plugging Robert in, isn't going to work as we have seen. When Gruden makes his adjustments, and tailor his game plan to the strength of his players, then we'll see progress. The premium is on coaching here, not the system.
Click to expand...

You have a LOT more faith in Gruden than I do.
 
Rymanofthenorth said:
The thing is, monk was usually the guy who went up against the #2 corners and clark was the guy teams schemed against. I love art monk, I still have a monk jersey that people look at me funny when I wear it, but without clark to take the top off defences monk would have just been a possession guy, with clark there, monk ended up being an all around receiver
Click to expand...
Not the way I remember it. But not a huge deal. We had the pleasure of watching them both.

If we could only of had one, Monk would have been my choice. And it ain't close.

On the 4 teams that Gibbs led to the Super Bowls, there were 4 constants.
Gibbs/Petitbon. The 2 Headed Monster
Hogs (In all their combinations)
Art Monk. (Shame he missed playing in the post season of SB17)
Monte Coleman
 
Last edited by a moderator:
micks113 said:
Redskins couldn't have won squat without those players, a simple fact you must begin with as the foundation for winning.
And besides, the defense was rather very very good.
Click to expand...

my my. are we piqued.....again?

the assertion you make - a negative. well...then.....prove it. I implore you. prove a negative. you da man!

while I applaud the technique and will certainly endeavor to employ it in the future myself....adding the hyperbole to "lucked out" for effect nevertheless doesn't undercut the force of the point you did or did not absorb: in a personnel business rife with uncertainty there was most certainly a dimension of luck involved in the ability to discover, validate and draft these talents. it didn't hurt! that said, I will ride the Joe Gibbs horse.

have to depart folks - will be spending the bulk of my week proving that there are no alternatives to anything I believe in!
 
It's a long summer fellas. Let's save some snark and condescension for the season.
 
Goaldeje said:
You have a LOT more faith in Gruden than I do.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I guess one has to decided where to place his faith. The success of the team in 2015 is not on the sole shoulders for Griffin, the line, the secondary, Bruce, McClou. Its sits squarely on Jay Gruden. He's the one that's got to pull it all together. The system has been changed in the front office, but systemic changes don't guarantee any wins. Its all about the coaching now that we have blown up the roster. Its a roll of the dice but I have to put all the chips on Jay. One thing he's got going for him is that he has learned what our limitations are. Invoking my best Clint Eastwood.....Man's got to know his limitations. Good or bad that's all we've got. I'm not going to be his apologist, but I will support him.
 
Last edited:
I get that, and admire your faith. I saw nothing from last year that indicates such faith is warranted.

But I certainly hope you are correct.
 
micks113 said:
Yeah, I guess one has to decided where to place his faith. The success of the team in 2015 is not on the sole shoulders for Griffin, the line, the secondary, Bruce, McClou. Its sits squarely on Jay Gruden. He's the one that's got to pull it all together. The system has been changed in the front office, but systemic changes don't guarantee any wins. Its all about the coaching now that we have blown up the roster. Its a roll of the dice but I have to put all the chips on Jay. One thing he's got going for him is that he has learned what our limitations are. Invoking my best Clint Eastwood.....Man's got to know his limitations. Good or bad that's all we've got. I'm not going to be his apologist, but I will support him.
Click to expand...

in the main...agree. the moves to bolster his supporting cast (coaching staff) have been very good IMO. I think we'll see a much more professional approach on all levels this season.
 
Om said:
It's a long summer fellas. Let's save some snark and condescension for the season.
Click to expand...
"Live each day as if it were your last?"

When do the snark and condescension OTA's start? We need to keep our knives sharp!





I keed!, I keed!
 
Ax said:
"Live each day as if it were your last?"

When do the snark and condescension OTA's start? We need to keep our knives sharp!





I keed!, I keed!
Click to expand...

SOTAs? by collective BGO bargaining agreement they aren't mandatory...right?
 
Rymanofthenorth said:
The thing is, monk was usually the guy who went up against the #2 corners and clark was the guy teams schemed against. I love art monk, I still have a monk jersey that people look at me funny when I wear it, but without clark to take the top off defences monk would have just been a possession guy, with clark there, monk ended up being an all around receiver
Click to expand...

The year before Clark was drafted Monk was an All-Pro, broke the single-season record for receptions. That was the year Brown saw limited action, and split time with Calvin Mohammed on the other side. It was Monk and nobody.

And Monk was awesome.

I am sure Monk's ability to produce at an all-pro level with a bunch of part-timers opposite him was on the minds of opposing defensive coordinators when Clark took the field a year later. I am certain the years of Clark and Monk together were a pick-your-poison nightmare for the likes of Bill Parcells. But I don't think for a minute that Monk was 'just a possession guy' without Clark. He was The Best There Ever Was. Without Clark.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Help Users
As we enjoy today's conversations, let's remember our dear friends 'Docsandy', Sandy Zier-Teitler, and 'Posse Lover', Michael Huffman, who would dearly love to be here with us today! We love and miss you guys ❤

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top