Random Commanders Thoughts

[TomE]

Yay!! Somebody got it...

Cooley said that Gruden may be the best since Joe Gibbs of bringing players together and getting them to buy into what he's doing.

Sorry, but that is a far far FAR cry from what we've been talking about.

Exactly, my main thing was that I didn't realize that Cooley 'was in the room' enough to get a feel how Gruden operated.

He was in the room with Gibbs, so that does give some cred to his comparison.

Don't think he was daring (gasp) to compare Gibbs' and Gruden's body of work..... don't even think McD is at that point yet

 

[Miles Monroe]

I think you are pretty right on BT.

Both guys share the same philosophy and seem to be on the same page. And both have had success with said philosophy.

I believe we have multiple SBs coming. My only concern going forward is Scot's sobriety. If he can conquer those demons and remain here ten years then I see no reason why we can't win three or more.

Again with the sobriety ? Has anything been said or done to indicate Scott doesn't have control of his past problems ? Something substantiated to cause your concern, because I haven't seen a single word anywhere since before he was hired that he is still has a problem.

 

[McD5]

Tr1, RG3 is that way. >--------->

Please say hi to the poster that used to call Gruden "Grudung" before we won the division. That guy used to crack me up. I miss him.

 

[Elephant]

Hard to believe the contentious atmosphere around here does not involve me.

:smiley_simmons:

 

[Ax]

Again with the sobriety ? Has anything been said or done to indicate Scott doesn't have control of his past problems ? Something substantiated to cause your concern, because I haven't seen a single word anywhere since before he was hired that he is still has a problem.

Preemptive strike to cover Gruden's ass if he ultimately tanks. Brother McD has been laying the groundwork for it ever since Gruden's first, horrific season. Blaming everyone from Snyder, to the waterboy, for any and all shortcomings of his idle.

Anyone else have any foolish statements they'd like to add while we're here?

No, I'd say you pretty much have foolish statements covered.

Please say hi to the poster that used to call Gruden "Grudung" before we won the division. That guy used to crack me up. I miss him.

Wonder if we could work a trade. You, for him.

Hard to believe the contentious atmosphere around here does not involve me.

Oh, but it does. We all started calling you The Danny, behind your back, months ago.

 

[Bulldog]

What's funny to me is that there are some folks on here that seem to absolutely dislike Gruden for some inexplicable reason.

The team went from 4-12 to 9-7 when he finally worked some magic with Scot McCloughan to get Snyder to agree to move on from Griffin and play the best quarterback on the roster.

That is a situation that most NFL coaches don't have to consider. Outside of proven, Super Bowl winning passers such as Rodgers, Roethlisberger or Wilson - quarterbacks in the NFL are rarely given the kind of teflon shadow that engulfed Griffin here for the better part of 3 years.

Coaches play the players they think gives the team the best chance to win and improve going forward.

It appears we have that now in Washington and the results on the field are starting to show that.

You run a professional team in a professional manner and it is amazing how quickly things can turn around.

That is how Bill Parcells was able to go into a demoralized locker room of a 1-15 or 2-14 team and have them 10-6 two years later and in the playoffs.

In addition to Griffin, I think the release of David Amerson and Jarvis Jenkins last offseason helped set a positive tone for the organization, where draft position does not guarantee a starting job and a lock on a roster spot.

This is the way teams like Green Bay, Pittsburgh, NE, Seattle and Denver have been operating for years with results to match.

 

[Henry]

I like Gruden just fine. But if some folks on here want to suggest he's comparable to Joe Gibbs or Bill Parcells I disagree. That is a far cry from 'absolute dislike.'

 

[ntotoro]

They have the same initials.

That's pretty much where it ends.

Nick

 

[Om]

Given the culture of the NFL these days, I'd bet we could go to just about any team website during OTA's and find comparable quotes from coaches around the league having to answer the same old tired questions about certain veteran players who choose not to attend these voluntary sessions. I don't think it's about playing favorites--I think it's about the way the league is these days and the fact that coaches all do coachspeak in different ways.

I understand some don't like Gruden's particular coachspeak dialect. Me, I have no problem with it, particularly given the way his players seem to like playing for the guy and the fact the team appears to be turning it around.

 

[Om]

Perhaps the lesson learned is there are (at least) two sides to the argument?

Also, to me the RG3 and DJax situations were/are very different.

 

[Henry]

I'm not going to comment on how Gruden should or shouldn't be handling this, but I will say I'm very disappointed that Jackson isn't showing up.

 

[Om]

I'm not going to comment on how Gruden should or shouldn't be handling this, but I will say I'm very disappointed that Jackson isn't showing up.

This I agree with. In a perfect world, he'd be a model professional 100% committed to his craft and setting a high bar for the youngsters. I also know that ain't his style. End of the day, I see him as a mercurial, egotistical veteran who knows exactly what he can and can't get away with, and I see the team willing to put up with that for one more year given his well-established impact on opposing defenses. It ain't perfect, but like Jay, I can live with it.

 

[Henry]

why would he be concerned to show up when his coach isn't even acting concerned?

Its like a kid who acts bad and doesn't care what you think because they know their own parent isnt going to do anything.

Rich Tandler covers my answer pretty well:

"Head coaches need to be very careful about what they say about attendance during the offseason program. As noted, showing up is voluntary and anything a coach said that can perceived as putting pressure on a player to show up can be frowned upon by the players union. So if Gruden is unhappy he probably wouldn’t say much about it."

For all we know Gruden IS pissed about it, but legally can't say anything. I think I've made it pretty clear I don't think Gruden is beyond reproach, but in this case I give him a pass.

 

[Om]

Oh goody.

 

[McD5]

Yearly reminder that Sean Taylor didn't participate in team offseason activities.

Additional reminder that ST wouldn't even return Joe Gibbs' phone calls in the offseason.

I wish Desean had 100% attendance, but there's nothing these coaches can do to force a guy to come in or to even answer the phone.

If they go off, they risk pissing off the agents, and can probably expect to receive letters from the NFLPA and/or the league.

Another amazing part of the story is that Desean could have made a $500k bonus for showing up to 90% of the workouts. Imagine just giving up $500k. That's insane.

 

[Elephant]

After pulling up lame on the first go route of the season last year, one would think that Desean Jackson would see the correlation. Many suggested he was doing his own conditioning...well, we saw how that worked out. He missed half the season...what an asshat!

I can't say I am upset that Gruden glossed over it, hell...Coach Gibbs was great at misdirecting the media, but Jackson's absence is troubling.

 

[Om]

After pulling up lame on the first go route of the season last year, one would think that Desean Jackson would see the correlation. Many suggested he was doing his own conditioning...well, we saw how that worked out. He missed half the season...what an asshat!

I can't say I am upset that Gruden glossed over it, hell...Coach Gibbs was great at misdirecting the media, but Jackson's absence is troubling.

Not sure it's there's enough causal link evidence here to flatly call it a "correlation." I had forgotten this until yesterday when I heard it discussed on local sports gab ... DeSean missed time last training camp with an injury--shoulder I think?--sustained in a block sled drill. His conditioning may well have been off by the time the Miami game rolled around, but there is no evidence it had anything to do with missing voluntary OTA's in May. Of if there is, I haven't seen any.

*

Edit: In fact, he missed the entire preseason from a shoulder injury in camp Aug 6, not because he skipped May voluntary OTA's.

 

[Primus Porcus]

Not sure it's there's enough causal link evidence here to flatly call it a "correlation." I had forgotten this until yesterday when I heard it discussed on local sports gab ... DeSean missed time last training camp with an injury--shoulder I think?--sustained in a block sled drill. His conditioning may well have been off by the time the Miami game rolled around, but there is no evidence it had anything to do with missing voluntary OTA's in May. Of if there is, I haven't seen any.

If I remember correctly he went down early in camp, then came back and went down early with the hammy. Is there direct evidence? nah.... but it would leave one to wonder if his body wasn't ready for game speed because he did miss so much time. He could have gone through camp and been fine without having done OTAs. A lot of 'what if' or 'could be' situations, but the bottom line is that last year he missed OTAs, then the majority of camp, then he had an injury that has widely been seen to be based on conditioning or hydration.



My personal opinion is that I would like to see him there.. Personally, I'd like to see him working with Cousins on timing, as well as the young receivers we have. They are voluntary so when it comes down to it, it's not required... but I would still prefer he be in attendance.

 

[Om]

If I remember correctly he went down early in camp, then came back and went down early with the hammy. Is there direct evidence? nah.... but it would leave one to wonder if his body wasn't ready for game speed because he did miss so much time. He could have gone through camp and been fine without having done OTAs. A lot of 'what if' or 'could be' situations, but the bottom line is that last year he missed OTAs, then the majority of camp, then he had an injury that has widely been seen to be based on conditioning or hydration.

My personal opinion is that I would like to see him there.. Personally, I'd like to see him working with Cousins on timing, as well as the young receivers we have. They are voluntary so when it comes down to it, it's not required... but I would still prefer he be in attendance.

If so, it was widely seen incorrectly. Perhaps his shoulder wasn't properly hydrated.

As to the rest, I'm with ya. I'd be happier if he were here getting in tune with Kirk and his teammates. Plus, we could be talking about something else.

 

[Primus Porcus]

If so, it was widely seen incorrectly. Perhaps his shoulder wasn't properly hydrated.

As to the rest, I'm with ya. I'd be happier if he were here getting in tune with Kirk and his teammates. Plus, we could be talking about something else.

I was referencing the hamstring, and his supposed involvement with the blocking sled causing him to miss time, added to the shape (or lack there of) he was in.