Who deserves more credit: Adams or Quinn?

Who deserves more credit

  • Adam Peters

    Votes: 12 80.0%
  • Dan Quin

    Votes: 3 20.0%

  • Total voters
    15
Obviously the most accurate answer is "both", but if I had to pick... I'd say for the 2024 season it was Quinn, but over the long term it will be Peters.
 
This may be a cop out but i dont think either one can get 'more' credit than the other. Peters worked with Quinn to get the groceries, Quinn cooked the meal. The two go hand in hand, not sure either deserves 'more'
 
This may be a cop out but i dont think either one can get 'more' credit than the other. Peters worked with Quinn to get the groceries, Quinn cooked the meal. The two go hand in hand, not sure either deserves 'more'

Peters also hired Quinn.
 
Both is the obvious answer. It's also the answer you want. You want that partnership blending where you can't quite determine where one starts and where one ends.

I'll be honest though. For this exercise, I didn't want the obvious answer because it's not as fun in terms of debate. What is fun is that you can make a very serious case for both men. Quinn stepped up in setting up a culture, assembling his staff, and getting the best out of his team. His fourth down aggressiveness and he and his staff's ability to adjust in the second half were often as key as Daniels' magic. A lot of it was Daniels but I'd say in equal parts it was getting everyone else to execute above expectations. It was about how the defense would be porous in the first half, but then shut down whatever was killing them in the second. It was the willingness to bench starters regardless of their name or draft pedigree.

Which brings us to Peters.

Peters was ruthless. Trading Dotson? Outright cutting Forbes? I know he didn't pick them, but how many GMs would be willing to do that? Last years first rounder? Likewise, he just tore apart Rivera's roster. He shredded it in a way I've never seen in any other regime change and we've seen so many regime changes. And he spent, but he never went crazy. He filled the roster with capable players on prove it contracts or savvy vets who could show the roster how to be a winner then he held a masterful draft and though most of us (I certainly was) screamed for him to address left tackle, he held his water. He didn't mortgage the future by overpaying a so-so vet. He didn't trade away too much because it was such a glaring need. He waited four picks. Four picks and then snagged Coleman who somehow worked out as one of the better tackles drafted in a year of great tackles.

Which brings us to Harris.

Harris spent a lot of his money to get this team. Then, he went out and spent a lot more. When it was pointed out the facilities and practice fields sucked, he improved them. When it was obvious Fedex Field was a miserable place even though he planned to exit it in a few years, he spent big to renovate it to the degree he could. When Peters wanted to blow up the roster, he stepped back and let him do it. When Peters said he wanted Quinn, Harris didn't argue that he didn't spend all this money for Quinn and that he had a dead fanbase. He could have said that Quinn would be perceived as just another Rivera. He could have demanded a coach that whose name would get some season tickets sold. Do you know how hard it is to do nothing and trust the process? Do you know how hard it is to allow your employees throw away prime assets (Dotson, Jamin, Forbes) for basically nothing? And it's not like Harris was invisible. He was very present. We saw him at practices. We saw him speak to the team. We saw him after many games. So, he was there, but allowed the grocer to shop and the chef to cook. He gave both the leeway they needed and the provisions required.

Which brings us to us.

After thirty years of seeing almost nothing good out of our team, we stuck around. There were scandals off the field, bad, bad play on the field, nepotism, hubris, a name change, so many lawsuits... and yet when the team gave us a reason to come back, we did. We damn near took over Tampa Bay. There were a lot of us who travelled to Philly. This team knew we had their backs and would go to hell for them because we have.

So who deserves more credit this year? That answer will change over time, but you can make an amazing case for Peters, Quinn, Harris, or even us. The easiest answer is all of the above because it's true. The fun answer is celebrating each and having a friendly bar debate because it allows us to cheer for each and both even louder. More, by the end of each section, I was convinced the answer was that guy, but then the write up of the next one left me convinced that that person was key. Okay, it probably wasn't us, but damn if I'm shortchanging how hard it has been to stay a fan of this team and how much we've gone through... especially the younger fans who've never known glory.
 
I wonder if anyone will read that whole mess. I should probably edit it, but nah...
 
What did Gibbs accomplish without Bobby Beathard?

Look at the team building (or lack there of ) from 1990-92. Just some spackle (plan B) to fill a hole or two. But the team itself was allowed to age out. Yeah 91 was awesome but it was the last hurrah of Beathard’s roster.

Then look at their work apart from eachother. Beathard was far more successful in San Diego than Gibbs was 04-07. Gibbs 2.0 was a mirror of 90-92, team building via free agency and trades and crap drafts. Difference is we didn’t have the existing good roster in place to lean on.

This isn’t to say Gibbs wasn’t a great Hall of Fame worthy head coach 81-92, he was, but he absolutely needed Beathard.

Having said all that, I voted Quinn for this poll. Both Adams and Quinn were important for the 14-6 turnaround but if I had to choose one it would be Quinn who transformed the locker room culture. Of course I do understand the counter that it was Peters who hired Quinn but the poll is either/or and I think Quinn blew away Peters in the interview process and had his excellent staff mapped out that his hire became a no brainer (even if we fans didn’t know it and were too busy fawning on the shiny new object Ben Johnson).

So my vote for a single season is Quinn but the true answer is both (just like it was both Bobby and Joe responsible for the 81-92 run).

But if the poll were to ask if I could only keep 1 for 15 seasons who would I choose? It’s Peters without a fraction of a second of hesitation.
 
What did Gibbs accomplish without Bobby Beathard?
A Super Bowl is pretty good. Plus, the man got to the playoffs twice under Snyder and Vinny Cerrato after being ten years out of the game. Plus, he took a team of castoff scabs and beat NFL rosters with most of their stars intact.

Beathard never provided Gibbs a star QB. Gibbs won his three Superbowls with three different QBs and three different running backs. He also alterred his system based on personel. Whatever you gave him, Gibbs turned it into a winner. How many coaches could have turned Mark Rypien into a Superbowl MVP? Look how few HOFers Beathard provided Gibbs compared to other dynastic teams. Look at the "talent" level of the 49ers and Giants of that era compared to what Gibbs had according to the "experts. Mind you, I think the experts ar full of it and underrate a bunch of our players who deserve induction, but that's a different story.

So yeah, Gibbs accomplished a lot without Beathard. They were a great team, but he is a top five coach in NFL history. Hell, he's a top five coach in sports' history considering that he is one of the only men to have ever lead his teams to championships in totally different sports.
 
The problem is - we only have one year of data/results. It's way too early to judge whether Quinn was the right hire. Great start, there's no debating that. And of course acquiring Jayden Daniels makes a HC hire grade tougher because he'd likely make most coaches look pretty smart. The other thing that's weird is, if the driving force in the decision were all the 'serious culture and chemistry matches', why were we reportedly enroute to hire someone else when it fell apart. Maybe that part - the actual offering of a job was on the table at that final Ben Johnson meeting, is wrong. Possible it hadn't progressed to that point and they still would've gone with DQ, we may not ever know.

On Mike McDonald, we had insider information on that one. What we were hearing is that McDonald wanted the Washington job badly, as did his spouse, but the timing didn't work out. Quite possible had he been more inclined to being patient, he may well have gotten the nod after Johnson got squirrely. I think McDonald is going to be a very good HC. Johnson, not so much. Good stuff SkinsNumberOne
 
The problem is - we only have one year of data/results.
Entirely fair. It's like posting rookie grades ;)

Still, it's what we do. It's what message boards are all about.
 
I voted AP, but it's super close. Probably 51-49 in favor of him over DQ.

Quinn did an excellent job of motivating and helping build the culture, but IMO Peters was the original architect of it. Though as Boone mentioned, the sample size is still very small thus far, so we'll have to see what happens over the next couple of seasons.
 
The problem is - we only have one year of data/results. It's way too early to judge whether Quinn was the right hire. Great start, there's no debating that. And of course acquiring Jayden Daniels makes a HC hire grade tougher because he'd likely make most coaches look pretty smart. The other thing that's weird is, if the driving force in the decision were all the 'serious culture and chemistry matches', why were we reportedly enroute to hire someone else when it fell apart. Maybe that part - the actual offering of a job was on the table at that final Ben Johnson meeting, is wrong. Possible it hadn't progressed to that point and they still would've gone with DQ, we may not ever know.

On Mike McDonald, we had insider information on that one. What we were hearing is that McDonald wanted the Washington job badly, as did his spouse, but the timing didn't work out. Quite possible had he been more inclined to being patient, he may well have gotten the nod after Johnson got squirrely. I think McDonald is going to be a very good HC. Johnson, not so much. Good stuff SkinsNumberOne
Exactly - we may not ever know. There are obvious reasons for the team to paint the history in a certain brush, which is why when the stories are fresh it is sometimes good to put it down somewhere - why not here? :)

Yes they were enroute to see Ben Johnson but the idea they were going to hire him was not ever clearly stated by them - it was a lot of conjecture. In fact, when Ben came out talking about "basketball people" some (I think on this board) theorized that Ben had a sense they weren't interested enough in him. That same theory/thought also came out with Mike - part of the reasoning being, well, when they knew they wanted AP, this ownership group (with advisors) went and got him. So, why in their HC coach, did they hesitate? Some of the thinking was, there were too many opinions (this was pushed by many reporters as well; I ended up buying into this more at the time). Another thought was, they were trying hard to do due diligence. I think you (Boone) may have subscribed to this at the time if memory serves, and it definitely makes a lot of sense too.

The one thing almost no one said was "This (DQ) was their guy." That was kind of implied by some things they said at the time, but it felt contrived and unmatched with the happenings. More recently, that story is gaining traction - articles about how AP really connected with DQ's vision for team culture, chemistry, and camaraderie. If that's accurate, then your thought (due diligence) could be dead on - they liked DQ but had to check boxes on every dude, implying they weren't as head-over-heels on DQ as how they felt about AP, or that AP himself just wanted to make 100% sure. Also, Ben and Mike may have gotten the impression that the team wasn't sold on them, and that would really explain why Mike would move to Seattle faster and not go to the team which had a lot of personal connection for him. Jobs were getting filled, Seattle moved fast with Mike; the reporting DID include direct quotes from Mike with an appreciation for their decisiveness.

All very interesting stuff, because there are reasons to actually believe the team's story at this point. There are observable signs, not the least of which is the TEAM AND ORGANIZATIONAL chemistry in year-1 that took them so far. It could be partly due to things like what they are saying having more truth than originally thought.
 
1738547709859.png

^The correct answer.

BUT for funsies.

Peters picked Quinn, so then shouldn't all of Quinn's accomplishments be also attributed to Quinn? :p

I think with regards to 2024 though, I'd actually go Quinn.

IIRC Quinn brought in Kliff, who is I think the biggest piece of the puzzle outside of Peters and Quinn to getting us to success this year.

Quinn really instilled the culture that led the team to its success. Peters might have been most responsible for bringing in the players, but overall our talent level is still a work in progress. Quinn really took what was probably an overall B tier roster and got the culture set to be successful. Outside of the culture, the other big piece is Daniels, who Quinn probably would pick on his own, but certainly with Kliff's help they'd have gotten there.

Even the other big rookie we got, Sanristil, I think Quinn really wanted too, there was some video of Quinn saying he couldn't wait to coach Sanristil.

So I guess on further inspection, Peters DIDN'T DO ANYTHING! :p
 
Eh, I'm not so sure about all that. Swap Daniels for Williams and we're probably complaining about all of them just like the so called stacked Bears fans are right now.

That's why it's Peters, even if Quinn wanted him also. Peters had to make the decision.
 
This may be a cop out but i dont think either one can get 'more' credit than the other. Peters worked with Quinn to get the groceries, Quinn cooked the meal. The two go hand in hand, not sure either deserves 'more'
I feel like this is such an understated truth. One of the reasons, maybe the biggest behind Snyder being the owner, was that I rarely felt like there was synergy between the GM and the Coach.

Bearthard and Gibbs seemed like they were on the same page.
I don't think Bruce Allen listened to anyone but himself and Dan.
Scot Mcloughan was only here a year, and we know how that went.
Ron came in and pretty much ran the show. Not sure how much Martin Mayhew had input, but it always felt to me like Ron was the final word.

This is the first time in recent memory, where I feel like we have a GM and Coach in synergy. Peters may have been hired first, but it does feel like Quinn was the one he preferred and the two have been on the same page since day one. I think it makes a HUGE difference to how the team is structured, built and how the culture filters through from the top down.

I REALLY hope that we're in for a long run of sustained success where we might one day look back on Quinn as being the second best coach this franchise has had behind Gibbs. I know that it's waaaaay too early to really say things like that, but the foundations look solid so far. Be nice to see Quinn/Daniels have a Belicheck/Brady sort of run. Always competitive, constantly in the Conf finals, reach a superbowl or six, win a few. That would be great.
 
I asked Chat GPT to come up with a t-shirt slogan using energy and synergy as I was unable to channel my inner Zig Ziglar... here is the AI response:

'Powered by Energy. United by Synergy'.

Not bad!
 

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

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top