Joe2 Legacy2 will be?

Im a Gibbs fan, but his record speaks for itself.
1. He won less than 50% of his games in 4 years.
2. Won 1 of 3 playoff games, and you can chalk most of that up to the D.
3. He (the skins) spent a ton of money on players and coaches.
4. He couldnt drop Brunell, when he was hurting the team.
5. Couldnt put together a team that didnt have a bunch of motion penalties, false starts, and delay of games.

If this were any other coach, everyone would say that he was garbage. This is a "what have you done for me lately" league, and he didnt do much the second time around. But heck, he had a team that fought thier guts out.

This is an honest and accurate assessment of Gibbs 2.0. Like someone in another post said, in comparison to Norv and OBC Gibbs 2 looked pretty good but in comparison to Gibbs 1 it didnt look so hot. Gibbs was not brought back to out do Norv & OBC, he was brought back to repeat Gibbs 1 and he didnt come close.

It's a new era, time to move forward. JLC must be bored.

Thank you! I sure didn't agree with a lot of what Gibbs 2 did. But he sure did bring us back to respectability. Anyone remember games in 03 when Dallas shut us out at home? We were a 2nd rate team back then. But it's time to move on now. Joe is gone now and I really like what Zorn is doing now. Time to turn the page!

If you measure "Gibbs 2.0" by the standards of "Gibbs 1.0", then the second coming was pretty much a failure. If "Gibbs 1.0" had not gotten him voted into the HoF, then "Gibbs 2.0" would not have polished his resume in any way; he'd be on the outside looking in for the rest of eternity.

If you measure Gibbs 2.0 by the standard of Steve Spurrier/Norv Turner performances, then "Gibbs 2.0" is a roaring success.

Is the glass half-full? Is the glass half-empty?

Or is the glass twice as big as it needs to be???

I agree with the notion of just moving on. But one final question. At the end of the day should Gibbs be measured as Joe Gibbs, or Gibbs 1.0 and Gibbs 2.0?

Its kinda like when michael jordan came back from retirement to bring the wizards to glory. The game passed him by, all the innovations that he brought to the game had been further innovated, the game had passed him by. It was time for him to step away.

This is a disturbing, scary thought, but the washpost guys brought it up on comcast a couple weeks back; what is the team gonna be like if Zorn is 1-4 after 5 games? Will they rally behind him or will it be like pettibon's lone season?

The reason I pose the question is that Gibbs may be viewed as a success based on how Zorn does. If Zorn loses badly, it will make Gibbs look good. If Zorn wins a lot, you can point to Gibbs' roster moves, e.g. Campbell. If we don't make the playoffs for a few years, people will look back at Gibbs' years as the last time we made it.

Bottom line, Zorn will have to stay here & win a while to diminish what Gibbs did and make people forget those years.

I personally believe he left us the legacy JZ, and the fan base is currently enjoying, and is reponsible for the about face, and maturation of Danny, and the VIN

I agree with the notion of just moving on. But one final question. At the end of the day should Gibbs be measured as Joe Gibbs, or Gibbs 1.0 and Gibbs 2.0?


Good question. He should be measured only as Gibbs 1.0 for the football history books. That his bust sits in Canton is testament enough. However, he should only be measured as Gibbs 2.0 if you're considering how to make this current team a championship caliber team.

Trading up for Jason Campbell will be the centerpiece of the Gibbs 2.0 legacy, and I'm convinced that Campbell will develop into the franchise QB that Gibbs envisioned. While I was critical of Gibbs and conservative playcalling during the 2nd run, he brought stability and maturity to the organization, as reflected by Snyder's more prudent approach during the past two offseasons.

The fact that JLC saw fit to write what is basically an article on what the old coach did before the new coach has done anything shows to me how much of a hardon he has for poopooing Gibbs. I don't think he is totally wrong is some respects but I think his general attitude towards Gibbs 2.0 is simply skewed far to negatively. He says the team was in the dumps last year and then when Collins comes in and get the offense going and we win 4 straight it is only because of the Defense.

I do wonder where this blog posting came from. It seems to have come out of nowhere for no reason.

I agree that Gibbs 2.0 was moderate in success. I think people underestimated how far the franchise and roster had fallen before he returned. Expecting Gibbs as great as he was in 1.0 to immediately produce a Super Bowl champion in three years with what he inherited would be like turning Fat Albert into Carl Lewis in three years, a bit too much to expect. I think in trying too hard to do this, Gibbs may have made some big mistakes, Sticking with Brunnell too long, Arch, LLoyd, Ultra-Conservative Offense that neutralized good moves, Campbell, Cooley, the 04 FA class, Taylor and Landry.

The one positive that I think people overlook in Gibbs 2.0 was that he also got us back to playing tough within the division. During Norv, Shotty and Spurrier we let division opponents smack us silly on the road and at home. Gibbs got us playing better within the division both on the road and at home. This is the first key in becoming an elite team.

I think Gibbs 2.0 may parallel what happened with Parcells at Dallas, he may indeed enable the next coach to excel and succeed in what he created as a foundation and left behind.