Quote:
Originally Posted by freddyg12
I feel pretty good about Zorn & the team too, but to me 8-8 would be a successful 1st year for him in all fairness. It's the toughest division top to bottom, he's new, the system's new, GW's gone, etc. I think it's reasonable to feel really good about zorn while not predicting much beyond a mediocre team.
I don't know how much can be gained by comparing him to spurrier. The biggest difference is that zorn has coached for years in the nfl, just not been a head coach or OC. Spurrier's problems amounted to mgmt., he simply didn't have control & respect.
Looking back of course there were red flags w/the ole ball coach, but tell me you weren't excited when he won early? Or when we opened his 2nd year at 3-1 after beating the Pats?
At a couple points in time he had the team looking up, then as the 03 season went on they just tanked & almost seemed to give up. That can & does happen to nfl coaches w/experience too. It's entirely possible that it could happen to Zorn. I don't see that happening any time soon because the team's direction and overall stability has improved exponentially after Gibbs II, this is a much different organization than it was 5 years ago.
|
I think people forget that in Steve Spurrier's (and Norv Turner's) tenure in Washington, we didn't really have good teams. That tends to be crucial in how well a coach performs.
Steve Spurrier has proven to be a good coach -- in college. You don't win National Championships by being a complete idiot. To me, the Spurrier experiment just highlighted the extraordinary differences between the NFL and the NCAA. He, like many of us, never realized those differences until things began to fall apart.