Gibbs vs. Parcells (1 Viewer)

[pollardsvision]

i'm really pretty indifferent myself, just curious what you guys think. (assuming there are vastly different opinions comparing a great redskins coach with the man who was often a big division rival)

Gibbs was 154-94, 17-7 in the playoffs with 3 rings.

Parcells was 172-130, 19-11 in the playoffs with 2 rings.

The numbers clearly point to Gibbs, but with Parcells propensity for turning franchises around, I think it makes for an interesting comparision.

Just wondering what you guys think.

 

[Mookie Blaylock]

i'm really pretty indifferent myself, just curious what you guys think. (assuming there are vastly different opinions comparing a great redskins coach with the man who was often a big division rival)Gibbs was 154-94, 17-7 in the playoffs with 3 rings.Parcells was 172-130, 19-11 in the playoffs with 2 rings.The numbers clearly point to Gibbs, but with Parcells propensity for turning franchises around, I think it makes for an interesting comparision.Just wondering what you guys think.

Wow. Talk about good vs. evil. I think Gibbs has the stats, but Parcells did more with less.

 

[Phlash]

Who has the most rings?

Who has the better playoff %?

Who has the better regular season %?

Parcells is a HoF coach, but there is no doubt in my mind Gibbs is better. Guy won 3 rings with 3 QBs. Hows THAT for coaching?

 

[Brutis]

Parcells, but Im biased and apparently by looking at the polls you guys are too.

 

[TD Ryan]

Parcells' media image and overall personality is so huge that it's hard to compare the two.

Too many fans have their clay-heads molded by ESPN and they can't vote intelligently on something like this.

Sadly, in this case, I'm one of them as I was about to press "Parcells" without really knowing all that Gibbs has done.

I will abstain as I know I am too uninformed about Gibbs to vote fairly.

 

[caglassc]

I'll give Parcells his due. I don't discount that Gibbs is a great coach and a great person, etc but I give the edge to Parcells due to the fact that he did turn around so many teams and was successful with them. You can't say that Gibbs would have been successful in Dallas, or New York or New England. Parcells proved his system worked in mulitiple locations throughout the 80s, 90s and 2000s. Gibbs can't claim that.....

 

[PranksterJD]

I'll give Parcells his due. I don't discount that Gibbs is a great coach and a great person, etc but I give the edge to Parcells due to the fact that he did turn around so many teams and was successful with them. You can't say that Gibbs would have been successful in Dallas, or New York or New England. Parcells proved his system worked in mulitiple locations throughout the 80s, 90s and 2000s. Gibbs can't claim that.....

2002 Dallas Cowboys under Campo = 5-112006 Dallas Cowboys under Parcells = 9-7Parcells 4 years in Dallas = 34-322003 Skins under Spurrier = 5-112007 Skins under Gibbs = 9-7Gibbs 4 years in Wash = 30-34Certainly New York and New England are different, and I really doubt that the 2008 Skins will roll in at 13-3, but Gibbs took a floundering Skins team and gave them an identity. He did a lot to bring that team back in from the cold.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Are we asking who was the better coach, or who was better, Parcells or Gibbs?

Gibbs was a significantly better coach, IMO.

 

[dgreen]

I'll give Parcells his due. I don't discount that Gibbs is a great coach and a great person, etc but I give the edge to Parcells due to the fact that he did turn around so many teams and was successful with them. You can't say that Gibbs would have been successful in Dallas, or New York or New England. Parcells proved his system worked in mulitiple locations throughout the 80s, 90s and 2000s. Gibbs can't claim that.....

2002 Dallas Cowboys under Campo = 5-112006 Dallas Cowboys under Parcells = 9-7Parcells 4 years in Dallas = 34-322003 Skins under Spurrier = 5-112007 Skins under Gibbs = 9-7Gibbs 4 years in Wash = 30-34Certainly New York and New England are different, and I really doubt that the 2008 Skins will roll in at 13-3, but Gibbs took a floundering Skins team and gave them an identity. He did a lot to bring that team back in from the cold.

Right. Gibbs II vs. Parcells with Dallas are very similar results. Gibbs I vs. Parcells with the NYG is an edge for Gibbs. Parcells with the NYJ and Pats is an edge to Parcells, but largely because Gibbs didn't try to do that.I've said it before and I'll say it again: Parcells has the head-to-head over Gibbs and has had success with more franchises. However, other than that, Gibbs wins every other comparison.

 

[Ripleys]

Gibbs and its not even close. No one in the history of the NFL has won 3 SB titles with 3 different starting QBs and 3 different starting RBs. Not taking anything away from the Steelers, Cowboys, and Patriots, but riding an amazing dynasty you built for a few titles is one thing, but starting over with an entirely new offense and winning it 3 times is something else. Gibbs deserves his place in the hall of fame as one of the greatest coaches in the history of the game.

 

[Brutis]

I'll give Parcells his due. I don't discount that Gibbs is a great coach and a great person, etc but I give the edge to Parcells due to the fact that he did turn around so many teams and was successful with them. You can't say that Gibbs would have been successful in Dallas, or New York or New England. Parcells proved his system worked in mulitiple locations throughout the 80s, 90s and 2000s. Gibbs can't claim that.....

2002 Dallas Cowboys under Campo = 5-112006 Dallas Cowboys under Parcells = 9-7Parcells 4 years in Dallas = 34-322003 Skins under Spurrier = 5-112007 Skins under Gibbs = 9-7Gibbs 4 years in Wash = 30-34Certainly New York and New England are different, and I really doubt that the 2008 Skins will roll in at 13-3, but Gibbs took a floundering Skins team and gave them an identity. He did a lot to bring that team back in from the cold.

Right. Gibbs II vs. Parcells with Dallas are very similar results. Gibbs I vs. Parcells with the NYG is an edge for Gibbs. Parcells with the NYJ and Pats is an edge to Parcells, but largely because Gibbs didn't try to do that.I've said it before and I'll say it again: Parcells has the head-to-head over Gibbs and has had success with more franchises. However, other than that, Gibbs wins every other comparison.

All i know is when Parcells took over Dallas that was a horrible team. I mean, they were REALLY bad.

 

[Ghost Rider]

If Parcells is gonna get extra credit for working with multiple franchises, then Gibbs gets extra credit for coaching only one team.

As it is, I give Gibbs the nod. He has a better winning percentage (in the regular season and in the playoffs), and he has more Super Bowl wins (despite less coaching years). Having won those three Super Bowls with three different QBs is a pretty awesome feat.

 

[Jason Wood]

Gibbs and its not even close. No one in the history of the NFL has won 3 SB titles with 3 different starting QBs and 3 different starting RBs. Not taking anything away from the Steelers, Cowboys, and Patriots, but riding an amazing dynasty you built for a few titles is one thing, but starting over with an entirely new offense and winning it 3 times is something else. Gibbs deserves his place in the hall of fame as one of the greatest coaches in the history of the game.

Exactly I hated them both (as an Eagles fan) in their primes, but I never once thought Parcells was a great coach; whereas I always saw Gibbs as a phenomenal coach.

 

[redman]

I'll give Parcells his due. I don't discount that Gibbs is a great coach and a great person, etc but I give the edge to Parcells due to the fact that he did turn around so many teams and was successful with them. You can't say that Gibbs would have been successful in Dallas, or New York or New England. Parcells proved his system worked in mulitiple locations throughout the 80s, 90s and 2000s. Gibbs can't claim that.....

2002 Dallas Cowboys under Campo = 5-112006 Dallas Cowboys under Parcells = 9-7Parcells 4 years in Dallas = 34-322003 Skins under Spurrier = 5-112007 Skins under Gibbs = 9-7Gibbs 4 years in Wash = 30-34Certainly New York and New England are different, and I really doubt that the 2008 Skins will roll in at 13-3, but Gibbs took a floundering Skins team and gave them an identity. He did a lot to bring that team back in from the cold.

Right. Gibbs II vs. Parcells with Dallas are very similar results. Gibbs I vs. Parcells with the NYG is an edge for Gibbs. Parcells with the NYJ and Pats is an edge to Parcells, but largely because Gibbs didn't try to do that.I've said it before and I'll say it again: Parcells has the head-to-head over Gibbs and has had success with more franchises. However, other than that, Gibbs wins every other comparison.

All i know is when Parcells took over Dallas that was a horrible team. I mean, they were REALLY bad.

I take it you were impressed with the soup sandwich that Gibbs took over? `

 

[dgreen]

Gibbs and its not even close. No one in the history of the NFL has won 3 SB titles with 3 different starting QBs and 3 different starting RBs. Not taking anything away from the Steelers, Cowboys, and Patriots, but riding an amazing dynasty you built for a few titles is one thing, but starting over with an entirely new offense and winning it 3 times is something else. Gibbs deserves his place in the hall of fame as one of the greatest coaches in the history of the game.

Just thought about this:He's taken 10 teams to the playoffs with 6 different QBs (Theismann, Schroeder, Williams, Rypien, Brunell, and Collins).

 

[savemejee]

Parcells is a HoF coach, but there is no doubt in my mind Gibbs is better. Guy won 3 rings with 3 QBs. Hows THAT for coaching?

I'm looking at you, Bellicheck.

 

[Brutis]

I'll give Parcells his due. I don't discount that Gibbs is a great coach and a great person, etc but I give the edge to Parcells due to the fact that he did turn around so many teams and was successful with them. You can't say that Gibbs would have been successful in Dallas, or New York or New England. Parcells proved his system worked in mulitiple locations throughout the 80s, 90s and 2000s. Gibbs can't claim that.....

2002 Dallas Cowboys under Campo = 5-112006 Dallas Cowboys under Parcells = 9-7Parcells 4 years in Dallas = 34-322003 Skins under Spurrier = 5-112007 Skins under Gibbs = 9-7Gibbs 4 years in Wash = 30-34Certainly New York and New England are different, and I really doubt that the 2008 Skins will roll in at 13-3, but Gibbs took a floundering Skins team and gave them an identity. He did a lot to bring that team back in from the cold.

Right. Gibbs II vs. Parcells with Dallas are very similar results. Gibbs I vs. Parcells with the NYG is an edge for Gibbs. Parcells with the NYJ and Pats is an edge to Parcells, but largely because Gibbs didn't try to do that.I've said it before and I'll say it again: Parcells has the head-to-head over Gibbs and has had success with more franchises. However, other than that, Gibbs wins every other comparison.

All i know is when Parcells took over Dallas that was a horrible team. I mean, they were REALLY bad.

I take it you were impressed with the soup sandwich that Gibbs took over? `

They weren't as bad as the quincy carter lead cowboys that Bill had.

 

[switz]

Parcells IMO was better, and I don't think it's close.

Look at how many coaches in this league have Parcells in their pedigree. Look at how many teams Parcells turned around, and turned into winners.

Compare that to Gibbs.

I'm not an NFC East fan in any way, so my opinion isn't biased. I just don't see how Gibbs, though good, is anywhere near the class of Parcells.

 

[PranksterJD]

I'll give Parcells his due. I don't discount that Gibbs is a great coach and a great person, etc but I give the edge to Parcells due to the fact that he did turn around so many teams and was successful with them. You can't say that Gibbs would have been successful in Dallas, or New York or New England. Parcells proved his system worked in mulitiple locations throughout the 80s, 90s and 2000s. Gibbs can't claim that.....

2002 Dallas Cowboys under Campo = 5-112006 Dallas Cowboys under Parcells = 9-7Parcells 4 years in Dallas = 34-322003 Skins under Spurrier = 5-112007 Skins under Gibbs = 9-7Gibbs 4 years in Wash = 30-34Certainly New York and New England are different, and I really doubt that the 2008 Skins will roll in at 13-3, but Gibbs took a floundering Skins team and gave them an identity. He did a lot to bring that team back in from the cold.

Right. Gibbs II vs. Parcells with Dallas are very similar results. Gibbs I vs. Parcells with the NYG is an edge for Gibbs. Parcells with the NYJ and Pats is an edge to Parcells, but largely because Gibbs didn't try to do that.I've said it before and I'll say it again: Parcells has the head-to-head over Gibbs and has had success with more franchises. However, other than that, Gibbs wins every other comparison.

All i know is when Parcells took over Dallas that was a horrible team. I mean, they were REALLY bad.

I take it you were impressed with the soup sandwich that Gibbs took over? `

They weren't as bad as the quincy carter lead cowboys that Bill had.

That's true. Danny Wuerffel was a football god.

 

[Brutis]

I'll give Parcells his due. I don't discount that Gibbs is a great coach and a great person, etc but I give the edge to Parcells due to the fact that he did turn around so many teams and was successful with them. You can't say that Gibbs would have been successful in Dallas, or New York or New England. Parcells proved his system worked in mulitiple locations throughout the 80s, 90s and 2000s. Gibbs can't claim that.....

2002 Dallas Cowboys under Campo = 5-112006 Dallas Cowboys under Parcells = 9-7Parcells 4 years in Dallas = 34-322003 Skins under Spurrier = 5-112007 Skins under Gibbs = 9-7Gibbs 4 years in Wash = 30-34Certainly New York and New England are different, and I really doubt that the 2008 Skins will roll in at 13-3, but Gibbs took a floundering Skins team and gave them an identity. He did a lot to bring that team back in from the cold.

Right. Gibbs II vs. Parcells with Dallas are very similar results. Gibbs I vs. Parcells with the NYG is an edge for Gibbs. Parcells with the NYJ and Pats is an edge to Parcells, but largely because Gibbs didn't try to do that.I've said it before and I'll say it again: Parcells has the head-to-head over Gibbs and has had success with more franchises. However, other than that, Gibbs wins every other comparison.

All i know is when Parcells took over Dallas that was a horrible team. I mean, they were REALLY bad.

I take it you were impressed with the soup sandwich that Gibbs took over? `

They weren't as bad as the quincy carter lead cowboys that Bill had.

That's true. Danny Wuerffel was a football god.

I thought Ramsy was the QB when Gibbs took over?

 

[savemejee]

I thought Ramsy was the QB when Gibbs took over?

Yep, Ramsey was the QB...I think I might have preferred Wuerffel.

 

[dgreen]

Not sure if Parcells would be in my top 10. Off the top of my head, and in no particular order, here are 9 I'd easily take over Parcells:

Gibbs

Lombardi

Belichick

Walsh

Brown

Landry

Shula

J. Johnson

Halas

I'm sure someone could make good arguments for adding certain people that would keep Parcells out of my top 10.

 

[Jason Wood]

If Parcells is gonna get extra credit for working with multiple franchises, then Gibbs gets extra credit for coaching only one team.

As it is, I give Gibbs the nod. He has a better winning percentage (in the regular season and in the playoffs), and he has more Super Bowl wins (despite less coaching years). Having won those three Super Bowls with three different QBs is a pretty awesome feat.

...and let's not forget that none of those QBs Gibbs won with were considered awesome signal callers either.

Joe Theismann

Theismann was in his 11th year when Gibbs took over in D.C. and had never completed 60% of his passes. Under Gibbs, Theismann goes on to Pro Bowl nods in consecutive seasons (at 33 and 34 years old) plus the Super Bowl victory.

Doug Williams

Williams, a backup to Jay Schroeder, steps in late in the season and then leads them to a SB. He never matched that success before or after.

Mark Rypien

Drafted Rypien, a 6th rounder out of Washington State, who takes over as the starter in his 3rd season and goes on to 2 Pro Bowls and a Super Bowl before the age of 30. He never came close to duplicating his numbers under Gibbs playing elsewhere.

And let's also not forget that Jay Schroeder was a Pro Bowler under Gibbs in between these guys.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

They both are excellent coaches and are 1-2 in my "favorite coaches" rankings. Both have been excellent at turning their own teams around over long stretches and winning with different personnel. Both have been excellent at squeezing great performances out of guys that were nothing before and after they got there. Parcells has done more turn around work for different organizations and has been successful everywhere he's went. So I give Parcells the nod on that factor. Both great great great coaches. I'd call them 1 of a kind, but we've seen them both in my lifetime.

I truly believe that if Gibbs had that fire still and decided to move around to a couple different teams post first Redskins tenure, he would've seen similar results as Parcells at turning teams around. But that's just an unprovable hypothesis. He did a great job walking away from the game at his peak when his heart wasn't in it anymore.

 

[dgreen]

Parcells has done more turn around work for different organizations and has been successful everywhere he's went. So I give Parcells the nod on that factor.

I don't understand why that one accomplishment carries so much weight with a lot of people.Saying you give Parcells the nod on that factor either means you give it a lot of weight or you see them as fairly even when excluding that factor.

 

[Jason Wood]

Gibbs has won Super Bowls without Belichick...Parcells hasn't.

 

[Pai Mei]

Gibbs was definitely the better coach. Parcells is better in talent acquisition.

If given the choice between them I'd pick Gibbs and hire a GM.

 

[Brutis]

Gibbs has won Super Bowls without Belichick...Parcells hasn't.

Gibbs had some very good coaches with him, don't sell them short.

 

[Workhorse]

Gibbs has won Super Bowls without Belichick...Parcells hasn't.

Were most of Gibbs' assistant coaches and coordinators the same through his Super Bowl runs?I'm curious.

 

[DCThunder]

Gibbs has won Super Bowls without Belichick...Parcells hasn't. :(

Were most of Gibbs' assistant coaches and coordinators the same through his Super Bowl runs?I'm curious.

Richie Pettibone as the DC was the constant of Gibbs I, as Bugel left to be HC at Arizona in the mid '80s. Bubba Tyrer the trainer was another constant. Bobby Beathard was the GM for the first part of Gibbs I and then it was Gibbs himself.

 

[BelichicksRevenge]

If Parcells is gonna get extra credit for working with multiple franchises, then Gibbs gets extra credit for coaching only one team.

As it is, I give Gibbs the nod. He has a better winning percentage (in the regular season and in the playoffs), and he has more Super Bowl wins (despite less coaching years). Having won those three Super Bowls with three different QBs is a pretty awesome feat.

...and let's not forget that none of those QBs Gibbs won with were considered awesome signal callers either.

Joe Theismann

Theismann was in his 11th year when Gibbs took over in D.C. and had never completed 60% of his passes. Under Gibbs, Theismann goes on to Pro Bowl nods in consecutive seasons (at 33 and 34 years old) plus the Super Bowl victory.

Doug Williams

Williams, a backup to Jay Schroeder, steps in late in the season and then leads them to a SB. He never matched that success before or after.

Mark Rypien

Drafted Rypien, a 6th rounder out of Washington State, who takes over as the starter in his 3rd season and goes on to 2 Pro Bowls and a Super Bowl before the age of 30. He never came close to duplicating his numbers under Gibbs playing elsewhere.

And let's also not forget that Jay Schroeder was a Pro Bowler under Gibbs in between these guys.

Theisman was selected to the pro bowl in 1979 and was considered an excellent qb before Gibbs arrived. It was a different era and many good qb's at that time passed below 60%.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Parcells IMO was better, and I don't think it's close.Look at how many coaches in this league have Parcells in their pedigree. Look at how many teams Parcells turned around, and turned into winners.Compare that to Gibbs.I'm not an NFC East fan in any way, so my opinion isn't biased. I just don't see how Gibbs, though good, is anywhere near the class of Parcells.

So, because Parcells turned teams around, and then bailed on them, before moving to another team, that somehow gives him the edge over a guy like Gibbs who stayed with the same team for his entire career? Interesting.

 

[redman]

I'll give Parcells his due. I don't discount that Gibbs is a great coach and a great person, etc but I give the edge to Parcells due to the fact that he did turn around so many teams and was successful with them. You can't say that Gibbs would have been successful in Dallas, or New York or New England. Parcells proved his system worked in mulitiple locations throughout the 80s, 90s and 2000s. Gibbs can't claim that.....

2002 Dallas Cowboys under Campo = 5-112006 Dallas Cowboys under Parcells = 9-7Parcells 4 years in Dallas = 34-322003 Skins under Spurrier = 5-112007 Skins under Gibbs = 9-7Gibbs 4 years in Wash = 30-34Certainly New York and New England are different, and I really doubt that the 2008 Skins will roll in at 13-3, but Gibbs took a floundering Skins team and gave them an identity. He did a lot to bring that team back in from the cold.

Right. Gibbs II vs. Parcells with Dallas are very similar results. Gibbs I vs. Parcells with the NYG is an edge for Gibbs. Parcells with the NYJ and Pats is an edge to Parcells, but largely because Gibbs didn't try to do that.I've said it before and I'll say it again: Parcells has the head-to-head over Gibbs and has had success with more franchises. However, other than that, Gibbs wins every other comparison.

All i know is when Parcells took over Dallas that was a horrible team. I mean, they were REALLY bad.

I take it you were impressed with the soup sandwich that Gibbs took over? `

They weren't as bad as the quincy carter lead cowboys that Bill had.

I'm not so sure. I agree that the 2002 Cowboys were awful, but have you seen the 2003 Redskins roster? :X

 

[Jason Wood]

If Parcells is gonna get extra credit for working with multiple franchises, then Gibbs gets extra credit for coaching only one team.

As it is, I give Gibbs the nod. He has a better winning percentage (in the regular season and in the playoffs), and he has more Super Bowl wins (despite less coaching years). Having won those three Super Bowls with three different QBs is a pretty awesome feat.

...and let's not forget that none of those QBs Gibbs won with were considered awesome signal callers either.

Joe Theismann

Theismann was in his 11th year when Gibbs took over in D.C. and had never completed 60% of his passes. Under Gibbs, Theismann goes on to Pro Bowl nods in consecutive seasons (at 33 and 34 years old) plus the Super Bowl victory.

Doug Williams

Williams, a backup to Jay Schroeder, steps in late in the season and then leads them to a SB. He never matched that success before or after.

Mark Rypien

Drafted Rypien, a 6th rounder out of Washington State, who takes over as the starter in his 3rd season and goes on to 2 Pro Bowls and a Super Bowl before the age of 30. He never came close to duplicating his numbers under Gibbs playing elsewhere.

And let's also not forget that Jay Schroeder was a Pro Bowler under Gibbs in between these guys.

Theisman was selected to the pro bowl in 1979 and was considered an excellent qb before Gibbs arrived. It was a different era and many good qb's at that time passed below 60%.

He did indeed go to the Pro Bowl but he was hardly considered an "excellent QB." Remember, he didn't make the Pro Bowl until he was 31 years old, and was a 4th round draft choice by Miami a decade before. He was considered a talented, veteran QB...but "excellent" is a platitude that oversteps the reality. Either way, it doesn't diminish what Gibbs managed to do with the guy. Theismann had seasons that far exceeded anything he'd produced prior to playing for him.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Parcells has done more turn around work for different organizations and has been successful everywhere he's went. So I give Parcells the nod on that factor.

I don't understand why that one accomplishment carries so much weight with a lot of people.Saying you give Parcells the nod on that factor either means you give it a lot of weight or you see them as fairly even when excluding that factor.

Pretty sure I said exactly that with my post.

 

[redman]

If Parcells is gonna get extra credit for working with multiple franchises, then Gibbs gets extra credit for coaching only one team.

As it is, I give Gibbs the nod. He has a better winning percentage (in the regular season and in the playoffs), and he has more Super Bowl wins (despite less coaching years). Having won those three Super Bowls with three different QBs is a pretty awesome feat.

...and let's not forget that none of those QBs Gibbs won with were considered awesome signal callers either.

Joe Theismann

Theismann was in his 11th year when Gibbs took over in D.C. and had never completed 60% of his passes. Under Gibbs, Theismann goes on to Pro Bowl nods in consecutive seasons (at 33 and 34 years old) plus the Super Bowl victory.

Doug Williams

Williams, a backup to Jay Schroeder, steps in late in the season and then leads them to a SB. He never matched that success before or after.

Mark Rypien

Drafted Rypien, a 6th rounder out of Washington State, who takes over as the starter in his 3rd season and goes on to 2 Pro Bowls and a Super Bowl before the age of 30. He never came close to duplicating his numbers under Gibbs playing elsewhere.

And let's also not forget that Jay Schroeder was a Pro Bowler under Gibbs in between these guys.

Theisman was selected to the pro bowl in 1979 and was considered an excellent qb before Gibbs arrived. It was a different era and many good qb's at that time passed below 60%.

He did indeed go to the Pro Bowl but he was hardly considered an "excellent QB." Remember, he didn't make the Pro Bowl until he was 31 years old, and was a 4th round draft choice by Miami a decade before. He was considered a talented, veteran QB...but "excellent" is a platitude that oversteps the reality. Either way, it doesn't diminish what Gibbs managed to do with the guy. Theismann had seasons that far exceeded anything he'd produced prior to playing for him.

And back then, it was Gibbs' offense that was being run.

 

[Christo]

Close call. But I'd have to go with Gibbs. He won it all without LT.

 

[culdeus]

Parcells - Better GM

Gibbs - Better Coach

 

[Brutis]

Parcells - Better GMGibbs - Better Coach

Has Parcells been a GM before?

 

[dgreen]

Parcells has done more turn around work for different organizations and has been successful everywhere he's went. So I give Parcells the nod on that factor.

I don't understand why that one accomplishment carries so much weight with a lot of people.Saying you give Parcells the nod on that factor either means you give it a lot of weight or you see them as fairly even when excluding that factor.

Pretty sure I said exactly that with my post.

How do you see them as even? Some pretty important stats:Regular Season win %: Gibbs 0.621 > Parcells 0.570

Post Season win %: Gibbs 0.708 > 0.579

SB Appearances: Gibbs 4 > Parcells 3

SB Wins: Gibbs 3 > Parcells 2

Playoff Appearances: Gibbs 10/16 > Parcells 10>19

Losing seasons: Gibbs 3/16 > Parcells 5/19

There just aren't many stats that I've seen that can come up in Parcells' favor.

 

[The Man with the Plan]

Joe Gibbs have 3 championships but 2 of them were in strike season so they don't really count for as much.

 

[dgreen]

Joe Gibbs have 3 championships but 2 of them were in strike season so they don't really count for as much.

Why?How much less do they count?

 

[Assani Fisher]

Joe Gibbs have 3 championships but 2 of them were in strike season so they don't really count for as much.

actually I would think that coaching is more important in strike shortened seasons since you have less time to prepare. I would say the fact you state speaks volumes about Gibbs.

 

[Yenrub]

I am a Giants homer so I voted for Parcells

Head to head Parcells has a better record 13-9 regular season 1-0 playoffs

Note the H2H record had nothing to do with my vote but it's nice to know

 

[DCThunder]

Joe Gibbs have 3 championships but 2 of them were in strike season so they don't really count for as much.

actually I would think that coaching is more important in strike shortened seasons since you have less time to prepare. I would say the fact you state speaks volumes about Gibbs.

Especially since in 1986 Gibbs told his striking players NOT to cross the picket lines and come back just to play in the game where the Replacement Redskins (including the QB who was on work release from jail) beat a bunch of Cowboy regulars who DID cross the picket line.

 

[BelichicksRevenge]

If Parcells is gonna get extra credit for working with multiple franchises, then Gibbs gets extra credit for coaching only one team.

As it is, I give Gibbs the nod. He has a better winning percentage (in the regular season and in the playoffs), and he has more Super Bowl wins (despite less coaching years). Having won those three Super Bowls with three different QBs is a pretty awesome feat.

...and let's not forget that none of those QBs Gibbs won with were considered awesome signal callers either.

Joe Theismann

Theismann was in his 11th year when Gibbs took over in D.C. and had never completed 60% of his passes. Under Gibbs, Theismann goes on to Pro Bowl nods in consecutive seasons (at 33 and 34 years old) plus the Super Bowl victory.

Doug Williams

Williams, a backup to Jay Schroeder, steps in late in the season and then leads them to a SB. He never matched that success before or after.

Mark Rypien

Drafted Rypien, a 6th rounder out of Washington State, who takes over as the starter in his 3rd season and goes on to 2 Pro Bowls and a Super Bowl before the age of 30. He never came close to duplicating his numbers under Gibbs playing elsewhere.

And let's also not forget that Jay Schroeder was a Pro Bowler under Gibbs in between these guys.

Theisman was selected to the pro bowl in 1979 and was considered an excellent qb before Gibbs arrived. It was a different era and many good qb's at that time passed below 60%.

He did indeed go to the Pro Bowl but he was hardly considered an "excellent QB." Remember, he didn't make the Pro Bowl until he was 31 years old, and was a 4th round draft choice by Miami a decade before. He was considered a talented, veteran QB...but "excellent" is a platitude that oversteps the reality. Either way, it doesn't diminish what Gibbs managed to do with the guy. Theismann had seasons that far exceeded anything he'd produced prior to playing for him.

And back then, it was Gibbs' offense that was being run.

Theisman was 29 before he was named a starter. he played in the CFL and then was a backup to Billy Kilmer because George Allen liked old guys. He was named to the pro bowl in his second year as a full time starter at 30 years old. Gibbs helped Theisman as a Qb but Theisman was already one of the better QB's on the league when Gibbs arrived.

 

[Dexter Manley]

Joe Gibbs have 3 championships but 2 of them were in strike season so they don't really count for as much.

actually I would think that coaching is more important in strike shortened seasons since you have less time to prepare. I would say the fact you state speaks volumes about Gibbs.

Remember during the 1987 season, replacement players were used for 3 games, so the importance of coaching was magnified much more than during a normal season. Interesting note during the 1987 strike season: the Redskins were the only team to not have a single player cross the picket line during the strike -- every player on their roster for those 3 games was a "scab." And Gibbs led these guys to a 3 - 0 record, inlcuding the memorable win at Dallas on MNF, when the strike was basically over, and the Cowboys had most of their stars back playing in the game. The movie "The Replacements," starring Keneau Reeves and Gene Hackman was based on these events.

 

[pollardsvision]

it looks like gibbs might be one of the more underrated coaches of all-time.

i assume that has alot to do with the fact that much of his sucess was intertwined in the 80's with a team and a coach that many see as the best dynasty of all-time.

from a historical perspective, it seems like gibbs' has been overshadowed by walsh/montana/rice and company.

it's ironic b/c the reason for his greatness (winning his 3 titles with different QBs) probably has alot to do with why he's overlooked in the conversations of greatest coaches.

with different stars, it doesn't have that same memorable feel to it that a lombardi/starr or walsh/montana or noll/bradshaw or landry/staubach or belchick/brady have when we consider them.

b/c of a different cast of characters, those redskins teams (and gibbs) can be forgettable to non-skins fans.

i'm not a gibbs fan at all, but you could make the argument that he's the best coach of all-time and i assume many, many people may not even think of gibbs if asked who the best ever was.

 

[Jercules]

Parcells never did a thing without Belichick.

 

[Assani Fisher]

Parcells never did a thing without Belichick.

Belichick never did a thing without Brady.Obviously, Brady>Parcells