"The game has passed him by." (1 Viewer)

[dgreen]

We hear it all the time. So many times, especially with older coaches, people say that the game has passed them by. What exactly does that mean? Can we get a working definition here? Is it just something people say about old guys who aren't getting results anymore or are there some specific things to look for in what they do?

To me, just the phrase makes it sound like people are saying a particular coach is no longer capable of understanding the complexity of the game at the current time. This would seem to imply two things: 1) the coach's age has led to their mind not working as well anymore and they can't continue to evolve and 2) that the league becomes more complicated every year. Is that it? Is there something else to it?

I hear it so much and I just wondered what exactly people mean when they say it. I think a lot of people just say it just because a team's record isn't too good and it really isn't about anything the coach does or is capable of doing.

 

[NoCheese]

In short, a 1993 mindset in 2007 (in reference to coaches)

 

[dgreen]

In short, a 1993 mindset in 2007 (in reference to coaches)

Right. What does that mean? What's a 1993 mindset and how is it different in 2007?

 

[Utter Chaos]

Think of you grandfather browsing the Internet versus yourself doing it. Technology has passed your grandfather by.

 

[Mr Capicollo]

It has always seemed like a blanket explanation for the inarticulate to use when describing why an older coach isn\\\'t as good as he used to be. It goes hand in glove with, \"He doesn\'t understand today\'s players.\"

 

[dgreen]

Think of you grandfather browsing the Internet versus yourself doing it. Technology has passed your grandfather by.

But are we talking about a grandfather who has been involved in technology his whole life as an NFL coach has been involved with football his whole life? Are we talking about a grandfather that at one time was good really good with technology and has a desire to understand technology?An NFL coach doesn't just roll out bed and become an NFL coach. If he did, he would have trouble like a grandfather deciding one day to surf the web.

 

[zDwinger]

In short, a 1993 mindset in 2007 (in reference to coaches)

Care to explain in detail?

 

[Utter Chaos]

Think of you grandfather browsing the Internet versus yourself doing it. Technology has passed your grandfather by.

But are we talking about a grandfather who has been involved in technology his whole life as an NFL coach has been involved with football his whole life? Are we talking about a grandfather that at one time was good really good with technology and has a desire to understand technology?An NFL coach doesn't just roll out bed and become an NFL coach. If he did, he would have trouble like a grandfather deciding one day to surf the web.

We're talking about a grandfather who worked with Mainframe computers then retired for a few years before the Internet became big to concentrate on race cars. After he tired of racing cars he decided to get back into computers but everything he knows about Mainframes don't do him any good on the Internet.

 

[identikit]

Think of you grandfather browsing the Internet versus yourself doing it. Technology has passed your grandfather by.

But are we talking about a grandfather who has been involved in technology his whole life as an NFL coach has been involved with football his whole life? Are we talking about a grandfather that at one time was good really good with technology and has a desire to understand technology?An NFL coach doesn't just roll out bed and become an NFL coach. If he did, he would have trouble like a grandfather deciding one day to surf the web.

We're talking about a grandfather who worked with Mainframe computers then retired for a few years before the Internet became big to concentrate on race cars. After he tired of racing cars he decided to get back into computers but everything he knows about Mainframes don't do him any good on the Internet.

 

[zDwinger]

Think of you grandfather browsing the Internet versus yourself doing it. Technology has passed your grandfather by.

Please explain in detail how a 3-4 defense has changed in the past 20 years.

 

[zDwinger]

Think of you grandfather browsing the Internet versus yourself doing it. Technology has passed your grandfather by.

But are we talking about a grandfather who has been involved in technology his whole life as an NFL coach has been involved with football his whole life? Are we talking about a grandfather that at one time was good really good with technology and has a desire to understand technology?An NFL coach doesn't just roll out bed and become an NFL coach. If he did, he would have trouble like a grandfather deciding one day to surf the web.

We're talking about a grandfather who worked with Mainframe computers then retired for a few years before the Internet became big to concentrate on race cars. After he tired of racing cars he decided to get back into computers but everything he knows about Mainframes don't do him any good on the Internet.

Please explain in detail how a rip technique has changed since 1970. Thanks

 

[Utter Chaos]

Think of you grandfather browsing the Internet versus yourself doing it. Technology has passed your grandfather by.

Please explain in detail how a 3-4 defense has changed in the past 20 years.

The 3-4 defense hasn't changed much in the past 20 years. It's the offensive schemes that have changed.

 

[Utter Chaos]

Think of you grandfather browsing the Internet versus yourself doing it. Technology has passed your grandfather by.

But are we talking about a grandfather who has been involved in technology his whole life as an NFL coach has been involved with football his whole life? Are we talking about a grandfather that at one time was good really good with technology and has a desire to understand technology?An NFL coach doesn't just roll out bed and become an NFL coach. If he did, he would have trouble like a grandfather deciding one day to surf the web.

We're talking about a grandfather who worked with Mainframe computers then retired for a few years before the Internet became big to concentrate on race cars. After he tired of racing cars he decided to get back into computers but everything he knows about Mainframes don't do him any good on the Internet.

Please explain in detail how a rip technique has changed since 1970. Thanks

Sorry, I don't know. I'm not a grandfather yet.

 

[switz]

In my opinion it refers to coaches who don't evolve with the game.

For instance, certain schemes work, until opponents figure out how to stop them. A coach then needs to evolve... perhaps some plays out of that scheme are still useful, but not all of them. A coach who stagnates eventually will lose his job.

 

[switz]

Think of you grandfather browsing the Internet versus yourself doing it. Technology has passed your grandfather by.

Please explain in detail how a 3-4 defense has changed in the past 20 years.

The formation hasn't changed much, that is true. But the plays run off that formation, the stunts and schemes within that formation have changed. For instance, 20 years ago, how many DEs dropped into coverage while the ILB blitzed? Just an example...On offense, the Pro Set has been used for 20 years as well, but many of the plays have changed.On the other hand, GB has been using the same running play for about 20 years and it still works...

 

[dgreen]

Think of you grandfather browsing the Internet versus yourself doing it. Technology has passed your grandfather by.

But are we talking about a grandfather who has been involved in technology his whole life as an NFL coach has been involved with football his whole life? Are we talking about a grandfather that at one time was good really good with technology and has a desire to understand technology?An NFL coach doesn't just roll out bed and become an NFL coach. If he did, he would have trouble like a grandfather deciding one day to surf the web.

We're talking about a grandfather who worked with Mainframe computers then retired for a few years before the Internet became big to concentrate on race cars. After he tired of racing cars he decided to get back into computers but everything he knows about Mainframes don't do him any good on the Internet.

I don't want to take your words literally here, but I do want to figure out exactly what you are talking about. Do you really think that "everything" a coach knows about football in the NFL in year X is useless in year x+15?Also, that's only an example of someone who leaves then comes back. I've heard "the game has passed him by" about coaches who never left. Don Shula was an example of that.

 

[dgreen]

In my opinion it refers to coaches who don't evolve with the game.For instance, certain schemes work, until opponents figure out how to stop them. A coach then needs to evolve... perhaps some plays out of that scheme are still useful, but not all of them. A coach who stagnates eventually will lose his job.

Is that about plain ol' stubbornness or their actual ability to evolve?

 

[dgreen]

Think of you grandfather browsing the Internet versus yourself doing it. Technology has passed your grandfather by.

Please explain in detail how a 3-4 defense has changed in the past 20 years.

The 3-4 defense hasn't changed much in the past 20 years. It's the offensive schemes that have changed.

So all defensive coaches have had the game pass them by?

 

[zDwinger]

Think of you grandfather browsing the Internet versus yourself doing it. Technology has passed your grandfather by.

Please explain in detail how a 3-4 defense has changed in the past 20 years.

The 3-4 defense hasn't changed much in the past 20 years. It's the offensive schemes that have changed.

Explain how the I formation has changed or a spread set has changed?

 

[dgreen]

It has always seemed like a blanket explanation for the inarticulate to use when describing why an older coach isn\\\'t as good as he used to be. It goes hand in glove with, \"He doesn\'t understand today\'s players.\"

Don't jump ahead of me. Seriously, though, it seems like a lot of people use this phrase because they've heard others use it. I'm really interested in hearing from those who use the phrase AND know what they are talking about.

 

[zDwinger]

Think of you grandfather browsing the Internet versus yourself doing it. Technology has passed your grandfather by.

Please explain in detail how a 3-4 defense has changed in the past 20 years.

The formation hasn't changed much, that is true. But the plays run off that formation, the stunts and schemes within that formation have changed. For instance, 20 years ago, how many DEs dropped into coverage while the ILB blitzed? Just an example...On offense, the Pro Set has been used for 20 years as well, but many of the plays have changed.On the other hand, GB has been using the same running play for about 20 years and it still works...

The DE dropping into coverage is a good example of a scheme change but this is something all coaches look for in review. I don't see this throwing off Lombardi or any other NFL level coach.Formations are used to get various angles of attack on the defense. So from a pro-set attacking the three hole how many new plays have there been in he last 20 years? How many new ways to block the sweep in the past 20 years?

 

[SuperJohn96]

It isn't just schemes. It's how you deal with players too.

Think of the difference in attitude of players now compared to 20 years ago.

A large part of being a coach is knowing how to deal with players too...

 

[dgreen]

It isn't just schemes. It's how you deal with players too.Think of the difference in attitude of players now compared to 20 years ago.A large part of being a coach is knowing how to deal with players too...

I agree dealing with players is a large part of being a coach.What I've never been convinced of, though, is that players of one era are different than players from the previous era in a meaningful way.

 

[Mr Capicollo]

Think of the difference in attitude of players now compared to 20 years ago.

What are the differences? Please explain.

 

[switz]

Think of you grandfather browsing the Internet versus yourself doing it. Technology has passed your grandfather by.

Please explain in detail how a 3-4 defense has changed in the past 20 years.

The formation hasn't changed much, that is true. But the plays run off that formation, the stunts and schemes within that formation have changed. For instance, 20 years ago, how many DEs dropped into coverage while the ILB blitzed? Just an example...On offense, the Pro Set has been used for 20 years as well, but many of the plays have changed.On the other hand, GB has been using the same running play for about 20 years and it still works...

The DE dropping into coverage is a good example of a scheme change but this is something all coaches look for in review. I don't see this throwing off Lombardi or any other NFL level coach.Formations are used to get various angles of attack on the defense. So from a pro-set attacking the three hole how many new plays have there been in he last 20 years? How many new ways to block the sweep in the past 20 years?

I'm not sure if you are arguing for arguments sake, or if you really believe there haven't been many changes... I pointed out a few, and while maybe there aren't a ton each year, they do accumulate.In addition plays that used to work, when players were smaller and slower, just don't work anymore. Or schemes that work against traditional defenses don't work now that teams use traditional formations to disguise more exotic schemes. And if coaches insist on running plays that don't work anymore, then - the game has passed them by.Few teams ever stick to one defensive scheme. Even if it's typically a 3-4 personnel, or a 4-3, some drop into cover 2, some go into 46. If coaches don't keep up with changes like that, and adapt then they become dinosaurs.I agree that in some cases that's a cliche that is used too much... but I do think it's true in some cases... Buddy Ryan, Mike Ditka, and Don Shula all come to mind.Even listening to Ditka's commentary at times shows how out of touch he is with today's game.

 

[Mr Capicollo]

Think of you grandfather browsing the Internet versus yourself doing it. Technology has passed your grandfather by.

Please explain in detail how a 3-4 defense has changed in the past 20 years.

The formation hasn\'t changed much, that is true. But the plays run off that formation, the stunts and schemes within that formation have changed. For instance, 20 years ago, how many DEs dropped into coverage while the ILB blitzed? Just an example...On offense, the Pro Set has been used for 20 years as well, but many of the plays have changed.On the other hand, GB has been using the same running play for about 20 years and it still works...

The DE dropping into coverage is a good example of a scheme change but this is something all coaches look for in review. I don\'t see this throwing off Lombardi or any other NFL level coach.Formations are used to get various angles of attack on the defense. So from a pro-set attacking the three hole how many new plays have there been in he last 20 years? How many new ways to block the sweep in the past 20 years?

I\'m not sure if you are arguing for arguments sake, or if you really believe there haven\'t been many changes... I pointed out a few, and while maybe there aren\'t a ton each year, they do accumulate.In addition plays that used to work, when players were smaller and slower, just don\'t work anymore. Or schemes that work against traditional defenses don\'t work now that teams use traditional formations to disguise more exotic schemes. And if coaches insist on running plays that don\'t work anymore, then - the game has passed them by.Few teams ever stick to one defensive scheme. Even if it\'s typically a 3-4 personnel, or a 4-3, some drop into cover 2, some go into 46. If coaches don\'t keep up with changes like that, and adapt then they become dinosaurs.I agree that in some cases that\'s a cliche that is used too much... but I do think it\'s true in some cases... Buddy Ryan, Mike Ditka, and Don Shula all come to mind.Even listening to Ditka\'s commentary at times shows how out of touch he is with today\'s game.

Gibbs himself (who I would wager inspired this thread) has said that about one-third of the schemes turn over each year, which obviously means a scheme becomes outdated in a hurry.To me, this \"game has passed him by\" comment is less about \"are you up to date on this year\'s changes?\" and is more about \"are you capable of changing and adapting year to year as is required of a head coach?\" Obviously, if a coach has been out of football, he won\'t simply be able to open up his old playbook and go to work expecting success. The Art Shell debacle in Oakland taught us that in vivid hues. The stuff about \"today\'s players are different\" has always been bunk to me. If you have people skills, those don\'t deteriorate. What you\'ve seen with Gibbs is that he is still able to create great team chemistry and unity, and to inspire veterans to lead, etc. He addressed the issue of his scheme being dated by hiring Saunders, a guy who never left the league. The jury is still out on him as to whether he\'s lost his nerve on game day in making critical calls (going for it on fourth downs; throwing the ball more with a lead, etc.) or has simply felt limited given the personnel that he\'s had to deal with, in large part due to injuries.

 

[ShadowMaster]

In short -

"What once worked for coach X, no longer does"

The term is used when a once succesful coach now struggles. The down turn could be due to changes in personal, rules, or the competition but the statement implys (IMO) that the change in success is rooted in a refusal to adapt to newer strategies or concepts.

 

[dgreen]

Gibbs himself (who I would wager inspired this thread)

Yes and no. Yes, he's the one I hear referred to a lot recently. But, I'm not necessarily trying to prove the game hasn't passed him by. I just wonder what people mean when they say that. For example, it was said a bunch after he called the back-to-back timeouts as if that's something so complicated that his old fart brain couldn't comprehend.This seems to be the same thing as saying, "That was a rookie mistake." I've heard that said after a rookie jumps offsides at a crucial point the game as if jumping offsides was acceptable in college, high school, and pee wee football.

 

[zDwinger]

It isn't just schemes. It's how you deal with players too.Think of the difference in attitude of players now compared to 20 years ago.A large part of being a coach is knowing how to deal with players too...

Pretty good point in dealing with millionaires versus players just making a living. I'm just not convinced that dealing with Hollywood henderson is much different than dealing with Terrel Owens.

 

[zDwinger]

Think of you grandfather browsing the Internet versus yourself doing it. Technology has passed your grandfather by.

Please explain in detail how a 3-4 defense has changed in the past 20 years.

The formation hasn't changed much, that is true. But the plays run off that formation, the stunts and schemes within that formation have changed. For instance, 20 years ago, how many DEs dropped into coverage while the ILB blitzed? Just an example...On offense, the Pro Set has been used for 20 years as well, but many of the plays have changed.On the other hand, GB has been using the same running play for about 20 years and it still works...

The DE dropping into coverage is a good example of a scheme change but this is something all coaches look for in review. I don't see this throwing off Lombardi or any other NFL level coach.Formations are used to get various angles of attack on the defense. So from a pro-set attacking the three hole how many new plays have there been in he last 20 years? How many new ways to block the sweep in the past 20 years?

I'm not sure if you are arguing for arguments sake, or if you really believe there haven't been many changes... I pointed out a few, and while maybe there aren't a ton each year, they do accumulate.In addition plays that used to work, when players were smaller and slower, just don't work anymore. Or schemes that work against traditional defenses don't work now that teams use traditional formations to disguise more exotic schemes. And if coaches insist on running plays that don't work anymore, then - the game has passed them by.Few teams ever stick to one defensive scheme. Even if it's typically a 3-4 personnel, or a 4-3, some drop into cover 2, some go into 46. If coaches don't keep up with changes like that, and adapt then they become dinosaurs.I agree that in some cases that's a cliche that is used too much... but I do think it's true in some cases... Buddy Ryan, Mike Ditka, and Don Shula all come to mind.Even listening to Ditka's commentary at times shows how out of touch he is with today's game.

First off I am not arguing just to argue. I'm discussing the topic and trying to determine where people think the game has changed so drastically. Let look at a few examples.Running plays. What has changed from the early 80's?1. Running the dive? 2. Running off-tackle? 3. Running outside?4. How has the lead blocker role changed?5. Have the fundamentals of a run play changed?Passing plays. What has changed from the early 80's1. Differences in routes or the route tree?2. Differences in a QB reads?3. How has the pass blocking fundamentals changed?4. Have the fundamentals of a pass paly changed?With all of that said I don't see a huge difference. Also, with the game passing up Gibbs the last two years (12-18) what does that say for coaches who are supposed to be modern such as Kubiak (13-17), Payton (17-13) but 7-7 this year just like Mr. passed by Gibbs, etc. I do not believe the game has passed any coach by in terms of how it is played but may have passed them by in them willing to put in the time and effort to win the game.

 

[renesauz]

Just a few short years ago, it was said that the college games had passed Joe Paterno by, and that he could no longer relate to his players too.

Then Penn State won a few games and went to a Rose bowl. Suddenly JoePa was a stud coach again.

The term is grossly (and more often then not incorrectly) overused.

 

[switz]

Gibbs himself (who I would wager inspired this thread)

Yes and no. Yes, he's the one I hear referred to a lot recently. But, I'm not necessarily trying to prove the game hasn't passed him by. I just wonder what people mean when they say that. For example, it was said a bunch after he called the back-to-back timeouts as if that's something so complicated that his old fart brain couldn't comprehend.This seems to be the same thing as saying, "That was a rookie mistake." I've heard that said after a rookie jumps offsides at a crucial point the game as if jumping offsides was acceptable in college, high school, and pee wee football.

Agreed, both those statements in that context are stupid. However, if a WR doesn't make the effort to get the second foot in, that's a rookie mistake.BTW, I don't think the game has passed Gibbs by at all...

 

[switz]

First off I am not arguing just to argue. I'm discussing the topic and trying to determine where people think the game has changed so drastically. Let look at a few examples.Running plays. What has changed from the early 80's?1. Running the dive? 2. Running off-tackle? 3. Running outside?4. How has the lead blocker role changed?5. Have the fundamentals of a run play changed?Passing plays. What has changed from the early 80's1. Differences in routes or the route tree?2. Differences in a QB reads?3. How has the pass blocking fundamentals changed?4. Have the fundamentals of a pass paly changed?With all of that said I don't see a huge difference. Also, with the game passing up Gibbs the last two years (12-18) what does that say for coaches who are supposed to be modern such as Kubiak (13-17), Payton (17-13) but 7-7 this year just like Mr. passed by Gibbs, etc. I do not believe the game has passed any coach by in terms of how it is played but may have passed them by in them willing to put in the time and effort to win the game.

I'm glad you're being sincere in your efforts to reason on this...As for running plays, actually they have changed quite a bit over time. Not necessarily what the RB himself does, but the OL schemes on an off tackle, draw, etc. have changed quite a bit, to compensate for the changes in defensive schemes.You mentioned lead block, but the fullback has basically been phased out of the league, so old plays usually run with a lead block aren't run the same way.Routes are run differently now, to sit in the different zones that result form the new defensive schemes. Even look at the WCO and the revolution it caused in defenses... Run n Shoot, etc.I just find it difficult to believe you can't see that schemes, and even plays have evolved significantly form 20 years ago.As for the Gibbs comment... I'm not of the mind, as stated, that the game has passed Gibbs by...I will say however, that much of his motion offense, once duplicated greatly by the Rams and others, is no longer used as much in the NFL because it lost its effectiveness... and that is just one example of how schemes change.

 

[cholo]

It means he's still running the wishbone and drop-kicking field goals.

 

[scoobygang]

I don't want to take your words literally here, but I do want to figure out exactly what you are talking about. Do you really think that "everything" a coach knows about football in the NFL in year X is useless in year x+15?Also, that's only an example of someone who leaves then comes back. I've heard "the game has passed him by" about coaches who never left. Don Shula was an example of that.

Well, let's talk about Gibbs, as this seems to be a proxy argument about him.I don't think its unfair to say that there are a few aspects of the modern game that Gibbs has never seemed particularly comfortable with. His first season back, he didn't seem to understand replay challenges very well at all. Even today, I don't think that's a particular strength of his. He seemed uncomfortable with the faster play clock, and I think the team still has game management issues that stem from that to an extent.Finally, I've just heard of too many older coaches, who seem to have trouble relating to the modern player. I heard it was a key factor in Parcells moving on. Now, I do think Gibbs still gets players to play hard for him, but I'm not sure he has the same type of relationship with his players he used to have. I don't blame that on Gibbs or on the players. 40 - 45 years is a huge gap to bridge in a workplace environment. It doesn't make anyone wrong, its just difficult.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

I agree that the phrase is overused or misued on occasion, but I can DEFINITELY where it apllies from time to time as well.

You see it all of the time in other sports and areas of expertise as well. A guy who was REALLY good at something sometimes just sticks to what he knows best figuring it will still work. Sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't. I remember when Bjorn Borg attempted a come back in tennis in the early 90s toting his crazy wooden racquet. Needless to say, it didn't work out well.

This does not ALWAYS happen. Some older guys adapt and can stay good or even great over a long period of time. But some guys DO just get passed by.

Oh and as for the game not being significantly different than it was 20 years ago, I really can't see a reasonable person believing that. Not only were schemes, plays, and positions (at least how they are used) different, but the players themselves are significantly different from a physical standpoint AND a social standpoint (money). The game atmosphere is different, the training is vastly different, the length of the season is drastically different, some of the equipment is very different, free agency and the salary cap are ENORMOUS differences, the draft and off-season are different, the playoff structure is different, the divisions are different, the number of teams are different, and the drugs are different . Other than that, yeah, it's pretty much the status quo.

 

[dgreen]

I don't think its unfair to say that there are a few aspects of the modern game that Gibbs has never seemed particularly comfortable with. His first season back, he didn't seem to understand replay challenges very well at all. Even today, I don't think that's a particular strength of his.

I see a lot of coaches make very poor replay decisions almost every week. Coaches challenge plays that are clearly not going to be overruled and I don't hear about those coaches not understanding the game or having the game passed them by. That seems to only apply to old coaches. I think it was in the Dallas game when the ref started his review announcement with, "In the NFL...," and explained why the play wouldn't be overturned. It was an obvious ruling. Yet, the game hasn't passed by Wade Phillips.

He seemed uncomfortable with the faster play clock, and I think the team still has game management issues that stem from that to an extent.

They have improved at this greatly, though. It was a problem at the beginning. But, to illustrate again the inconsistency in "the game has passed him by," a lot of people said Gibbs needed to adapt and ditch all the shifting motioning prior to the snap; that you can't do that in "today's NFL." Yet, almost every team does it. They simply weren't getting the play in and to the LOS quickly. So, Gibbs has been critisized for doing something he used to do when most other offenses do the same thing.

Finally, I've just heard of too many older coaches, who seem to have trouble relating to the modern player. I heard it was a key factor in Parcells moving on. Now, I do think Gibbs still gets players to play hard for him, but I'm not sure he has the same type of relationship with his players he used to have. I don't blame that on Gibbs or on the players. 40 - 45 years is a huge gap to bridge in a workplace environment. It doesn't make anyone wrong, its just difficult.

I agree it can be a problem, but I've heard little evidence that this is the case with Gibbs. Personally, I know some guys 30+ years older than me at work who do a great job connecting with the new generation of employees. And, of course, there are others who are horrible and say everything the new generation does is stupid.Again, I honestly didn't start this thread to be about Gibbs. Yes, all the talk about the game passing Gibbs by is what inspired it, but it's really just a general question about what people mean when they say it.

 

[TitusIII]

These coaches simply get old, and are out-smarted/out-worked/out-coached...it's life...

 

[zDwinger]

I don't want to take your words literally here, but I do want to figure out exactly what you are talking about. Do you really think that "everything" a coach knows about football in the NFL in year X is useless in year x+15?Also, that's only an example of someone who leaves then comes back. I've heard "the game has passed him by" about coaches who never left. Don Shula was an example of that.

Well, let's talk about Gibbs, as this seems to be a proxy argument about him.I don't think its unfair to say that there are a few aspects of the modern game that Gibbs has never seemed particularly comfortable with. His first season back, he didn't seem to understand replay challenges very well at all. Even today, I don't think that's a particular strength of his. He seemed uncomfortable with the faster play clock, and I think the team still has game management issues that stem from that to an extent.Finally, I've just heard of too many older coaches, who seem to have trouble relating to the modern player. I heard it was a key factor in Parcells moving on. Now, I do think Gibbs still gets players to play hard for him, but I'm not sure he has the same type of relationship with his players he used to have. I don't blame that on Gibbs or on the players. 40 - 45 years is a huge gap to bridge in a workplace environment. It doesn't make anyone wrong, its just difficult.

Good post. I hadn't considered the replay and play clock. I think even modern coaches have trouble with challenges though. On players is dealing with TO really that different than dealing with Hollywood Henderson?

 

[zDwinger]

These coaches simply get old, and are out-smarted/out-worked/out-coached...it's life...

I would disagree with out-smarted. That happens to all of the coaches through out their coaching years. Being out-worked is the same as being out-coached in my opinion. If the coach still loves the game age shouldn't matter otherwise they just want put in the same work.

 

[zDwinger]

As for running plays, actually they have changed quite a bit over time. Not necessarily what the RB himself does, but the OL schemes on an off tackle, draw, etc. have changed quite a bit, to compensate for the changes in defensive schemes.You mentioned lead block, but the fullback has basically been phased out of the league, so old plays usually run with a lead block aren't run the same way.Routes are run differently now, to sit in the different zones that result form the new defensive schemes. Even look at the WCO and the revolution it caused in defenses... Run n Shoot, etc.I just find it difficult to believe you can't see that schemes, and even plays have evolved significantly form 20 years ago.As for the Gibbs comment... I'm not of the mind, as stated, that the game has passed Gibbs by...I will say however, that much of his motion offense, once duplicated greatly by the Rams and others, is no longer used as much in the NFL because it lost its effectiveness... and that is just one example of how schemes change.

You still have not explained HOW a off-tackle is blocked differently? Do the backside guard/tackle not pull, no more cross blocks, no TE reading the DE technique? Are log blocks or angle block no longer used? A WR sitting in a zone is nothing new as far back as I can remember. You also mention the Run and Shoot which originated in the late 40's or early 50's or somewhere in that range. The big advantage of the run and shoot was allowing the WR's to read and adjust. The West coast offense is also mentioned which has it's roots in the60's and 70's and really wasn't even called the WCO. One should also note that the WCO also focuses on short high percentage passes to establish the passing game prior to the running game. These passes are very similar to early single-wing type systems where a RB style receiver was utilized.