Skip to main content

Why the Chip Kelly-Steve Spurrier comparison is a silly one to make

After Chip Kelly's successful debut, where his Philadelphia Eagles defeated last year's NFC East Champion Washington Redskins in this nation's capital on Monday Night Football by the final score of 33-27, I was surprised to hear many ESPN talking heads like Michael Wilbon and Bill Plaschke compare the Eagles coach to Steve Spurrier, who coached the Redskins in the 2002 and 2003 seasons. Their reasoning centered around the hype surrounding both coaches coming out of college, their exciting style of football, the success both had early in their first seasons, and how when teams adjusted, they either did or will likely fail at this level. The two (and others) even mentioned that the second half of the Monday night game depicted just this point. Since the Eagles led 26-7 at halftime and 33-7 early in the third quarter, only to allow 20 consecutive points to win by the final of 33-27, this obviously showcased that Chip Kelly's offense won't succeed long-term and that like Steve Spurrier, he won't as an NFL head coach.

I think the Kelly-Spurrier comparison is ridiculous on multiple levels and especially when just focusing on the 2nd half of Philly's win on Monday night.

What happened in the Monday night game was nothing new. The Philadelphia Eagles jumped out to a 33-7 lead and were in complete control of the game. So, they did what a lot of teams do - geared their offense toward the run to drain time off the clock and played more prevent defense to do likewise. I've never been a big fan of either strategy - especially the prevent defense, but it's not like this hasn't happened before. A big reason why the Eagles' offense was so effective in the first 2.5 quarters was that they played at a very up-tempo pace and mixed the run and pass well with one another. They went away from the pass, were playing at a slower pace, and this made them far more predictable in the final 1.5 quarters of play. If the Eagles maintained that high-speed pace and solid mix of run and pass plays in the latter half of the 3rd quarter as well as the 4th quarter, chances are they would have scored more points and gained more yards than they did. However, it would also have made some key players, including quarterback Michael Vick, more susceptible to injury, and Chip Kelly and his staff didn't feel the risk was worth it. On defense, a key reason why Robert Griffin III wasn't effective through 2.5 quarters was because of the Eagles pass rush. The guy got hit, battered, and bruised for the first 35+ minutes of the game. When the Eagles eased up on the pressure and played more of a prevent defense, this gave Griffin much more time in the pocket to throw, and as shocking as it is, a professional quarterback tends to be more efficient when protected than when hurried. This all resulted in the game winding up being closer than it probably should have been. The Monday night game wasn't indicative of any future Philadelphia Eagles games as some talking heads are making it seem. It was simply a case of a team getting out to a four-score advantage in the 3rd quarter, slowing things down on both ends, and paying for it on the scoreboard. It's not the first time that has happened and definitely won't be the last. Let's wait a few games before passing judgment on Chip Kelly's offense, which scored 33 points and won the game. 

With regard to the Chip Kelly to Steve Spurrier comparison, it's silly on multiple levels, but one in particular - the players. It's virtually impossible to know how much success Spurrier would have achieved if he were in the league longer than two years, but let's get one thing straight - Chip Kelly has much more to work with on the offensive side of the ball than Spurrier ever did.

In his first year as coach of the Washington Redskins, Steve Spurrier started three different quarterbacks: Shane Matthews (who was coached by Spurrier at Florida), Patrick Ramsey, and Danny Wuerffel (who was also coached by Spurrier at Florida). The trio combined for 23 touchdown passes against 20 interceptions, a completion percentage of 53.8, and a quarterback rating around 72.0. Stephen Davis was Spurrier's starting tailback. Davis ran for 820 yards and averaged 4.0 per carry. Rod Gardner and Derrius Thompson were the only receivers of note for Spurrier's team. The defense was pretty solid, which was the main reason why the Redskins won seven games that year. In other words, Spurrier had about as much to work with on the offensive side of the ball with the 'Skins in 2002 as Cleveland Browns' coaches have had to work with for the past several years. I'm sorry, but I don't care how great an NFL coach is - if he has minimal speed and talent to work with (by NFL standards), then he's going to run into problems in terms of success. 

Compare that to what Chip Kelly has to work with in Philadelphia. For as much as Michael Vick has been criticized as a passer throughout his career, his worst season, where he's started at least 10 games, is better than what Shane Matthews, Patrick Ramsey, or Danny Wuerffel had to offer Spurrier in his first year with the Redskins. He's also run for over 5,600 yards in his career - the most of any quarterback in NFL history. He has LeSean McCoy in the backfield, who ran for about 2,400 yards in 2010-2011 (an average of 5.0 per carry), and has also gained at least 315 yards through the air in each of the past three seasons. He ran for 184 yards in the team's win on Monday night. Bryce Brown is a very capable backup. DeSean Jackson is a highlight reel waiting to happen at receiver. He gained close to 1,000 yards every year from 2008 through 2011, before injuries limited him to 700 last year. He caught seven passes in Monday's game for 104 yards. For his career, he averages an astounding 17.4 yards per catch. Brent Celek is a very solid tight end, who usually gains between 500 and 900 receiving yards each and every year. The team also has very capable backups at both positions. The team is also without speedy standout receiver Jeremy Maclin, who is out with a knee injury. Like I said, it's ridiculous to compare Chip Kelly to Steve Spurrier, especially this early in Kelly's tenure. 

If we're going to even include the names Chip Kelly and Steve Spurrier in the same sentence, it should read something like this:

"Steve Spurrier wishes he had the speed and talent of Chip Kelly's offense to work with while in Washington and Chip Kelly is thanking the high heavens he wasn't stuck with Steve Spurrier's 2002-2003 Redskins."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"