Jim Fassel front runner for Skins job?

**purplepoe** · 01-27-2008, 11:38 AM

Originally Posted by Hook

Ok dont agree but Take it easy Purplepoe, its not that serious.

Priest never played here at the level he had played in KC. Thats a fact. There were flashes of it. But if You want to go on about this whole Ozzie and Billick thing, fine, thats been your game the past few weeks. I'm not getting caught in that. I have no beef with Billick or Ozzie, but Billick didnt get the most out of Priest the way the chiefs did. Thats a fact, stat wise. I'm sure most of you will just write off all the TDs he scored with KC - forget about the yards and receptions.

What should Billick have done differently?

He used him in 99 when he was healthy and he produced.

The team drafted Jamal Lewis in 2000 and he went on rush for over 1200 yds and we won the SB.

Then Holmes moved on the Chiefs.

Your contention is that somehow Billick not getting the most out of Holmes resulting in us taking Jamal #5 overall instead of using it on another player/position.

Once again, he became the coach in 1999. Holmes was injured for much of that year. We drafted Jamal in 2000.

Please explain to me how Billick's inability to get the most out of Holmes 1)resulted in us spending a high pick on Jamal and 2) has anything to do with what he did in KC.

And stop with your "I know what you're gonna say" crap.

Holmes was fantastic in KC and I haven't nor will I take anything away from his accomplishments.

The facts are Billick coached a healthy Holmes for half a season and then we drafted Lewis. Lewis was a very productive back that was the workhorse on a Super Bowl winning team. Holmes complemented him nicely and then moved on to another team because he wanted to start and knew he wouldn't here for numerous reasons. The team wanted him but couldn't because of the cap.

Those are the facts.

You haven't once addressed what Billick did when you claim he didn't get the most out of Holmes.

PP

**RavenScallywag** · 01-27-2008, 12:19 PM

I still don't get how Fassel became the toast of DC overnight? The guy has been out of a job for a year and a half. He's 58-53-1 lifetime, which is a winning record, but isn't all that great. He's the biggest NAME available that can make a splash, which is what Danny wants, but I don't see how they can view him being the best guy to replace Gibbs. I don't remember if Fassel was a disciplinary type coach, or a players' friend type coach, but I can't see a disciplinarian coming into DC and making that team any better than it was. Only real asset I see him bringing to DC is his ability to develop QBs, which we can certainly argue against, given that the QBs he coached here were Boller, Wright, etc.

The rumour right now regarding Gregg Williams is he said something negative about Gibbs in his interview, which apparently buys you a one way ticket out of DC. So, Jim "Fossil", if you really want the job, just kiss Joe Gibbs' ass, and that should win you the job. I think their best move right now is to bring in Jim Schwartz, who is a local guy, really bright, and would do wonders to a defense that will probably be in free fall this year.

But, I'd be happy with them blowing their next few years by hiring the Fossil

**Hook** · 01-27-2008, 12:46 PM

Your responses are quite comical, the fact that you take such offense to this is amusing. But regardless, It seems as though the staff in KC understood the talent they had in priest and used him to his FULLEST POTENTIAL but billick's staff didn't. That was the original question in the first place. ONE player was named. Dont get huffy because the player named became a legend playing somewhere else.

And stop with your "I know what you're gonna say" crap.

of course you want me to stop with that. Why would you want the stats and TD production ruin your side of the debate.

What should Billick have done differently?

How about trying to use priest to score a few TDs during the TD drought, Vermeil and company found a way to get Priest the ball for a very long time.

**purplepoe** · 01-27-2008, 12:58 PM

Originally Posted by Hook

Your responses are quite comical, the fact that you take such offense to this is amusing. But regardless, It seems as though the staff in KC understood the talent they had in priest and used him to his FULLEST POTENTIAL but billick's staff didn't. That was the original question in the first place. ONE player was named. Dont get huffy because the player named became a legend playing somewhere else.

of course you want me to stop with that. Why would you want the stats and TD production ruin your side of the debate.

How about trying to use priest to score a few TDs during the TD drought, Vermeil and company found a way to get Priest the ball for a very long time.

Im glad Priest Holmes succeeded in KC.

The guy worked hard and deserved it.

The fact that you seem to equate the drafting of Jamal Lewis with Brian Billick not using Holmes adequately for the half a season he had to work with him in 1999 is amusing.

You can have the last word.

I've made my points known.

PP

**Purpleguy** · 01-27-2008, 04:40 PM

Originally Posted by Hook

Not that I'm a Billick basher but he clearly didnt get the most out of Priest Holmes. In fact because he didnt get the most out of him they went out and spent a first round pick on Jamal.

Ozzie said that Priest was the 5th best back in the AFC Central. Priest clearly wasn't in the Ravens plans when Billick was hired.

**darb72** · 01-27-2008, 05:09 PM

I'm one of the people who thought we really didn't need to draft Jamal because we had Priest. He was our first 1,000 yard rusher after all, and we could have used that number five pick on an offensive lineman or another posistion of real need.

That said, Newsome was going to draft Jamal pretty much the whole time. Jamal, when healthy, is a physical freak at RB and was a better fit for our, "offense".

**flraven** · 01-27-2008, 05:28 PM

Originally Posted by darb72

I'm one of the people who thought we really didn't need to draft Jamal because we had Priest. He was our first 1,000 yard rusher after all, and we could have used that number five pick on an offensive lineman or another posistion of real need.

That said, Newsome was going to draft Jamal pretty much the whole time. Jamal, when healthy, is a physical freak at RB and was a better fit for our, "offense".

Same here, I was scratching my head when they picked Jamal. I thought Priest was an excellent back for us. I liked Priest a lot, especially since he thanked me for asking for his autograph at one of those rallies at the Inner Harbor during the Super Bowl run. He is definitely a class act, and too bad that neck injury shortened his career.

But I guess the Ravens board had Jamal as the best player available, and they took him.

**UKRavenStockers** · 01-27-2008, 05:29 PM

Other picks from 6-15 in 2000:

- Corey Simon - DT - Eagles - Florida State
- Thomas Jones - RB - Cardinals - Virginia
- Plaxico Burress - WR - Steelers - Michigan State
- Brian Urlacher - LB - Bears - New Mexico
- Travis Taylor - WR - Ravens - Florida
- Ron Dayne - RB - Giants - Wisconsin
- Shaun Ellis - DE - Jets - Tennessee
- John Abraham - DE - Jets - South Carolina
- Bubba Franks - TE - Packers - Miami (Fl.)
- Deltha O'Neal - DB - Broncos - Cal

Not sure exactly where else we were supposed to go besides Jamal?

**AZRAVEN** · 01-27-2008, 10:04 PM

Plaxico wouldn't have hurt my feelings any.. Oh wait, we got the great Travis Taylor... never mind...

**Hook** · 01-28-2008, 08:29 AM

The fact that you seem to equate the drafting of Jamal Lewis with Brian Billick not using Holmes adequately for the half a season he had to work with him in 1999 is amusing.

I equate the drafting of Jamal as a sign that the Front office and the coaching staff felt a need to grab a running back in the first round. Had they thought they would of needed a LB they may have grabbed Urlacher but there wasnt a need for that as we were stack in that position.

Ozzie said that Priest was the 5th best back in the AFC Central. Priest clearly wasn't in the Ravens plans when Billick was hired.

Who cares who said it? What if Art said it or Ray? Billick never got the production out of Priest the way Vermeil did. You asked for a player who Billick didnt get the most out of, I think that player is Priest. You dont have to agree with that but if you line up the stats Billick hardly used him effectively the way KC did. That's all.

**festivus** · 01-28-2008, 08:33 AM

Originally Posted by Hook

Your responses are quite comical, the fact that you take such offense to this is amusing. But regardless, It seems as though the staff in KC understood the talent they had in priest and used him to his FULLEST POTENTIAL but billick's staff didn't. That was the original question in the first place. ONE player was named. Dont get huffy because the player named became a legend playing somewhere else.

Wow. A debate about Priest Holmes vs. Jamal Lewis, where somebody is complaining it is Billick's fault Priest Holmes did not put up his KC numbers here.

Just. Wow.

Hook we had two RBs on the roster. One was going to start. The other would have to take a huge pay cut to stay. As I recall they were even represented by the same agent, who even *told* the organization only one was going to stay a Raven. We went with Jamal and won the Super Bowl, something the Chiefs never did with Priest.

I was glad for Priest to cash in and have success elsewhere, but each team only gets to have one starting running back, and we did pretty well with #31 for awhile there. Let it go.

**Hook** · 01-28-2008, 09:07 AM

Wow. A debate about Priest Holmes vs. Jamal Lewis, where somebody is complaining it is Billick's fault Priest Holmes did not put up his KC numbers here.

No one is complainng about Billick.

Did Billick get the same production out of Priest as the KC did? The answer is no, so he didnt get the most out of him. Thats all.

We went with Jamal and won the Super Bowl, something the Chiefs never did with Priest.

Priest was on that team too

**festivus** · 01-28-2008, 09:21 AM

Originally Posted by Hook

No one is complainng about Billick.

Did Billick get the same production out of Priest as the KC did? The answer is no, so he didnt get the most out of him. Thats all.

Priest was on that team too

Meh. Call it want you want, you are whining about Billick.

Priest was on that team in his role as the back up. That was his role. We won the Super Bowl under utilizing him. So I don't see your complaint.

I wish in our new smileys we had one called :shrug:, if we did, I'd put it here.

**Greg** · 01-28-2008, 09:30 AM

Billick had both backs in 2000 and he used Priest quite effectively, but given our talent there is no doubt who the best back FOR US was at the time. Or are you going to claim Priest played better than Jamal in 2000?

In 1999 Priest was used quite well WHEN HE WAS HEALTHY. You can try and ignore his injuries and claim it was Billick's fault he wasn't more productive in 1999 and you might have a point if Billick were the trainer or team doctor.

Beyond that blaming Billick for Priest leaving is idiotic and just oozes Billick hate. Before Billick was even here Ozzie Newsome said Priest was the 5th best back in the AFC Central. He makes the personnel decisions, if you can't put two and two together regarding the signing of Rhett and then the drafting of Jamal let me try and help. OZZIE MISSED ON PRIEST, NOT BILLICK!

**Hook** · 01-28-2008, 09:32 AM

I wish in our new smileys we had one called :shrug:, if we did, I'd put it here.

Me too. My comment about jamal has been disected way too much. But I still stand by it because in the end the entire ravens organiztion thought a rookie Running back was the way to go and as you say, priest was deemed a backup, when he clearly was not.

**Hook** · 01-28-2008, 09:42 AM

Billick had both backs in 2000 and he used Priest quite effectively, but given our talent there is no doubt who the best back FOR US was at the time. Or are you going to claim Priest played better than Jamal in 2000?

he was under utilized, he was an unknown weapon that we could have used more effectively but choose to keep him on the bench.

**Greg** · 01-28-2008, 09:50 AM

Keep on the bench? He started the first several games while Jamal healed from a separated elbow. He was used as a WR and got plenty of time spelling Jamal. Jamal out-played him, plain and simple.

**festivus** · 01-28-2008, 09:55 AM

Originally Posted by Greg

Beyond that blaming Billick for Priest leaving is idiotic and just oozes Billick hate. Before Billick was even here Ozzie Newsome said Priest was the 5th best back in the AFC Central. He makes the personnel decisions, if you can't put two and two together regarding the signing of Rhett and then the drafting of Jamal let me try and help. OZZIE MISSED ON PRIEST, NOT BILLICK!

Greg I wouldn't even go that far. Remember our OL was a bunch of road-grader types, for whom Priest was not well suited as a (McGahee-style) slasher and pass catcher. Nobody "missed" on Priest, we had Jamal instead, whose numbers may not have been as gaudy but who was well suited to our team.

Originally Posted by Hook

he was under utilized, he was an unknown weapon that we could have used more effectively but choose to keep him on the bench.

Good god. Most of the Billick haters do not go this far, and point to the Super Bowl winning team as one that was mismanaged by Billick. Seriously, criticizing a SB winning team for its failure to take better advantage of a backup running back is bizarre.

**evade6317** · 01-28-2008, 10:39 AM

Originally Posted by Purpleguy

For all of you Billick bashers please name one talented player that he didn't get the most out of?

He did the best with what he was given.

He was the beginning of the end for both Billick and Fassel.

**B-more Ravor** · 01-28-2008, 11:05 AM

If the Ravens missed on Priest, then so did a lot of other teams as well.

KC signed Priest on the first day of the draft (not at the beginning of March when the FA market opened) in 2001, after they didn't select a RB. At one point, the Ravens thought they had a chance to retain him as a back-up because no one wanted to offer him even a shot at a starting gig. He was signed to a small contract and he was sharing carries for the first couple of games - even KC didn't know what they had at that point.