Stafford 92mg and 27m per season

[Sharkinva]

Like I said, if you're okay with being a fringe playoff team, that's completely fine. But after a while, that's gonna leave a sour taste in fans mouths and the first person to go will be the Head Coach, the 2nd person to go will be the QB. Then they will make some changes to the rest of the team. That's the nature of the sport. And yeah, it's a huge risk, like I've said, but it's a risk that has paid off in the past.

The 2015 Dallas Cowboys defense was ranked 16th in ppg allowed.
The 2016 Dallas Cowboys start rookie QB Dak Prescott and finish 13-3

The 2000 New England Patriots defense was ranked 17th in ppg allowed
The 2001 New England Patriots start QB Tom Brady and finish 11-5 with a Super Bowl

The 2003 Pittsburgh Steelers defense was ranked 15th in ppg allowed.
The 2004 Pittsburgh Steelers start rookie QB Ben Roethlisberger and finish 15-1

The 2011 Seattle Seahawks defense was ranked 7th but their offense was ranked 23rd in ppg
The 2012 Seattle Seahawks start rookie QB Russell Wilson and their offense was ranked 9th and finished 11-5.

No, they didn't have horrible defenses, but they had middle of the pack defenses when they were thrown into the starting QB role. The Redskins defense was ranked 19th in PPG allowed last year. Middle of the pack as well.

If the Redskins had a middle of the pack defense the past two years, they make the playoffs back to back.

Instead Kirk is being asked to carry a bottom 5 defense. And your fix is, ditch the QB?? Your own stats and research put your theory to shame. Hell give the Redskins a top ten defense as Wilson walked into, and you might be looking a a legit strong playoff team, as in Conference level contender.

 

[Stymietee]

Since this topic seems to have everyone going in circles and repeating themselves. Let me know when you all get to the point where the light bulb goes off again because you realize that it won't be Kirk getting the team to the playoffs or better, but improvements on the team in other areas will.

Geeez, almost everyone says that's what's required, and for some the next line is, Kirk will lead them there. If it happens it will be for the same reasons that Williams, Theesman (I know) and Rypien got there and not because of his leadership abilities. He's NOT the TYPE of QB that we have.

 

[Yo Tee]

If the Redskins had a middle of the pack defense the past two years, they make the playoffs back to back.

Instead Kirk is being asked to carry a bottom 5 defense. And your fix is, ditch the QB?? Your own stats and research put your theory to shame. Hell give the Redskins a top ten defense as Wilson walked into, and you might be looking a a legit strong playoff team, as in Conference level contender.

16 is the middle of 31. 19 is not that far off of 16. The Redskins statistically had a middle of the pack defense. I simply was proving to you that Brady and Ben and Dak and Russell did not walk into "Stellar defenses" So, like I've said about 6721 times, there are options and one of those options is to not sign Kirk Cousins and go to Free Agency or the draft. The safe best is to sign Kirk Cousins and pay him however much it costs to keep him. Personally, he isn't worth the money and it's better to rip the bandaid off after 2 years than after 6.

 

[Stymietee]

What sources are you guys using to support your defensive ranking position?

 

[Yo Tee]

What sources are you guys using to support your defensive ranking position?

2012 Seattle Seahawks Statistics & Players | Pro-Football-Reference.com

This is the website I'm using.

 

[Stymietee]

There's this one but I've seen others that have different rankings.

2016 NFL Team DEFENSE Stats | FOX Sports
www.foxsports.com/nfl/team-stats?season=2016...category=DEFENSE

 

[Sharkinva]

16 is the middle of 31. 19 is not that far off of 16. The Redskins statistically had a middle of the pack defense. I simply was proving to you that Brady and Ben and Dak and Russell did not walk into "Stellar defenses" So, like I've said about 6721 times, there are options and one of those options is to not sign Kirk Cousins and go to Free Agency or the draft. The safe best is to sign Kirk Cousins and pay him however much it costs to keep him. Personally, he isn't worth the money and it's better to rip the bandaid off after 2 years than after 6.

Spin it how you like. The Redskins gave up almost 400 yards per game. The defense was so horrid that the DC got fired. There were multiple games where the Offense handed them a lead only to see it squandered away in the final minutes. Thats assuming the Defense didnt put them in such a hole that a come back would have required miracle level play. I can name maybe 4 games where the defense was good, and another three where they were average.

Now I fully admit Cousins is not elite. But chasing elite at QB is about 70% of the reason the defense has been bereft of talent for years at this point. So I cant see a few million Dollars of cap space as a solid reason to ditch a good QB, go back into the draft and HOPE we strike gold and get an elite QB. Especially when it would require the team to either tank the season,. or make another mega trade to get said named QB in the draft to begin with.

 

[Yo Tee]

There's this one but I've seen others that have different rankings.

2016 NFL Team DEFENSE Stats | FOX Sports
www.foxsports.com/nfl/team-stats?season=2016...category=DEFENSE

According to this site, Redskins were 18th in PPG last yea which was ahead of Green Bay, Miami, Atlanta and Oakland, which are ALL playoff teams.

 

[Stymietee]

According to this site, Redskins were 18th in PPG last yea which was ahead of Green Bay, Miami, Atlanta and Oakland, which are ALL playoff teams.

Yeah I saw that too...but as I said there are others with varying rankings. Some having them as @Sharkinva indicated 5th worse. That is why I asked for sources.

 

[Sharkinva]

Yeah I saw that too...but as I said there are others with varying rankings. Some having them as @Sharkinva indicated 5th worse. That is why I asked for sources.

Sty.. its easy to cherry pick a stat and say well this is the determining factor. BUt at the end of the day, if the Redskins were in fact a middle of the road defense based on Points per Game, you dont fire the DC. We were just below middle of the pack in points per game. We were bottom five in total yards given up. We were dead last in 3rd down percentage ( meaning we gave up more third downs than any one in the league). We were also dead last in 3rd and long percentage( We gave up more 3rd and longs than any one). Bottom ten in yards per rush, as well as passing defense. Over all that 19th in points per game is as much smoke and Mirrors as people want to claim Cousins stats were.

End of the day there is a reason why we dumped the majority of our draft into defensive players.

 

[skinsdad62]

On the verge of being a consistent playoff team is where you really wanna be? Or do you want to be a consistent division title contender? Because that risk you take might make you a perennial division title contender with a possible playoff win for the first time in 10 years. Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger, Eli Manning, Russell Wilson, they've all dramatically changed the outlook of their franchise immediately. Like I said it's a huge risk but a possible huge reward.

terry being a consistent playoff team is a step . if you make the playoffs anything can happen after that why do you jump to " i am settling mode " its a 20% chance . no need to do that

 

[skinzfan]

the Redskins couldn't stop the Holy Angels girls football team on third down last year. How much has changed?

 

[gkekoa]

The argument wasn't that the defense sucked in the super bowl. Read it again. The Patriots defense in 2001 was ranked 24th in total yards allowed. No one ever said the Patriots defense sucked in the Super Bowl.

In 2001, the Patriots gave up 17 PPG, which was good for sixth in the NFL. Had we given up 17 every game last season, we would have been 12-4.

See...the game is won by getting points, not getting yards. All that matters is the scoreboard.

 

[Stymietee]

Sty.. its easy to cherry pick a stat and say well this is the determining factor. BUt at the end of the day, if the Redskins were in fact a middle of the road defense based on Points per Game, you dont fire the DC. We were just below middle of the pack in points per game. We were bottom five in total yards given up. We were dead last in 3rd down percentage ( meaning we gave up more third downs than any one in the league). We were also dead last in 3rd and long percentage( We gave up more 3rd and longs than any one). Bottom ten in yards per rush, as well as passing defense. Over all that 19th in points per game is as much smoke and Mirrors as people want to claim Cousins stats were.

End of the day there is a reason why we dumped the majority of our draft into defensive players.

OK, I'm not arguing about any of this. I just wanted to know what sources were being used to back up claims.(I'm a voracious reader) As I said, there are some with differing rankings. I don't know how that's possible because the numbers shouldn't change , so I thought it wise to check them out myself.

 

[Sharkinva]

OK, I'm not arguing about any of this. I just wanted to know what sources were being used to back up claims.(I'm an voracious reader) As I said there are some with differing rankings, I don't know how that's possible because the numbers shouldn't change.

The numbers dont change. Its just a matter of where you want to put the most importance. For those that want to say, Kirk is more the problem than the solution... 19th in points given up per game suggests the defense was middle of the pack and not that bad.

For those that actually have been around this team and dont have a personal bent against the QB... 19th in points is the outlier as to how shitty our defense actually was.

 

[Yo Tee]

terry being a consistent playoff team is a step . if you make the playoffs anything can happen after that why do you jump to " i am settling mode " its a 20% chance . no need to do that

I'm not jumping to it. It's been two years. Two years of 1 game above .500 play and on the edge of making the playoffs. If you pay Kirk Cousins $25 mil a year, you have little room to get good defensive free agents next year. If, like you say, the defense if the issue, why not pay for the top defensive free agents instead of keeping your QB?

 

[j_y19]

I'm not jumping to it. It's been two years. Two years of 1 game above .500 play and on the edge of making the playoffs. If you pay Kirk Cousins $25 mil a year, you have little room to get good defensive free agents next year. If, like you say, the defense if the issue, why not pay for the top defensive free agents instead of keeping your QB?

If, like you say, the defense if the issue, why not pay for the top defensive free agents instead of keeping your QB?

This has to be one of the most inane posts I have ever seen on this board. Think about what you just asked. So you are suggesting that this team will go further with a defense and no QB. After you posted in an earlier post that the QB is the most important position and without one you go nowhere. You have completely contradicted yourself. You really are just trolling at this point, aren't you.

 

[Sharkinva]

I'm not jumping to it. It's been two years. Two years of 1 game above .500 play and on the edge of making the playoffs. If you pay Kirk Cousins $25 mil a year, you have little room to get good defensive free agents next year. If, like you say, the defense if the issue, why not pay for the top defensive free agents instead of keeping your QB?

Right now we are scheduled to have in cap space

2018 $55M
2019 $78M
2020 $111M

SO if we paid Kirk $25M straight money that would leave $20M, $53M and $86M respectively.

And why are we going to go into the top end defensive player free agent market with no QB and starting over. We tried that, quite a few time actually. And what we got was an expensive defense and a below .500 record.

Smart money would say keep the QB and once again use the draft to add talent to the defense.

 

[Yo Tee]

If, like you say, the defense if the issue, why not pay for the top defensive free agents instead of keeping your QB?

This has to be one of the most inane posts I have ever seen on this board. Think about what you just asked. So you are suggesting that this team will go further with a defense and no QB. After you posted in an earlier post that the QB is the most important position and without one you go nowhere. You have completely contradicted yourself. You really are just trolling at this point, aren't you.

Everyone keeps saying the defense is the issue, not the QB. Invest some money in the defense then. Oh wait, you can't if you over pay for Kirk Cousins. People on here are arguing that the QB isn't the sole purpose of winning. So, why are you investing so much money into your QB if the defense is the real problem? It's a legit question, no trolling, just using the arguments made to me, and turning it back around. What's more important, the defense or the QB?

 

[Yo Tee]

Right now we are scheduled to have in cap space

2018 $55M
2019 $78M
2020 $111M

SO if we paid Kirk $25M straight money that would leave $20M, $53M and $86M respectively.

And why are we going to go into the top end defensive player free agent market with no QB and starting over. We tried that, quite a few time actually. And what we got was an expensive defense and a below .500 record.

Smart money would say keep the QB and once again use the draft to add talent to the defense.

How has drafting defensive talent helped you out so far?