Chiefs post game

[kbso83432]

Cousins can play. No doubt. I'll speak for myself. He's the best QB we've had probably since Joe.

Mark had a spectacular year. That said he had the posse and the best o-line in football. Doug was clutch in 87. Brad Johnson was good, not great.

The only thing that bothered me about Kirk was he just always seemed to come up small in really big spots for us. Giants, Panthers, or any National televised game.

He did win the Eagles game that got.us the division and was good in 12 after RG3 went down. Thats my only gripe. The home losses to the Panthers and Giants when both those teams had nothing to play for just stick with me.

 

[skinsdad62]

 

[kbso83432]

Didn't know Davis had 11 tackles. Okay!

 

[skinsdad62]

 

[skinsdad62]

We need a qb with arm strength. Fitz ain’t it either. We seem to get mostly noodle arm guys Haskins and his dumb ass aside

 

[skinz2winz]

Last yr we hit on our fas , this yr not so much

How bad has WJIII been? Whoa this guy is awful in coverage and cannot tackle but that goes with the rest of the defense.

 

[skinsdad62]

How bad has WJIII been? Whoa this guy is awful in coverage and cannot tackle but that goes with the rest of the defense.

Samuel hurt as well , AH not producing much , Fitz out all yr so far

 

[Breed]

Wasn't Theismann MVP. HOF is not really good.

Yeah, Joey T was the MVP in 83.

 

[Sportster 72]

Cousins can play. No doubt. I'll speak for myself. He's the best QB we've had probably since Joe.

Mark had a spectacular year. That said he had the posse and the best o-line in football. Doug was clutch in 87. Brad Johnson was good, not great.

The only thing that bothered me about Kirk was he just always seemed to come up small in really big spots for us. Giants, Panthers, or any National televised game.

He did win the Eagles game that got.us the division and was good in 12 after RG3 went down. Thats my only gripe. The home losses to the Panthers and Giants when both those teams had nothing to play for just stick with me.

Oh I won't argue there were games where things didn't go well at the end but that is what people remember more so than a win or even when he got them in position to win and a kick was missed or the defense let the opposition go right down the field to go ahead.

Just the past two weeks Cousins helped lead his team back from down 1 with 37 seconds to go, this past week he helped lead them to position for a game winning field with goal with 52 seconds that was missed, then helped them to a OT win with a TD drive. They lost two where he led them into FG position but Cook fumbled and he led them into position for a game winning FG that was missed.

Mark was good for a couple of years. Man could he throw the deep ball. Once the talent on the team got a little worse, so did Mark.

I was one of the few Joe T fans back in the day. Many people didn't like him because he talked so much. I do think Cousins is better.

Sonny is the best I have ever seen in Washington.

When people bring up wins and losses ... I just say Sonny, Marino and Moon. All great QBs that never played for a consistent winner.

 

[deanpet21]

Sounds like all your trust in Rivera is fading.

If he doesn't makes changes, yes. Nothing has been different since week 1 as far as personnel. We never blitz. I didn't expect to beat the Chiefs but the way we lose is crazy. Its not all RR., the secondary has been awful.

 

[deanpet21]

way too much. They have been awful this year.

 

[skinz2winz]

way too much. They have been awful this year.

I think we can all agree that if we did our professional jobs as poorly as this coaching staff/players we would be fired immediately. Can we all just agree on that!?

 

[skinsdad62]

34.6 million on urine ! Piss stain , McCain and fuller and they couldn’t fill up a bucket of urine

 

[Caliskinsfan]

 

[skinsdad62]

WTF over ! Let him play his game

 

[Caliskinsfan]

 

[Stymietee]

How bad has WJIII been? Whoa this guy is awful in coverage and cannot tackle but that goes with the rest of the defense.

I know that WJIII isn't performing well here in D.C.but that might be because he is in D.C. more than anything else.

When Washington acquired him he was considered a real "get" and an improvement here based on his play with the Bengals.

In effect he played well there, and hasn't here. Perhaps it isn't just him.

 

[Stymietee]

Cousins can play. No doubt. I'll speak for myself. He's the best QB we've had probably since Joe.

Mark had a spectacular year. That said he had the posse and the best o-line in football. Doug was clutch in 87. Brad Johnson was good, not great.

The only thing that bothered me about Kirk was he just always seemed to come up small in really big spots for us. Giants, Panthers, or any National televised game.

He did win the Eagles game that got.us the division and was good in 12 after RG3 went down. Thats my only gripe. The home losses to the Panthers and Giants when both those teams had nothing to play for just stick with me.

Nobody is saying that Cousins can't play, in fact rating him correctly as middle of the pack proves that he has ability. He is and has always been a middle of the pack QB. ANYONE suggesting anything else is DEAD WRONG and they know it, or are too biasedly blind to know the difference between a singular stat and how QB's are evaluated.

They (QB's) aren't rated for more than what they are, based on a cherry picked stat. They are rated based on their overall performances, a couple of intangibles in relation to their peers and effect in the game. Now, ANYONE who tries to convince anyone else that I'm factually wrong, is being dishonest, deceptive, and are absolutely wrong in doing that.

I understand that there has been some fake "proof" posted to show that Kirk Cousins is more than a middle of the pack QB. This proof cited 30,000 passing yards as its "evidence" to that effect. OK, let's use that metric, since that's the "proof." I submit, that the ONLY thing that such a metric "proves" is that if you stick around long enough, you can amass similar numbers. Here's my evidence...

If I told you that there is a player on the current Washington football team with more career passing yards than Kirk Cousins, based solely on that nonsensical "proof," most here would proclaim him as the answer that we have been looking for since Cousins left, correct? Then, after that revelation I told everyone that he's been on 9 different teams, never led a team to the playoffs, and is universally deemed a journeyman QB based upon his overall body of work. How then, would people look at that so-called proof? By now anyone reading this knows the QB that I'm referring to, and based on that sole metric he's way better than KIrk. (he's not)

 

[j_y19]

Nobody is saying that Cousins can't play, in fact rating him correctly as middle of the pack proves that he has ability. He is and has always been a middle of the pack QB. ANYONE suggesting anything else is DEAD WRONG and they know it, or are too biasedly blind to know the difference between a singular stat and how QB's are evaluated.

They (QB's) aren't rated for more than what they are, based on a cherry picked stat. They are rated based on their overall performances, a couple of intangibles in relation to their peers and effect in the game. Now, ANYONE who tries to convince anyone else that I'm factually wrong, is being dishonest, deceptive, and are absolutely wrong in doing that.

I understand that there has been some fake "proof" posted to show that Kirk Cousins is more than a middle of the pack QB. This proof cited 30,000 passing yards as its "evidence" to that effect. OK, let's use that metric, since that's the "proof." I submit, that the ONLY thing that such a metric "proves" is that if you stick around long enough, you can amass similar numbers. Here's my evidence...

If I told you that there is a player on the current Washington football team with more career passing yards than Kirk Cousins, based solely on that nonsensical "proof," most here would proclaim him as the answer that we have been looking for since Cousins left, correct? Then, after that revelation I told everyone that he's been on 9 different teams, never led a team to the playoffs, and is universally deemed a journeyman QB based upon his overall body of work. How then, would people look at that so-called proof? By now anyone reading this knows the QB that I'm referring to, and based on that sole metric he's way better than KIrk. (he's not)

View attachment 281758

 

[j_y19]

Nobody is saying that Cousins can't play, in fact rating him correctly as middle of the pack proves that he has ability. He is and has always been a middle of the pack QB. ANYONE suggesting anything else is DEAD WRONG and they know it, or are too biasedly blind to know the difference between a singular stat and how QB's are evaluated.

They (QB's) aren't rated for more than what they are, based on a cherry picked stat. They are rated based on their overall performances, a couple of intangibles in relation to their peers and effect in the game. Now, ANYONE who tries to convince anyone else that I'm factually wrong, is being dishonest, deceptive, and are absolutely wrong in doing that.

I understand that there has been some fake "proof" posted to show that Kirk Cousins is more than a middle of the pack QB. This proof cited 30,000 passing yards as its "evidence" to that effect. OK, let's use that metric, since that's the "proof." I submit, that the ONLY thing that such a metric "proves" is that if you stick around long enough, you can amass similar numbers. Here's my evidence...

If I told you that there is a player on the current Washington football team with more career passing yards than Kirk Cousins, based solely on that nonsensical "proof," most here would proclaim him as the answer that we have been looking for since Cousins left, correct? Then, after that revelation I told everyone that he's been on 9 different teams, never led a team to the playoffs, and is universally deemed a journeyman QB based upon his overall body of work. How then, would people look at that so-called proof? By now anyone reading this knows the QB that I'm referring to, and based on that sole metric he's way better than KIrk. (he's not)

View attachment 281758

I dont think that anyone is saying that the 30000 yard milestone is THE fact that KC is an effective QB, but a fact. The OPs original point is still valid. We have not had a better solution to our QB delimma since we ran KC out of here. Your argument seems to be that if we signed KC to what would have been a very team friendly contract when we had a chance, that would have precluded us from trying to upgrade that position in the future. In reality, what it would have done is given us the ability to draft a young QB and develop him as KCs eventual replacement. Isn't that what you have argued for for years on this board? The fact is that this team would have been in a better position today if we extended KC when we had a chance. Maybe not because of KCs direct performance (because we are not a QB away from winning), but because of all of the resources we have spent trying to replace KC since we ran him out. Think about how we might have been able to deploy all the capital we used on the various QBs we have pranced through here in the lat 5 years. Hell, we might have been able to draft another DL in the first round!