Chiefs post game

[skinsdad62]

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

How many years has he played again ?

 

[Sportster 72]

Actually j_y I am saying the 30k mark and 200 TD passes does prove that KC is more than an average player. It ranks him top 50 currently "stat" wise. It does not mean he is in the top 50 of QBs all time. He is very likely going to be 30 with a possibility of 20 before he retires.

We all know the modern game has allowed for a lot more passing yards and that is true not just of the last 10 or 20 years but as long as the game has gone on. I don't suggest he is better than the elite. I never called him elite. I have always referred to KC as above average. That is what he is. Sonny Jurgensen threw for 32,000 yards so KC will pass before this year is over or early next year. I am not ready to say he is better than Sonny. Some people thought he did not have the ability to raise the level of his game after 2 years as a starter ... they were wrong, some people thought you could replace him with AJ McCarron or someone like him, they were woefully wrong. Some of these people said Warren Moon was great ... I agree. His all time record is 102-101 ... not much different than Cousins 54-54 record.

You nailed in regards to replacing him here. The WTF have not come close to finding his replacement. The team has suffered year after year from bad QB play. I don't suggest KC would have turned the team into and 11-5 team. The overall talent on this team is low and remains low. I do believe that 15,000 yards and 103 TDs would have resulted in a few more wins in the past 3 1/2 years.

Vikings-Panthers Preview and Predictions | NFL Network

 

[Sportster 72]

How many years has he played again ?

Fitz and Smith have thrown for more yards than KC at this point. That is not wrong, what it is is a half ass attempt to prove a point. The problem with that is it is telling a misleading story. Both of those players have played 7 more years so if you extend what KC has done by 7 years he blows by them at 20,000 more yards. Good try but you are busted!!

At his current pace Cousins will pass Aikman, Jurgensen, Simms, Warner, Young, Kelly, Unitas, Montana .... again, I am not saying he is better than all of those guys but is where he will be stat wise. That is above average and the WTF have had nothing that compares to that since Jurgensen.

 

[Breed]

Hell, we might have been able to draft another DL in the first round!

Nice ^^^^^^^^

 

[Stymietee]

How many years has he played again ?

Show me where that poster indicated at any point that the 30,000 yards were done in a particular number of years. All that was mentioned was 30,000 yards. I accepted that nonsense and bested it with a counter. Keep in mind that there has now been an admission, so my position stands.

Now the goal posts move once again to "above average" which once again proves my original point. There are 32 teams in the league, and were when all of this foolishness began, he was ranked 18th then, but I'll use current starters, to be fair and more generous to his move up in the rankings. Now, if you take Brady, Murray, Jackson, Allen, Burrow, Mayfield, Prescott, Rodgers, Mahomes, Herbert, Stafford, and Ryan, as your current first tier of QB's who would be preferred over him if you had to pick one now. (we'll have to break the rankings into 3 tiers in order to have a top, middle and lower one) How then, does Kirk NOT fit into that "Middle of the pack" second tier??? I get it, people don't like the whole "middle of the pack" thing, but it is, what it is!

It really doesn't help in trying to keep Kirk relevant here simply because one person has a boner for a memory that never existed. To say that "he was the best that this team had since he left" (for some the "best since, Theesman, Sp, yeah I know, Williams etc) is also misleading as it gives the impression of having something really good, instead of steady, middling, or to use what the poster used, "above average." To be clear, when " above average" (meaning top of the middle of the pack) is the measuring stick upon which some try to assert that it's the "best since..." is your norm, it isn't an indication of how good he was/has been, but an indictment on how awful this organization has been prior to and after he was here. Farkin' perspective matters!!!

 

[skinz2winz]

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.

Dudes are dudes Sty, you know that. You don't just "lose it" because you are playing for a pourous defense/coordinator. He has shown the inability to cover in man, cover in zone and inability to tackle with vengance. (He appears to not have the want-to as with others which falls in with your take)

In my humble opinion, and no one including the players will say it but, these coaches have lost the team. There is no way this much talent can be this bad after the tape put out from last season, particularly the 2nd half of last season. I sure would like to hit "restart" button, and bring in a younger innovative coach to lead this young team. This group of coaches and players are not meshing well together at all.

 

[Breed]

In my humble opinion, and no one including the players will say it but, these coaches have lost the team.

Its been said, a couple times by a couple posters.

 

[skinz2winz]

Show me where that poster indicated at any point that the 30,000 yards were done in a particular number of years. All that was mentioned was 30,000 yards. I accepted that nonsense and bested it with a counter. Keep in mind that there has now been an admission, so my position stands.

Now the goal posts move once again to "above average" which once again proves my original point. There are 32 teams in the league, and were when all of this foolishness began, he was ranked 18th then, but I'll use current starters, to be fair and more generous to his move up in the rankings. Now, if you take Brady, Murray, Jackson, Allen, Burrow, Mayfield, Prescott, Rodgers, Mahomes, Herbert, Stafford, and Ryan, as your current first tier of QB's who would be preferred over him if you had to pick one now. (we'll have to break the rankings into 3 tiers in order to have a top, middle and lower one) How then, does Kirk NOT fit into that "Middle of the pack" second tier??? I get it, people don't like the whole "middle of the pack" thing, but it is, what it is!

It really doesn't help in trying to keep Kirk relevant here simply because one person has a boner for a memory that never existed. To say that "he was the best that this team had since he left" (for some the "best since, Theesman, Sp, yeah I know, Williams etc) is also misleading as it gives the impression of having something really good, instead of steady, middling, or to use what the poster used, "average." To be clear, when "average" is the measuring stick upon which some try to assert that it's the "best since..." isn't an indication of how good he was/has been, but an indictment on how awful this organization has been prior to and after he was here. Farkin' perspective matters!!!

I cannot believe we are still talking about this ^ anymore. We all know the FULL story and we all know how things unfolded. Guy got a sh*t ton of money for very few wins here (Captain played his cards just right) and parlayed that into another guaranteed contract ($84m) with little to show for it which parlayed into another guaranteed contract of which its looking like Zimmer may lose his job as they cannot sustain success in Minny. Just because we cannot find a suitable replacement since KC, doesn't mean he was anymore than avg while here (like the team) and while he has had an uptick of success in Minny, he also has more talent around him which correct me if I'm wrong, that has resulted in how many playoff wins? None? I will say this, he certainly did not put together a season like Mark Rypien had which resulted in MVP and Superbowl winner. When I think back on QB's who had success while in DC in any kind of order the fall out would go something like this:
1. Sammy Baugh (3-3 in playoffs)
2. Sonny Jurgenson (none)
3. Joe Theismann (6-2 in playoffs)
4. Mark Rypien (5-2 in playoffs)
5. Doug Williams (3-0 in playoffs)
6. RGIII (0-1 in playoffs)
7. Kirk Cousin (0-1 in playoffs)
8. Mark Brunell (1-1 in playoffs)
9. Brad Johnson (1-1 in playoffs)
10. Billy Kilmer (2-5 in playoffs)

Not that this list is full of greats because its not, but full of very good to avg ones, the best are certainly top 5 on this list while the rest were avg to below avg while guiding the team at QB.

 

[skinz2winz]

Its been said, a couple times by a couple posters.

I was referring to the orgainization and so called tv analyst experts.

 

[skinz2winz]

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.

To add to this, I'm just tired of the excuses by players and coaches about poor play, poor execution and overall just poor product on the field. Its exhausting hearing the same ol sh*t over and over and over from this team.

 

[kbso83432]

I cannot believe we are still talking about this ^ anymore. We all know the FULL story and we all know how things unfolded. Guy got a sh*t ton of money for very few wins here (Captain played his cards just right) and parlayed that into another guaranteed contract ($84m) with little to show for it which parlayed into another guaranteed contract of which its looking like Zimmer may lose his job as they cannot sustain success in Minny. Just because we cannot find a suitable replacement since KC, doesn't mean he was anymore than avg while here (like the team) and while he has had an uptick of success in Minny, he also has more talent around him which correct me if I'm wrong, that has resulted in how many playoff wins? None? I will say this, he certainly did not put together a season like Mark Rypien had which resulted in MVP and Superbowl winner. When I think back on QB's who had success while in DC in any kind of order the fall out would go something like this:
1. Sammy Baugh (3-3 in playoffs)
2. Sonny Jurgenson (none)
3. Joe Theismann (6-2 in playoffs)
4. Mark Rypien (5-2 in playoffs)
5. Doug Williams (3-0 in playoffs)
6. RGIII (0-1 in playoffs)
7. Kirk Cousin (0-1 in playoffs)
8. Mark Brunell (1-1 in playoffs)
9. Brad Johnson (1-1 in playoffs)
10. Billy Kilmer (2-5 in playoffs)

Not that this list is full of greats because its not, but full of very good to avg ones, the best are certainly top 5 on this list while the rest were avg to below avg while guiding the team at QB.

You know what. I was wrong. Kirk couldn't see Doug on his best day. It's just that his best days were in Tampa. That said, Mark and Doug won us a freaking SB. I can't put Kirk over them, even though Mark was terrible out the gate as a Redskin and was clumsy as hell.

 

[Stymietee]

Its been said, a couple times by a couple posters.

I suggested this 3 games ago and was roundly dismissed for doing so.

One thing that's certain... players know... and despite what they say publicly, that locker room knows and feels it. Perhaps it was the performance against Tampa Bay that burst the "feel good bubble." If not, then it was the beginning of doubt, further impressed by this season's lackluster performances, especially early on.

I'm going to add one more piece to this that hasn't been mentioned since the off-season. Not getting "that guy" at the QB position hurt the confidence of this team before the season began. Again, players know and what they knew were two things...

1. They were impressed, some would say confident, in Taylor Heinicke against Tampa Bay and summarily put into a position in which they had to put that aside for Fitzpatrick a QB that everyone knew to be a stopgap at best. I can't say for certain how much confidence there was in Fitzpatrick, but there had to be an "earn our confidence" element in their approach to him considering his history.

2. They knew that there was going to be a heavy reliance on defense. What does that mean in real terms? Holding high powered offenses and star QB's to less than their normal production levels because of #1 above in a league designed for increased offensive production. Say what you will about my position on getting a star QB, but whatever that is, it cannot be said that, "that guy" gives a team the intangible that translates into a belief in winning. Better stated, when other players talk about their QB, especially after a win, it's almost universally said that "as long as we have that guy on our team..."

 

[Stymietee]

To add to this, I'm just tired of the excuses by players and coaches about poor play, poor execution and overall just poor product on the field. Its exhausting hearing the same ol sh*t over and over and over from this team.

Please join me in the cloak of invincibility, excuses are the norm with this team/organization, have been...still is, nothing new! I feel your angst man, protect yourself from it.

 

[skinsdad62]

Show me where that poster indicated at any point that the 30,000 yards were done in a particular number of years. All that was mentioned was 30,000 yards. I accepted that nonsense and bested it with a counter. Keep in mind that there has now been an admission, so my position stands.

Now the goal posts move once again to "above average" which once again proves my original point. There are 32 teams in the league, and were when all of this foolishness began, he was ranked 18th then, but I'll use current starters, to be fair and more generous to his move up in the rankings. Now, if you take Brady, Murray, Jackson, Allen, Burrow, Mayfield, Prescott, Rodgers, Mahomes, Herbert, Stafford, and Ryan, as your current first tier of QB's who would be preferred over him if you had to pick one now. (we'll have to break the rankings into 3 tiers in order to have a top, middle and lower one) How then, does Kirk NOT fit into that "Middle of the pack" second tier??? I get it, people don't like the whole "middle of the pack" thing, but it is, what it is!

It really doesn't help in trying to keep Kirk relevant here simply because one person has a boner for a memory that never existed. To say that "he was the best that this team had since he left" (for some the "best since, Theesman, Sp, yeah I know, Williams etc) is also misleading as it gives the impression of having something really good, instead of steady, middling, or to use what the poster used, "above average." To be clear, when " above average" (meaning top of the middle of the pack) is the measuring stick upon which some try to assert that it's the "best since..." is your norm, it isn't an indication of how good he was/has been, but an indictment on how awful this organization has been prior to and after he was here. Farkin' perspective matters!!!

Well my math skills may be waning but avg is 16 out of 32 . 13 would in fact be above avg if we buy that burrow and mayfield are at this point proven better or even Ryan . I do think you skipped over Wilson though .

I absolutely believe KC would have had this team in the playoffs for quite a few seasons here

I absolutely believe that all the qbs since he left have been urine infected with the clap

 

[Stymietee]

You know what. I was wrong. Kirk couldn't see Doug on his best day. It's just that his best days were in Tampa. That said, Mark and Doug won us a freaking SB. I can't put Kirk over them, even though Mark was terrible out the gate as a Redskin and was clumsy as hell.

I also can't put Kirk over Theesman (Sp, I know) because he was a tough as nails scrapper, a bulldog as Doc Walker refers to him. I don't see that in Kirk at all but to be fair the two played in different eras. Still I take Joe T over Kirk for the reasons stated.

 

[kbso83432]

I wasn't the biggest Kirk fan, but wasn't against him either. Bruce certainly blundered by low balling Kirk and then even worse by not trading him to SF when he had the chance (after it became clear Kirk was done with us).

 

[Caliskinsfan]

Theesman

Laughing so hard here. My grandpops ALWAYS pronounced his name that way and then proceeded with the story of why Joe changed how to say his name

 

[Stymietee]

Well my math skills may be waning but avg is 16 out of 32 . 13 would in fact be above avg if we buy that burrow and mayfield are at this point proven better or even Ryan . I do think you skipped over Wilson though .

I absolutely believe KC would have had this team in the playoffs for quite a few seasons here

I absolutely believe that all the qbs since he left have been urine infected with the clap

Your math is flawed, given the fact that we're talking about three (3) tiers, Top, middle and bottom. My assertion that he's "middle" of the pack means that you necessarily have to have packs or groupings. Kirk fits perfectly into that second grouping and I'm not sure that he tops that group either, but by any account he's in that group. Is he above the average within that group, maybe, I don't care enough about "average" or "above average" QB's to rate them. (BTW: thanks for Wilson)

32 teams broken down into those tiers gives you 10.66 players per tier or top 10. rounded to 11, middle 10, rounded to 11, and bottom ten rounded to 11. That's 33 (i think that there's a skunk, pretending, in one of these tiers) Even if I used your way of ranking them 16 as middle and 13 as above average, we would still be talking about a player who's dubious at 13 ( a very generous ranking btw) considering Tannehill, and Carr.

There's zero evidence that this organization has the drive or ability to string together playoff appearances with or without Kirk, but all I can do is present the evidence and support your belief. BTW; I don't share that belief, I've tried that for far too many years, and now it's all about what's actually true when it comes to this team/organization.

Oh, I agree and again, when "average' an/or "above average" is the yardstick, you're still dealing with clean urine, just not " urine infected with the clap."

 

[Stymietee]

I wasn't the biggest Kirk fan, but wasn't against him either. Bruce certainly blundered by low balling Kirk and then even worse by not trading him to SF when he had the chance (after it became clear Kirk was done with us).

Dammit, I forgot about that potential trade offer, thanks!

 

[Stymietee]

Laughing so hard here. My grandpops ALWAYS pronounced his name that way and then proceeded with the story of why Joe changed how to say his name

Your grandpops is a smart man, gotta appreciate the humor and truthfulness in how that name is used!