Damn Eagles Destroying Steelers

[SoCalWizFan]

OK so he needs to put up 30 points a game. And yes he does need to do better. But seriously, even 30 points a game is asking a bit much in order to have a reasonable chance of winning. Lets see how we do over the next few weeks and then determine if its really the QB, or if its a total team issue.

Again - nobody is stating that Cousins is the only reason for the team's issues nor even the primary reason (except for perhaps the Cowboys game). I am not even asking for him or anyone else to lead this team to victory on most occasions. I am simply asking for Cousins to consistently play at a decent level & minimize mistakes. If he does that & they still say go 6-10 then they should bring him back.

He has a long ways to go this season to reach that pt & I truly hope that he does - we will see.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

I dismissed it because having played various sports at a fairly high level, I can tell you when you are on the field, in the middle of a play, outside thoughts about things like contacts just dont occur. You are in the moment. Now you are aware of on field situations, like score, down, distance, play importance, etc. Now before game or after game, it definitely adds pressure. While sitting in the locker room before game, you do think about things like how important this game might be for your contact, etc. But not when executing a play.

Golf is different. You have a lot of down time in golf to let your mind wander, upward of 5 minutes between shots sometimes. Football is much faster pace and more of a reactive sport.

Considering the skins are giving up over 30 points a game, he damn near does have to score 40 to win.

No offense, but I am guessing that you never played with a potential $100M + contract on the line. I agree that players are in the moment for the most part. However - no doubt either consciously or subconsciously Cousins is aware of that situation. Perhaps not for Cousins, but we have all seen examples of players who play much better in a contract year so this has to be a factor for some. Perhaps it is the pregame factor that you mention, and certainly preparation & other factors can influence play in the actual game.

Regardless - let's just hope Kirk settles down & plays to the best of his ability. I don't care about him being a franchise QB or carrying the team on his back & leading them to improbable victories. I just want him to be as good as he can be and minimize his mistakes (if nothing else - don't have a repeat of the end of the 1st half vs Giants - those type of boneheaded mistakes should not occur at this pt in his career).

Go Kirk and HTTR

 

[SoCalWizFan]

BTW Shark - regardless of the amt of pts required to win or the shortcomings in other areas a QB really needs to be somewhat accurate, minimize turnovers and manage the clock well. These have been areas where Cousins has had some issues. If he cuts down on these & shows progress then he should be fine IMO.

We all know about the shortcomings in other areas, and a lot of this cannot be addressed until the offseason so they will simply have to do the best they can this season. However - shortcomings in another area are no excuse for anyone not to perform to the best of their ability & honestly I don't think that anyone is asking Cousins to be the next Brady, Rodgers or Brees. They are simply asking him to be the best Kirk Cousins.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

OK, now we can go back to arguing. First, who has said that KC has played well? Second, The play of the defense and the play of the offense are absolutely tied together. Since the QB leads the offense, his play is affected by how the defense plays. I don't care who the QB is. It appears that when anyone points this out, you extrapolate it to mean that they are defending the play of the QB. I haven't seen one poster yet defend KC's play.

Oh good, I know the world is right we we are arguing.

Shark has said Cousins needs to play better. But throughout the thread he has posted things like this:

BUt if he cant pt up 40 points a game.. then maybe he isnt the franchise QB we need to begin with.

That clearly gives the impression that Kirk is being held to a unfair high standard. Nobody said he needs to hang up 40 a game, we are simply asking for our QB to make the plays when they are there and to, I don't know, make something happen when he needs to improvise. Right now that is simply not happenng and there is nothing wrong with pointing this out. And to be clear nobody has said the defense wasn't a huge part of our record.

I have tried to stay on point throughout thread. And that point has focused on Kirk's play because this IMO is the biggest factor in how this team will do moving forward. If what we have seen in over half of his 33 starts is who he really is, and that is a distinct possibility, well I consider that a major major problem.

 

[j_y19]

Oh good, I know the world is right we we are arguing.

Shark has said Cousins needs to play better. But throughout the thread he has posted things like this:



That clearly gives the impression that Kirk is being held to a unfair high standard. Nobody said he needs to hang up 40 a game, we are simply asking for our QB to make the plays when they are there and to, I don't know, make something happen when he needs to improvise. Right now that is simply not happenng and there is nothing wrong with pointing this out. And to be clear nobody has said the defense wasn't a huge part of our record.

I have tried to stay on point throughout thread. And that point has focused on Kirk's play because this IMO is the biggest factor in how this team will do moving forward. If what we have seen in over half of his 33 starts is who he really is, and that is a distinct possibility, well I consider that a major major problem.

I get it. But I do feel you really are premature in your concern, as sometimes is seems you have already labeled him a bust. 33 starts really isn't that much, especially since half of them came in spurts early in his career when he was the backup. But it is fair to say that since he was named starter, half of his starts he played below the level any team could accept as a starting QB. But on the flip side, half he has play at, or near, franchise level. I chose to look at those and see what he can be. Its not that you are placing an unfair high expectation, as my expectations for him are to play consistently and at a level near his stretch run of last year. Where I think you are at bit harsh is the continued quote of 33 starts and where he should be at this point. While he is a 5 year vet, his playing time really puts him in year 3 or so. This is the year he should be coming into his own. I also agree with Shark in that its not an excuse, but reality, that playing QB for a team with such a poor defense is a liability and can affect his play.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Yeah but as I said earlier he has been in an ideal situation. He wasn't rushed, he had time to learn while getting spot duty to learn through game experience. And this is not the NFL of 1975. By year 3 we had a good idea of the type of QB Luck, Cam and Russell Wilson are, by the same token we got a pretty clear picture of Geno Smith as well. Andy Daulton's picture is becomming clearer by the minute, now there is an example of team with a tremdous roster and defense but every January their OK QB holds them back. Same thing in Arizona.

 

[j_y19]

Yeah but as I said earlier he has been in an ideal situation. He wasn't rushed, he had time to learn while getting spot duty to learn through game experience. And this is not the NFL of 1975. By year 3 we had a good idea of the type of QB Luck, Cam and Russell Wilson are, by the same token we got a pretty clear picture of Geno Smith as well. Andy Daulton's picture is becomming clearer by the minute, now there is an example of team with a tremdous roster and defense but every January their OK QB holds them back. Same thing in Arizona.

Ideal situation????? Playing for the Redskins???? Sorry, don't buy it. Aaron Rodgers was in the ideal situation. A backup to a hall of fame QB and a stable coaching staff that knows how to develop a young QB.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

I mean in terms of development he was pretty much in an ideal situation with time to learn combined with game experience.

Did Luck go into an ideal situation, following a legend on the worst team in the league? Cam also went to the worst team in the league. Wentz went to a last place team with horrible receivers. Just sounds like everyone continues to make excuses for Kirk. If he is the man he should be able to handle adversary.

 

[Sharkinva]

I mean in terms of development he was pretty much in an ideal situation with time to learn combined with game experience.

Did Luck go into an ideal situation, following a legend on the worst team in the league? Cam also went to the worst team in the league. Just sounds like everyone continues to make excuses for Kirk. If he is the man he should be able to handle adversary.

Can we stop with the outright falicy that Luck went to the worst team in the league crap?? Prior to 2011, the Colts had either won their Division or been a Wild Card team for 10 years. In 2010 Even with Manning getting Injured they won their division at 10-6. 2011 Manning is injured to start the season, there is this kid named Luck in the next draft..... Thus began the suck for Luck crusade. And before you say, no NFL owner would intentionally suck to get a single player.

Remember we have seen MUltiple teams in the past five years give up multiple picks for a QB. So in the grand scheme of things, would you intentionally take a 2-14 record and guarantee you get the top QB in the draft over giving up 3 first rounders plus??

 

[j_y19]

Could anyone say that Luck, to date, has met expectations? Or did Cam do so his first couple of years? The answer is no, IMO. It takes most QBs time to develop. DGF, you feel that KC has had enough time. Others feel he is still a work in progress. No one has made excuses for his play. NO ONE. But to ignore that his play, or any QBs play, could be affected by weakness in other areas of the team, is just not being realistic. It is also a fallacy to believe that KC has had the opportunity to grow in and ideal situation. His situation has been anything but ideal.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Can we stop with the outright falicy that Luck went to the worst team in the league crap?? Prior to 2011, the Colts had either won their Division or been a Wild Card team for 10 years. In 2010 Even with Manning getting Injured they won their division at 10-6. 2011 Manning is injured to start the season, there is this kid named Luck in the next draft..... Thus began the suck for Luck crusade. And before you say, no NFL owner would intentionally suck to get a single player.

Remember we have seen MUltiple teams in the past five years give up multiple picks for a QB. So in the grand scheme of things, would you intentionally take a 2-14 record and guarantee you get the top QB in the draft over giving up 3 first rounders plus??

You could not have made my point about a good QB any better than this post. Thank you for that.

With Manning: As you said constant playoff team for over a decade
Without Manning: 2-14 the worst team in the league
With Luck the very next year: 11-5 and in the playoffs once again.

Obviously the QB made the difference, without a good QB they stunk. Them's the facts Jack.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Could anyone say that Luck, to date, has met expectations? Or did Cam do so his first couple of years? The answer is no, IMO. It takes most QBs time to develop. DGF, you feel that KC has had enough time. Others feel he is still a work in progress. No one has made excuses for his play. NO ONE. But to ignore that his play, or any QBs play, could be affected by weakness in other areas of the team, is just not being realistic. It is also a fallacy to believe that KC has had the opportunity to grow in and ideal situation. His situation has been anything but ideal.

Do you really want to compare Luck's body of work to Kirks? Of course Luck met expectations his first few years. Don't let his minor drop off change that. Cam as well, he was by far the biggest reason for that team's turnaround IMO. I was not a big Cam believer, using just the numbers to judge him. When I finally watched him play I understood his value.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Can we stop with the outright falicy that Luck went to the worst team in the league crap?? Prior to 2011, the Colts had either won their Division or been a Wild Card team for 10 years. In 2010 Even with Manning getting Injured they won their division at 10-6. 2011 Manning is injured to start the season, there is this kid named Luck in the next draft..... Thus began the suck for Luck crusade. And before you say, no NFL owner would intentionally suck to get a single player.

Remember we have seen MUltiple teams in the past five years give up multiple picks for a QB. So in the grand scheme of things, would you intentionally take a 2-14 record and guarantee you get the top QB in the draft over giving up 3 first rounders plus??

Wait Shark, sorry I just read this again and saw your entire conspiracy theory. So let me see if I understand this. You actually believe the Colts got 53 guys to agree to drop passes, miss blocks, drop interceptions and do anything possible to guarantee a loss even though it would result in bad tape of themselves for all to see which would cost them money in future contracts and in some cases jobs. And all these players would agree to do this and the coaches would be onboard by calling bad plays on purpose, which would be equally damaging to their careers, as the entire group performed a death march through the season from Hell. They would be doing this under the direction of the owner, who has zero loyalty to them, just so the team could draft a QB who may or may not change the team's fortunes?

I say this with as much respect as I possibly can: Stop being an idiot.

 

[Sharkinva]

It doesnt take 53 guys to tank a season. All it takes is a head coach willing to play ball. But you are right, a team that has gone to the playoffs 8 times in a row is alot more likely to just put up a 2-14 record because the QB was out.

You know dude you make me hope they do trade another boat load for a QB. Because you say you want good, but I think really anything short of elite wont be good enough for you.

 

[j_y19]

Do you really want to compare Luck's body of work to Kirks? Of course Luck met expectations his first few years. Don't let his minor drop off change that. Cam as well, he was by far the biggest reason for that team's turnaround IMO. I was not a big Cam believer, using just the numbers to judge him. When I finally watched him play I understood his value.

That's what you took out of what I wrote? Luck has had one really good year, 2014. His "minor" drop off is not so minor. He is a middle of the pack QB based on his production. For the first pick in the draft, my bet is that the Colts were expecting more. But that's not the point. The point is that it takes time for most QBs. We can go through the list of a multitude of QBs that needed 3 or 4 years to become proficient. But it would be a waste of time. You are convinced that KC is a bust. you are entitled to that and may eventually be proved right. But I dont think we have seen the final product just yet.

 

[Breed]

Wait Shark, sorry I just read this again.

Heh, when I saw your response to Shark I was like, either Dave didn't read that right or he's been replaced by a pod person. Those were the only two options I could come up with. Glad it was one and not two.

 

[Breed]

That's what you took out of what I wrote? Luck has had one really good year, 2014. His "minor" drop off is not so minor. He is a middle of the pack QB based on his production. For the first pick in the draft, my bet is that the Colts were expecting more. But that's not the point. The point is that it takes time for most QBs. We can go through the list of a multitude of QBs that needed 3 or 4 years to become proficient. But it would be a waste of time. You are convinced that KC is a bust. you are entitled to that and may eventually be proved right. But I dont think we have seen the final product just yet.

He took the Colts to the playoffs his first 3 seasons and took a step forward every year in playoffs. 1st year lost 1st playoff game, 2nd year won 1st playoff game, lost in round two, 3rd year won 2 playoiff games, lost in AFCCG. And of the 3 rookie QBs who made a whole lotta noise in 2012. Luck imo went to the worst team of the three. The Colts also won 11 games three years in a row 2012-2014. I thiink he throws too many picks imo, but he was also asked and did more passing-wise than any QB in NFL history his first 3 years except for P Manning. And while he did throw picks, he also overcame a lot of them to sti;ll lead the Colts to victory time and time again. But instead of getting him an adequate OLine. The Colts went out and signed over the hill FAs and the GM and HC squabbled with one another.

Luck is the tits. He'd be good grief scary with an OLine.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

It doesnt take 53 guys to tank a season. All it takes is a head coach willing to play ball. But you are right, a team that has gone to the playoffs 8 times in a row is alot more likely to just put up a 2-14 record because the QB was out.

You know dude you make me hope they do trade another boat load for a QB. Because you say you want good, but I think really anything short of elite wont be good enough for you.

I have said several times that any of the top 10-12 QBs would be good enough. I have said a number of times Brady is not necessary, using QBs like Luck and Wilson as examples. If you chose to ignore what I have said and make assumptions that I insist on elite when I have very cleary said the opposite, well that's not exactly helping your argument.

Your theory that a head coach would tank a season is completely idiotic. How'd it work out for him anyway? Oh yeah, he was fired and never got to coach the player he tanked the season to acquire.

Good God Shark.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

That's what you took out of what I wrote? Luck has had one really good year, 2014. His "minor" drop off is not so minor. He is a middle of the pack QB based on his production. For the first pick in the draft, my bet is that the Colts were expecting more. But that's not the point. The point is that it takes time for most QBs. We can go through the list of a multitude of QBs that needed 3 or 4 years to become proficient. But it would be a waste of time. You are convinced that KC is a bust. you are entitled to that and may eventually be proved right. But I dont think we have seen the final product just yet.

To use your quote is that what you took from what I wrote? You have said twice now that I am convinced that Cousins is a bust. I have never drawn any conclussions, I have consistantly used terms such as "will he be good enough?" I also said very clearly that I agree with you and see him being somewhere between his play last year and this. If you see that to mean I have concluded that Kirk is a bust well that is your mistake, not mine. Tim Couch was a bust. A 4th round QB who is a middle of the road starter, which is exactly where I have said I think Kirk is headed, is not a bust. As I have said repeatedly that type of QB won't be good enough to take this team where we all want it to go. But I have never said anything close to concluding that Kirk is a bust.

As for the other young QBs I won't go so far as to call Luck the tits. But Breed covered it pretty well. For the Redskins to trade Cousins for Luck would require, well never mind. There isn't a GM in the league who trade Luck for Cousins.. As for most QBs taking 3-4 years to be proficient a quick scan of the top 12 (IMO) and I could only find Tony Romo, a FA who obviously started at the bottom, and Brees. Every other one, including Brady who also had a long climb, were established starters with big upside by year 3. Kirk is in year 5. The QBs that take years to develop usually land in Alex Smith territory, again not good enough IMO.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Damn wouldn't let me edit. Another exception is obviously Rodgers who was in a unique situation of sitting behind a Hall of Famer. To assume a talent like that would have needed 3-4 years, when the vast majority of the top 12 QBs did not, is unfair. But we'll never know so we need to throw him out of the comparison. But the fact is the nearly all of the good QBs didn't need 3-4 years. And yes that includes Cam who was in the Pro Bowl after his rookie season and has continued to play at a high level..