Damn Eagles Destroying Steelers

[Breed]

Yeah he is talking about me and why Shark would chose Wentz, who to date is a perfect example to support my argument, is perplexing. Anyone with a TV, internet access and basic football knowledge can see that right now that trade is a slam dunk win for the Eagles. Of course we can't predict the future so the first 3 games, as well as the scout projections, is all the information we have to date and it clearly shows the Eagles made the right move.

So you said because of Wentz the Skins need to make another multi players/picks trade for a QB trade?

Or did you say. If someone comes along that Scotty Mac and the brain trust believe will be a franchise QB. That you'd be OK with it if they pulled a trigger on a trade involving multiple picks from the Skins?

Cuz there's a pretty big difference between those statements.

Not that it matters really. Cuz you're talking QBs with a guy who said comparing Russell Wilson to Kirk Cousins is throwing shade on KC. And then doubled down, dropping this nugget. "If Russell Wilson had to throw 45 passes a game with this present Redskins team. He'd be Jason Campbell."

Personally I think Wilson directing this present Skins offense (if/when he's healthy) would be deadly as shit.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

So you said because of Wentz the Skins need to make another multi players/picks trade for a QB trade?

Or did you say. If someone comes along that Scotty Mac and the brain trust believe will be a franchise QB. That you'd be OK with it if they pulled a trigger on a trade involving multiple picks from the Skins?

Cuz there's a pretty big difference between those statements.

Not that it matters really. Cuz you're talking QBs with a guy who said comparing Russell Wilson to Kirk Cousins is throwing shade on KC. And then doubled down, dropping this nugget. "If Russell Wilson had to throw 45 passes a game with this present Redskins team. He'd be Jason Campbell."

Personally I think Wilson directing this present Skins offense (if/when he's healthy) would be deadly as shit.

I don't see where those 2 statements are mutually exclusive. I am saying to date what we are seeing from Carson Wentz is strong evidence that it is a solid move to trade a ton of picks if you can get a good QB. Again 3 games in, too early to say for sure, but it's all the evidence we have on September 27, 2016. So with that said yeah if SM sees a QB who he thinks can be good I'm in favor of trading up to get him. I understand the risk and I also understand that teams with average QBs don't win a damn thing in this league very often.

 

[Caliskinsfan]

Wouldnt the difference be 1) the ability to actually identify who is that good QB is followed by 2) whether you have the scheme, players and coaching staff in place to develop the talent properly.

It's not just about getting the right QB. Skins have failed with not getting both aspects right to date.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

Wouldnt the difference be 1) the ability to actually identify who is that good QB is followed by 2) whether you have the scheme, players and coaching staff in place to develop the talent properly.

It's not just about getting the right QB. Skins have failed with not getting both aspects right to date.

No denying that & I believe that most of us are maintaining that Cousins at times is only part of the problem. We all know that the Redskins moving fwd need at least some d-lineman, a center, another RB & better coaching. I still see hope with current FO - it will just likely take more time. The current coaches? Um - not as confident in them, but the coaching staff certainly stepped fwd in several ways during the 2nd half of the Giants game. Whether they can do this on a sustained basis is another matter.

 

[j_y19]

A couple points. First, I never mentioned KC or his play. I agree. Right now he is at best a middle of the pack QB that is too inconsistent to be viewed anything more than a work in progress. We saw last year his potential. Playing 10 games at that level is not a fluke. He can do it. Its up to the coaching staff and KC to figure out why he played at such a high level the second half and put him in that position to get there again. My guess is he will end up somewhere between his play last year and what we have seen from him through 3 games this year, which won't be too shabby. QBs in that range have won SBs but do need support. i guess that is the point I was trying to make. There are SB winning QBs that are not Peyton, Brady, Rodgers or Brees. They are good QBs that have a firm grasp on their abilities and there offenses but they also have support from other areas of the team, i.e. a good ground game and/or a good defense. Wilson, in my mind is exactly that type of QB. If he didn't have that defense and felt he had to orchestrate 40 points every game to win, I'm quite confident you would see a different QB. One that presses and tries to force things. IS KC doing that right now? Yes. Is it because he feels the pressure of having to score every drive? Who knows. Maybe its his contract situation, but I doubt that. But he is definitely pressing more this year than his great stretch run of last year. Some of his misses this year are ugly, and he was hitting those last year.

Its too early to know exactly where KC will settle, but his potential alone is worth playing it out. OF course, we really don't have a choice, do we? Its just premature to write him off as QB that cant play to the level to take a team to the SB. Its also to early to say that he can. But there are very few QBs in the league that could take THIS team to the promise land as poor as our defense and running attack are. I'd say maybe only 1 (Brady).

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

I don't disagree with a world of that j_y19 (some day you will need to explain your username to me). I too see Kirk as somewhere in between last year and this. And as you said we don't really have a choice do we? Which is why I was OK with the idea of signing him long term because he's all we have and it beats the Hell out of Ryan Fitzpatrick situations.

But will he be good enough? That's the question. Again I am not saying if you don't have a Brady you have no chance, the top 10-12 QBs (and that includes Russell Wilson for sure) is all you need. Once you get past that group history has shown it's very very difficult to win over a long period of time with an average QB. The 2 notable exceptions are Eli and Flacco and both have had a strange history of playing great in big games which is very unusual for average QBs. But they play average in those playoffs and the don't win rings.

The problem is we never have that guy. Wait, we had him for one year. In that one year Mark Rypien played like a top 10 QB. Of course he had a lot of help but his play elevated a good team to a champion. Once he fell from that level we fell off the map. Then age did that team in.

 

[j_y19]

I don't disagree with a world of that j_y19 (some day you will need to explain your username to me). I too see Kirk as somewhere in between last year and this. And as you said we don't really have a choice do we? Which is why I was OK with the idea of signing him long term because he's all we have and it beats the Hell out of Ryan Fitzpatrick situations.

But will he be good enough? That's the question. Again I am not saying if you don't have a Brady you have no chance, the top 10-12 QBs (and that includes Russell Wilson for sure) is all you need. Once you get past that group history has shown it's very very difficult to win over a long period of time with an average QB. The 2 notable exceptions are Eli and Flacco and both have had a strange history of playing great in big games which is very unusual for average QBs. But they play average in those playoffs and the don't win rings.

The problem is we never have that guy. Wait, we had him for one year. In that one year Mark Rypien played like a top 10 QB. Of course he had a lot of help but his play elevated a good team to a champion. Once he fell from that level we fell off the map. Then age did that team in.

Well how in the hell am I supposed to argue with this?????

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

If I can't argue on the internet then life is not worth living.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

I am not sure why you are so quick to dismiss the contract situation. If someone told you that you could say double or triple your salary & you would be closely analyzed you don't believe that would result in stress and perhaps some mistakes? Look at golfers who can make long putts all day long but blow a 2 footer when there is money on the line.

It is not just the money from the extension. It is also the chance for long term security and a future with the Redskins. If Cousins falls short he could be looking at a future of being a journeyman QB. No doubt I would feel pressure in this situation. The contract may not be the major contributor to his issues, but I would not discount the possibility.

I also don't believe that he needs to score 40 pts every game. I think that Redskins are acknowledging the fact that they have holes in their defense & will adjust somewhat. Like I stated earlier - they will likely be like the team in 2012 - give up lots of yards & some scores but perhaps also force key turnovers to help keep things competitive against many teams. We will see.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

BTW - in terms of Cousins needing to score tons of pts - remember in the 1st half last week they started in good field position numerous times only to settle for a FG or worse. They adjusted somewhat in the 2nd half (& benefited from a fake punt) & were a little better.

This is an area where the offense & Cousins need to thrive - they need to take advantage of turnovers & score TDS where possible. Yes - I know that some of this falls on the running game, but he also bears some of the responsibility especially when he was off target on several occasions.

 

[Breed]

I don't see where those 2 statements are mutually exclusive.

The first statement implies, at least for me, a "If Jimmy jumped off the Golden Gate bridge would you jump off it to?" vibe. The second statement more of a you or we or whoever have thought this out, talked about it, maybe even took it a step further with a player or two.

I am saying to date what we are seeing from Carson Wentz is strong evidence that it is a solid move to trade a ton of picks if you can get a good QB. Again 3 games in, too early to say for sure, but it's all the evidence we have on September 27, 2016. So with that said yeah if SM sees a QB who he thinks can be good I'm in favor of trading up to get him. I understand the risk and I also understand that teams with average QBs don't win a damn thing in this league very often.

I don't disagree with any of this ^^^^^^^. I can't blame any Skins for being gun-shy when a multiple picks traded away for a single player discussion pops up though, especially if said player is a QB. Brunell, Campbell, NcNabb, Griffin, all acquired by that type of trade of which none remotely panned out long term for the Skins.

 

[j_y19]

I am not sure why you are so quick to dismiss the contract situation. If someone told you that you could say double or triple your salary & you would be closely analyzed you don't believe that would result in stress and perhaps some mistakes? Look at golfers who can make long putts all day long but blow a 2 footer when there is money on the line.

It is not just the money from the extension. It is also the chance for long term security and a future with the Redskins. If Cousins falls short he could be looking at a future of being a journeyman QB. No doubt I would feel pressure in this situation. The contract may not be the major contributor to his issues, but I would not discount the possibility.

I also don't believe that he needs to score 40 pts every game. I think that Redskins are acknowledging the fact that they have holes in their defense & will adjust somewhat. Like I stated earlier - they will likely be like the team in 2012 - give up lots of yards & some scores but perhaps also force key turnovers to help keep things competitive against many teams. We will see.

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.

 

[Sharkinva]

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.

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

 

[Breed]

The 38 points Pitt scored skews the points per game stats a bit for the defense, but that is the only game thus far where 40 points would've been needed for a Skins victory. Against NYG and Dall they've given up 28 points a game which is still too many, but the "KC needs to score 40 points to win a game." was/is popping up a little too much and not factual.

What is factual is that the Skins are 5th in the NFL in total yards, 406 yd per and 1 of 5 teams averaging over 400 yd per game. KC ranks 2nd in the NFL in passing yards at 330.7 per game. Yet when it comes to scoring. The Skins fall all the way down to 18th with 22.7 pt per game. Dustin Hopkins is leading the NFL in points. Largely on the strength of being 11 /11 on FGs. Of those 11 FGs, 8 of them have been from 39 yards or fewer. That no doubt is due to the Skins only scoring 3 TDs in 14 trips into the red zone. Which is largely due to KC's shitty and indecisive red zone play.

The truth is that averaging damn near 5 trips into the red zone every game. The Skins should be closer to averaging 40 points a game as opposed to the 22.7 they're averaging now. And while Gruden and the play calling do bear some responsibility. The lion's share imo falls on KC as there have been plays there to be made, he's simply failed to make them.

 

[Sharkinva]

The 38 points Pitt scored skews the points per game stats a bit for the defense, but that is the only game thus far where 40 points would've been needed for a Skins victory. Against NYG and Dall they've given up 28 points a game which is still too many, but the "KC needs to score 40 points to win a game." was/is popping up a little too much and not factual.

What is factual is that the Skins are 5th in the NFL in total yards, 406 yd per and 1 of 5 teams averaging over 400 yd per game. KC ranks 2nd in the NFL in passing yards at 330.7 per game. Yet when it comes to scoring. The Skins fall all the way down to 18th with 22.7 pt per game. Dustin Hopkins is leading the NFL in points. Largely on the strength of being 11 /11 on FGs. Of those 11 FGs, 8 of them have been from 39 yards or fewer. That no doubt is due to the Skins only scoring 3 TDs in 14 trips into the red zone. Which is largely due to KC's shitty and indecisive red zone play.

The truth is that averaging damn near 5 trips into the red zone every game. The Skins should be closer to averaging 40 points a game as opposed to the 22.7 they're averaging now. And while Gruden and the play calling do bear some responsibility. The lion's share imo falls on KC as there have been plays there to be made, he's simply failed to make them.

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.

 

[Stymietee]

Back to the thread topic, I believe that it's time for us to realize that last year was last year. We "won" the division, how seems irrelevant unless we insist that no other team in the division has worked to improve. Sure we belittle them because they are rivals, often we, just like them, are trying to convince ourselves that their teams or certain personnel just "aint shit" because that helps us to envision our guys doing better. Here's the real news....no team has taken the position to stand pat. Whether we want to admit it or not, repeating as division champs will require real work this year, right now, unlike a season ago, it looks like a real dog fight!!

 

[BeaReylo]

If Wentz can keep this pace for two more season then I will believe he is the truth. I've seen a plethora of QBs with a spectacular year/game sparkle and fade.

 

[Breed]

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.

There's no set in stone formula when it comes to winning a football game. Except maybe that a team does all it can to play to its strength. And right now the strength of the Redskins lies on the offensive side of the ball. I doubt they win or even have many 17-14 knockdown, drag out defensive slugfests this year. If the Redskins are to be a successful this year. They will do so by outscoring opponents in relatively high scoring games.

Getting mad at the defense for giving up a lotta points this year is akin to getting mad at a fat kid who likes cake. Its not gonna change anything. I think the best we can hope from a defensive standpoint is what we saw Sunday. That they make a few key plays and the offense by sticking to a balanced attack that includes a ground game. Limits the TOP for the opposing team.

Some things were done, signing Norman and drafting Cravens, defensively this year, but an argument can be made that the DL was ignored. Even while its main pieces, Hatcher and Knighton retired or weren't sought after by the front office. You can have studs in the secondary and studs at LB, but if the defense line can't keep blockers from getting to the next level and into your LBs. Or mount a pass rush leaving your DBs to cover longer than they can be expected to. Eventually shit's gonna get funky like penicillin for the defense.

I don't know how many points is reasonable or unreasonable to expect the offense to generate. I'd bet money though the averaging 22.7 points a game this year. Will have the Skins in a 6-10/4-12 neighborhood at the end of the year. We need to score baby and score often if we're to compete for an NFC East title, playoff berth, or even a respectable won/loss record.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Exactly Breed. Deflecting the blame to the defense, and they deserve plenty of blame, as a way of semi-defending the play of the QB makes no sense. Kirk has not played well, that is an issue. This is a show me year to see if he really is a long term answer so yeah his play this year is a big deal and deserves close scrutiny. The defense is another issue altogether.

 

[j_y19]

Exactly Breed. Deflecting the blame to the defense, and they deserve plenty of blame, as a way of semi-defending the play of the QB makes no sense. Kirk has not played well, that is an issue. This is a show me year to see if he really is a long term answer so yeah his play this year is a big deal and deserves close scrutiny. The defense is another issue altogether.

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.