Let's get this whole time thing straight!

[skinsdad62]

Again the hypocrisy continues.......how often have we heard that the higher selected player should have done this or that in order to improve his game instead of running his mouth, paying attention to his brand or issuing blog posts everywhere? While I agree with all of this, shouldn't the backup who by virtue of his status, have more time himself to work on his craft to a point where he becomes a master reader of defenses, less prone to turnovers because of that and an immediate threat to the starter even if the starter was a superstar?

Maybe it's a generational mindset for me vs. todays players.....but When I played sports and didn't start (which was very rare) my first thought was to go to the coach and ask why? After finding out what was perceived to be a weakness, guess what I worked on? So I'll ask you guys...........Why does it seem that there are fewer and fewer players pushing for starting status and such a fall off between starter and backup in sports today?

i dont have a real answer for you sty , except this generation isnt as tested . and lets be real a ot of these guys have been coddled for a long time and now they are experiencing the real world and they struggle

 

[martinez]

I believe he's gotten plenty of coaching and chances over the past 4 years. He's not good, sorry.

I actually agree with this. Kirk has had plenty of time to develop. We might have groomed him better than rg3. Kirk didn't get thrown into the fire to early like rg3 did, even though rg3 was good from the start. Look at rodgers right now, he had plenty of time to work on his game before starting.

 

[Sharkinva]

I actually agree with this. Kirk has had plenty of time to develop. We might have groomed him better than rg3. Kirk didn't get thrown into the fire to early like rg3 did, even though rg3 was good from the start. Look at rodgers right now, he had plenty of time to work on his game before starting.

The Rogers comparison is a joke and here is why.

Rogers was playing understudy to a HOF QB and did so in an offense that remained the same over his entire four years of apprenticeship. Also he was being groomed to take over an offense that was suited to his skill set.

Kirk on the other hand at best was being taught to be a backup in a system completely opposite of his strengths. And he was NEVER I repeat NEVER being groomed to take over the team. So the idea that he was being groomed to be a starter at any point other than now is a complete and utter falacy thrown out by those who still believe for some reason that he who shall not be named should be starting. Kirk has been afforded neither the resources or the support that Rogers was.

Despite everything his only real issue at this point is that he is a system QB that still has issues with turnovers. But the team as a whole is far better off staying with Kirk for the rest of the season than wasting any more time on he who shall not be named.

 

[ehb5]

The Rogers comparison is a joke and here is why.

Rogers was playing understudy to a HOF QB and did so in an offense that remained the same over his entire four years of apprenticeship. Also he was being groomed to take over an offense that was suited to his skill set.

Kirk on the other hand at best was being taught to be a backup in a system completely opposite of his strengths. And he was NEVER I repeat NEVER being groomed to take over the team. So the idea that he was being groomed to be a starter at any point other than now is a complete and utter falacy thrown out by those who still believe for some reason that he who shall not be named should be starting. Kirk has been afforded neither the resources or the support that Rogers was.

Despite everything his only real issue at this point is that he is a system QB that still has issues with turnovers. But the team as a whole is far better off staying with Kirk for the rest of the season than wasting any more time on he who shall not be named.

I'm not saying Rodgers is the right comparison. But you can't tell me you can't learn as a backup. That's just supreme bs.

I'm also not saying cousins shouldn't start the rest of the year. I'm just saying we shouldn't pretend he hasn't been horrible and shouldn't hang on to the hope of him turning it around.

 

[j_y19]

I'll say it. He hasn't been horrible. John beck was horrible. KC is a young, inexperienced QB that has had a few good games, a few average games, and a handful of real stinkers. Like most young QBs. This is the problem with our fan base. Everyone wants immediate gratification. Unfortunately it doesn't work that way. Learning takes time, effort and usually a failure or two. To think that KC was getting anywhere near the attention, training, or quality reps of Robert over the first 3 years is ignorant about the ways of football and how teams prepare. KC may prove to be a bust as a starter. That is a real possibility. But I will take his ways over what Robert was offering any day. At least KC has shown the ability to move an NFL offense. He has now had all of 12 starts and you have already deemed him horrible. That's why we have constant turnover and upheaval. We never let anyone grow into the job.

 

[Sharkinva]

I'm not saying Rodgers is the right comparison. But you can't tell me you can't learn as a backup. That's just supreme bs.

I'm also not saying cousins shouldn't start the rest of the year. I'm just saying we shouldn't pretend he hasn't been horrible and shouldn't hang on to the hope of him turning it around.

Sure you can learn as a backup. But Im also saying that just because he was on the roster for 3 seasons, does not mean we should expect him not to have growing pains. He is having the same kinds of issues others in his situation have had. Look at Romo when he finally got the start. He was a turn over machine early on. And Im not pretending Kirk is the end all answer. But I am saying that most who are saying he is a lost cause are also those that are saying he who shall not be named should be starting. So yes, Kirk might not ever get there, but I think we have had a large enough sample size to know that the other option should not even be considered at this point.

 

[gkekoa]

The point is this...people always say give RG3 another year...he had three years to prove.

KC was a 4th rounder. A 4th round rookie taken the same year as the #2 overall pick won't get the coaching, especially when the #2 pick was a project. There are fundamental things KC could have improved on in the time RG3 was being coached. I do not believe KC is the answer but I do think he deserves more than 3 games as a supported starter to make that decision.

 

[martinez]

The Rogers comparison is a joke and here is why.

Rogers was playing understudy to a HOF QB and did so in an offense that remained the same over his entire four years of apprenticeship. Also he was being groomed to take over an offense that was suited to his skill set.

Kirk on the other hand at best was being taught to be a backup in a system completely opposite of his strengths. And he was NEVER I repeat NEVER being groomed to take over the team. So the idea that he was being groomed to be a starter at any point other than now is a complete and utter falacy thrown out by those who still believe for some reason that he who shall not be named should be starting. Kirk has been afforded neither the resources or the support that Rogers was.

Despite everything his only real issue at this point is that he is a system QB that still has issues with turnovers. But the team as a whole is far better off staying with Kirk for the rest of the season than wasting any more time on he who shall not be named.

I was going to say that rodgers was put in way way better position because of favre and stability and what not but I figured my point was already proven. I was thinking of qbs that got the luxury of siting a while before getting thrown into the fire. Rodgers was on my tv screen. Of course shark would be the one to shit on the example.
Point is kirk has had his time to be groomed behind the scenes which is a damn good situation compared to other qbs that are expected to instantly save a shit franchise.

 

[martinez]

Sure you can learn as a backup. But Im also saying that just because he was on the roster for 3 seasons, does not mean we should expect him not to have growing pains. He is having the same kinds of issues others in his situation have had. Look at Romo when he finally got the start. He was a turn over machine early on. And Im not pretending Kirk is the end all answer. But I am saying that most who are saying he is a lost cause are also those that are saying he who shall not be named should be starting. So yes, Kirk might not ever get there, but I think we have had a large enough sample size to know that the other option should not even be considered at this point.

Now this I agree with.

 

[Sharkinva]

I was going to say that rodgers was put in way way better position because of favre and stability and what not but I figured my point was already proven. I was thinking of qbs that got the luxury of siting a while before getting thrown into the fire. Rodgers was on my tv screen. Of course shark would be the one to shit on the example.
Point is kirk has had his time to be groomed behind the scenes which is a damn good situation compared to other qbs that are expected to instantly save a shit franchise.

But I also gave a perfect example in one Romo. He sat for 4 years as an unheralded backup. When he finally did get the starting job, he was all over the place for a good while. Hence the nick name Oh No Romo, or Tony Choko early in his career. He threw double digit INTs his first three years as THE named starter. He developed, got over most of his bad habits eventually. And while the team stuck with him, much to our dismay Dallas has in fact put together a solid team around him. So much so that now even with him on the shelf for half the season, they are still considered Division favorites.

 

[martinez]

But I also gave a perfect example in one Romo. He sat for 4 years as an unheralded backup. When he finally did get the starting job, he was all over the place for a good while. Hence the nick name Oh No Romo, or Tony Choko early in his career. He threw double digit INTs his first three years as THE named starter. He developed, got over most of his bad habits eventually. And while the team stuck with him, much to our dismay Dallas has in fact put together a solid team around him. So much so that now even with him on the shelf for half the season, they are still considered Division favorites.

We basically agree. He's not as much of a rookie as people make him out to be. He should start every game this season and re access in the off season. I haven't given up on him but I'm not counting on him either. Hopefully he can turn out as good as romo

 

[Sharkinva]

We basically agree. He's not as much of a rookie as people make him out to be. He should start every game this season and re access in the off season. I haven't given up on him but I'm not counting on him either. Hopefully he can turn out as good as romo

I dont need him to be as good as Romo right now, but if he continues to move the offense and can even cut the turn overs in half of his norm, this becomes a legit offense. I can live with that for damn sure

 

[gkekoa]

I dont need him to be as good as Romo right now, but if he continues to move the offense and can even cut the turn overs in half of his norm, this becomes a legit offense. I can live with that for damn sure

Let us not forget...no DJAX either.

 

[gkekoa]

I was going to say that rodgers was put in way way better position because of favre and stability and what not but I figured my point was already proven. I was thinking of qbs that got the luxury of siting a while before getting thrown into the fire. Rodgers was on my tv screen. Of course shark would be the one to shit on the example.
Point is kirk has had his time to be groomed behind the scenes which is a damn good situation compared to other qbs that are expected to instantly save a shit franchise.

Who is the last player we successfully groomed, let alone QB?

 

[j_y19]

Who is the last player we successfully groomed, let alone QB?

Keenan Robinson

 

[skinsdad62]

i would say keenon as well and maybe moses if he can keep it up riley would be a guy even though most dont like him

niles paul would be another and even chris thompson could be in that mix but maybe its a stretch because he was injured

 

[SoCalWizFan]

Who is the last player we successfully groomed, let alone QB?

Yep - unfortunately true for the most part in the recent past. On the bright side - I believe that you are seeing this grooming now with several players on the O line. As time goes on (& SM places his mark on this team) I believe that you will see this across the board. It may be Gruden's staff or someone else - I don't really think it matters since eventually the rt coaching staff will be in place unlike those that existed in the previous circus environments.

 

[gkekoa]

Yep - unfortunately true for the most part in the recent past. On the bright side - I believe that you are seeing this grooming now with several players on the O line. As time goes on (& SM places his mark on this team) I believe that you will see this across the board. It may be Gruden's staff or someone else - I don't really think it matters since eventually the rt coaching staff will be in place unlike those that existed in the previous circus environments.

Yep and people wanted to cut Morgan Moses...oh he is a bum because he can't win the starting job in year 1.

People are impatient. As for Keenan, we weren't grooming him...we were waiting for him to get healthy.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

Yep and people wanted to cut Morgan Moses...oh he is a bum because he can't win the starting job in year 1.

People are impatient. As for Keenan, we weren't grooming him...we were waiting for him to get healthy.

I am with you on this one. Cheering for a rebuilding team is not easy, but fans have to understand that this is likely the correct approach. It may not work out in the end, but it won't be because they are employing the wrong approach (unlike many times in the recent past where most things were geared primarily for the upcoming season).

I am getting used to not becoming too angry with the results of individual games nor mistakes being made since I truly see hope that this team can be a true contender in a few years assuming that they don't revert to their old ways anytime soon. Fans need to look beyond this season.

 

[Stymietee]

Wouldn't we all be cheering louder and be a lot more confident if Washington had a system like this one in place? The results speak for themselves. I'm not sure what everyone else is referring to, but this is the comparison that I speak of when comparing to Aaron Rodgers. Please pay attention to what was worked on during the "Quarterbacking schools" and the attitude that he originally had going to them.



"Though Rodgers played very little in his rookie season, he ran the scout team during practice.[44] His job was to mimic opponents' schemes for the defense for the game the following week. Rodgers said this was critical to his success, and that those were his game reps.[45] The defense and scouts often complained that he was practicing too hard, and at one point asked him to tone it down.[44] He stated that he had probably "rubbed people the wrong way" with how hard he practiced.[44] Wide receiver Donald Driver, commented that Rodgers took "every scout-team possession like it was the last possession of his life."[45]

"After the Packers' losing season of Rodgers' rookie year, head coach Mike Sherman was fired and replaced by current head coach Mike McCarthy.[46][47] Rodgers was then placed in McCarthy's "Quarterback school" for six hours a day several times a week.[48] This focused on working on Rodgers' motor skills such as hand-eye coordination, finger dexterity, and mechanics.[44] McCarthy also worked on Rodgers' release point, moving it from right beside the ear hole of his helmet to further below it, to give him a smoother release.[37] Rodgers was also instructed to lower his body fat ratio from 15 percent to 12 percent.[44] Rodgers was resistant to the changes at first but later commented that he thought they were for the better.[48] During practice in 11-on-11 drills, Rodgers completed 62.7% of his passes with seven interceptions, and McCarthy commented that "He's getting better" and that "You're looking at a guy who's going to mature. He's got athletic ability that people still haven't seen."[37]