Redskins' Kirk Cousins: Still far apart on extension terms

[j_y19]

Again, you just don't get it. A play lasts for 8 seconds and a game is 60 minutes. There is no such thing as a game winning play and they do not trump everything else.

You say games are won and lost on single plays at the end of the game. Tell that to the Broncos and Doug Williams.

So, when the Dallas Cowboys scored 48 points against Denver in 2013, it was the Denver defense that won the game because they intercepted Tony Romo with 2:04 left in the game? Dallas' offense had 522 yards of offense and Denver had 517 yards of offense. Romo threw 5 TDs and over 500 yards of passing but that Denver defense won the game? There was one punt in the entire game but it was a defensive contest apparently. Sit down and use your brain. Games are not won and lost on a single play.

I will say this...the defense sealed a couple of games for us. They won one game for us last season, Baltimore. Those big plays you are talking about though are far less impressive than a good game of defense. As a matter of fact, big plays are usually luck.

As dean has alluded, we have had this same argument. I used the term game saving plays when the defense sealed the victory at the end. But they, by themselves, were by no means game winning plays.

 

[deanpet21]

Again, you just don't get it. A play lasts for 8 seconds and a game is 60 minutes. There is no such thing as a game winning play and they do not trump everything else.

You say games are won and lost on single plays at the end of the game. Tell that to the Broncos and Doug Williams.

So, when the Dallas Cowboys scored 48 points against Denver in 2013, it was the Denver defense that won the game because they intercepted Tony Romo with 2:04 left in the game? Dallas' offense had 522 yards of offense and Denver had 517 yards of offense. Romo threw 5 TDs and over 500 yards of passing but that Denver defense won the game? There was one punt in the entire game but it was a defensive contest apparently. Sit down and use your brain. Games are not won and lost on a single play.

I will say this...the defense sealed a couple of games for us. They won one game for us last season, Baltimore. Those big plays you are talking about though are far less impressive than a good game of defense. As a matter of fact, big plays are usually luck.

NO such thing as a game winning play?? LMFAO. wow.

 

[deanpet21]

I know exactly what a game winning play is. A fallacy. There are over 100 plays in every game. Every one of them have meaning and an impact on the outcome. An INT for a pic six in the first quarter is just as impactful as a fumble recovery to stop a final drive. In fact I would argue that the INT is more impactful as the defense did something that it wasn't expected to do. Score. Yet you only see one play. You still can't see the bigger picture.

No you don't.

 

[skinsdad62]

wait , dean the great one has decided what game winning plays are and when they happen and hence you cant debate that . so sayeth the great one

 

[j_y19]

wait , dean the great one has decided what game winning plays are and when they happen and hence you cant debate that . so sayeth the great one

Ah, yes. To be young and naive.

 

[deanpet21]

wait , dean the great one has decided what game winning plays are and when they happen and hence you cant debate that . so sayeth the great one

A Game winning play is the result of that play that wins the game. Simple as that. IF the game winning play wasn't made then the game would still be in doubt.

 

[skinsdad62]

A Game winning play is the result of that play that wins the game. Simple as that. IF the game winning play wasn't made then the game would still be in doubt.

a game winning play can happen at anytime not just at the end of games , now we all know you are acting silly with this in your lame effort to bring up a shaky defense

fact is we dont sniff 8 wins without KC we are a 4 win team

 

[j_y19]

A Game winning play is the result of that play that wins the game. Simple as that. IF the game winning play wasn't made then the game would still be in doubt.

Ohhhh. Now I see. So it could be a one yard run for a first down that extends a drive to run out the clock? Or a short pass to do the same? If that is your definition, then KC has had multiple game winning plays. Hell, he should be in the HOF with all of the game winning plays he has had.

 

[skinsdad62]

jy , dean seems to be the king of the double standard , if the defense "seals " a win with a play then the defense won the game , if the offense gets the end of game first down they get no credit

dean 95% of the fans , pundits , analysts , or anyone with more then a days worth of experience with football would call our defense straight up PUTRID , that means they stink , are awful , they are no good .

only a moron would argue they were good or a person with an agenda , now which one might you be ? i am thinking agenda . i am thinking its agenda driven because no one can be that ignorant and say they know football

 

[deanpet21]

jy , dean seems to be the king of the double standard , if the defense "seals " a win with a play then the defense won the game , if the offense gets the end of game first down they get no credit

dean 95% of the fans , pundits , analysts , or anyone with more then a days worth of experience with football would call our defense straight up PUTRID , that means they stink , are awful , they are no good .

only a moron would argue they were good or a person with an agenda , now which one might you be ? i am thinking agenda . i am thinking its agenda driven because no one can be that ignorant and say they know football

I never said the defense was good. I always have given credit to the offense. 4th qtr plays mean something. you guys totally discount this. Fine. When you watch the two Giants games, the 2 Eagles games, Minn, Cle, and Bal games and come away saying the defense was putrid. That is a problem my friend.

 

[j_y19]

I never said the defense was good. I always have given credit to the offense. 4th qtr plays mean something. you guys totally discount this. Fine.

Dean no one has ever said 4th qtr plays don't matter. What we are saying is that games are not won or lost on one play. Football is a chess match and every move matters and has an effect on every move after it. To say that the defense won a game because they made a 4th qtr stop is a huge over simplification of what happened throughout that entire game.

 

[skinsdad62]

I never said the defense was good. I always have given credit to the offense. 4th qtr plays mean something. you guys totally discount this. Fine. When you watch the two Giants games, the 2 Eagles games, Minn, Cle, and Bal games and come away saying the defense was putrid. That is a problem my friend.

i have shown box scores that say otherwise

 

[Sharkinva]

only a moron would argue they were good or a person with an agenda , now which one might you be ? i am thinking agenda . i am thinking its agenda driven because no one can be that ignorant and say they know football

You know, I dont even really have a problem if some one has an agenda. But at least be straight up about it is all some of us are asking. If you dont like the guy, and hope we dont sign him long term... man up and own it.

If the real reason you dont want to sign him long term is because you have the lottery ticket mentality and really think we will easily find a better QB in next years draft... man up and own it.

As frustrated as some of these guys seem with the concept of signing Kirk long term, you would think just coming out and saying it would actually be some how liberating.

 

[skinsdad62]

cleveland defense allowed 26 1st downs and 380 yds vs winless browns with cody kessler , they gave up 5.8 yds per carry for 163 yds

giants game 1 defense allowed 403 yrds and 28 1st downs and 5.7 yds per rush

offense put up 29 points

ravens game pretty much a defensive win

eagles game one offense jumped out 14-0 , put up 493 yds so i hardly classify this as a defensive only win . the played a division 2 rookie in his 5th pro game

minn pretty much a team win with smith making some big plays on defense however the offense put up 388 yds and 23 1st downs
eagles game 2 defense allowed rookie qb 383 yds of offense , 24 1st downs 36 minutes time of possession
offense scored winning TD with 1.54 remaining in the game

giants 2 gave up 332 yds of offense and 35 minutes time of possession however the defnse played well enough to win

those are the facts

 

[gkekoa]

NO such thing as a game winning play?? LMFAO. wow.

Show me a single play that ever won a game.

A Game winning play is the result of that play that wins the game. Simple as that. IF the game winning play wasn't made then the game would still be in doubt.

So a kneel down is a game winning play?

The game is always in doubt until the time is gone.

You also never answered my question about a specific game. When Denver intercepted Romo after giving up 48 points, 500 yards passing, and 5 TDs, did Denver's defense win that game? After all, they stepped up at the end and the offense only scored 51 points.

 

[Breed]

IM still wondering how,

You wandering, likely in confusion, surprises no one, but no worries, Buttercup. I'll get you squared away again. What's the problem here?

We were #3 in total offense

Total Offense = Total Yards. Why were the Skins ranked 3rd? They/Kirk were good, sometimes very good, at moving the ball up and down the field.

12 in scoring offense which meant we scored about 3 points less per game than the Patriots.

Ah, no. That's not really what that means at all. Buttercup. Though again, I'm not surprised that you would break it down in an ass backwards, not relating it at all to a single mothafuckin pertinent point.

Those less than 3 points you've repeatedly tried to dismiss as no big deal. Was the difference between being a top 3 scoring offense which the Pats were. And being a slightly above average scoring offense which the Redskins were as the 12th best team in the NFL at scoring offense.

Another reasonable indication from the disparity in the Skins total off ranking and scoring offense ranking is The Skins moved the ball consistently, but settled for FGs instead of getting TDs too many times once in the opponents red zone.

Had a historically bad defense.

How so?

And yet the real question is still... is the QB good enough.

That's just one question among several.

 

[Sharkinva]

You wandering, likely in confusion, surprises no one, but no worries, Buttercup. I'll get you squared away again. What's the problem here?



Total Offense = Total Yards. Why were the Skins ranked 3rd? They/Kirk were good, sometimes very good, at moving the ball up and down the field.



Ah, no. That's not really what that means at all. Buttercup. Though again, I'm not surprised that you would break it down in an ass backwards, not relating it at all to a single mothafuckin pertinent point.

Those less than 3 points you've repeatedly tried to dismiss as no big deal. Was the difference between being a top 3 scoring offense which the Pats were. And being a slightly above average scoring offense which the Redskins were as the 12th best team in the NFL at scoring offense.

Another reasonable indication from the disparity in the Skins total off ranking and scoring offense ranking is The Skins moved the ball consistently, but settled for FGs instead of getting TDs too many times once in the opponents red zone.



How so?



That's just one question among several.

The Redskins’ third-and-long defense is bad. Historically bad.


Read much Breed? Like I said, historically bad defense.

We get it, you dont like the idea of signing Kirk long term.

 

[deanpet21]

Show me a single play that ever won a game.




So a kneel down is a game winning play?

The game is always in doubt until the time is gone.

You also never answered my question about a specific game. When Denver intercepted Romo after giving up 48 points, 500 yards passing, and 5 TDs, did Denver's defense win that game? After all, they stepped up at the end and the offense only scored 51 points.

I already stated many plays that decided the outcome of the game in the 4th qtr and on the last drive of the game. If you don't warrant these type of plays then I don't know what to tell you.

 

[Sharkinva]

Derek Carr negotiations could have major impact on Kirk Cousins contract

 

[deanpet21]

Derek Carr negotiations could have major impact on Kirk Cousins contract

lol. I knew this was coming. Here we go with the stats again. Of course Carr is going to wait if KC signs a LTD before 7/15. b/c his agent knows that he is worth more than KC. So they will play the waiting game. Now once the 7/15 deadline passes maybe Carr could get a deal done. Then, like I said KC will play out the season and we will revisit this next year.

This is why KC will not resign right now b/c he is going to wait for Carr to sign his deal. If Carr doenst sign this offseason then we will go through this same thing next year. Now the wildcard in all of this is Danny. If Danny panics and gives KC a huge deal before 7/15 then Carr will point to this deal and say I want more.

Now if all three QB's Stafford, Carr, and KC become Fa in 2018 the only way KC makes more money then Carr would be if KC has a huge season and takes us to the NFC Championship game or SuperBowl. Meanwhile if Carr takes the Raiders to the AFC Championship game or Super Bowl his contract should still trump KC's. Stafford should not make the playoffs this year so he could be the lowest of the three regarding the money in the contract. Plus I think he is the oldest out of all of them.