Mike Vanderjagt

[Irn-Bru]

For what it's worth, Suisham sent his first kickoff in the scrimmage about 4 yards deep into the endzone. His next kickoff went out of bounds around the 5 (somewhere around there, from what I recall). It could have been the same thing, with Danny Smith asking him to angle it.

I guess I'll panic a bit more if it happens more than once over the next 3 games. We'll also get to see more work by Shaun on field goals, although I agree with Fios that he really should have the benefit of the doubt from fans, given his performance last year.

[The Hogster]

............

[The Hogster]

I'll take Suisham over Vandy in a heart beat.

Suisham missed a kick... so what? He missed his first one last year too... then didn't miss another all season.

It's not like the guy tanked the kick completely, or that it was a chip shot... he hit the upright from 47 yards out, and it had the distance to be good from 57.

If Shaun starts missing FGs from 35 yards, THEN maybe I'd be worried enough to bring in a pariah like Vanderjagt, but otherwise, i don't see a problem.

I didn't like that he kicked one kickoff out of bounds, but how do we know that SINCE IT'S PRESEASON, Danny smith didn't have him try angle his kick? Regardless... his other kickoffs sailed all the way to the goal line - that's 10-15 yards further than Redskin kickers have been kicking KO for a few years.

I think we're fine with Suisham personally, but if we were to make a change, the last guy I would want is Vanderjagt.

I don't suppose anyone actually considered that Suisham beat the HEAVILY FAVORED, HEAVILY TOUTED Vanderjagt out of the job in Dallas last year did they? just asking...

Apparently no one is reading the post before answering. No one is 'abandoning' Suisham which I mentioned several times. The concern is that he is the only Kicker on the roster and he is unproven.

Additionally, I don't know what football coach would ask you to kick it out of bounds. Asking him to 'angle' the kick has nothing to do with it being "preseason' in all caps. Kickers in the NFL should be able to make a directional kick at any time of the year without shanking it out of bounds. Not sure what point that was intended to prove.

Let's try this one piece at a time:

Coach: Hey, Shaun, try for a corner kick on this one, if you could consistently kick to a corner, that would be a HUGE advantage on special teams since we would, essentially, only have to cover half the field.

Shaun: OK

*** Suisham sends ball in direction of corner where out-of-bounds also happens, coincidentally, to be located. Ball lands out of bounds. ***

Shaun: Whoops, my bad

Coach: Don't sweat it, just wanted to try something in THE FIRST GAME OF THE PRESEASON BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT IT EXISTS FOR.

How is 9-for-10 last season "unproven"? Isn't that, at the very least, somewhat proven?

Yeah, I'm sure it happened exactly like that. I've never heard an exchange like that at any time playing football, whether practice or a game.

I don't know if you guys read the posts, but no one is panicking in Pre-season...some of you guys just blindly support things as if they are not even up for discussion. Apparently that is why people on here talk about the same tired topics all the time, because whenever someone throws something else out there, people act like they know it all and that the subject isn't even up for debate.

The 'its only pre-season' argument is an excuse. We all likened our 0-4 preseason start last year to the Superbowl season. I'm a die hard Skins fan, and optimistic to a fault, however, I am also not scared to say that

1) Suisham's ability remains to be seen....and competition CAN"T HURT. I guess that's a tough concept to grasp. That simply bringing in competition does not mean you are shaking up the entire roster. It's called COMPETITION...with the eye towards bringing out the best in each player and making the best decision for the team. We have competition at every position except kicker....that position just so happened to account for two miscues....but I guess thats not enough to justify a DISCUSSION on a message board.

But, hey, I guess that's what PRE SEASON is for right...? Or not.

[Fios]

Yes, well, it's awesome that your personal experience can automatically rule out every single hypothetical scenario, that's a tremendous power. I'm not "blindly" supporting anything, you suggested it would be almost inconceivable to have a guy try to angle his kicks, I disagree. I didn't see an 0-4 pre-season as a start to a SuperBowl season, I just didn't see it as a sign the team would collapse the way it did. Not certain how you get to "we all" either, I don't profess to remember what "everyone" thought. Not once did I say competition was a bad thing, you've invented that straw man. What I am saying is this: I am perfectly comfortable with Suisham as the kicker at this point. I reserve the right to change my mind if he tanks but I have a solid feeling about the guy's ability to be consistent. You posted a suggestion that the team go after Vanderwhatever and that has been debated, that's exactly what a discussion is for. You, apparently, do not want discussion, you want agreement.

[Irn-Bru]

I don't know if you guys read the posts, but no one is panicking in Pre-season...some of you guys just blindly support things as if they are not even up for discussion. Apparently that is why people on here talk about the same tired topics all the time, because whenever someone throws something else out there, people act like they know it all and that the subject isn't even up for debate.

So you're saying that the Suisham supporters don't read your posts, but this is how you characterize the debate at THN? I think a more effective strategy would be to generate debate, not simply claiming that the other person isn't listening.

I don't see your generalization of THN as accurate, although the theme of "you just have blind support" is a very familiar one around the board. Support = blind support. I say, let's talk things out, perhaps without as much sarcasm, and see what happens. . .

The 'its only pre-season' argument is an excuse. We all likened our 0-4 preseason start last year to the Superbowl season.

It can be a legitimate point in situations like this, where special teams or other experimental plays are concerned, so I don't buy this counter-claim.

1) Suisham's ability remains to be seen....

Except for last year, when he hit 8 in a row in varying situations and circumstances. He also was pretty good on kickoffs, as I recall.

and competition CAN"T HURT.

It can hurt when you use a roster spot on a throw-away kicker that could be used on, say, another thin position such as RB: in this case, Mason. A kicker was released to make room for Mason (either that or a TE, another thin spot), who is now pushing Blaylock for that last RB spot. Our injuries are preventing the Skins from bringing in another kicker, and they may even do so before the end of training camp / pre-season.

I guess that's a tough concept to grasp. That simply bringing in competition does not mean you are shaking up the entire roster. It's called COMPETITION...with the eye towards bringing out the best in each player and making the best decision for the team. We have competition at every position except kicker....that position just so happened to account for two miscues....but I guess thats not enough to justify a DISCUSSION on a message board.

(1) You have to admit that this is a straw man argument, since no one on THN that I know of has ever said "competition isn't good for a player!" It's not clear what you are trying to accomplish with this paragraph, as far as reasoned arguments go.
(2) Do you see how sarcasm and talking down to others can hamper the discussion that you allegedly are pining for?
(3) We're having a discussion. . .if you want one.

[UK Skins Fan]

Irn-Bru wrote:

(2) Do you see how sarcasm and talking down to others can hamper the discussion that you allegedly are pining for?

Look here, young fella, sarcasm and talking down to people are perfectly reasonable debating techniques. Now, run along and play with your dollies.

As for the theme of the thread, I see no sensible reason for bringing in Vanderjagt. There's no way that Suisham won't start this season as our kicker, and I think bringing in "competition" is just a false idea. His performance on Saturday should hardly set the alarm bells ringing, and I think our kicking situation is healthier than it's been in years.

[SkinsFreak]

I'll take Suisham over Vandy in a heart beat.

Suisham missed a kick... so what? He missed his first one last year too... then didn't miss another all season.

It's not like the guy tanked the kick completely, or that it was a chip shot... he hit the upright from 47 yards out, and it had the distance to be good from 57.

If Shaun starts missing FGs from 35 yards, THEN maybe I'd be worried enough to bring in a pariah like Vanderjagt, but otherwise, i don't see a problem.

I didn't like that he kicked one kickoff out of bounds, but how do we know that SINCE IT'S PRESEASON, Danny smith didn't have him try angle his kick? Regardless... his other kickoffs sailed all the way to the goal line - that's 10-15 yards further than Redskin kickers have been kicking KO for a few years.

I think we're fine with Suisham personally, but if we were to make a change, the last guy I would want is Vanderjagt.

I don't suppose anyone actually considered that Suisham beat the HEAVILY FAVORED, HEAVILY TOUTED Vanderjagt out of the job in Dallas last year did they? just asking...

I am happy that Suisham got his shanks out early. Just like last year, when he missed the first kick then made 8 straight. I was also impressed that he kicked routinely into the end zone on kick offs, and his 47 yard attempt may have hit the upright, but he had the distance to make that kick from 60.

Guess I should have looked to see if someone had posted my thoughts word-for-word again.

My thoughts exactly. Yes, the ball bounced off the upright and missed, but from 47 yards, it hit the very top of the upright. That's the first thing that entered my mind when that happened.

[The Hogster]

I don't know if you guys read the posts, but no one is panicking in Pre-season...some of you guys just blindly support things as if they are not even up for discussion. Apparently that is why people on here talk about the same tired topics all the time, because whenever someone throws something else out there, people act like they know it all and that the subject isn't even up for debate.

So you're saying that the Suisham supporters don't read your posts, but this is how you characterize the debate at THN? I think a more effective strategy would be to generate debate, not simply claiming that the other person isn't listening.

I don't see your generalization of THN as accurate, although the theme of "you just have blind support" is a very familiar one around the board. Support = blind support. I say, let's talk things out, perhaps without as much sarcasm, and see what happens. . .

The 'its only pre-season' argument is an excuse. We all likened our 0-4 preseason start last year to the Superbowl season.

It can be a legitimate point in situations like this, where special teams or other experimental plays are concerned, so I don't buy this counter-claim.

1) Suisham's ability remains to be seen....

Except for last year, when he hit 8 in a row in varying situations and circumstances. He also was pretty good on kickoffs, as I recall.

and competition CAN"T HURT.

It can hurt when you use a roster spot on a throw-away kicker that could be used on, say, another thin position such as RB: in this case, Mason. A kicker was released to make room for Mason (either that or a TE, another thin spot), who is now pushing Blaylock for that last RB spot. Our injuries are preventing the Skins from bringing in another kicker, and they may even do so before the end of training camp / pre-season.

I guess that's a tough concept to grasp. That simply bringing in competition does not mean you are shaking up the entire roster. It's called COMPETITION...with the eye towards bringing out the best in each player and making the best decision for the team. We have competition at every position except kicker....that position just so happened to account for two miscues....but I guess thats not enough to justify a DISCUSSION on a message board.

(1) You have to admit that this is a straw man argument, since no one on THN that I know of has ever said "competition isn't good for a player!" It's not clear what you are trying to accomplish with this paragraph, as far as reasoned arguments go.
(2) Do you see how sarcasm and talking down to others can hamper the discussion that you allegedly are pining for?
(3) We're having a discussion. . .if you want one.

I would love to have a 'discussion'. I asked whether there was

1) something about Vanderjagt that has kept him off of NFL rosters across the board and
2) i asked whether, if he was just a jerk and (i.e. not in the substance abuse program..." first offenses are kept from the media")...would it be worth to bring in an 85 % kicker...PERIOD.

The reason why this isn't a 'discussion' with some people is that people make the logical jump and assume that you are "panicking" in pre-season "all caps" by asking a purely football related question. That is ridiculous...that people can't see the entire continuum of evaluation (from a fan's perspective)

Asking whether we should only carry Suisham right now is a legitimate question that does not connote "panick" or "giving up" on the guy. However, people paint you with that brush just by posing the question.

I asked a similar question about John Hall, two seasons ago...and I got bashed because I suggested that we cut him and just go with Novak, since everytime we tweaked his hammy...we ended up bringing in Novak or someone from the UK to kick for us.

If we had a proven veteran kicker who happened to shank one out of bounds then I could see people using the language that suggests being fickle.

However, we have a young, ex- Cowboy kicker who kicked 81 percent last year on a whopping 9 FG's. He started this year by kicking one off the upright and another kickoff out of bounds. It is pretty silly to excuse the kickoff out of bounds by speculating he was 'asked to directional kick'. Even if I buy into that rhetoric, it still seems strange that we are sooo comfortable with a guy who can't directional kick.

Ever occur to you that perhaps he is a tad 'complacent' knowing that we have no other options? Would it ignite or motivate someone to know that a veteran with something to prove may have something to prove?

These are valid pre-season questions, that in no way suggest that I am in panick mode. That's my beef with some of the posters on here. Everything is not black and white all the time. You can ask a question without jumping ship.

I am not one of the kill Brunnel posters, nor am I one of the whiners and complainers about our draft picks, etc.

However, if you are suggesting that competition is not good, you're drunk.

Every coach in the NFL plays the card saying that we want 'competition' at every position and the best players will play. Well if you have no competition, how can you be certain he is the best player? I hope he is.

BTW, I don't need agreement. As of right now, 31 to 11 people believe that competition is actually a good thing. Go figure.

[Countertrey]

However, if you are suggesting that competition is not good, you're drunk.

I don't think he suggested that... what he suggested is:
1. The coaches are comfortable with Suisham, and
2. The team needed bodies in other positions more than they needed someone to push Suisham. There are a limited number of roster spots. Something had to give. There will not be competition for Suisham unless and until the injury situations in several other areas are cleared up.


For the record, your 31 to 11 strawman is just that... I am one of the 11. The question was not "should Suisham have competion in camp?" It was 'Mike Vanderjagt... "Should we bring him in for a Tryout?". You want to discuss, discuss... but you'd help your cred if you loose the attempt to distort the facts.

[The Hogster]

However, if you are suggesting that competition is not good, you're drunk.

I don't think he suggested that... what he suggested is:
1. The coaches are comfortable with Suisham, and
2. The team needed bodies in other positions more than they needed someone to push Suisham. There are a limited number of roster spots. Something had to give. There will not be competition for Suisham unless and until the injury situations in several other areas are cleared up.


For the record, your 31 to 11 strawman is just that... I am one of the 11. The question was not "should Suisham have competion in camp?" It was 'Mike Vanderjagt... "Should we bring him in for a Tryout?". You want to discuss, discuss... but you'd help your cred if you loose the attempt to distort the facts.

Whatever dude. I'm not distorting the facts. Anyone can read the thread. You're right, that was my question. However, posing the question doesn't mean that I am panicking. Re-read the first post to get my drift. Asking whether we need competition is not panick.

[skins#1fan]

whoever says no is crazy...we have not had a kicker in the past 5 years that can consistantly kick within even 40 yards. We all sit on the edge of our seat on 30 yard field goal attempts and dont act like you dont because you know its true! We have to suffer and watch our kickoffs land on the 10 almost 75 percent of the time which is terrible. Why not some competion atleast! Our kicking game alone cost us atleast 3 games a year! This is a major problem especially the way our team is set up with a solid defense and running game. We are based around a close game and field position!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Irn-Bru]

Asking whether we should only carry Suisham right now is a legitimate question that does not connote "panick" or "giving up" on the guy. However, people paint you with that brush just by posing the question.

These are valid pre-season questions, that in no way suggest that I am in panick mode. That's my beef with some of the posters on here. Everything is not black and white all the time. You can ask a question without jumping ship.

Well, I think the whole business of "panic", as well as calling people blind in their optimism, is more a result of the tone of conversation than the positions themselves.

Your question of whether Vanderjagt would make for good competition for Suisham assumes that the Skins should seriously consider replacing Suisham — this must be the case because right now roster spots are at a premium at camp. BossHog replied to that assumption by defending Suisham as a kicker: in other words, he was rejecting the idea that Vanderjagt would make for good competition because Suisham is doing well enough that Vanderjagt wouldn't be a viable replacement. (Better a Suisham without competition than a Vanderjagt who gets the nod).

If there is nothing wrong with Suisham, then it follows that he doesn't necessarily need competition, or rather that we don't need competition there at the expense of some other position. (Do you think the Ravens have seriously considered alternatives at kicker over the last decade, for example?)

I think that the posts that followed were an example of 'talking past each other,' as you took BH's post to mean "we don't need competition, period" (which he's clearly not saying) and others took what you were saying to mean "we may need to replace Suisham" or "Suisham won't be a good kicker" or something like that. At no point did anyone say competition for Suisham was a bad thing (or not a good thing), and at no point did you say that the Skins should drop Suisham and get a 'real' kicker.

However, if you are suggesting that competition is not good, you're drunk.

Every coach in the NFL plays the card saying that we want 'competition' at every position and the best players will play. Well if you have no competition, how can you be certain he is the best player? I hope he is.

BTW, I don't need agreement. As of right now, 31 to 11 people believe that competition is actually a good thing. Go figure.

Man, you're really harping on this point, when no one disagrees with you. Think about it this way:

Suppose your team has 5 places where you need training-camp style competition — that is, bringing in some no name to keep the presumed starter on his toes. However, due to your current roster and NFL rules, you are only able to sign 3 more players. No matter how you slice it, two positions of need will go without competition. (How would you like it if I equated your desire for a kicker to mean that you didn't want competition at WR? 'What, don't you think competition is good? Obviously not. . .')

The question was never "Is competition actually a good thing?", it was some form of "Should getting Suisham competition be more of a priority than X (bringing in bodies to try to address the o-line or d-line defficiencies; keeping all 3-4 of those WRs, only one of whom will get the last roster spot; keeping an extra TE due to our draft pick's groin injury; keeping both Blaylock and Mason due to competition at RB and Portis' injury. . .), and if so, is Vanderjagt a good candidate for competition?"

[BossHog]

I would love to have a 'discussion'. I asked whether there was

1) something about Vanderjagt that has kept him off of NFL rosters across the board and
2) i asked whether, if he was just a jerk and (i.e. not in the substance abuse program..." first offenses are kept from the media")...would it be worth to bring in an 85 % kicker...PERIOD.

Read almost any article about Vanderjagt written in the last 18-24 months - he's been labeled a pariah, a locker room cancer... a real team negative... and that's on top of being absolutely below average on the field itself the last time he played (he went 13-for-18 )... and we all remember the 39-yarder that he didn't kick against Washington that resulted in the infamous Sean Taylor turnover.

"I'm not a real big Colts fan right now, unfortunately. I just don't see us getting better. Coach Dungy, he's just a mild-mannered guy. He doesn't get too excited, he doesn't get too down and I don't think that works either." -- Mike Vanderjagt, Indianapolis Colts

Awesome prediction.

In 2006, he started shanking kicks in the pre-season (those misses aren't included in the statistic above). He missed kicks of 32 and 33 yards (both wide right) in overtime against the Vikings.

His 'crowning glory' was when he missed two of two kicks against his former team - they were both wide right too.

And let's talk about the other aspect of a kicker's job -- kickoffs. Mike Vanderjagt was, is, and probably always will be one of the league's worst. In fact, even when he was in Indy they tried numerous different kickoff specialists. Dallas let him do the kickoffs last year, and were rewarded with an average of 57 or so yards - the only kicker in the league to average less than 60 yards a kickoff I believe.

Accuse me of whatever you like. My opinion was based on the fact that you asked if I thought that a 37-year old locker room cancer that can't kickoff and has stunk the joint out for the better part of a couple of seasons, was worth bringing in for a kicking competition, and I don't think he is.

I said at the very end of my post - that I didn't care if they brought a kicker in for competition - I just didn't think it should be Vanderjagt.

And I still don't.

For the record, I asked Suisham specifically about developing any relationship in Dallas with Vanderjagt (being that they're both Canadians) - it was obvious from Shaun's reaction that he was picking and choosing his words. Shaun was very polite (and politically correct) and on record said, 'No... but everything was fine.' (with a smile)

Nice young man.

I've been watching Vanderjagt since he played in the CFL... he's just always been a bit of a jerk, and the longer he played in the league, the more and more arrogant and self-centered he became. To be honest, as a Canadian, I'd like to see Mike humbled by the situation and respond with a turnaround.

I just don't want to see the Redskins be the one who gives him the shot - because usually a leopard can't change it's spots.

[Irn-Bru]

"I'm not a real big Colts fan right now, unfortunately. I just don't see us getting better. Coach Dungy, he's just a mild-mannered guy. He doesn't get too excited, he doesn't get too down and I don't think that works either." -- Mike Vanderjagt, Indianapolis Colts

Awesome prediction.

Well, you have to admit that, aside from the Superbowl Championship, the playoff appearances, and the 12-4 winning records, Vanderjagt was basically right.

[Chris Luva Luva]

LOL, that fool actually said that?

[Mursilis]

I just find it extremely curious that his phone hasn't seemed to be ringing. For a guy who had such a great kicking percentage, why hasn't he gotten picked up yet?

[everydayAskinsday]

I just find it extremely curious that his phone hasn't seemed to be ringing. For a guy who had such a great kicking percentage, why hasn't he gotten picked up yet?

its gotta be his attitude IMO.. coaches usually call around and talk to each other about players to find out what kinda player and person they are and he must not be getting any love

[JansenFan]

He was great in Indy, but at least half and usually more of his games were indoors. Makes it a little easier on a kicker. When he got outdoors, he seemed to have lost his confidence.

[UK Skins Fan]

...we ended up bringing in Novak or someone from the UK to kick for us.

My God, just imagine it.

[Countertrey]

Hogster, you said:

I'm not distorting the facts. Anyone can read the thread

Yes, they can. And, most will see your straw man.

You close with...

However, posing the question doesn't mean that I am panicking. Re-read the first post to get my drift. Asking whether we need competition is not panick.

What the heck are you reading???

[Countertrey]

...we ended up bringing in Novak or someone from the UK to kick for us.

My God, just imagine it.

As long as they are Scottish, we'll be ok.

[The Hogster]

Hogster, you said:

I'm not distorting the facts. Anyone can read the thread

Yes, they can. And, most will see your straw man.

You close with...

However, posing the question doesn't mean that I am panicking. Re-read the first post to get my drift. Asking whether we need competition is not panick.

What the heck are you reading???

Uh...what?

-Geico Caveman

[Countertrey]

Exactly!

[The Hogster]

Exactly!

LOL. Your post didn't make sense. You asked rhetorically, "what am I reading"? But you don't specify what you're referring to. The thread is 3 pages long...a little clarification would make it all make sense..

[Countertrey]

Apparently, there is a problem, but it's not with me. READ THE FOLLOWING>>>

You close with...
Quote:
However, posing the question doesn't mean that I am panicking. Re-read the first post to get my drift. Asking whether we need competition is not panick.


What the heck are you reading???

You can see that I included what I was referring to... The initial "quote" is yours. It was written in response to my initial post. Where, in my post, do I suggest you have "panicked"? Hence "What the heck are you reading?"

I'll refrain from insulting you... you should be doing that yourself.