grampi wrote:I don't know where this "improvement" in RG3 is as I've seen little to no improvement in his play. I want to to see him back to 100% and playing like he was last year before his injury, but is it worth scrapping the entire season just to find out IF he's gonna come around this year? He may not. The season isn't over yet, and I'd hate to see the entire season wasted when we've got a backup as good as Cousins sitting on the bench. Is he good enough to get the team a SB win...probably not, but I certainly think he's good enough to get to the play-offs, which RG3 is not, not playing the way he's playing right now anyway. I'd say if RG3 isn't playing markedly better in the OAK game, then it's time to start Cousins after the bye...
I'd say you'd have to give Griffin until at least after the bye before there are legitimate calls for him to be benched.
Nah, I think 4 games is enough to tell if RG's gonna come around this year or not...if the team gets to 0-5 or 0-6 the season is basically over at that point...right now it's still savalgable...
Barring injury, there is zero chance Griffin takes a seat. Griffin is the quarterback and rightfully so. We saw Cousins in one full game, he played great, but so did Matt Flynn and Kevin Kolb early on. If we play Cousins because of injury I have confidence in him, but there is nothing good about benching your franchise QB. However, if Griffin was one of our safeties I would be in favor of benching him.
gregory smith wrote:Barring injury, there is zero chance Griffin takes a seat. Griffin is the quarterback and rightfully so. We saw Cousins in one full game, he played great, but so did Matt Flynn and Kevin Kolb early on. If we play Cousins because of injury I have confidence in him, but there is nothing good about benching your franchise QB. However, if Griffin was one of our safeties I would be in favor of benching him.
So I'm guessing your in favor of leaving RG3 in indefinitely, even if he's showing no signs of improvement (which in my opinion, he's not), and even if it costs the team the season? Sorry, I'm not willing to do that....Cousins may not be the QB of the future for this team, but RIGHT NOW, he's the best we've got....
3rd down conversions is one area of improvement. I just don't know how you can say Cousins is the best we've got. He is probably the best backup we have. If the staff really believed that Robert Griffin was not going to be a productive quarterback in this league, if they thought "Oh My God, he can't play at this level", "we blew it", if they were totally ready to start over, give up on the investment of the trade, just throw it all out the window, then yes by all means give Kirk a shot. We are 2 years from that scenario. To bench him would mean the end of the Shanahan's and the hiring of a new coach and system etc, a total rebuild. The injury was unfortunate, yes it's a setback, but just like the cap penalty we have no choice but to stay the course and play through it. Robert Griffin is our quarterback and he's a good one. A damn good one, and I'm glad he's a Redskin. Get used to it. Kirk Cousins may very well be a great starter in this league, but not for the Washington Redskins. Robert Griffin is not going to cost us the season, he's our only hope for the season. Jim Haslett, now he might cost us the season, the John Mara penalty, that might cost us the season, and any knee-jerk reaction like benching your franchise quarterback, that would cost us more than a season.
gregory smith wrote:Barring injury, there is zero chance Griffin takes a seat. Griffin is the quarterback and rightfully so. We saw Cousins in one full game, he played great, but so did Matt Flynn and Kevin Kolb early on. If we play Cousins because of injury I have confidence in him, but there is nothing good about benching your franchise QB. However, if Griffin was one of our safeties I would be in favor of benching him.
So I'm guessing your in favor of leaving RG3 in indefinitely, even if he's showing no signs of improvement (which in my opinion, he's not), and even if it costs the team the season? Sorry, I'm not willing to do that....Cousins may not be the QB of the future for this team, but RIGHT NOW, he's the best we've got....
Yes, you leave RG3 in there until he improves and he has improved. If you haven't noticed the improvement you haven't been watching!
Is he back to where he was last year? It just depends on which part of the season you are talking about. No he isn't anywhere close to where he was prior to the Ngata hit, but he is better than where he was post-Ngata hit. It is just that the rest of the team isn't playing the same. Heck the rules have even changed. Had that 30 yard scramble and fumble happened last year he would have been ruled down because he gave himself up. Last year Robbinson holds onto that pass and the TD stands. Last year Hankerson comes back to the ball and RG3 throws either an incomplete pass or Hank makes the catch.
Last year O-lay-po was injured and Rob Jackson wasn't suspended and Rob makes some of those tackles that O-lay-po misses.
If you can't see the improvement in RG3 then that is a you problem, not a team problem.
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain"
(It is time to roll the dice) Tai'shar Manetheren
"Duty is heavier than a Mountain, Death is lighter than a feather" Tai'shar Malkier
gregory smith wrote:Barring injury, there is zero chance Griffin takes a seat. Griffin is the quarterback and rightfully so. We saw Cousins in one full game, he played great, but so did Matt Flynn and Kevin Kolb early on. If we play Cousins because of injury I have confidence in him, but there is nothing good about benching your franchise QB. However, if Griffin was one of our safeties I would be in favor of benching him.
So I'm guessing your in favor of leaving RG3 in indefinitely, even if he's showing no signs of improvement (which in my opinion, he's not), and even if it costs the team the season? Sorry, I'm not willing to do that....Cousins may not be the QB of the future for this team, but RIGHT NOW, he's the best we've got....
Yes, you leave RG3 in there until he improves and he has improved. If you haven't noticed the improvement you haven't been watching!
Is he back to where he was last year? It just depends on which part of the season you are talking about. No he isn't anywhere close to where he was prior to the Ngata hit, but he is better than where he was post-Ngata hit. It is just that the rest of the team isn't playing the same. Heck the rules have even changed. Had that 30 yard scramble and fumble happened last year he would have been ruled down because he gave himself up. Last year Robbinson holds onto that pass and the TD stands. Last year Hankerson comes back to the ball and RG3 throws either an incomplete pass or Hank makes the catch.
Last year O-lay-po was injured and Rob Jackson wasn't suspended and Rob makes some of those tackles that O-lay-po misses.
If you can't see the improvement in RG3 then that is a you problem, not a team problem.
If he's improving, it's by such minute amounts that it's almost unnoticable, and he certainly isn't improving fast enough to help the team get into the win column...again I go back my original question, is it worth throwing away the entire season JUST TO FIND OUT WHETHER OR NOT RG3 is going to get back to being able to play well? I don't think it is considering how good our backup is...I'd say it might be worth it if Grossman was our backup, but Cousins is leaps and bounds better than Grossman...Cousins gives us a good chance to win these games...even with our lousy D, whereas continuing to play RG3 is just going to keep resulting in losses...
Had Aldrick not had the drop, had Hankerson come back for the ball, would you still be calling for the benching of Griffin? I think not. Even if Robert was the cause of our struggles, and he's not, benching him is a way bigger deal than trying to salvage a season. This is about the next 10 seasons. He's the quarterback until they haul him off the field like Theismann. Come on man.
Let's just be honest, grampi. By "improving", you clearly mean "winning".
Seriously, RGIII ran for one yard against the Packers. He ran for 37 yards against the Lions. He completed 61% of his passes against the Eagles. He completed 64% against the Lions. The guy has thrown for 300+ yards in three consecutive games.
Its not like we have John Beck under center.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "You can't do epic **** with basic people." - DJax "We're on the rise, man, whether you're on the train or not." - Josh Norman
gregory smith wrote:Robert Griffin is our quarterback and he's a good one. A damn good one, and I'm glad he's a Redskin. Get used to it. Kirk Cousins may very well be a great starter in this league, but not for the Washington Redskins. Robert Griffin is not going to cost us the season, he's our only hope for the season. Jim Haslett, now he might cost us the season, the John Mara penalty, that might cost us the season, and any knee-jerk reaction like benching your franchise quarterback, that would cost us more than a season.
gregory smith wrote:Had Aldrick not had the drop, had Hankerson come back for the ball, would you still be calling for the benching of Griffin? I think not. Even if Robert was the cause of our struggles, and he's not, benching him is a way bigger deal than trying to salvage a season. This is about the next 10 seasons. He's the quarterback until they haul him off the field like Theismann. Come on man.
This season isn't the only thing at stake here...RG3's long term health is as well....what do you think will happen to that knee if he were to take a hit on it? I think he'd be less suseptible to reinjuring that knee if it was allowed to heel longer...it is clearly not even closed to being fully heeled...
gregory smith wrote:Had Aldrick not had the drop, had Hankerson come back for the ball, would you still be calling for the benching of Griffin? I think not. Even if Robert was the cause of our struggles, and he's not, benching him is a way bigger deal than trying to salvage a season. This is about the next 10 seasons. He's the quarterback until they haul him off the field like Theismann. Come on man.
This season isn't the only thing at stake here...RG3's long term health is as well....what do you think will happen to that knee if he were to take a hit on it? I think he'd be less suseptible to reinjuring that knee if it was allowed to heel longer...it is clearly not even closed to being fully heeled...
Better not let Kirk play either. He is coming off a sprained ankle.
Again I'll ask. Had Aldrick caught the ball cleanly and had Hankerson come back for the ball would you feel this way?
He's been cleared to play. We will have to go through this process whether it be now or 6 weeks from now. His comfort level will only improve by playing. This can be a valuable year for him, developing the dropback aspect of his game, then next year pitch the brace and torch the league. Hopefully.
gregory smith wrote:Again I'll ask. Had Aldrick caught the ball cleanly and had Hankerson come back for the ball would you feel this way?
He's been cleared to play. We will have to go through this process whether it be now or 6 weeks from now. His comfort level will only improve by playing. This can be a valuable year for him, developing the dropback aspect of his game, then next year pitch the brace and torch the league. Hopefully.
THIS.
"That's a clown question, bro" - - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman "But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man That he didn't, didn't already have" - - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America
grampi wrote:I don't know where this "improvement" in RG3 is as I've seen little to no improvement in his play. I want to to see him back to 100% and playing like he was last year before his injury, but is it worth scrapping the entire season just to find out IF he's gonna come around this year? He may not. The season isn't over yet, and I'd hate to see the entire season wasted when we've got a backup as good as Cousins sitting on the bench. Is he good enough to get the team a SB win...probably not, but I certainly think he's good enough to get to the play-offs, which RG3 is not, not playing the way he's playing right now anyway. I'd say if RG3 isn't playing markedly better in the OAK game, then it's time to start Cousins after the bye...
I'd say you'd have to give Griffin until at least after the bye before there are legitimate calls for him to be benched.
Nah, I think 4 games is enough to tell if RG's gonna come around this year or not...if the team gets to 0-5 or 0-6 the season is basically over at that point...right now it's still savalgable...
What I meant was that before giving up on Griffin, you should see how he plays after the bye because then there can be no more "well it's preseason for him" because he would have played 4 games and had a full week off. If he shows no meaningful improvement (despite what some say on here, his "improvement" has been less than stellar, with a QBR of 26.6) then I'm all for having a serious discussion about sitting him. But I just do not see that happening.
StorminMormon86 wrote: (despite what some say on here, his "improvement" has been less than stellar, with a QBR of 26.6)
Are you fabricating Bob's QBR, or getting it from Cowboys.com? His current quarterback rating, while not stellar, is 84.1... above Flacco... above Rothlisburger... abpve Kaepernick... above Sheli Manning... and even above Tom Brady.
That's twice, I believe, you have cited this bogus stat... So... tell me... why should I have any confidence in anything you say????
"That's a clown question, bro" - - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman "But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man That he didn't, didn't already have" - - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America
grampi wrote:I don't know where this "improvement" in RG3 is as I've seen little to no improvement in his play.
Then you are not watching or are blind. If you can't see just the difference in his mechanics from the start of the Smeagols game, then you will never see it.
Andre Carter wrote:Damn man, you know your football.
skinsfan#33 wrote:Had that 30 yard scramble and fumble happened last year he would have been ruled down because he gave himself up.
Nope, that rule's been the same for at least 10 years.
Nope, as I said it was changed in the off season. A couple of years ago Victor Cruise caught a pass in a two minute fill from Eli dove to the ground and left the football on the ground. Since he had never been touched the Cardinals pounced on the ball. The refs have the ball to the Giants because they said VC had declared him self down.
This rule was changed during the off season.
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain"
(It is time to roll the dice) Tai'shar Manetheren
"Duty is heavier than a Mountain, Death is lighter than a feather" Tai'shar Malkier
skinsfan#33 wrote:Had that 30 yard scramble and fumble happened last year he would have been ruled down because he gave himself up.
Nope, that rule's been the same for at least 10 years.
Nope, as I said it was changed in the off season. A couple of years ago Victor Cruise caught a pass in a two minute fill from Eli dove to the ground and left the football on the ground. Since he had never been touched the Cardinals pounced on the ball. The refs have the ball to the Giants because they said VC had declared him self down.
This rule was changed during the off season.
No, it wasn't. That was just the refs giving the vaGiants a break. Also, the rules are different for a scrambling QB, than they are for anybody else. To give himself up, a QB must slide feet first. That has been the rule for at least 10 years.
Andre Carter wrote:Damn man, you know your football.
StorminMormon86 wrote: (despite what some say on here, his "improvement" has been less than stellar, with a QBR of 26.6)
Are you fabricating Bob's QBR, or getting it from Cowboys.com? His current quarterback rating, while not stellar, is 84.1... above Flacco... above Rothlisburger... abpve Kaepernick... above Sheli Manning... and even above Tom Brady.
That's twice, I believe, you have cited this bogus stat... So... tell me... why should I have any confidence in anything you say????
Because it's true. I should have said "TOTAL QBR", but I guess you thought I meant QB rating.
skinsfan#33 wrote:Had that 30 yard scramble and fumble happened last year he would have been ruled down because he gave himself up.
Nope, that rule's been the same for at least 10 years.
Nope, as I said it was changed in the off season. A couple of years ago Victor Cruise caught a pass in a two minute fill from Eli dove to the ground and left the football on the ground. Since he had never been touched the Cardinals pounced on the ball. The refs have the ball to the Giants because they said VC had declared him self down.
This rule was changed during the off season.
No, it wasn't. That was just the refs giving the vaGiants a break. Also, the rules are different for a scrambling QB, than they are for anybody else. To give himself up, a QB must slide feet first. That has been the rule for at least 10 years.
Everybit of that is incorrect including the part about the only way a QB can declare himself down is by sliding feet first. How about taking a knee? Victory formation?
Chris ey said it on air during the game that he thought that Robert was down prior to the fumble because he had declared himself down. Then later this week he was imformed that the rule had in fact changed during the off season and admitted he was wrong.
And there aren't different rules for "scrambling QBs". There different rules for a player running a football (weathe that player is RG3, AP, or Peyton Manning) then there are for a QB attempting to make a pass from the pocket.
I would bet that you still believe you are correct and that is fine.
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain"
(It is time to roll the dice) Tai'shar Manetheren
"Duty is heavier than a Mountain, Death is lighter than a feather" Tai'shar Malkier
StorminMormon86 wrote: (despite what some say on here, his "improvement" has been less than stellar, with a QBR of 26.6)
Are you fabricating Bob's QBR, or getting it from Cowboys.com? His current quarterback rating, while not stellar, is 84.1... above Flacco... above Rothlisburger... abpve Kaepernick... above Sheli Manning... and even above Tom Brady.
That's twice, I believe, you have cited this bogus stat... So... tell me... why should I have any confidence in anything you say????
Because it's true. I should have said "TOTAL QBR", but I guess you thought I meant QB rating.
That Total QBR thing is an ESPN only deal and it is based more on subjective things than the traditional QB rating is based.
Personally I don't think it is anything but an ESPN promotional "look at us" tool. Does it have some merit, sure, but it needs some tweeking and until it becomes the standard it will just be a quirking ESPN gimmick.
But lets assume it is credibl. He showed an improvement from week 1 to week 2 and then regressed in week three. Anyone that watched him play all three games knows that is not the case.
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain"
(It is time to roll the dice) Tai'shar Manetheren
"Duty is heavier than a Mountain, Death is lighter than a feather" Tai'shar Malkier
"That's a clown question, bro" - - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman "But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man That he didn't, didn't already have" - - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America
skinsfan#33 wrote:But lets assume it is credibl. He showed an improvement from week 1 to week 2 and then regressed in week three. Anyone that watched him play all three games knows that is not the case.
ey said it on air during the game that he thought that Robert was down prior to the fumble because he had declared himself down. Then later this week he was imformed that the rule had in fact changed during the off season and admitted he was wrong.