Post Game We Lose/Giants Lose!

Talk about the Washington Football Team here. Do you bleed burgundy and gold?
gibbsfan
Joe's#1Fan
Joe's#1Fan
Posts: 1948
youtube meble na wymiar Warszawa
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 11:59 am
Location: chocowinity nc

Post by gibbsfan »

The skins need help in the Trenches after getting a qb
This Ownership Has The Quarantine Virus..
frankcal20
^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^
Posts: 9017
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 5:52 pm
Contact:

Post by frankcal20 »

Looks like the Skins will draft #10 if Seahawks win or #11 if Rams win. I'm pulling for the Rams only b/c they've been a battered franchise and would love to see them get in the playoffs. Hope we model our franchise over what they've done in recent years. Shore up the O-line and then go after a QB. Smart!!!!
User avatar
REDEEMEDSKIN
~~
~~
Posts: 8496
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 3:12 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Post by REDEEMEDSKIN »

frankcal20 wrote:...[Gossman] turned the ball over a TON the past 3 weeks (8 to's I believe compared to McNabb's 16 for 14 weeks) doesn't spell success IMO.


Rex vs. Giants: 17-14 (one GANO missed field goal from a tie and possible OT)

McNabb vs. Giants: 31-7

One of these guys has a PROVEN track record of success against NFC EAST foe, New York.

Both got the L, of course, but in the end, I'll take Shanny at his word, he wanted to evaluate talent, namely Rexy.

1-2 as a starter, yet the offense looked much better than under McNabb (except for that fluke game vs the Texans).

Keep Rexy to teach the offense to next year's rookie QB.

Give McNabb his walking papers.

HTTR
Back and better than ever!
KazooSkinsFan
kazoo
kazoo
Posts: 10293
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 4:00 pm
Location: Kazmania

Post by KazooSkinsFan »

Thank you Skins for at least covering the spread. It meant an extra $375 in my other pool. $1,000 if we dont' cover the spread, $1,375 if we do. Don't get me wrong, I'd give it up to win. but since we did lose, it's a nice bottle of scotch to drown my sorrows...
Hail to the Redskins!

Groucho: Man does not control his own fate. The women in his life do that for him

Twain: A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way
PulpExposure
Pushing Paper
Pushing Paper
Posts: 4860
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2005 3:01 pm

Post by PulpExposure »

frankcal20 wrote:Looks like the Skins will draft #10 if Seahawks win or #11 if Rams win. I'm pulling for the Rams only b/c they've been a battered franchise and would love to see them get in the playoffs. Hope we model our franchise over what they've done in recent years. Shore up the O-line and then go after a QB. Smart!!!!


You make it sound so easy :)

Couple of things to remember; you forget how terrible the Rams were. The 3 seasons before this one, they won a grand total of SIX games. Averaging 2 wins a season that netted them some very high draft choices, including twice the #2 overall picks (used on OL/DL) and the #1 overall for Bradford. And then turning to the "then go after a QB": Remember, it's not as if Bradford was just any QB; as a rookie, he threw for 18 TDs and 14 INTs (up until tonight); they got an absolute gem. To get a guy like that in the draft, you either have to be lucky as sin, or get the #1 pick overall like the Rams did.

So, you're saying to be like the Rams, the Skins should be just ridiculously awful for the next few years. Personally, that's not really a path you want to travel, as though it seems to have worked for the Rams, it doesn't guarantee success at all.

Oh and also, the Rams play in the worst division in the NFL. That has to help...
frankcal20
^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^
Posts: 9017
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 5:52 pm
Contact:

Post by frankcal20 »

I can't say that the path we've been on has worked out too well. 10+ year's of "almost"
frankcal20
^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^
Posts: 9017
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 5:52 pm
Contact:

Post by frankcal20 »

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Thank you Skins for at least covering the spread. It meant an extra $375 in my other pool. $1,000 if we dont' cover the spread, $1,375 if we do. Don't get me wrong, I'd give it up to win. but since we did lose, it's a nice bottle of scotch to drown my sorrows...


Screw that!!! That's diapers & formula for the next 4 mos for me. But I don't really gamble on sports so it would've never happened for me to begin with.
CanesSkins26
Canes Skin
Canes Skin
Posts: 6684
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 5:02 pm
Location: Alexandria, VA

Post by CanesSkins26 »

Grossman is NOT the starting QB here - he was being looked at to see if we might want to keep him as back-up ONLY IMO


I would not be the least bit surprised if the Skins drafted a qb in the first and had Rex start until the rookie is ready to play.

McNabb might not be here but he gives this franchise a better chance than Grossman, that's for sure


Might? There is no chance in hell that McNabb will be a Redskin in 2011. The Skins don't want him here and he doesn't want to be here. Under what scenario do you see McNabb on this team next season?
Last edited by CanesSkins26 on Mon Jan 03, 2011 1:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
Suck and Luck
Shabutie
piggie
Posts: 173
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 11:11 pm

Post by Shabutie »

SkinsJock wrote:
CanesSkins26 wrote:..Well, he did put the ball in the endzone. 7 td's in 3 games. That's half as many as McNabb had in 10 less games. Even the announcers said that Rex has a much better grasp of the offense. Neither qb played great this year but Rex clearly ran the offense more effectively than McNabb did.


First of all Canes - the announcers know less about what is happening here than Crazyhorse

Grossman is NOT the starting QB here - he was being looked at to see if we might want to keep him as back-up ONLY IMO

McNabb might not be here but he gives this franchise a better chance than Grossman, that's for sure
It is definitely a sure thing that McNabb gives up a better chance to win... Unless you look at facts.
User avatar
brad7686
B-rad
B-rad
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 9:46 am
Location: De La War

Post by brad7686 »

The Giants won AND they didn't cover. Bad day.
welch
Skins History Buff
Skins History Buff
Posts: 6000
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: New York, NY

Post by welch »

- Missed Gano failed goal and questionable call in Grossman fumble while throwing the ball.

- Competed, blundered, but competed.

- Sometimes felt like the Gossman to Smurfs passing game was working. Yes, these are Smurfs II. Find a Charley Taylor II or an Art Monk II, and watch how they improve.

- OL blocking poor.

- DL seems to be getting the 3 - 4. I'm still emotionally attached to the 4-3, but if Shanahan wants 3-4, we know the defense can work with the right players. Bryant over Haynesworth: big improvement.

- Still not much pressure on Manning during key drives.

- Grossman isn't Sonny, but he seemed sharper than McNabb. And I have a lot of respect for McNabb's ability.

(I didn't post much today because, for once, I could see the game.)
TeeterSalad
09 Champ
09 Champ
Posts: 1262
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 8:24 pm
Location: Upstate NY

Post by TeeterSalad »

I'd take the past 3 weeks of Grossman over most of McNabbs performances this year. Grossman gave this team a chance to win every game he was in, and the offense actually moved the ball...I don't understand how people aren't seeing that. I'm not sure either will be the starter next year, but I'd take Grossman over McNabb for the entire season after seeing the difference in the two. Just my My 2 cents
-2009 Hognostications Champion-
-Hognosti-Bowl V Champion-
-Hognosti-Bowl VI Champion-

RIP ST # 21
SkinsJock
08 Champ
08 Champ
Posts: 18385
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 10:23 pm
Location: New England

Post by SkinsJock »

I agree that Grossman has played well - I think that many of the guys who are concerned about Grossman would agree that he's played well - the BIG concern for me is that Grossman is not a good enough starting QB and I'm not sure he's a good mentor either - end of story

Grossman's playing better BUT he's not a bettter starting QB because he just doesn't have "it"

I'll agree that it looks very much like McNabb is not going to be here but I'd prefer McNabb with an improved O line (which I think will happen) AND better preparation this offseason to Grossman - that's just me

I also don't think it's likely that McNabb wants to make the effort it will take this offseason to become better with Kyle's offense


I do not think that McNabb will be starting here but I'm pretty sure it will not be Grossman either - Grossman MAY have earned a job as our back-up

I think, if they're getting rid of McNabb they will find another QB to replace him FIRST and then draft a QB for the future - A lot depends on whose available as QB

BUT we really need to find 2 possibly 3 starting O linemen and also have some very good depth
Until recently, Snyder & Allen have made a lot of really bad decisions - nobody with any sense believes this franchise will get better under their guidance
Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
CanesSkins26
Canes Skin
Canes Skin
Posts: 6684
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 5:02 pm
Location: Alexandria, VA

Post by CanesSkins26 »

I'll agree that it looks very much like McNabb is not going to be here but I'd prefer McNabb with an improved O line (which I think will happen) AND better preparation this offseason to Grossman - that's just me

I also don't think it's likely that McNabb wants to make the effort it will take this offseason to become better with Kyle's offense


So you would prefer that McNabb be the starter next year over Grossman even though you don't that McNabb wants to put in the effort necessary to better understand and execute the offense? What kind of sense does that make?
Suck and Luck
chiefhog44
**ch44
**ch44
Posts: 2444
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 10:00 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by chiefhog44 »

CanesSkins26 wrote:
I'll agree that it looks very much like McNabb is not going to be here but I'd prefer McNabb with an improved O line (which I think will happen) AND better preparation this offseason to Grossman - that's just me

I also don't think it's likely that McNabb wants to make the effort it will take this offseason to become better with Kyle's offense


So you would prefer that McNabb be the starter next year over Grossman even though you don't that McNabb wants to put in the effort necessary to better understand and execute the offense? What kind of sense does that make?


I know right?
Miss you 21

12/17/09 - Ding Dong the Witch is Dead...Which Old Witch? The Wicked Witch.

1/6/10 - The start of another dark era
SkinsJock
08 Champ
08 Champ
Posts: 18385
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 10:23 pm
Location: New England

Post by SkinsJock »

CanesSkins26 wrote:
I'll agree that it looks very much like McNabb is not going to be here but I'd prefer McNabb with an improved O line (which I think will happen) AND better preparation this offseason to Grossman - that's just me

I also don't think it's likely that McNabb wants to make the effort it will take this offseason to become better with Kyle's offense


So you would prefer that McNabb be the starter next year over Grossman even though you don't think that McNabb wants to put in the effort necessary to better understand and execute the offense? What kind of sense does that make?


NO - you're taking 2 statements and making your own conclusion = :thump:

here are the scenarios:
1) We let McNabb go or we trade him and Grossman becomes the starter - we then draft a QB who can hopefully start very quickly because .... :roll:

2) We let McNabb go or we trade him and we find a QB to be the starter
a) we sign Grossman to be the back-up and we draft a QB
b) we don't sign Grossman and we draft a QB

3) We keep McNabb and maybe Grossman and we draft a QB

I do think that we are drafting a QB in this coming draft



I think that if McNabb were to apply himself he would offer the better starting QB here but this would require him to be here and not at home in Arizona
I doubt that McNabb will do that



McNabb has the tools/ability to be a better starting QB than Grossman - for a year maybe more - I'm not sure he gets to do that again, though
Until recently, Snyder & Allen have made a lot of really bad decisions - nobody with any sense believes this franchise will get better under their guidance
Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
Post Reply