The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

markshark84 wrote:And honestly, one of the main reasons Cundiff made the pro bowl in 2010 was because he only had 1 attempt of over 50 yards that year.

I agree, I'm concerned about it too. I'm not 100% gungo, Mike can do no wrong. LOL

But, I also believe our reliance on the kicker will diminish. Our redzone offense wont be as bad. I think more often than not, we'll get within Cundiffs... I was going to say "sweet spot" but, I'll digress.

I hope you're right. I think a lot of people think our offense will instantly take off. I want to stress that when you have a rookie QB it will take time -- regardless of how highly touted he is. Even Peyton threw 26 INTs in his rookie year.

I am in the camp that your reliance on a kicker will never diminish and will always be vital to your success. You will always need a very good kicker because in a game of inches like football every inch, yard, point, etc. is extremely important. What separates the good from the mediocre is very small -- 3 points a game can be that difference.

markshark84 wrote:I am in the camp that your reliance on a kicker will never diminish and will always be vital to your success. You will always need a very good kicker because in a game of inches like football every inch, yard, point, etc. is extremely important. What separates the good from the mediocre is very small -- 3 points a game can be that difference.

But some teams rely on it more than others. Baltimore being a prime example in the past, all they did was kick FG's.

markshark84 wrote:

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

markshark84 wrote:And honestly, one of the main reasons Cundiff made the pro bowl in 2010 was because he only had 1 attempt of over 50 yards that year.

I agree, I'm concerned about it too. I'm not 100% gungo, Mike can do no wrong. LOL

But, I also believe our reliance on the kicker will diminish. Our redzone offense wont be as bad. I think more often than not, we'll get within Cundiffs... I was going to say "sweet spot" but, I'll digress.

I hope you're right. I think a lot of people think our offense will instantly take off. I want to stress that when you have a rookie QB it will take time -- regardless of how highly touted he is. Even Peyton threw 26 INTs in his rookie year.

I am in the camp that your reliance on a kicker will never diminish and will always be vital to your success. You will always need a very good kicker because in a game of inches like football every inch, yard, point, etc. is extremely important. What separates the good from the mediocre is very small -- 3 points a game can be that difference.

Well if his kickoffs are better and he gets more TB then he will be taking more points off for the other team right? Then how about when they punt 5 or 10 yards futher back too? That could be more points for us.

markshark84 wrote:I think a lot of people think our offense will instantly take off. I want to stress that when you have a rookie QB it will take time -- regardless of how highly touted he is. Even Peyton threw 26 INTs in his rookie year.

I'm one of those. Cam Newton threw 21 TDs and 17 INTs last year. I happen to think RGIII is going to rewrite the rookie marks Cam set last season. I don't care about how highly he is touted. I care about what I have seen of him so far. I think he is going to set the NFL on fire.


Of course, one hit could change all of that.

I don't think RGIII is going to touch Cam's records. But he's good enough to get us in FG position, I know that much.

THIS just in - this is a team game - all these guys areall very talented but they also ALL need players around them in order to succeed

Teams succeed because of players playing together not because of individual performances

Coaches & FOs have to decide who best suits their schemes and the other players they have - sometimes it works out and sometimes it does not

Thinking that a player that leaves a team and does well might have had the same success on the team he left is just STUPID - this shows no appreciation for the intricacies and intangibles of this game


I'm not a blind homer (as many think) about Mike & Bruce .... I do think they're trying to put the best 53 on the roster and I do think their plan will continue to make this franchise better - we're not good yet but we're getting there

To me, Cundiff is not better than Gano or Rackers - Mike maybe wrong, but then again ....

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

markshark84 wrote:Not a good move at all. I see a David Akers type thing happening with Gano.

This just makes no sense. Cut a younger, better kicker for a lesser, older one......

1. I think the Akers thing is a bit much...
2. Gano is better from long distance, Cundiff is better from mid-range/kick offs. So "better" is subjective.


Everyone lost their mind when we cut Gafney... FYI, the Patriots just cut him too, he didn't even last to the final round of cuts.

Let's not overreact.

"everybody lost their mind when we cut Gafney"?????? what are you talking about? who's everybody? I hope not. Gaffney was before a redskin, as a redskin, and after a redskin the very definition of mediocre.

i would hope that no one would have cared either way if he stayed or went.

as for the kicker change, i would think its a bad decision but we'll see.

.


Scroll to the troll.
Scroll to the troll.
SCROLL TO THE TROLL!

Almost forgot:

Graham Gano
School: Florida State
Position: K

Career Punting: 147 Punts, 6189 Yds, 42.1 Avg

We just lost a really good backup punter too.

DarthMonk

I wanted Gano cut at the end of last season. He sucks. This is a good move.

The Hogster wrote:I wanted Gano cut at the end of last season. He sucks. This is a good move.

but....but.....but....they say he has BIG legs???? is that from doing all those squats???

WhatEV........that's why we are all fans and NOT coaches. I wish GG good luck in his NFL career.

I hear the Steelers aren't totally sold on Swishy....they can take Gano now.

I'm hoping he doesn't get picked up (sorry Graham), so that we can re-sign him if the Cundiff experiment goes awry.

tribeofjudah wrote:

The Hogster wrote:I wanted Gano cut at the end of last season. He sucks. This is a good move.

but....but.....but....they say he has BIG legs???? is that from doing all those squats???

WhatEV........that's why we are all fans and NOT coaches. I wish GG good luck in his NFL career.

I hear the Steelers aren't totally sold on Swishy....they can take Gano now.

The funny thing is how fans, who aren't in practice, can say this is a dumb move when they haven't seen what this guy is doing in practices. He's been awful two years in a row. All I hear are excuses for him. He had 5 blocks last year, but the year prior he was still the worst kicker in the league. He's only made 74% of his kicks since becoming a Redskin. He's also been a Shankapotamus & a choke artist. It was time for him to go.

emoses14 wrote:Not at all jazzed about signing Cundiff and cutting Gano. This has to be a competition signing for this last week or game. Gano is better than Cundiff in every possible way other than extra points (Gano had one miss, Cundiff had none).

THAT INCLUDING 5 BLOCKS THAT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH GANO!!!!

This is insane if true.

The extra point was blocked too. AND Gano had two more kicks that were blocked that still went through!

The FG blocking team was just historically bad last year!

The Hogster wrote:I wanted Gano cut at the end of last season. He sucks. This is a good move.

Come on Hogster. Normally you are pretty rational about things, but this is a major step back words if you are going off last years parformance!

Gano was 31 of 41 with 5 blocks or 76%
Cundiff was 28 of 37 with no blocks or 76%

Gano was 29 of 34 on kicks that weren't blocked or 85% and he was 2 for 7 on kicks that were blocked (yes, you read that right).

So compared to Cundiff he was 9% better on kicks that weren't blocked. The Ravens didn't allow any of Cundiff's kicks to get blocked, but Gano actually made 2 out of the 7 kicks that were blocked; not too bad!

Not blaming a kicker for a blocked kick that was the fault of the blocking unit is not making an excuse it is being rational and looking at the situation realistically!

skinsfan#33 wrote:Not blaming a kicker for a blocked kick that was the fault of the blocking unit is not making an excuse it is being rational and looking at the situation realistically!

You should be warned up front: it's no use.

skinsfan#33 wrote:

The Hogster wrote:I wanted Gano cut at the end of last season. He sucks. This is a good move.

Come on Hogster. Normally you are pretty rational about things, but this is a major step back words if you are going off last years parformance!

Gano was 31 of 41 with 5 blocks or 76%
Cundiff was 28 of 37 with no blocks or 76%

Gano was 29 of 34 on kicks that were blocked or 85% and he was 2 for 7 on kicks that were blocked (yes, you read that right).

So compared to Cundiff he was 9% better on kicks that weren't blocked. The Ravens didn't allow any of Cundiff's kicks to get blocked, but Gano actually made 2 out of the 7 kicks that were blocked; not too bad!

Not blaming a kicker for a blocked kick that was the fault of the blocking unit is not making an excuse it is being rational and looking at the situation realistically!

Check his 2010 stats. He was still dead last without the blocks. But I guess we know better than experienced coaches who have watched him in games and in practice. Even still, kickers are judged by their ability to perform under pressure. And, Gano doesn't.

It's a kicker, whats the big deal?

Instead of looking at his stats, which are almost identical to Cundiff's (except that pro bowl thing...) explain what he has done to earn the right to stay.

Look, we are a sub .500 team. At this point whatever changes the coaches make I'm all for.

skinsfan#33 wrote:Gano was 29 of 34 on kicks that were blocked or 85% and he was 2 for 7 on kicks that were blocked (yes, you read that right).

But did you write it right?

ATX_Skins wrote:It's a kicker, whats the big deal?

Instead of looking at his stats, which are almost identical to Cundiff's (except that pro bowl thing...) explain what he has done to earn the right to stay.

Look, we are a sub .500 team. At this point whatever changes the coaches make I'm all for.

Nevermind that better kicking could have won us a couple of games, maybe in both Dallas games. And trading in a young kicker (coming off a much better season (86% of makable kicks) for a vet with nearly identicle career stats (coming off an average year for him - 76%) is just not smart.

Deadskins wrote:

skinsfan#33 wrote:Gano was 29 of 34 on kicks that were blocked or 85% and he was 2 for 7 on kicks that were blocked (yes, you read that right).

But did you write it right?

Wait, i did screw that up. Obviously I meant on kicks that weren't blocked. I'll go back and fix it, thanks.

The Hogster wrote:

tribeofjudah wrote:

The Hogster wrote:I wanted Gano cut at the end of last season. He sucks. This is a good move.

but....but.....but....they say he has BIG legs???? is that from doing all those squats???

WhatEV........that's why we are all fans and NOT coaches. I wish GG good luck in his NFL career.

I hear the Steelers aren't totally sold on Swishy....they can take Gano now.

The funny thing is how fans, who aren't in practice, can say this is a dumb move when they haven't seen what this guy is doing in practices. He's been awful two years in a row. All I hear are excuses for him. He had 5 blocks last year, but the year prior he was still the worst kicker in the league. He's only made 74% of his kicks since becoming a Redskin. He's also been a Shankapotamus & a choke artist. It was time for him to go.

Can't speak for all, but my problem is not with cutting Gano. It's that we replaced him with an equally crappy kicker, so why bother.

The Hogster wrote:

tribeofjudah wrote:

The Hogster wrote:I wanted Gano cut at the end of last season. He sucks. This is a good move.

but....but.....but....they say he has BIG legs???? is that from doing all those squats???

WhatEV........that's why we are all fans and NOT coaches. I wish GG good luck in his NFL career.

I hear the Steelers aren't totally sold on Swishy....they can take Gano now.

The funny thing is how fans, who aren't in practice, can say this is a dumb move when they haven't seen what this guy is doing in practices. He's been awful two years in a row. All I hear are excuses for him. He had 5 blocks last year, but the year prior he was still the worst kicker in the league. He's only made 74% of his kicks since becoming a Redskin. He's also been a Shankapotamus & a choke artist. It was time for him to go.

Still better than Cundiff. Which is why this fan thinks it was a dumb move. Drop him for someone better, fine. Not for someone worse.

The Hogster wrote:

skinsfan#33 wrote:

The Hogster wrote:I wanted Gano cut at the end of last season. He sucks. This is a good move.

Come on Hogster. Normally you are pretty rational about things, but this is a major step back words if you are going off last years parformance!

Gano was 31 of 41 with 5 blocks or 76%
Cundiff was 28 of 37 with no blocks or 76%

Gano was 29 of 34 on kicks that were blocked or 85% and he was 2 for 7 on kicks that were blocked (yes, you read that right).

So compared to Cundiff he was 9% better on kicks that weren't blocked. The Ravens didn't allow any of Cundiff's kicks to get blocked, but Gano actually made 2 out of the 7 kicks that were blocked; not too bad!

Not blaming a kicker for a blocked kick that was the fault of the blocking unit is not making an excuse it is being rational and looking at the situation realistically!

Check his 2010 stats. He was still dead last without the blocks. But I guess we know better than experienced coaches who have watched him in games and in practice. Even still, kickers are judged by their ability to perform under pressure. And, Gano doesn't.

Not talking about 2010. I'm talking about 2011 and I don't care if a Kicker misses every kick in practice (although reports are he was doing fine in practice) all I care about is what he can control on game day.

On game day, if the kick wasn't blocked he connected on 85% last year, the guy that just replaced him connected on 76% (which is roughly an average season for him.

So as you pointed out, 2010 was bad for him and as I pointed out 2011 was pretty good. Cundiff was just the opposite.

You may be happy Gano is gone but you can't be happy it is for this guy!

chiefhog44 wrote:

The Hogster wrote:

tribeofjudah wrote:

The Hogster wrote:I wanted Gano cut at the end of last season. He sucks. This is a good move.

but....but.....but....they say he has BIG legs???? is that from doing all those squats???

WhatEV........that's why we are all fans and NOT coaches. I wish GG good luck in his NFL career.

I hear the Steelers aren't totally sold on Swishy....they can take Gano now.

The funny thing is how fans, who aren't in practice, can say this is a dumb move when they haven't seen what this guy is doing in practices. He's been awful two years in a row. All I hear are excuses for him. He had 5 blocks last year, but the year prior he was still the worst kicker in the league. He's only made 74% of his kicks since becoming a Redskin. He's also been a Shankapotamus & a choke artist. It was time for him to go.

Can't speak for all, but my problem is not with cutting Gano. It's that we replaced him with an equally crappy kicker, so why bother.

+1
Equally crappy and older too.