Page 2 of 7
Posted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:59 pm
by SkinsJock
If, at any time, Mike thought that bringing in Cousins would be better for Griffin (by giving him some time) or that Cousins might give the team more chance at success - he would have done that
so ... if any fan thinks it would be better for the team for RG3 to 'rest' ... OR ... that Cousins will be better at QB for now ... that is fine but IMO he/they are completely wrong
Posted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:44 pm
by DaSkinz Baby
IMHO all this PLAY AS IF YOU NEVER WERE GONE IS BULL! If you can't do what made you the same threat you were last year then sit down, learn to read defenses and come back when you are able to run and have confidence in that repaired knee. We don't have time to sit back and wait and hope you come back to where you where. You want to be compared to AP for healing, AP put that team on his back from the jump when he started his first game. Sorry RGIII you have looked suspect and that is even better than what I actually think. Get Cousins in there and have this passing attack work, your throwing into double coverage and behind your recievers isn't the answer IMHO!!!
Posted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:56 pm
by Deadskins
DaSkinz Baby wrote:We don't have time to sit back and wait and hope you come back to where you where.
Sure we do. In fact, we could wait an entire season if we had to. We're talking about a career, not a single year. smh
DaSkinz Baby wrote:You want to be compared to AP for healing, AP put that team on his back from the jump when he started his first game.
No, he didn't. Look at the stats the Vikings first six games. What was their record?
Posted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 7:02 pm
by Countertrey
DaSkinz Baby wrote:IMHO all this PLAY AS IF YOU NEVER WERE GONE IS BULL! If you can't do what made you the same threat you were last year then sit down, learn to read defenses and come back when you are able to run and have confidence in that repaired knee. We don't have time to sit back and wait and hope you come back to where you where. You want to be compared to AP for healing, AP put that team on his back from the jump when he started his first game. Sorry RGIII you have looked suspect and that is even better than what I actually think. Get Cousins in there and have this passing attack work, your throwing into double coverage and behind your recievers isn't the answer IMHO!!!
I've seen him throw into double coverage ONCE... How many times have you seen it? He's thrown 3 picks... 2 of which were catchable tosses that were muffed by receivers... I always prefer facts over exaggeration, myself. The bottom line is, Griff has to do this... at this point there is no choice... he plays... and he learns.
Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 9:44 am
by StorminMormon86
Countertrey wrote:I've seen him throw into double coverage ONCE... How many times have you seen it? He's thrown 3 picks... 2 of which were catchable tosses that were muffed by receivers... I always prefer facts over exaggeration, myself. The bottom line is, Griff has to do this... at this point there is no choice... he plays... and he learns.
I have no doubts that Griffin will never be benched for poor play. But would you personally want to stick with him if we are 0-4 going into the bye (if his play is the same as the first two weeks)?
Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 10:32 am
by SkinsJock
RG3 will not be the QB here if he does not show EACH & EVERY WEEK that he's the best QB we have ...
what's the point of saying "if RG3 shows that he cannot play QB .... "
I have no doubt that Mike will put the best QB out there each week - with both short and long term in mind
I'm not 'sitting' RG3 for Cousins based on the last 2 games ... I want to see this team play well and RG3 play badly ... THEN, I'd consider putting Cousins in ... that is not happening IMO
Cousins is a good QB but he's not near as good as RG3 ...
Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 10:33 am
by emoses14
Deadskins wrote:DaSkinz Baby wrote:You want to be compared to AP for healing, AP put that team on his back from the jump when he started his first game.
No, he didn't. Look at the stats the Vikings first six games. What was their record?
AP 2012: carries/yards W/L
Game 1: 17/84 W
Game 2: 16/60 L
Game 3: 25/86 W
Game 4: 21/102 W
Game 5: 17/88 W
Game 6: 17/79 L (Redskins W)
Game 7: 23/153 W and he was off.
Total TDs through 6 games: 2; Total yards: 499, 4.4 y/carry average (his y/carry for the whole year, 6yds/carry).
So no, not tearing it up from jump by any stretch.
Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 12:54 pm
by LORD GIBBS
stick with him hes our QB ride him through this tuff time he will be back
Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:35 pm
by EA7649
tbh we are stuck with starting him right now. he is our franchise qb. if we were talking prior to game 1 we could bring up benching him, which i thought it would be wise to keep him out a few games. the first 2 games experience will only make griffen better. well be alright after the bye.
Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:39 pm
by riggofan
StorminMormon86 wrote:riggofan wrote:I'm just not buying that Kirk Cousins was going to be the difference maker against the Packers last weekend.
I don't disagree with this at all, but you can't tell me that we wouldn't have had a better shot at winning with the Kirkster against the Eagles in week 1.
Maybe I can't convince you, but I think its debatable. Was Kirk Cousins going to make it less likely that McCoy would break off 200 yards on us?
I don't see how anybody watched that game and thought, "Wow, we would have won that one if only Kirk Cousins had started." Seriously, the Eagles ran all over us on offense and pushed our offensive line around on defense.
Say what you want about that game, but RGIII did bring us back to within six points in the end. Nobody gives him much credit because maybe the Eagles D had backed off some in the second half. But we were still only down six and came very close to recovering the onside kick at the end.
Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:48 pm
by EA7649
riggofan wrote:StorminMormon86 wrote:riggofan wrote:I'm just not buying that Kirk Cousins was going to be the difference maker against the Packers last weekend.
I don't disagree with this at all, but you can't tell me that we wouldn't have had a better shot at winning with the Kirkster against the Eagles in week 1.
Maybe I can't convince you, but I think its debatable. Was Kirk Cousins going to make it less likely that McCoy would break off 200 yards on us?
I don't see how anybody watched that game and thought, "Wow, we would have won that one if only Kirk Cousins had started." Seriously, the Eagles ran all over us on offense and pushed our offensive line around on defense.
Say what you want about that game, but RGIII did bring us back to within six points in the end. Nobody gives him much credit because maybe the Eagles D had backed off some in the second half. But we were still only down six and came very close to recovering the onside kick at the end.
So true!!! The defense has been awful. And did we really have a chance against the Packers? You know? An argument can be said that Griffen gives the defense momentum but still...
Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:51 pm
by DaSkinz Baby
Have you all read the article in the Washington Post from good ole Josh Wilson? Man you talk about a smack in the face for any Redskin fan. He is now the worst hated Redskin of mine!!!
Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 2:50 pm
by langleyparkjoe
DaSkinz Baby wrote:Have you all read the article in the Washington Post from good ole Josh Wilson? Man you talk about a smack in the face for any Redskin fan. He is now the worst hated Redskin of mine!!!
oh naaaaw... what did he say??
Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 3:08 pm
by emoses14
DaSkinz Baby wrote:Have you all read the article in the Washington Post from good ole Josh Wilson? Man you talk about a smack in the face for any Redskin fan. He is now the worst hated Redskin of mine!!!
I hope you're talking about some article other than the one in which he's quoted as responding to a reporter asking him about how many yards the d has given up (and how its setting a record for futility) and his responding that he doesn't care about yards, he's focused on wins and losses.
The one titled, "yards don't matter, wins do"
Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 10:30 am
by StorminMormon86
riggofan wrote:StorminMormon86 wrote:riggofan wrote:I'm just not buying that Kirk Cousins was going to be the difference maker against the Packers last weekend.
I don't disagree with this at all, but you can't tell me that we wouldn't have had a better shot at winning with the Kirkster against the Eagles in week 1.
Maybe I can't convince you, but I think its debatable. Was Kirk Cousins going to make it less likely that McCoy would break off 200 yards on us?
I don't see how anybody watched that game and thought, "Wow, we would have won that one if only Kirk Cousins had started." Seriously, the Eagles ran all over us on offense and pushed our offensive line around on defense.
Say what you want about that game, but RGIII did bring us back to within six points in the end. Nobody gives him much credit because maybe the Eagles D had backed off some in the second half. But we were still only down six and came very close to recovering the onside kick at the end.
Guess we'll agree to disagree on this one. The rust on RGIII is what held our offense back in the first half letting the game get out of reach, IMO.
Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 11:47 am
by Deadskins
StorminMormon86 wrote:Countertrey wrote:I've seen him throw into double coverage ONCE... How many times have you seen it? He's thrown 3 picks... 2 of which were catchable tosses that were muffed by receivers... I always prefer facts over exaggeration, myself. The bottom line is, Griff has to do this... at this point there is no choice... he plays... and he learns.
I have no doubts that Griffin will never be benched for poor play. But would you personally want to stick with him if we are 0-4 going into the bye (if his play is the same as the first two weeks)?
Absolutely! His play has shown steady improvement over those two games, so extrapolating forward as you are, I can't see benching him for getting better.
Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 10:38 am
by HarleyHog
While RGIII hasn't shown the top-end speed we crave, he is still faster and more mobile than the majority of qb's in the league. He is quick enough to be effective running IMO. He may not be a homerun threat quite yet, but 8-12 yards and a slide a few times will likely create opportunities that the straight pocket approach has not. I see progress with Robert and the offense, and thus see no point to sitting him. When else is he supposed to work things out, in walk-thru's?
The D has really disappointed so far, but I don't think they actually suck. The Talent is there, but not the execution. The most frustrating part to me has been seeing the D do good things and putting the opposition into a bad spot, only to commit some stupid penalty or blow an assignment and negate the positive. Haslett managed to tweak last year's squad into relative effectiveness, and I am hopefull that this group will pull it together soon and play as a unit.
We are one game back at present in a division where nobody is playing dominant football. We actually CAN afford to lose a few games while Griffin returns to form as long as our division continues to obligingly collect "L"s. If we get it together and beat the Lions, we could even be tied for the division lead come Monday. If so, this whole conversation will be moot.
I readilly confess that I have alway clung to any silver lining I can find regarding the Skins, but since Bob's debut, I do not think of it as drinking the kool-aid anymore. With RGIII, anything is possible and I have faith.
Re: How Long Should They Play Griffin Without Improvement?
Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:43 pm
by Bishop Hammer
Deadskins wrote:OldSchool wrote:How many games do the rest of you think the Skins should give Griffin before making a change?
16
Best answer all season.
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:13 am
by DaSkinz Baby
So that article about yards don't matter doesn't concern you all? Wow okay to each his own. But while he isn't worried about yards, we continue to stock up in the L column. If teams don't get yards, they don't score, they don't have first downs. No Yards is a pretty good recipe for winning IMHO but what do I know, that defense set the record for most yards allowed thru 3 games and have a record of 0-3 but Josh is right.....Yards don't matter.......SMH!!!
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 1:39 pm
by StorminMormon86
DaSkinz Baby wrote:So that article about yards don't matter doesn't concern you all? Wow okay to each his own. But while he isn't worried about yards, we continue to stock up in the L column. If teams don't get yards, they don't score, they don't have first downs. No Yards is a pretty good recipe for winning IMHO but what do I know, that defense set the record for most yards allowed thru 3 games and have a record of 0-3 but Josh is right.....Yards don't matter.......SMH!!!
I'd say to at least wait until this game against the Raiders before starting the gloom and doom stuff. 1-3 going into the bye would be a considerable difference from 0-4. Now if our team goes out there and lays an egg again I fully expect the sky is falling stuff to start. But it's only week 4. Lots of football to go.
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 1:42 pm
by riggofan
Man, I loved this response in the WashPost mailbag today.
Mike Shanahan is playing Griffin because he is their franchise quarterback and ultimately gives them the best chance to win. Now, having said that, although he didn’t come out and say it at the start of the season, Shanahan knew it was possible that Griffin would encounter some struggles in the opening weeks of the season as he worked his way back into the flow. He didn’t have offseason practices or preseason games. I think the hope, however, was that the defense would have provided more support, and that the other 10 offensive players could have helped compensate for any rust Griffin experienced. But, the defense hasn’t been able to stop anyone, and the team has fallen behind early in games, and Griffin has had to pass more than anyone wanted. The plan of feeding Alfred Morris early and often while Griffin got his groove back has gone out the window because of the large deficits. Griffin has gotten better each week. Is he his old self? Not quite. Is he making improvements? Yes. His knee is structurally sound, it’s just muscle memory and mental sharpness that must be refined. Shanahan could have sat Griffin for the first four weeks of the season, but then he would have faced the Dallas Cowboys in a Week 6 divisional game without any game reps. As is evident, practice-speed reps are nothing like game-speed.
Shanahan also has done the right thing sticking with Griffin. If he’s already working on regaining his confidence, a benching would only rattle him, and possibly jeopardize the player and coach’s relationship. The crazy thing about this past week is, you take away three mistakes — the interception, the fumble and Aldrick Robinson’s drop — and the Redskins are 1-2 and headed for Oakland looking at a good shot at going into the bye with a 2-2 record. The Redskins would’ve likely scored a field goal on both of the drives that ended in turnovers, so it’s possible they could’ve actually led in the fourth quarter. And despite the interception and fumble, Washington still had a chance for the win. Say Aldrick Robinson gets his hand further under the ball by just a couple more inches and keeps it from rolling around before he did secure it. Everyone would’ve been saying, “Okay, Griffin the gangster is back. Mojo is flowing. He got the last bit of ugly out with the turnovers and then shrugged both of them off to throw a game-winning touchdown pass to stop the bleeding.” But, just a couple inches made a difference
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 1:46 pm
by StorminMormon86
I've never been a big fan of "well if this wouldn't have happened we'd be 1-2" because it did happen and you can't erase it. But you can improve on it. I just hope we don't tank against the Raiders because 0-4 going into the bye is going to be a looooong two weeks.
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 1:51 pm
by grampi
I don't know where this "improvement" in RG3 is as I've seen little to no improvement in his play. I want to see him back to 100% and playing like he was last year before his injury as much as anyone else, 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...
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 1:59 pm
by StorminMormon86
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.
Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 1:59 pm
by grampi
langleyparkjoe wrote:You play RG3 until he gets injured (knock on wood), benching him isn't an option.
I disagree....you don't throw away an entire season in hopes that he'll get back to 100%...especially when we have a backup as good as Cousins is...