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

Ftr mike HAS done a lot of good.. he seems to be done here, not because of the beating our team took but because he has given up as a coach. We need an energetic leader... Look at seatle or the harbarough bros, u can't possibly say you don't want that here.
At this point its fanned if you do damned if u don't starting rgiii.. he could use the exp but not at the price of injury. Course if cousins gets killed then its double damned

I'm genuinely curious...for those who want to stick with Griffin for the last three games I ask one simple question: why? For all intents and purposes Shanny and Co. are gone by next year (maybe even before the year is through) so what is three meaningless games going to do to help develop Griffin in a system that he won't even be using next year!? You also run the risk of getting him injured, and as Mike pointed out in the presser, you don't want your franchise QB to go through another offseason with no OTAs, practices, etc. It just makes absolutely no sense to play Griffin from here on out. Shanny's real motives aside, playing Cousins is the correct thing to do for this team.

StorminMormon86 wrote:I'm genuinely curious...for those who want to stick with Griffin for the last three games I ask one simple question: why? For all intents and purposes Shanny and Co. are gone by next year (maybe even before the year is through) so what is three meaningless games going to do to help develop Griffin in a system that he won't even be using next year!? You also run the risk of getting him injured, and as Mike pointed out in the presser, you don't want your franchise QB to go through another offseason with no OTAs, practices, etc. It just makes absolutely no sense to play Griffin from here on out. Shanny's real motives aside, playing Cousins is the correct thing to do for this team.

At this point it doesn't matter. It used to be because we wanted Robert to get better in the pocket and learn. Next year different guy. Go ahead, give it to Cousins. See what happens.

StorminMormon86 wrote:I'm genuinely curious...for those who want to stick with Griffin for the last three games I ask one simple question: why?

Reps.

For all intents and purposes Shanny and Co. are gone by next year (maybe even before the year is through) so what is three meaningless games going to do to help develop Griffin in a system that he won't even be using next year!? You also run the risk of getting him injured, and as Mike pointed out in the presser, you don't want your franchise QB to go through another offseason with no OTAs, practices, etc.

If there is a greater than normal risk of injury, then yes, I think you sit Griffin. (Probably that's going to be the case.) But otherwise, all that stuff about scheme doesn't really matter. Reps are good to have.

StorminMormon86 wrote:I'm genuinely curious...for those who want to stick with Griffin for the last three games I ask one simple question: why? For all intents and purposes Shanny and Co. are gone by next year (maybe even before the year is through) so what is three meaningless games going to do to help develop Griffin in a system that he won't even be using next year!? You also run the risk of getting him injured, and as Mike pointed out in the presser, you don't want your franchise QB to go through another offseason with no OTAs, practices, etc. It just makes absolutely no sense to play Griffin from here on out. Shanny's real motives aside, playing Cousins is the correct thing to do for this team.

It's not just developing him in this system. You can look at these as pre-season games. They aren't going to help the team, but the players still get the game experience. The more Robert plays, the better he will get at reading defenses, developing pocket presence, and just slowing down the game in general. I say play him. Yes, he might get injured, but that could happen in any game at any time, and unless he blows out the knee again, he has four months to recover from an injury before OTAs even begin. Start him, and if things are looking bad or we get a huge lead ( ), then you pull him later in the game.

^^ +1

Like I said - a lot is being made out of this MESS that is just over the top reporting …. as usual

IMO Mike is considering benching RG3 because he feels that's best for the franchise and for RG3
Robert OBVIOUSLY gives the team the best chance at winning but that is not the priority at this time
Cousins can use the playing time and the offense is not badly hurt by having him at QB

I'm sure that Mike discussed this with Dan - I do NOT agree that Robert's 'health' is the primary motive here - it's the best 'move' for the franchise

we don't know that Mike's going to 'bench' Robert but we do know that most of the 'speculation' for why he's doing it is BS

Deadskins wrote:[It's not just developing him in this system. You can look at these as pre-season games. They aren't going to help the team, but the players still get the game experience. The more Robert plays, the better he will get at reading defenses, developing pocket presence, and just slowing down the game in general. I say play him. Yes, he might get injured, but that could happen in any game at any time, and unless he blows out the knee again, he has four months to recover from an injury before OTAs even begin. Start him, and if things are looking bad or we get a huge lead ( ), then you pull him later in the game.

He's taking a massive amount of sacks. He's not learning. Despite what the majority of the fan base believes, the sacks are not all solely the fault of the o-line. I think there was an article written that detailed what factored in to the different sacks in each game, which put a whole different perspective on QB sacks. I really think that was what Shanny was trying to convey in the press conference yesterday, he thinks Griffin is partially to blame for the number of sacks he's been taking so he needs to rest. 3 "preseason" games aren't going to help him develop any less than if he were to rest the remaining games and then have his first full offseason.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-foo ... ion-on-qbs

I would think if this is true, Shanahan will shut down Griffin for the reaminder of the year.

I'm not really convinced this "shut down RGIII" stuff is everything the media has blown it up to be or that Shanahan was all that serious about it. I know he made the comment, but having watched the press conference it was way more an off the cuff remark than anything. And the reporters kind of trapped him into saying certain things. Like clearly the "we need to protect Robert from all the sacks" was kind of a bs excuse from Shanahan, so the reporters backed him into a corner with, "Well that MUST mean for the rest of the season then, RIGHT COACH?" If you watched it, he really didn't come out and lay this all out the way the reports have made it sound.

Any other week, people would have chalked it up to "oh Shanahan wants to make the Falcons prepare for two QBs".

StorminMormon86 wrote:

Deadskins wrote:[It's not just developing him in this system. You can look at these as pre-season games. They aren't going to help the team, but the players still get the game experience. The more Robert plays, the better he will get at reading defenses, developing pocket presence, and just slowing down the game in general. I say play him. Yes, he might get injured, but that could happen in any game at any time, and unless he blows out the knee again, he has four months to recover from an injury before OTAs even begin. Start him, and if things are looking bad or we get a huge lead ( ), then you pull him later in the game.

He's taking a massive amount of sacks. He's not learning. Despite what the majority of the fan base believes, the sacks are not all solely the fault of the o-line. I think there was an article written that detailed what factored in to the different sacks in each game, which put a whole different perspective on QB sacks. I really think that was what Shanny was trying to convey in the press conference yesterday, he thinks Griffin is partially to blame for the number of sacks he's been taking so he needs to rest. 3 "preseason" games aren't going to help him develop any less than if he were to rest the remaining games and then have his first full offseason.

We'll just have to agree to disagree then.

riggofan wrote:I'm not really convinced this "shut down RGIII" stuff is everything the media has blown it up to be or that Shanahan was all that serious about it. I know he made the comment, but having watched the press conference it was way more an off the cuff remark than anything. And the reporters kind of trapped him into saying certain things. Like clearly the "we need to protect Robert from all the sacks" was kind of a bs excuse from Shanahan, so the reporters backed him into a corner with, "Well that MUST mean for the rest of the season then, RIGHT COACH?" If you watched it, he really didn't come out and lay this all out the way the reports have made it sound.

Any other week, people would have chalked it up to "oh Shanahan wants to make the Falcons prepare for two QBs".

+1 - that's why I kind of think that Robert will start …

despite what some may think - these guys all want to win each and every game and Robert will want to be a part of that

I also think that Mike would only pull Robert if he felt that it might in any way help Cousins get some time

Robert's playing IMO and it's for all the right reasons NOT because of what is being speculated by some fans and the media

StorminMormon86 wrote:And if Cousins performs well and we were to go 3-0?

Then we get a first round pick.

Having a good back up QB is not something that you trade away just to pick up a first round pick and a team with a high pick is NOT trading it for Cousins

depth at all positions is really very important, especially at QB

StorminMormon86 wrote:

Deadskins wrote:[It's not just developing him in this system. You can look at these as pre-season games. They aren't going to help the team, but the players still get the game experience. The more Robert plays, the better he will get at reading defenses, developing pocket presence, and just slowing down the game in general. I say play him. Yes, he might get injured, but that could happen in any game at any time, and unless he blows out the knee again, he has four months to recover from an injury before OTAs even begin. Start him, and if things are looking bad or we get a huge lead ( ), then you pull him later in the game.

He's taking a massive amount of sacks. He's not learning. Despite what the majority of the fan base believes, the sacks are not all solely the fault of the o-line. I think there was an article written that detailed what factored in to the different sacks in each game, which put a whole different perspective on QB sacks. I really think that was what Shanny was trying to convey in the press conference yesterday, he thinks Griffin is partially to blame for the number of sacks he's been taking so he needs to rest. 3 "preseason" games aren't going to help him develop any less than if he were to rest the remaining games and then have his first full offseason.

I would say he is learning. People forget before we drafted him he was most not ready out of the top QBS to be drafted. We knew this. He due to many circumstances is trying to be a pocket passer and learn. He had a real good game against the Giants. It doesn't matter. I would expect if Cousins gets the start he will fumble, throw picks and get sacked too. I hope I am wrong of course.

What little action cousins has seen was probably even worse.. hits per drop back, fumbles per drop back, and int per attempt have been piss poor in his limited action.

Storminmormon: that report on sacks revealed nothing to allieviate the blame on the o line except maybe extend some to the wide outs! The most were blown blocks followed by coverage sacks ... The "mistakes" column which I guess mostly credits rgiii were the least. It also didn't take into account all the sacks rgiii avoided by being elusive and scrambling. Jus an fyi

I don't care who starts at this point, so long as the pukes get murdered and enjoy the playoffs from home

riggofan wrote:I'm not really convinced this "shut down RGIII" stuff is everything the media has blown it up to be or that Shanahan was all that serious about it. I know he made the comment, but having watched the press conference it was way more an off the cuff remark than anything. And the reporters kind of trapped him into saying certain things. Like clearly the "we need to protect Robert from all the sacks" was kind of a bs excuse from Shanahan, so the reporters backed him into a corner with, "Well that MUST mean for the rest of the season then, RIGHT COACH?" If you watched it, he really didn't come out and lay this all out the way the reports have made it sound.

Any other week, people would have chalked it up to "oh Shanahan wants to make the Falcons prepare for two QBs".

I thought that was the case too initially, after the little comment he made on Sunday. But then when he went into detail about what he meant on Monday, it made me believe he was strongly considering it. Because on Sunday, he was just saying a roundabout answer about every position, but then Monday he went on to clarify that Griffin specifically was more of a concern for health reasons.

The positive view some of you take on this whole fiasco amazes me. I truly wish I had your outlook, I really do. I am not generally one to doom and gloom but things are getting ugly fast.

When in the history of the NFL has a team benched its prized franchise QB ( especially one still learning/ developing ) for fear of injury because the season was "lost" and they were just playing out the string? I have been trying to think of just one instance and I can come up with nothing. If anyone does know please share because maybe it will help me to understand. All I am able to come up with is a team who has secured a playoff bye resting starters and that is no where close to being the same situation. This benching of RG3 for whatever the reason may be is going to cause a lot more harm then good IMO, both in RG3's confidence and the locker room. I just dont see how anything positive can come from this...

I say this as one of the people who felt that RG3 needed to be humbled and felt his ego was getting the best of him but it has gone from maybe needing a wake up call and learning to be a better leader to possibly ruining the kids future here in DC. I know some of you feel this is a chance to showcase Kirk and possibly get a better draft pick out of him but who says the team is even trading him.. If RG3 is so injury prone that we need to protect him by sitting him these last 3 games, then we certainly need someone like Cousins ready to step in at a moments notice. So we cant trade the kid and now we are creating a possible QB controversy and a split locker room. You are risking losing the player you invested soo much in and getting nothing in return or not near the same value we gave up.

I really hope the powers that be know what they are doing and that all of you with the positive view on this matter are right!

So Mike Shanahan is now the smart coach protecting his player?

Excuse me, January 6 is calling.

I'm not sure that I would classify many of us that are advocating taking a closer look at things than accepting what the VERY biased media is reporting as "positive"

I sure don't feel very positive about the Redskins at this time - I am VERY concerned

we have some major concerns here

I am feeling 'positive' about the QB - that is more towards his potential to help this franchise in the future than at this time

Please Mike......bench yourself now rather than later. Just go

I would like to keep Cousins until his contract is up. Trading him before then would be foolish, IMO.

everydayAskinsday wrote:The positive view some of you take on this whole fiasco amazes me. I truly wish I had your outlook, I really do. I am not generally one to doom and gloom but things are getting ugly fast.

When in the history of the NFL has a team benched its prized franchise QB ( especially one still learning/ developing ) for fear of injury because the season was "lost" and they were just playing out the string? I have been trying to think of just one instance and I can come up with nothing. If anyone does know please share because maybe it will help me to understand. All I am able to come up with is a team who has secured a playoff bye resting starters and that is no where close to being the same situation. This benching of RG3 for whatever the reason may be is going to cause a lot more harm then good IMO, both in RG3's confidence and the locker room. I just dont see how anything positive can come from this...

I say this as one of the people who felt that RG3 needed to be humbled and felt his ego was getting the best of him but it has gone from maybe needing a wake up call and learning to be a better leader to possibly ruining the kids future here in DC. I know some of you feel this is a chance to showcase Kirk and possibly get a better draft pick out of him but who says the team is even trading him.. If RG3 is so injury prone that we need to protect him by sitting him these last 3 games, then we certainly need someone like Cousins ready to step in at a moments notice. So we cant trade the kid and now we are creating a possible QB controversy and a split locker room. You are risking losing the player you invested soo much in and getting nothing in return or not near the same value we gave up.

I really hope the powers that be know what they are doing and that all of you with the positive view on this matter are right!

The closest I can come is Andy Reid benching Vick last year to go with Foles, but that's also not really the same situation because Vick is getting up there in years, and has many more injuries than RGIII.

BTW - Mike's tenure here is most likely over at the end of this season no matter what happens with these next 3 games

THAT happens whether Cousins plays great at QB or not and whether the Redskins win 3 games or lose all 3

Mike is most likely gone - the QB change (if it happens) has nothing to do with Mike staying or leaving

SkinsJock wrote:Mike is most likely gone - the QB change (if it happens) has nothing to do with Mike staying or leaving

But it has something to do with how he leaves.

Deadskins wrote:I'm going to the Falcons' game. I want to see RGIII play. I obviously don't want him to get hurt, but I don't think you can just sit him, either. Let him start, and see how it goes. If we are going down in flames again, then by all means, let others play. This just seems spiteful to me. Especially if RGIII and the Danny really do have a relationship that irritates Shanny.

I cannot tell you how pissed off I am right now. Its bad enough that I have avoided the NFL for 4 weeks because my team is playing like a cricket team in pads, but now NOW this shannahan decides to pull the only player my daughter (who is going to the game with me) wants to see (she's 4)! I don't believe not one report about a rift, between qb coach owner or any combination thereof. This is all just the result of a 3-10 campaign, when you stink [expletive] floats to the surface. But yeah, deciding to sit him when you're playing the 3-10 falcons makes no sense, despite my obvious selfish reasons for being pissed off.