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

OH...can I reminde you all:
we took the BUCs lightly..........and got socked in the face.

And get rid of that BUM Haslett. He has one great plan vs. the Cowpukes..........then we revert to crap

Robert is in year three and is looking like a rookie out there with his play. Apologists will say that he has "been injured" the last couple of years which is true; however, he should have studied more in the film room and have a better basic grasp of fundamentals. It is quite evident that Robert is uncomfortable looking, at best which, is a sign of a person not quite knowing what to do. Could it be that he is still learning how to be an NFL quarterback? Yes, that is a valid argument, but I will say that the proof is in the pudding. He just isn't playing well and the NFL is a "what have you done for me lately" league. All that Robert has done, from what I can tell, is act like RG-Me. It's an old and tired act which needs to be "reformed" in order for him to progress as a person and in his profession.

This is just a really bad dream.

cowboykillerzRGiii wrote:Just because another teams patchwork oline has success doesnt mean squat! Just a testament to how piss poor our scouting dept has done and the utter lack of depth.

It actually does mean something. If you have a decent quarterback, you don't need an all pro line to win games. That was the point.

StorminMormon86 wrote:

cowboykillerzRGiii wrote:Just because another teams patchwork oline has success doesnt mean squat! Just a testament to how piss poor our scouting dept has done and the utter lack of depth.

It actually does mean something. If you have a decent quarterback, you don't need an all pro line to win games. That was the point.

Exactly. This is why I'm so tired of hearing about the offensive line. I fully understand that having a great offensive line helps a QB, any QB. However, there are playoff contending teams getting it done this year with worse lines than ours.

But we're going to blame the scouting dept.? Give me a freaking break.

StorminMormon86 wrote:

Deadskins wrote:1. Bob has all of the tools, rocket arm, acuracy (this can't be overrated), and brains. Mechanics can be fixed.

Jay Gruden wrote:His footwork was below average. He took three-step drops when he should have taken five. He took a one-step drop when he should have taken three, on a couple occasions, and that can’t happen. He stepped up when he didn’t have to step up and stepped into pressure. He read the wrong side of the field a couple times. So from his basic performance just critiquing Robert it was not even close to being good enough to what we expect from the quarterback position.

Deadskins wrote:2. Getting a new QB only starts the process all over again, and there's no guarantee that the next guy will fare any better.

We're in year three and we still have people saying this is his first year. What's the difference?

Deadskins wrote:3. Instead of wasting more seasons and draft picks trying to find and train somebody new while neglecting the real issue (the line), why not invest those in getting respectable protection for him to let him use his talents.

The real issue (besides Griffin) is the defense. Not the o-line.

Deadskins wrote:Use the picks on non-skill positions. If Bob does ultimately fail, and I doubt he would given real protection, then it would be much easier to plug in his replacement and/or develop a young player behind a new set of hogs.

Nick Foles was playing just fine behind a patchwork o-line. Rodgers as well. Basically we need the hogs back for Griffin to succeed. That's not going to happen.

1. See? Gruden agrees with me. Mechanics can be fixed. All Bob's issues he named have nothing to do with his ability to the job at a high level. He also praised Bob's talents, and said these things could be fixed with time.
2. No one is saying it's his first year. Yes, he's learning a new system, and they are trying to change some of his tendencies (this is the difficult part), so in that respect he's in his first year of this program, but experience-wise, he has almost two full seasons of regular season starts, that a new rookie coming in won't have. That's the difference! It'd be totally stupid to start over at this point.
3. We'll have to agree to disagree there. Yes, the defense is a real issue, and were they to play better, then Bob might not be percieved to be struggling like he is. That doesn't make the issues on the O-line any less real.
4. Yeah Nick was doing great until he got pummeled behind that patchwork line. How long before Sanchez has the same issues? Also, comparing Foles or Rodgers to RGIII is ridiculous. Both sat behind starters for multiple seasons before being asked to come in and be the man.

Deadskins wrote:3. We'll have to agree to disagree there. Yes, the defense is a real issue, and were they to play better, then Bob might not be percieved to be struggling like he is. That doesn't make the issues on the O-line any less real.

I don't agree with everything you've been writing this week, but I'm with you here and I'm trying not to lose sight of it. Griffin is struggling, but there is no doubt it looks even worse because he's not getting much help from the defense.

Deadskins wrote:

StorminMormon86 wrote:Nick Foles was playing just fine behind a patchwork o-line. Rodgers as well. Basically we need the hogs back for Griffin to succeed. That's not going to happen.

4. Yeah Nick was doing great until he got pummeled behind that patchwork line. How long before Sanchez has the same issues? Also, comparing Foles or Rodgers to RGIII is ridiculous. Both sat behind starters for multiple seasons before being asked to come in and be the man.

RGIII was playing behind an offensive line worse than our current one in 2012, with receivers who couldn't even make a backup spot on today's Redskins roster. And he was remarkably successful as a quarterback by just about any metric you want to choose.

What's that? He was largely the beneficiary of a new offensive system that temporarily took defenses by surprise?

Oh, OK, fair point. I got off topic. Back to Nick Foles and pure QB skills, then . . .

It's really an embarrassment of epic proportions when you factor-in the bye week, playing at HOME, playing a 1-8 team, and losing by a decisive margin to boot. Absolutely NO excuse whatsoever.

Bob was raised as a run-option quarterback. Everything he did was predicated by the threat that he would take off. As a result, he was never asked to develop pocket skills until he arrived in DC. None of this is an excuse... it is simple fact.

I have no doubt that Bob has all of the necessary fundamental tools to BECOME a great pocket quarterback. Incredible physical gifts... high levels of intelligence... a drive to work. Yet, I knew that there would be a steep learning curve... not only gaining an understanding of the concepts, but in unlearning bad habits.

So... why has he not progressed much farther than he has? I really woud expect more, at this point.

Countertrey wrote:Bob was raised as a run-option quarterback. Everything he did was predicated by the threat that he would take off. As a result, he was never asked to develop pocket skills until he arrived in DC. None of this is an excuse... it is simple fact.

I have no doubt that Bob has all of the necessary fundamental tools to BECOME a great pocket quarterback. Incredible physical gifts... high levels of intelligence... a drive to work. Yet, I knew that there would be a steep learning curve... not only gaining an understanding of the concepts, but in unlearning bad habits.

So... why has he not progressed much farther than he has? I really woud expect more, at this point.

Totally agree. I'd guess the injuries played a key role in slowing the progress, even causing him to revert to those bad habits when pressured. He's playing a little bit scared right now, IMO, and that only makes things worse.

Take Romo, for example, on the last play of that game. When he saw the blitz coming he tucked down into the fetal position expecting to get hit. After a couple of seconds, he realized they weren't going to get to him, so he popped up and tried to make a throw to Dez. He was definitely playing scared on that final play.

Maybe...just maybe he really was 100% ready to go in 2013. Maybe not in the first few weeks, but probably after the bye.

The more I think about it the more depressing it is: Griffin just might be a guy who can put up a decent game (against Minnesota this year) and then turn right around and have a horrible one. Jason Campbell II.

Irn-Bru wrote:RGIII was playing behind an offensive line worse than our current one in 2012, with receivers who couldn't even make a backup spot on today's Redskins roster. And he was remarkably successful as a quarterback by just about any metric you want to choose.

What's that? He was largely the beneficiary of a new offensive system that temporarily took defenses by surprise?

Oh, OK, fair point. I got off topic. Back to Nick Foles and pure QB skills, then . . .

THANK YOU

Deadskins wrote:

Countertrey wrote:Bob was raised as a run-option quarterback. Everything he did was predicated by the threat that he would take off. As a result, he was never asked to develop pocket skills until he arrived in DC. None of this is an excuse... it is simple fact.

I have no doubt that Bob has all of the necessary fundamental tools to BECOME a great pocket quarterback. Incredible physical gifts... high levels of intelligence... a drive to work. Yet, I knew that there would be a steep learning curve... not only gaining an understanding of the concepts, but in unlearning bad habits.

So... why has he not progressed much farther than he has? I really woud expect more, at this point.

Totally agree. I'd guess the injuries played a key role in slowing the progress, even causing him to revert to those bad habits when pressured. He's playing a little bit scared right now, IMO, and that only makes things worse.

I agree and certainly hope that MacVay and Gruden can help him get his confidence back

would be a huge shame if this athlete cannot find a way to make great things happen on an NFL field

StorminMormon86 wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:RGIII was playing behind an offensive line worse than our current one in 2012, with receivers who couldn't even make a backup spot on today's Redskins roster. And he was remarkably successful as a quarterback by just about any metric you want to choose.

What's that? He was largely the beneficiary of a new offensive system that temporarily took defenses by surprise?

Oh, OK, fair point. I got off topic. Back to Nick Foles and pure QB skills, then . . .

THANK YOU

I think you missed my point.

Countertrey wrote:Bob was raised as a run-option quarterback. Everything he did was predicated by the threat that he would take off. As a result, he was never asked to develop pocket skills until he arrived in DC. None of this is an excuse... it is simple fact.

I have no doubt that Bob has all of the necessary fundamental tools to BECOME a great pocket quarterback. Incredible physical gifts... high levels of intelligence... a drive to work. Yet, I knew that there would be a steep learning curve... not only gaining an understanding of the concepts, but in unlearning bad habits.

So... why has he not progressed much farther than he has? I really woud expect more, at this point.

Agree, and I'm equally as puzzled. All of the tools, talents, and intangibles seemed to be there. But it's all turned into a complete mess.

Irn-Bru wrote:

StorminMormon86 wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:RGIII was playing behind an offensive line worse than our current one in 2012, with receivers who couldn't even make a backup spot on today's Redskins roster. And he was remarkably successful as a quarterback by just about any metric you want to choose.

What's that? He was largely the beneficiary of a new offensive system that temporarily took defenses by surprise?

Oh, OK, fair point. I got off topic. Back to Nick Foles and pure QB skills, then . . .

THANK YOU

I think you missed my point.

No, I got it loud and clear. I was thanking you for pointing out the obvious in what made Griffin (and to a lesser extent) Foles so successful in their rookie years. It was more of a "surprise" system rather than the individual player.

But Foles didn't exactly regress this year did he? Maybe not a lights out near perfection performance like last year, but he was still winning games.

StorminMormon86 wrote:No, I got it loud and clear. I was thanking you for pointing out the obvious in what made Griffin (and to a lesser extent) Foles so successful in their rookie years. It was more of a "surprise" system rather than the individual player.

But Foles didn't exactly regress this year did he? Maybe not a lights out near perfection performance like last year, but he was still winning games.

Foles was a backup his rookie year, and Andy Reid was his coach, not Chip Kelly.

StorminMormon86 wrote:But Foles didn't exactly regress this year did he? Maybe not a lights out near perfection performance like last year, but he was still winning games.

I think you're picking the wrong guy to support here. Foles regressed big time. When he went out injured, he was leading the NFL in turnovers. People in Philadelphia were unhappy with his play. 13 TD passes, 10 INTs, 4 fumbles lost. He was missing open receivers, got gun shy due to his bruised throwing shoulder (before he broke the non-throwing clavicle), and was jittery in the pocket. It was not a good year for him. You may be thinking of him based on the game against Washington, but note that was the extreme. It was by far his best game if the year (best QBR game by 20 points). For example, the game against the Redskins was the only game this year he didn't throw an interception. And he didn't fumble, because of course our defense doesn't turn the ball over anyways.

The Eagles were winning in spite of the QB play, not because of it. That's what a special teams that works, and a defense that turns the ball over and scores points, can do for you. Haven't seen those in DC for years....

PulpExposure wrote:The Eagles were winning in spite of the QB play, not because of it. That's what a special teams that works, and a defense that turns the ball over and scores points, can do for you. Haven't seen those in DC for years....

Fair point.

I still stand by the contention that outside of one or two games this year, Foles has put up respectable numbers despite having a bad offensive line.

Deadskins wrote:

StorminMormon86 wrote:No, I got it loud and clear. I was thanking you for pointing out the obvious in what made Griffin (and to a lesser extent) Foles so successful in their rookie years. It was more of a "surprise" system rather than the individual player.

But Foles didn't exactly regress this year did he? Maybe not a lights out near perfection performance like last year, but he was still winning games.

Foles was a backup his rookie year, and Andy Reid was his coach, not Chip Kelly.

My mistake. I had meant their first year as starters.

StorminMormon86 wrote:

Deadskins wrote:

StorminMormon86 wrote:No, I got it loud and clear. I was thanking you for pointing out the obvious in what made Griffin (and to a lesser extent) Foles so successful in their rookie years. It was more of a "surprise" system rather than the individual player.

But Foles didn't exactly regress this year did he? Maybe not a lights out near perfection performance like last year, but he was still winning games.

Foles was a backup his rookie year, and Andy Reid was his coach, not Chip Kelly.

My mistake. I had meant their first year as starters.

That's a huge difference, though. Sitting behind a veteran for a year or two gives you a huge advantage over a rookie starting fresh out of college.