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

tammet wrote:This is true and I give you that my Redskin brother but, why should it be different for Beck vs. Grossman? Why doesn't Rex get that same treatment that you want Beck to have?

Rex's games-
We were healthy, the giants were greatly stuggling with injuries.
Arizona was particularly awful. Dallas made more ghastly mistakes than i've seen in a very long time and we still lost. I CANT believe we lost that game.
St. louis = awful. Philly defense was Rex's greatest test by far this season and that's why he looked so bad. Even in the games won against the crappy teams, he seemed to try and find a way to lose.

Beck, on the other hand has had three FAR tougher challenges in front of him coupled with OL issues, the loss of hightower and moss. So, the Rex vs Beck comparison based games won or most other measures is not , by a long shot, apples to apples. Whenever Arrington says, "but REX won more games" it makes me ill that he can be so unobservant.[/quote]

OK, I beg the differ though. The Giants even depleted are going to win the division. Why? Because they actually have depth. The Cowboys as much as I hate to admit it are a better team than the panthers and the Bills. I know the Bills have a better record but look who has the better defense. I hope the Skins rock against Miami but what if we lose like I expect? Is it ok for Beck to keep losing for the rest of the season? When is it going to be the deadline for Beck? Last game he had wide open receivers all game long. When is it the last straw for Beck?

If I give Beck 3 full seasons which is more than Rex and he still hasn't won one game then what? I just don't believe in him. He is a nice guy. He is trying real hard. Yes our O line is weaker. I am thinking that soon he will get benched and you will see Rex come back and look like crap but will out perform Beck and actually win some games. Of course people will say it was the defense not Rex. Any way let sleeping dogs....

hahaha....time to suck for LUCK for some other stud QB from college.

OK, I beg the differ though. The Giants even depleted are going to win the division. Why? Because they actually have depth.


I agree with you that depth can correlate to success in the face of starter injuries. However, it's seems apparent that the first four games were a bit "lighter" than the recent four.
I'm not a huge Beck fan, but he is improving faster than people will admit, and it will be interesting to see how long that can continue.
Last night's game -eagles/chicago, was a lesson in how much impact an effective OL can have on the success of a quarterback. Cutler reportedly told the coaches that "something must be done, I can't take this many hits"
Prior to last night's game, Cutler had been sacked 22 times; that ranks 6th in the league. They made some very key changes up front and the Eagles sacked him zero times last night and its evident the effect that had on the game and Cutler. What's astonishing is that he had force the hand of coaches to have anything done about it. Amazing.

Irn-Bru wrote:Why don't you tell us how you really feel, DarthMonk? Let it all out, man!



I hear you. But I think we'll get our guy in April.

I love you guys!

skinpride1 wrote:One thing for sure Mike better get it right next year.

Sorry but Darthmonk is right Shanny has done a piss poor job at QB so far.

Now bite me if you don't like it.

Thanks for your support.

DarthMonk

tammet wrote:

Kilmer72 wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/redskins/redskins-john-beck-hard-to-believe-in-hard-to-root-against/2011/11/07/gIQAlqJGxM_story.html

Nuff said I hope.

I listen to Wise daily and he doesnt seem to grasp all the variables before he speaks, unlike his more competent co-host CJ. On that note, I find it interesting that he failed to site the lack of a running game/ dropped balls/ and a still weak OL as contributing factors to the overall poor performance. In short, his article is extremely myopic.

While those are all factors that need to be considered, it doesn't take away from the fact that Beck misses A TON of wide open receivers. His field vision is poor -- which, unfortunetly isn't something that can be fixed by watching tape.

DarthMonk wrote:
He had a shot at the QB with perhaps the best skill set in the NCAA. Oh, that's right - Mallett drank beer in college.

I just saw so many guys open yesterday and can't help but see Mallett in his 8th game with us making defenses play honest because he is incredibly accurate and made all the throws in meaningful games year after year in the SEC ... as opposed to, you know, a 30-year-old "rookie" who hasn't played a meaningful game in years double clutching with open guys waving their hands as they immediately break into the clear.

We have 2 guys who cannot make all the throws. They have pedestrian arms. They are shortish and slowish. One might say they suck. We coulda had a truly gifted player with incred upside for almost free with the two early trade-downs we astutely made.

OMFG

DarthMonk

In terms of Mallet, my issues were not with whether or not he drank beer in college (it was actually getting arrested for public intoxication) -- it had to do with maturity (which can be brought right back to being arreested). I saw a number of Mallet interviews were I came away questioning whether he was mature enough to be a leader (i.e., he came across unprepared, cocky, disinterested, etc). I think you may see be salivating over this guy because it appears he has all the physical tools, but without a head on his shoulders the physical tools are all worthless. So, I wouldn't assume that he would be easily making all the throws (especially as a rookie) that Beck is missing (and I agree Beck is missing a ton of open looks).

All this being said, yes the Pats got value, but I am not sure he is the type of guy that would work well with Shanahan or the current roster. After all, he has been known to "give up" or fold in close games. With our OL, I am not sure we want that type of QB.......

KazooSkinsFan wrote:I've been staunchly arguing the people who bash Beck with zero intelligence or observation regarding the rest of the O and his experience. And I think it's possible. But he hasn't shown me anything, to say it's "VERY likely" seems like a bit of a stretch to me. Let's see what he's got, no pressure, no commitment.

+1

And that article about how it's hard to cheer for Beck but also hard to root against him written in the Washington Post must have been written by one of those people with zero intelligence. They have said that after three games they now realize he is not a NFL quality starting QB. Three games.

Does anyone believe that Beck will win 3 games this year?

How bout 2 because we might take Miami if we get TO of course.

If Beck were a true rookie, he'd still be worse than:

Cam Newton
Andy Dalton
Christian Ponder
Blaine Gabbert

He may be inexperienced, but he's also 30. It's time to show something.

tammet wrote:This is true and I give you that my Redskin brother but, why should it be different for Beck vs. Grossman? Why doesn't Rex get that same treatment that you want Beck to have?

Rex's games-
We were healthy, the giants were greatly stuggling with injuries.
Arizona was particularly awful. Dallas made more ghastly mistakes than i've seen in a very long time and we still lost. I CANT believe we lost that game.
St. louis = awful. Philly defense was Rex's greatest test by far this season and that's why he looked so bad. Even in the games won against the crappy teams, he seemed to try and find a way to lose.

Beck, on the other hand has had three FAR tougher challenges in front of him coupled with OL issues, the loss of hightower and moss. So, the Rex vs Beck comparison based games won or most other measures is not , by a long shot, apples to apples. Whenever Arrington says, "but REX won more games" it makes me ill that he can be so unobservant.

You know, you weren't here way back ... but I recall some fans claiming that guys like Moss were holding back Jason Campbell from success. You know ... too short ... lost a step from his previous glory days, etc. Now, Beck is suffering his absence?

The reality is, that guy behind center has to make it happen ... it's his responsibility to get the ball to the players around him to make plays. And as the QB goes, so too does the entire team. Look at how pitifully inept the Colts are without Peyton Manning if you think the QB position doesn't determine wins and losses more than any other player on the field, or is dependent upon a superstar supporting cast to succeed. Great receivers can make an average QB look better, but it's great QBs who allow great receivers to show their greatness, because without the ball, they are just another guy running down the field waving their empty hand.

Aside the personality issues, look at Brandon Lloyd's success last year leading the league in receiving ... when he was here, we couldn't get him 10 catches ... and he was a total bust .. or was he? Was it him or his QB/offense that failed to get him the ball?

Here's the honest, blunt reality "The Law of Nobody" cannot be ignored or circumvented. That law states that in this day and age, nobody wins with a nobody under center ... nobody. And, particularly a 30 year old nobody who has failed to become anybody by nailing down at least the backup somebody role with two other teams. And, Nobody trades a promising QB for Doug Dutch, a practice squad player who failed to make the roster of the Las Vegas Locomotives. Nobody.

And, apparently, nobody coaching the Redskins is aware of this law.

RayNAustin wrote:

tammet wrote:This is true and I give you that my Redskin brother but, why should it be different for Beck vs. Grossman? Why doesn't Rex get that same treatment that you want Beck to have?

Rex's games-
We were healthy, the giants were greatly stuggling with injuries.
Arizona was particularly awful. Dallas made more ghastly mistakes than i've seen in a very long time and we still lost. I CANT believe we lost that game.
St. louis = awful. Philly defense was Rex's greatest test by far this season and that's why he looked so bad. Even in the games won against the crappy teams, he seemed to try and find a way to lose.

Beck, on the other hand has had three FAR tougher challenges in front of him coupled with OL issues, the loss of hightower and moss. So, the Rex vs Beck comparison based games won or most other measures is not , by a long shot, apples to apples. Whenever Arrington says, "but REX won more games" it makes me ill that he can be so unobservant.

You know, you weren't here way back ... but I recall some fans claiming that guys like Moss were holding back Jason Campbell from success. You know ... too short ... lost a step from his previous glory days, etc. Now, Beck is suffering his absence?

The reality is, that guy behind center has to make it happen ... it's his responsibility to get the ball to the players around him to make plays. And as the QB goes, so too does the entire team. Look at how pitifully inept the Colts are without Peyton Manning if you think the QB position doesn't determine wins and losses more than any other player on the field, or is dependent upon a superstar supporting cast to succeed. Great receivers can make an average QB look better, but it's great QBs who allow great receivers to show their greatness, because without the ball, they are just another guy running down the field waving their empty hand.

Aside the personality issues, look at Brandon Lloyd's success last year leading the league in receiving ... when he was here, we couldn't get him 10 catches ... and he was a total bust .. or was he? Was it him or his QB/offense that failed to get him the ball?

Here's the honest, blunt reality "The Law of Nobody" cannot be ignored or circumvented. That law states that in this day and age, nobody wins with a nobody under center ... nobody. And, particularly a 30 year old nobody who has failed to become anybody by nailing down at least the backup somebody role with two other teams. And, Nobody trades a promising QB for Doug Dutch, a practice squad player who failed to make the roster of the Las Vegas Locomotives. Nobody.

And, apparently, nobody coaching the Redskins is aware of this law.

In the words of Frank Zappa "great googly moogly"

You hit the nail on the head.

Here's the honest, blunt reality "The Law of Nobody" cannot be ignored or circumvented. That law states that in this day and age, nobody wins with a nobody under center ... nobody.



Adam Smith is a very pedestrian quarterback who had the good fortune to have Harbaugh design a scheme around him. SF has pretty much the same players as last year , but this year they are faring much better. Apparently, Singletary, much like the Shannies could learn a lesson of creating synergy between the players (particularly the QB) and the scheme. With regards to the colts, their defense has been slipping for several years. Even Freeney expounded on those failings being the result of "extreme inconsistency". The Colts precipitous fall from offensive grace also has a lot to do with disparity between Painter and Manning. Here, you have the top QB in the league backed up by one of the worst. The irony of that can't be overstated.
And a great QB is NOT going to "win games" when the collective effort is less than good. Cam Newton is a really good GB, but their recond suggest someting else. The QB alone does not make an otherwise crappy team great, and typically, never has. Kinda like an otherwise good running back will, for the most part perform mediorcre at best behind a suspect OL. Ryan Torrain is HORRIBLE against anything other than poor defenses, and I don't want to watch him run another silly failing sweep. He is too slow for that nonsense.
I hate the phrase, "How many games the quarterback has won". Its basically, greatly oversimplifying the reasons for wins and losses. It's well accepted that a team with a great QB will win more than a team with a poor one. However, the extent of any team's success lies in the totality of talent, coaching , etc, Otherwise the colts would have won , or at least been to, the superbowl every year of Manning's tenure.

tammet wrote:Here's the honest, blunt reality "The Law of Nobody" cannot be ignored or circumvented. That law states that in this day and age, nobody wins with a nobody under center ... nobody.



Adam Smith is a very pedestrian quarterback who had the good fortune to have Harbaugh design a scheme around him. SF has pretty much the same players as last year , but this year they are faring much better. Apparently, Singletary, much like the Shannies could learn a lesson of creating synergy between the players (particularly the QB) and the scheme. With regards to the colts, their defense has been slipping for several years. Even Freeney expounded on those failings being the result of "extreme inconsistency". The Colts precipitous fall from offensive grace also has a lot to do with disparity between Painter and Manning. Here, you have the top QB in the league backed up by one of the worst. The irony of that can't be overstated.
And a great QB is NOT going to "win games" when the collective effort is less than good. Cam Newton is a really good GB, but their recond suggest someting else. The QB alone does not make an otherwise crappy team great, and typically, never has. Kinda like an otherwise good running back will, for the most part perform mediorcre at best behind a suspect OL. Ryan Torrain is HORRIBLE against anything other than poor defenses, and I don't want to watch him run another silly failing sweep. He is too slow for that nonsense.
I hate the phrase, "How many games the quarterback has won". Its basically, greatly oversimplifying the reasons for wins and losses. It's well accepted that a team with a great QB will win more than a team with a poor one. However, the extent of any team's success lies in the totality of talent, coaching , etc, Otherwise the colts would have won , or at least been to, the superbowl every year of Manning's tenure.

Shhhh, don't make to much sense. Just have blind faith my friend.

Kilmer72 wrote:... Shhhh, don't make to much sense. Just have blind faith my friend.

yeah - we'd be so much better if we had a good QB

look at how well the Panthers are doing with Newton - and he's the rookie of the year after 8 games


we're not losing games SOLELY because of Beck - this offense has many other issues

Beck is not a good QB but he'll be the starter until he shows that he's worse than Grossman


btw - WHO is Adam Smith?

I think we have a good shot at winning the next 3 games coming up. Flame me if you want, but I still don't see the gloom and doom that others are seeing.

StorminMormon86 wrote:I think we have a good shot at winning the next 3 games coming up. Flame me if you want, but I still don't see the gloom and doom that others are seeing.

I agree with you that we could win at least two of the next three based upon positive changes being made on the OL and Beck consistantly erasing bad habits with each passing week. I was surprised the OL did as well as they did against the DL of San Fran. Not saying they set the world on fire, but given the fact that San Fran's DL is much better than Buffalo's, it's obvious that the substitutions the skins made were effective.
Becks biggest problem last week was holding onto the ball too long. This week he did not do that at all. In fact, he got rid of it too soon to the detriment of missing some open recievers downfield. This week I would assume, based on his weekly incremental improvement, that he will have some success with downfield targets instead of constantly dumping it off for 5 yard at a time.

tammet wrote:

StorminMormon86 wrote:I think we have a good shot at winning the next 3 games coming up. Flame me if you want, but I still don't see the gloom and doom that others are seeing.

I agree with you that we could win at least two of the next three based upon positive changes being made on the OL and Beck consistantly erasing bad habits with each passing week. I was surprised the OL did as well as they did against the DL of San Fran. Not saying they set the world on fire, but given the fact that San Fran's DL is much better than Buffalo's, it's obvious that the substitutions the skins made were effective.
Becks biggest problem last week was holding onto the ball too long. This week he did not do that at all. In fact, he got rid of it too soon to the detriment of missing some open recievers downfield. This week I would assume, based on his weekly incremental improvement, that he will have some success with downfield targets instead of constantly dumping it off for 5 yard at a time.

Holding the ball too long....throwing too soon.

HECK BECK....YOU GOTTA STAY "MEDIUM".......

Why Beck is likely to start the rest of the year

By Rich Tandler

You do not need any advanced statistical analysis to figure out why John Beck remains the Redskins starting quarterback despite the fact that the team has not won a game with him under center. Even though Rex Grossman has led the team to three wins this year, don’t look for him to be playing with the first team any time soon.

Beck has one very important advantage of Grossman that virtually guarantees that, barring disaster, he will be starting for the rest of the season.

What is Beck’s big advantage?

His contract.

Soon after Beck was traded from the Ravens to the Redskins in August of 2010, he signed a three-year contract extension. He is signed through the 2012 season.

When Grossman came to the Redskins in 2010, he signed a one-year contract. After the lockout ended this year he signed another one-year deal. He hinted that he could have signed for longer but he decided he would rather have the ability to negotiate a new deal in 2012.

That would have allowed Grossman to cash in if he could have a solid 2011 season. Things were looking good when the Redskins started 3-1 and Grossman was making plays and moving the team. But then came the four-interception game against the Eagles and his subsequent move to the bench.

And he is likely to remain on the bench for the rest of the season at least in part because even if he overcomes his turnover-prone ways, the Redskins may not be the team that benefits from his improvement. When the league year starts next March, Rex will be able to sign anywhere he wants to.

Availability next year is particularly important because the Redskins are likely to draft a quarterback in April. They will need a transitional signal caller who can start the season and who will be able to take over from time to time if the rookie struggles. If Grossman is gone, he can’t be that guy.

But Beck remains under the Redskins’ control through the transitional 2012 season. He could be that bridge quarterback if he can develop into a marginally competent NFL QB. The Redskins will spend the rest of this year giving Beck that chance because they know that they can keep him here next year. If they spend the time on Grossman there is no assurance that he will be back next year.

Red_One43 wrote:Why Beck is likely to start the rest of the year

By Rich Tandler

I dont' think that'll have anything to do with it. Grossman won't be hard to sign and Beck's not making enough to sway that decision. This can happen, but to apply this to Beck and Grossman is overthinking it.

^^ +1

the choice for QB here is simply who gives the offense the best shot at being successful - EACH WEEK

NOBODY is really concerned AT THIS TIME about who is going to be here NEXT SEASON

NEITHER Beck or Grossman is going to be a very good QB in 2012 - I doubt that both are here next season

RayNAustin wrote:

tammet wrote:This is true and I give you that my Redskin brother but, why should it be different for Beck vs. Grossman? Why doesn't Rex get that same treatment that you want Beck to have?

Rex's games-
We were healthy, the giants were greatly stuggling with injuries.
Arizona was particularly awful. Dallas made more ghastly mistakes than i've seen in a very long time and we still lost. I CANT believe we lost that game.
St. louis = awful. Philly defense was Rex's greatest test by far this season and that's why he looked so bad. Even in the games won against the crappy teams, he seemed to try and find a way to lose.

Beck, on the other hand has had three FAR tougher challenges in front of him coupled with OL issues, the loss of hightower and moss. So, the Rex vs Beck comparison based games won or most other measures is not , by a long shot, apples to apples. Whenever Arrington says, "but REX won more games" it makes me ill that he can be so unobservant.

You know, you weren't here way back ... but I recall some fans claiming that guys like Moss were holding back Jason Campbell from success. You know ... too short ... lost a step from his previous glory days, etc. Now, Beck is suffering his absence?

The reality is, that guy behind center has to make it happen ... it's his responsibility to get the ball to the players around him to make plays. And as the QB goes, so too does the entire team. Look at how pitifully inept the Colts are without Peyton Manning if you think the QB position doesn't determine wins and losses more than any other player on the field, or is dependent upon a superstar supporting cast to succeed. Great receivers can make an average QB look better, but it's great QBs who allow great receivers to show their greatness, because without the ball, they are just another guy running down the field waving their empty hand.

Ray,
I have literally been trying to say this since the very first day I posted on this cite. As I recall, you and I were a couple of the very few posters that would not make excuses for Campbell. Talented QBs make it happen -- regardless of the circumstances (with some minor exceptions). Brady had no receivers (outside of Branch -- and how did he do in Seattle again? and Patton -- and how he do with the skins?) but still put up crazy numbers and won SBs. You can also look at the receiving corps for Brees, Schaub (without Williams), Fitzpatrick, Eli, Romo, and others who don't have a top WR. They make it happen regardless of who lines up wide.

Bottom line, there are two ways to resurrect (or have a good one) an offense: by having an all-star OL or a superstar QB. Honestly, if you have one or the other, all your RBs, TEs, and WRs will look decent (assuming at least a mediocre OL or QB). If you have both, you have a SB contender (barring a horrendous defense). Why our front office has never understood this very simple concept totally baffles me.

The issue is that whining and excuse-making has plagued this city and team for a very long time. We have to realize that the players are only as good as the results they produce on the field -- and not by how other players affect them. I find it obvious that we have two of the worst QBs in the league and one of the worst OLs in football due to injuries (although we potentially only have 2 decent OLs). Lets stop crying about who is worse or a greater detriment to the team and hold players accountable for their own performances. Also, lets stop tying to put band-aids on this team and realize that in order to be successful it is imperative that our front office has the talent to identify college talent, invest in that talent and BUILD a team -- letting them evolve together and to not slap players together in hopes that they gell.

Football is a team sport. In order for a team to be successful, they need to play together, learn one anothers capabilities and assignments. This takes time. It cannot be done in the off-season or during practices.

Whether we like it or not, Dan Snyder has made this once proud franchise the laughing stock of the NFC East and the NFL in general. The smirks and laughs I get when I tell people I am a skins fan is depressing. We need to honest with ourselves and realize that there is no quick fix.

Allen & Shanahan have begun to put together a group here that is going to result in us having a team we can be proud of again

there have been mistakes but there have been a lot of good additions too

the QB position hurts and the fact we could not get one in the last draft really sucks
THANKFULLY we did not reach on a QB - we cannot bring in a QB that does not become a very good QB



these guys will continue to add players that will result in a franchise that we all can be proud of - AND SOON

A Lombardi quotation from the most excellent biography of Vince Lombardi When Pride Still Mattered:

"Football's central flaw is that one player, the quarterback, is too important."

PS - this book is on Google if you don't want to buy it.

http://books.google.com/books?id=iM_WWZ ... ce=gbs_atb

DarthMonk

markshark84 wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:

tammet wrote:This is true and I give you that my Redskin brother but, why should it be different for Beck vs. Grossman? Why doesn't Rex get that same treatment that you want Beck to have?

Rex's games-
We were healthy, the giants were greatly stuggling with injuries.
Arizona was particularly awful. Dallas made more ghastly mistakes than i've seen in a very long time and we still lost. I CANT believe we lost that game.
St. louis = awful. Philly defense was Rex's greatest test by far this season and that's why he looked so bad. Even in the games won against the crappy teams, he seemed to try and find a way to lose.

Beck, on the other hand has had three FAR tougher challenges in front of him coupled with OL issues, the loss of hightower and moss. So, the Rex vs Beck comparison based games won or most other measures is not , by a long shot, apples to apples. Whenever Arrington says, "but REX won more games" it makes me ill that he can be so unobservant.

You know, you weren't here way back ... but I recall some fans claiming that guys like Moss were holding back Jason Campbell from success. You know ... too short ... lost a step from his previous glory days, etc. Now, Beck is suffering his absence?

The reality is, that guy behind center has to make it happen ... it's his responsibility to get the ball to the players around him to make plays. And as the QB goes, so too does the entire team. Look at how pitifully inept the Colts are without Peyton Manning if you think the QB position doesn't determine wins and losses more than any other player on the field, or is dependent upon a superstar supporting cast to succeed. Great receivers can make an average QB look better, but it's great QBs who allow great receivers to show their greatness, because without the ball, they are just another guy running down the field waving their empty hand.

Ray,
I have literally been trying to say this since the very first day I posted on this cite. As I recall, you and I were a couple of the very few posters that would not make excuses for Campbell. Talented QBs make it happen -- regardless of the circumstances (with some minor exceptions). Brady had no receivers (outside of Branch -- and how did he do in Seattle again? and Patton -- and how he do with the skins?) but still put up crazy numbers and won SBs. You can also look at the receiving corps for Brees, Schaub (without Williams), Fitzpatrick, Eli, Romo, and others who don't have a top WR. They make it happen regardless of who lines up wide.

Bottom line, there are two ways to resurrect (or have a good one) an offense: by having an all-star OL or a superstar QB. Honestly, if you have one or the other, all your RBs, TEs, and WRs will look decent (assuming at least a mediocre OL or QB). If you have both, you have a SB contender (barring a horrendous defense). Why our front office has never understood this very simple concept totally baffles me.

The issue is that whining and excuse-making has plagued this city and team for a very long time. We have to realize that the players are only as good as the results they produce on the field -- and not by how other players affect them. I find it obvious that we have two of the worst QBs in the league and one of the worst OLs in football due to injuries (although we potentially only have 2 decent OLs). Lets stop crying about who is worse or a greater detriment to the team and hold players accountable for their own performances. Also, lets stop tying to put band-aids on this team and realize that in order to be successful it is imperative that our front office has the talent to identify college talent, invest in that talent and BUILD a team -- letting them evolve together and to not slap players together in hopes that they gell.

Football is a team sport. In order for a team to be successful, they need to play together, learn one anothers capabilities and assignments. This takes time. It cannot be done in the off-season or during practices.

Whether we like it or not, Dan Snyder has made this once proud franchise the laughing stock of the NFC East and the NFL in general. The smirks and laughs I get when I tell people I am a skins fan is depressing. We need to honest with ourselves and realize that there is no quick fix.