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

He is not an accurate kicker. I believe he has the worst FG percentage of any full time kicker this year. He is not getting it done

yea, the skins don't care though. There are plenty of decent FA kickers every year and they never get one.

While I agree that Graham Cracker needs to get cut, the offense as a whole left 11 points out there completely independent of Gano's woes.

It should be 24 - 3 at the half. Any time you're inside the 10 yard line you HAVE TO score a TD.

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:While I agree that Graham Cracker needs to get cut, the offense as a whole left 11 points out there completely independent of Gano's woes.

It should be 24 - 3 at the half. Any time you're inside the 10 yard line you HAVE TO score a TD.

No team has ever held themselves to that standard, so what's the point of asserting it?

Irn-Bru wrote:No team has ever held themselves to that standard, so what's the point of asserting it?

It you have a credible defense I'd rather turn the ball back over to the opposition inside their 10 rather than at their 20 when the sack of garbage kicker misses the FG.

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:No team has ever held themselves to that standard, so what's the point of asserting it?

It you have a credible defense I'd rather turn the ball back over to the opposition inside their 10 rather than at their 20 when the sack of garbage kicker misses the FG.

Uh, OK . . . but that has nothing to do with my point.

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:No team has ever held themselves to that standard, so what's the point of asserting it?

It you have a credible defense I'd rather turn the ball back over to the opposition inside their 10 rather than at their 20 when the sack of garbage kicker misses the FG.

Wait we have a credible defense? What did I miss?

broomboy wrote:Wait we have a credible defense? What did I miss?

No we don't, as proven in the second half today. However, I'd still rather TRY to score a TD than to automatically turn it over by attempting the FG.

Irn-Bru wrote:Uh, OK . . . but that has nothing to do with my point.

You'll find I deal with Principles rather than anything else. The Principle is that I side the 10 you score a TD 100% of the time or you turn the ball over on downs. If you can't get it in from there you don't deserve to get any points.

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:Uh, OK . . . but that has nothing to do with my point.

You'll find I deal with Principles rather than anything else. The Principle is that I side the 10 you score a TD 100% of the time or you turn the ball over on downs. If you can't get it in from there you don't deserve to get any points.

Well, every offensive coordinator and head coach in the league would say that's preposterous, so I'm not really sure what you're looking in terms of a response. You take the points you can get, play percentages, and look to improve if possible. Games are often won on field goals where you wish you had scored a TD instead.

Irn-Bru wrote:Well, every offensive coordinator and head coach in the league would say that's preposterous, so I'm not really sure what you're looking in terms of a response. You take the points you can get, play percentages, and look to improve if possible. Games are often won on field goals where you wish you had scored a TD instead.

Unless it's the game-winner with no time left on the clock I'd rather lose the game than kick the field goal. As I said, it's all about principles in my mind.

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:Well, every offensive coordinator and head coach in the league would say that's preposterous, so I'm not really sure what you're looking in terms of a response. You take the points you can get, play percentages, and look to improve if possible. Games are often won on field goals where you wish you had scored a TD instead.

Unless it's the game-winner with no time left on the clock I'd rather lose the game than kick the field goal. As I said, it's all about principles in my mind.

Sure, I like principles too. Principles like winning. Refusing to take 3 points is definitely not a way to win ball games.

Irn-Bru wrote:Sure, I like principles too. Principles like winning. Refusing to take 3 points is definitely not a way to win ball games.

Having a competent offense and offensive coaching staff tha gets the team in the endzone is a much better way to win games. This team has neither, as evidenced all season by the number of field goal attempts Graham Cracker has had. That's a sign of in impotent offense in my mind.

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:Sure, I like principles too. Principles like winning. Refusing to take 3 points is definitely not a way to win ball games.

Having a competent offense and offensive coaching staff tha gets the team in the endzone is a much better way to win games. This team has neither, as evidenced all season by the number of field goal attempts Graham Cracker has had. That's a sign of in impotent offense in my mind.

Once again, this has nothing to do with the point. Having "a competent offense" does NOT mean you will be scoring every time you get inside the 10 yard line. In fact, the greatest teams in the history of the NFL weren't able to do that. So why assert it as a standard? It makes no sense.

Irn-Bru wrote:Once again, this has nothing to do with the point. Having "a competent offense" does NOT mean you will be scoring every time you get inside the 10 yard line. In fact, the greatest teams in the history of the NFL weren't able to do that. So why assert it as a standard? It makes no sense.

It's a matter of principles, it doesn't have to "make sense". How mug do you think having a TD instead of a missed (or even made) FG would have helped this piece of garbage team in the first half TODAY. The very idea that a FGA is an acceptable end to a drive is a mentality that breeds losing. Which should explain why it's so well embraced in DC.

After the last play... y'all are still certain that it was the kicker?

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:Once again, this has nothing to do with the point. Having "a competent offense" does NOT mean you will be scoring every time you get inside the 10 yard line. In fact, the greatest teams in the history of the NFL weren't able to do that. So why assert it as a standard? It makes no sense.

It's a matter of principles, it doesn't have to "make sense". How mug do you think having a TD instead of a missed (or even made) FG would have helped this piece of garbage team in the first half TODAY. The very idea that a FGA is an acceptable end to a drive is a mentality that breeds losing. Which should explain why it's so well embraced in DC.

But that doesn't explain why many winners in the league — in fact, ALL OF THEM — have that "mentality." There isn't a single team in the history of the NFL that just refused to kick field goals once they got inside the 10. In fact, all of the great teams won many of their games by taking the three points when it was there.

brad7686 wrote:yea, the skins don't care though. There are plenty of decent FA kickers every year and they never get one.

If that's true, why is Suisham an active kicker?

Irn-Bru wrote:But that doesn't explain why many winners in the league — in fact, ALL OF THEM — have that "mentality." There isn't a single team in the history of the NFL that just refused to kick field goals once they got inside the 10. In fact, all of the great teams won many of their games by taking the three points when it was there.

I would suggest that you and I probably have a very different definition of what a GREAT Team is. The Redskins came CLOSE to having one in 1991. The Dolphins have come the closest of anyone over time with their undefeated season. A GREAT Team must have the mentality to decimate their enemy AT ALL TIMES. They must strive to be perfect. It's probably an unreachable goal, but for teams like the post 1991-92 Washington Redskins who don't even bother to attempt it, there is little to no respect from me and never will be.

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:But that doesn't explain why many winners in the league — in fact, ALL OF THEM — have that "mentality." There isn't a single team in the history of the NFL that just refused to kick field goals once they got inside the 10. In fact, all of the great teams won many of their games by taking the three points when it was there.

I would suggest that you and I probably have a very different definition of what a GREAT Team is. The Redskins came CLOSE to having one in 1991. The Dolphins have come the closest of anyone over time with their undefeated season. A GREAT Team must have the mentality to decimate their enemy AT ALL TIMES. They must strive to be perfect. It's probably an unreachable goal, but for teams like the post 1991-92 Washington Redskins who don't even bother to attempt it, there is little to no respect from me and never will be.

Sooo... are you saying that the 91 'Skins and the '72 Dolphins weren't great teams... just "close"? Are you serious??? That's what you seem to say. Wow... that's a serious standard!

Striving for perfection doesn't mean not taking field goals inside the 10...


PS... I thought you were done...

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:for teams like the post 1991-92 Washington Redskins who don't even bother to attempt it, there is little to no respect from me and never will be.

You must be really fun to spend time with. So do you achieve your standard in your own life?

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:I would suggest that you and I probably have a very different definition of what a GREAT Team is. The Redskins came CLOSE to having one in 1991. The Dolphins have come the closest of anyone over time with their undefeated season. A GREAT Team must have the mentality to decimate their enemy AT ALL TIMES. They must strive to be perfect. It's probably an unreachable goal, but for teams like the post 1991-92 Washington Redskins who don't even bother to attempt it, there is little to no respect from me and never will be.

Well a perfect team would never kick a field goal because they'd score a touchdown on every play.

Sounds like a lot of arbitrary standards and distinctions to cover a stupid generalization. Why not just admit that the original idea wasn't worth hanging onto?

Countertrey wrote:PS... I thought you were done...

He's never going to live that one down.

Countertrey wrote:Sooo... are you saying that the 91 'Skins and the '72 Dolphins weren't great teams... just "close"? Are you serious??? That's what you seem to say. Wow... that's a serious standard!

That is correct. I'm always serious. I had my sense of humor surgically removed as a child to allow my ego to grow to its full size. Yes it is a very tough standard and it always will be, because the moment you start allowing anything less than perfection as accptable, you're setting yourself up to fail.

Countertrey wrote:Striving for perfection doesn't mean not taking field goals inside the 10...

Striving for Perfection means not having to consider kicking fieldgoals in side the 10 because you know that with four downs your team can punch the ball into the end zone; or at worst your defense will hold if you do turn the ball over on downs that deep in the opponent's end of the field.

Countertrey wrote:PS... I thought you were done...

So did I. Unfortunately after 30 years following these losers it's not as easy to walk away as I would like.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:You must be really fun to spend time with. So do you achieve your standard in your own life?

I don't engage in competitive endeavours in my life because I know I can't maintain that standard.