Veryoldschool

Let's All Get Behind Alex Smith!

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, crabbypatty said:

IIRC they offered him $16 million a year after the season. That obviously wasn't enough as he didn't even bother to respond to it, so yes, north of $20 million with more guaranteed money would probably have been what was required to extend him after the 2015 season. There were plenty of arguments here about it, because he only had 8 "good" games as a starter and there was plenty of debate as to whether big multi year extension was warranted based on that half season.

 

Again, who is being disingenuous here? You claimed it would take “20+ million” early in 2015.

 

1) NO ONE WAS TALKING ABOUT EARLY 2015. 

 

2) That’s unequivocally false because Kirk’s side countered the team with a 19.5 million/year deal. 

 

1 hour ago, crabbypatty said:

Really? you knew all this for a fact way back then?? Do you forget the dismal start to the 2015 season he had? People were begging for him to be benched. Prior to his 3 touchdown tampa breakout game he had thrown 6td's and 8 int's through the first 7 weeks, and the team was averaging 16 ppg and appeared stuck in neutral. After his hot 2nd half of the season, at the time who was to say which kirk was the real one long term? IIRC, after the 2015 season and the 16 million offer he had already made up his mind to play on the Tag, so unless some giant outlandish offer came in, he was gonna take the guaranteed money.. there was no impetus for him not to take the tag money, as he would have that guaranteed amount plus a ltd the next offseason if he so chose.

 

A lot of us were, who the heck are you to tell me how we felt back then? Would you like me to show you those posts? Many of us didn’t see it as “Kirk’s dismal start”, and fully expected him to get better as the season wore on. 

 

But that doesn’t matter. A lot of us felt Kirk was going to maintain at worst and that it’d only increase his price if he played on the tag. This is 100% fact. You’re embarrassing yourself right now trying to revise this history.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alex Smith will be okay.  Just go look at the highlights from the Chiefs vs Patriots and Jets games from 2017.I know they lost the Jets game but man that was fun to watch.  Hopefully we see a lot of that Alex Smith. Looking forward to this season. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, crabbypatty said:

So yes I stand by my "disingenuous" claim of 20+ million, because 16 million/yr apparently didn't even warrant a response from Kirk's camp. In fact there were articles that came out after 2015 where Kirk stated he was perfectly happy playing on the FT and would revisit the situation next year, meaning his mind was made up pretty early in the process.. he was going to "bet on himself"

 

FALSE.

 

His side countered with under 20 million per year, as stated. The team didn’t respond. Kirk being a good sport and saying what he said is not in any way proof of anything. 

 

But keep revising the history to make yourself feel better. The fact is they've allocated at least $115 million in cap space, a 3rd round pick and Fuller over a period of 5 years (2016-2020) to the position. There is no way around that, as much as you’d like Bruce to be an innocent victim to circumstance. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, MisterPinstripe said:

Can we not turn an Alex Smith thread into a discussion about Cousins? Surely that can go somewhere else.

 

Thank you.

 

Imo There is no point of dragging on the conversation about Kirk Cousins anymore. He is gone, Alex Smith is here. Let’s just get behind him and root him on.

 

Same for the draft, the team traded for Kevin Hogan and that’s your project QB. Root him on as well and forget about what might have been in the 2018 draft.

 

Too many people are uninformed about this situation to constantly argue the points that they want to make. Like what it would have been like to not trade for Alex Smith in draft capital which no one can say for sure what it would have cost. And too many of the same posters can’t seem to come to grips with the Chiefs needing cap space which is why they moved on from Alex Smith. I’m done trying to reason with the people who pretend that we have a way back machine and can undo this trade or pretending that hindsight matters at all about 2015 when it’s ancient history and things can’t be undone.

 

From here on out I will shut up and just root for Alex Smith and continue enjoying the many articles and interviews coming out on ESPN where Crowder and Guice say how Alex is a leader (something never said about Kirk) and how they are expecting great things this year and going to ignore all of the nonsense the same people say about how Alex is too old when by NFL starting QB standards isn’t the case. I don’t think anyone is going to change any ones opinions here anymore but know this, Alex Smith is the best QB this teams had in many many years and he deserves the fans support. Signing off 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

Disingenuous? Give me a break. :rolleyes: 

 

First off, the only one being disingenuous is you with that “20+ million” number in “early 2015”. There’s absolutely NOTHING out there suggesting that was ever remotely the demand or the market for him. He and his agent did what most players do in that situation, just play out the season and see what happens. 

 

After that, there were many of us at the time saying that allowing him to play on the franchise tag was foolish and that there was no way he’d regress so badly that signing him long term wasn’t the better idea. This required very little in the way of foresight. There’s a reason teams don’t tag QBs. It’s too expensive and the position is similar to that of a coach’s, where stability is important in terms of his ability to lead and you don’t want him playing as a lame duck. 

 

It’s been detailed a thousand times over by myself and many others. I might as well just copy and paste what I’ve said in the past on the matter and it’d dismantle every single argument you’ve made here. Nothing disingenuous about it, the sunk cost happened BECAUSE of a lack of foresight that is required by any FO. Most executives lose their jobs over much less significant matters, yet Bruce is still here after this ridiculous waste of resources.

 

It’s disgusting, and if you want to justify it that’s fine, but don’t attack others who see it for what it is. Why don’t you compare it to the rest of the league in terms of resource management and get back to me? 

 

 Oh, let me guess, “unique situation, can’t blame them”! Like they had no hand in creating that situation, just randomly occurred.  :ols: 

 

 

The Redskins are literally the only team anyone can remember who let letting a good QB simply walk out the door with zero compensation.  Impossible to defend that.

  • Like 6
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

FALSE.

 

His side countered with under ( 19 20 million per year, as stated. The team didn’t respond. Kirk being a good sport and saying what he said is not in any way proof of anything. 

 

 

 

I think it might have been the other way around as crabbypatty was suggesting.

 

 

Quote

Cousins’s camp was reportedly looking for $19 million per year and roughly $44 million in guaranteed money. The Redskins, unconvinced after one full season ......... , countered by offering a deal in the neighborhood of $16 million per year 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Spearfeather said:

 

I think it might have been the other way around as crabbypatty was suggesting.

 

 

 

 

That's not what he was suggesting. At least, that's not how it reads. He needs to clarify if this is what he meant.

 

First, he said this: 

 

"The $44 million was a sunk cost. Should they have signed Kirk long term early in 2015? Yes. Would anyone have felt comfortable handing out 20+ million at that point? no."

 

His narrative followed off of that. The implication is that Kirk's side wanted $20+ from the onset, which simply wasn't true. The fact that Kirk's side offered under $20 million dispels that notion on its own. Who offered whom what first and who countered doesn't even matter here. But I'd like you to post a link to the source of your info, because I've heard it otherwise, as well. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

 

 

His narrative followed off of that. The implication is that Kirk's side wanted $20+ from the onset, which simply wasn't true. The fact that Kirk's side offered under $20 million dispels that notion on its own. Who offered whom what first and who countered doesn't even matter here. But I'd like you to post a link to the source of your info, because I've heard it otherwise, as well. 

 

Sure

:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dc-sports-bog/wp/2018/03/13/kirk-cousins-in-washington-a-timeline-from-awkward-start-to-lucrative-departure/?utm_term=.1151bdcef86f

 

I agree that it probably wouldn't have taken " north " of 20 mill a year to sign him after 2015.

 

Edited by Spearfeather
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Spearfeather said:

 

Sure

:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dc-sports-bog/wp/2018/03/13/kirk-cousins-in-washington-a-timeline-from-awkward-start-to-lucrative-departure/?utm_term=.1151bdcef86f

 

I agree that it probably wouldn't have taken " north " of 20 mill a year to sign him after 2015.

 

 

Yeah, this is the entire quote from that article: 

 

Quote

February 2016: Washington makes a lowball offer

Cousins’s camp was reportedly looking for $19 million per year and roughly $44 million in guaranteed money. The Redskins, unconvinced after one full season with Cousins as a starter that he was a franchise quarterback, countered by offering a deal in the neighborhood of $16 million per year with $24 million guaranteed. It was a particularly unimpressive offer given that Cousins stood to earn $19.95 million guaranteed by playing under the franchise tag. With the two sides unable to come to an agreement, Washington used the non-exclusive franchise tag on Cousins, retaining his services for another year.

 

 

I'm not sure they got this exactly right to use the word "counter" here, but like I said, it doesn't really matter. And they don't suggest here that Kirk's camp didn't respond after their $16 million offer. They're just saying "here is what both sides wanted", basically. Either way, I've read it from numerous sources differently but that's not the essence of the point I was making. ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

Yeah, this is the entire quote from that article: 

 

 

 

I'm not sure they got this exactly right to use the word "counter" here, but like I said, it doesn't really matter. And they don't suggest here that Kirk's camp didn't respond after their $16 million offer. They're just saying "here is what both side wanted", basically. Either way, I've read it from numerous sources differently but that's not the essence of the point I was making. ;) 

 

 

O.K. but it definitely doesn't suggest that he did counter, either. I think there maybe was some contract talks in 2014 ( maybe ? ) but from what I've seen Cousins never responded to any offer from the Team except franchise tag offers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Spearfeather said:

 

 

O.K. but it definitely doesn't suggest that he did counter, either. I think there maybe was some contract talks in 2014 ( maybe ? ) but from what I've seen Cousins never responded to any offer from the Team except franchise tag offers.

 

True, but I don't think they were getting into that stuff in terms of who countered who and when, really. Again, it doesn't matter pertaining to the point I was making.

 

I'm sure @Skinsinparadise, who is an encyclopedia of knowledge regarding all of the media narratives out there on the topic, can clarify all of this as he has a million times. But, yeah, I've heard it the other way around, as well.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

As for some of the debate on Kirk -- here are some articles.  I wasn't in the mood to weigh in.  But some saying here's what went down with Kirk, case closed -- that got my attention -- because I followed that soap opera's every turn back then.  For those interested here are somethings relevant to the discussion. Yeah its water under the bridge -- old news.  But these are the people that still make decisions here that dealt with Kirk.   People can ignore as much as they like here.  I am not debating Kirk.  But the idea that one side is misinformed on this -- I think is wildly off. 

 

https://www.hogshaven.com/2017/3/9/14866610/report-redskins-rejected-kirk-cousins-deal-for-3-years-19-5-million-per-year-last-offseason

 

According to “a source with knowledge of the Redskins’ decision,” Cousins’ camp offered the Redskins a “three-year deal last February worth $19.5 [million] a year with significant guarantees.” That offer was still on the table in July.

The Redskins reportedly offered Kirk Cousins a deal worth $16 million a year, with $24 million dollars guaranteed last year, and didn’t budge off of that number. It wasn’t reported what Cousins counteroffer was, but it was assumed to be the price of the franchise tag. Grant Paulsen of 106.7 the fan is reporting that is exactly what they wanted, but the Redskins turned them down. The team wanted to see more from Cousins, and didn’t want to be locked in if Cousins was unable to replicate his success at the end of the 2015 season.

 

https://www.si.com/mmqb/2016/08/24/kirk-cousins-washington-redskins-contract-nfl-notebook

“When I go out on the football field on a Sunday afternoon, if I feel my quarterback gives me a chance to win, I’ll take him,” Gruden said. “And that’s not always the case in pro football. It’s a big deal, and he gives us a chance to win. He’s very smart, great leader, can make all the throws. And at the end of the day, the players all like him and want to play for him. That’s good enough for me.”

 

John Keim

http://www.espn.com/blog/washington-redskins/post/_/id/31870/dan-snyders-desire-jay-grudens-play-calling-could-help-kirk-cousins-long-term-future-with-redskins

Cousins has said publicly several times that he likes playing in Washington; sources have said he's privately told them the same. Multiple sources over the past few weeks have reiterated that he’d definitely consider staying here beyond 2017. However, when the team president makes a statement like this, it certainly doesn't help.

 

Was that offer made before the pre-tag deadline in March? If so, that could have kick-started talks. Was the offer made in May? That would have been too late. In essence, Cousins would have received one additional year of guaranteed money (two years overall) – but he can do much better when he hits free agency. The deal, a five-year extension, never made sense for Cousins to sign.

 

But if the statement was designed to get fans on the Redskins' side, then it could turn fans against the very quarterback that the Skins say they want to keep around. Unless they now know they won't. Is that statement really the way the Redskins want to enter training camp?

 

...Leverage: If there’s no threat of a future franchise tag, it would alter Cousins’ stance. The Redskins needed to make offers the past two years that reflected their ability to keep him under the tag. They did not, opting for offers that might have made sense if had he been completely free. If they don’t use a tag on him next offseason, then everyone finally will see his true market value.

 

https://247sports.com/nfl/washington-redskins/Bolt/Jerry-Brewer-Kirk-Cousins-doesnt-want-to-be-here-112610645

 

One of those is Washington Post writer Jerry Brewer, who believes that despite Cousins' comfort in the Washington Redskins offense and his relationship with Jay Gruden, the damage has already been done in regards to his relationship with the front office. Speaking to Chad Ryan of Redskins Capital Connection, Brewer shed light on the situation behind the scenes with Cousins, and how fractured the relationship is between him and the team's front office.

"Kirk Cousins does not want to be here for the organization, the way it's constructed right now and that's even tho he loves playing for Jay and this offense," Brewer said. "He doesn't wanna be here, and the Redskins botched this."

 

"He did want to be here after that first year, I think you could have told him last season," he added. "You could have made him want to be here if [the Redskins] had been aggressive about putting realistic offers on the table, but the situation has only gotten worse. I don't care how professional Kirk Cousins has been throughout this thing, or anything that he's said I mean that's just Kirk being Kirk. He's great at compartmentalizing things, but the situation is that there's no belief there. Kirk does not want to put the rest of his prime and the best years of what's remaining in his career in the hands of Bruce Allen's organization. It was more hurtful that Bruce put out this statement revealing what the offer was."

 

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MOD DIRECTIVE:

 

Someone will be taking some time off for doing the old "don't talk about Kirk, but in the same post I'm going to push my narrative about the whole thing and that's okay, but everyone else stop talking about him!" ridiculousness that's happened on numerous occasions now. 

 

That person has been repeatedly warned about other things so it's not only that trolling obnoxiousness that generated the penalty, but I want everyone to understand that any QB thread, yes even one about Alex, is going to include conversation about the entirety of the QB position, the resources spent on it, and how it's generally been handled. Which, therefore, inevitably brings Kirk into the discussion. That is inescapable and shouldn't be a problem.  

 

This is not an invitation to discuss this here. You can PM me if you have any questions or concerns about the matter. Thanks. 

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Side note (no directive or moderating here), but we can both be disgusted by the resource management of the FO at the position AND support Alex. In fact, one lends to the other, as good resource management by the top brass benefits EVERYBODY ON THE TEAM. That is cap space/draft capital/player personnel that will improve everyone's chances. Desiring that from the FO and condemning them for perceived failures at that essential aspect of their job is NOT being unsupportive of coaches/players/staff, just the opposite.   

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

one more and I rest my case.   This is leading into the 2018 FA season.  Forgetting Kirk, I think its an interesting read into what agents go through. 

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/03/19/kirk-cousins-minnesota-vikings-free-agency-guaranteed-contract-mmqb-peter-king

At the beginning of the process, McCartney said, he and his staff produced a book for Cousins that detailed the seven teams he felt might be interested in Cousins once it was clear Washington was not going to make him a serious long-term contract offer: Arizona, Buffalo, Cleveland, Denver, Miami, Minnesota and the Jets. This winter he and Cousins had discussed in detailed phone calls each team—how close it was to competing for a title, who would coach him, the style of offense, the lifestyle of the area. And on Monday at 11, he wasn’t positive how many teams would call, but he had a good feeling that at least four would. He told each one to make its best offer. This was not going to last long. At the beginning of the process Monday, McCartney felt strongly that any of the four—Cards, Broncos, Jets, Vikings—could win. But he and Cousins, before any formal bids came, felt that probably Minnesota and the Jets had an edge. (More about that later.)

 

...I’ve found the agent for Cousins, Mike McCartney, to be an honorable man in my dealings with him over the years. All of us in this business have to judge the people we come in contact with and make decisions on how much we trust them. Whenever McCartney has told me something, it’s been the truth.

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's one starting QB thread on the front page of ES and it only has 15 pages in May...I'd say the fanbase is cautiously optimistic about Alex Smith, or wants to be. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This Kirk discussion ends up going in circles because there is a segment that complains about lowball offers and disrespecting Kirk and “They are paid to evaluate and to know.” Then there’s another segment that acknowledges that many factors (some of their own wrong doing, right about that) created an extremely unprecedented situation, and that while Kirk had the leverage of the franchise tag in his back pocket, he was never worth top 5 QB money.

 

The disagreement from segment number two doesn’t stem from not understanding that yes, in the grand scheme of things, the Redskins didn’t present him offers that he would reasonably expect on the open market. That’s fairly obvious. The disconnect is that some don’t believe he was worth the average salary of the top 5 players at the position. But also didn’t want to lose him and would hope that he would accept a more team friendly deal so that a strong roster could be put around him. Which is what some believe he needs in order to be a QB that regularly contends for the playoffs. You know, like how he already proved he couldn’t win a playoff game with an average or injury riddled roster here in DC for the past 3 seasons.

 

The biggest blunder, and one that I have already stated I highly disagree with, was letting Kirk play another year on the franchise tag. And the reasoning behind it probably was half trying to keep him away from the Shanahans and half to keep butts in seats and remain competitive. It was extremely short sighted on the FO’s part and I called for them to trade Kirk last off-season because of it because we could have gotten really good value. Instead we milked him for one pointless year and had to lose Fuller so that we didn’t take a step backward at the position. Dumb.

 

However, this is the one reason I’m not completely livid. 

 

http://www.espn.com/blog/washington-redskins/post/_/id/35994/in-contracts-for-kirk-cousins-alex-smith-new-teams-got-what-they-wanted

 

Quote

 

Another key part of Smith's deal is the salary-cap hits. In 2018, Smith ranks 16th among quarterbacks, at $18.4 million. In 2019, he ranks 19th, at $20.4 million, and in 2020, he ranks ninth out of the 20 quarterbacks with contracts extending into that season. He'll fall a lot farther once other quarterbacks -- such as Matt Ryan and Aaron Rodgers -- sign extensions. Over that span, Cousins' cap hits rank sixth, third and second, respectively.

The Redskins will be dinged for giving Smith so much money in the first year of the deal; the Vikings will be knocked for giving Cousins so much money overall. But if the Redskins didn't have one of the NFL's top quarterbacks, they didn't want to be hamstrung by the cap. As such, they got a good quarterback at a favorable cap hit. The Vikings wanted one final piece and got that -- they hope.

 

 

There are a lot of respected opinions out there that think we upgraded at Quarterback. Most likely it’s a lateral move and they will bring different strengths to the table. Worst case scenario we take a small step back. Yet we will be allocating a significantly less percentage of the cap toward the QB position. That’s a win no matter how you slice it. It means more money to allocate to the rest of the team, which as the Eagles just proved, does matter. I do think they deserve credit for not going outside of their comfort range and ponying up what was needed to keep him in DC. We’ve seen what that can do to franchises like the Ravens and Seahawks. And I do think they deserve credit for making the best out of a really messy situation. The thing I’m most excited about with Alex is what he seemingly will bring as a leader and his ability to win. There’s no denying Smith has won some games, much more than Cousins has. So while it blows losing Fuller, I will say I’m excited to watch Smith and see what this season brings us. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alex Smith .... Alex smith that is the name of the redskins starting QB .... not that other guy who plays elsewhere . OTAS are about to start the one thing I am looking forward to is actual stability at QB and a leader on the field .

 

Also can we stop changing the narrative as to the cost it took to get him or indeed how much he is costing ..

 

Alex cap hit this season 18.4 million vs 24 for that other guy (rising to 29 and 31 in the next couple of years ) 

 

Smith in essence cost us Fuller - we also gave a 3rd round pick up but actually recouped a third pick for doing not much..... so if you spend a £ and then find a £ are you any worse off than you were ?

 

More important is what happens in the future - in my mind what was the most criminal aspect of the entire QB situation over the last three years there was no legitimate plan b or succession planning ... that cannot happen again .

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

There's one starting QB thread on the front page of ES and it only has 15 pages in May...I'd say the fanbase is cautiously optimistic about Alex Smith, or wants to be. 

 

I am cautiously optimistic about Alex Smith.  I'd be wildly optimistic about him if I was sold on the supporting cast.   As it was pointed out in the other QB thread by a number of posters who did the research on it.  Big years for teams even the ones with elite QBs = multiple units playing really really well.

 

To me the idea that Alex Smith = Kirk Cousins is arguable.  Some pundit types think Alex is better.  Some Kirk is better.  Some think they are the same.  Personally, I got no idea. But I like both. None of those outcomes would surprise me -- Kirk being better, Alex being better, them being about the same.  But the two QBs to me aren't equal for one reason their ages.  Alex's age puts the Redskins FULL roster on the spot immediately. 

 

And I am not saying the full roster isn't up to task.  It's that its an unknown.  Injuries have a lot to do with it, too.  There is this narrative that some have that since they had all those injuries last year -- this year it has to be better.  But typically guys coming off injury aren't healthier than the average player but if anything they might not be 100% coming off of it or more vulnerable to get hurt again.

 

To me case in point is Jordan Reed.  OK we got him back after surgery if I recall off both of his feet?  If the dude is healthy and plays all season, I like this teams chances.  But I am not banking on it until I see it.  Ditto the Redskins defense -- for about 10 years now we've heard after our off seasons improvements, you'll see they will be better or yeah maybe on paper it looks like this unit on defense looks vulnerable but watch X, Y, Z work out and everything will be fine.  Well, for years now the X,Y, Z stuff does not tend to work out.  So yeah the this time is different...these changes will take them over the top narrative -- I am very familiar with.  

 

But for me I am not even cynical about whether it all goes down.  I just got no idea and when I've gotten optimistic, I've been burned.  so I am in a wait and see mode. I am agnostic on the issue.   But with a 34 year old QB, IMO the rest of the roster has to come together fast in the next couple of seasons or so otherwise to me its a wasted trade unless it was purely needed to save Jay's job..  And that has zero to do with Alex.  I think Alex will do his part to make the team successful but the question to me is will everyone else?    

 

Why the heck is Keim talking about run defense in an article about Alex Smith?  Becuuse its relevant. It's a team game. 

http://www.espn.com/blog/washington-redskins/post/_/id/36517/otas-another-step-in-alex-smiths-integration-with-redskins

Smith will be a big story, but the Redskins know their postseason fate won’t change if the run defense struggles yet again. They ranked last against the run in 2017. And they have finished 24th or worse for three straight seasons.

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know its only OTAs, but Im excited to start at least getting some reports on the team as they get together. Maybe start to get a feel for what Alex brings to the team. A lot to ask for an OTA session, but Im desperate for information. :ols:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is cynical to say Alex is here to save Jays job - I think it genuinely was the right move to make when it became clear that Kirk was not going to sign - and that was to go out and get the best QB available at the time. 

 

Some may believe Smith is a win now move - But I kind of see Smith more as a very good bridging QB.

 

The worst thing about the early days of the Snyder eara were the constant coaching changes - each change brought new philosophies and washed out developmental depth from the roster.. 

 

I am not saying Smith is the bridge to a new contract for Jay etc - but he is a safe pair of hands (Smith) and while he may or may not get us over the hump - one thing he does do is give the team a steady consistent leader who wants to be here (or at least accepts it) at the top from which the rest of the roster can be given time to develop and the team identity to grow ( something that it really couldn't with that other guy)   - Ultimatly next year or in 2020 I figure we will be looking QB of the future ( Smiths contract is really a 3 year deal) - 

 

But if it gives us chance to establish a direction based on the foundation of the last 4 years and continue to build even though the names might change thats worth a slot corner who was constantly benched two seasons ago for a guy no longer even in football (i think) 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, bedlamVR said:

in my mind what was the most criminal aspect of the entire QB situation over the last three years there was no legitimate plan b or succession planning ... that cannot happen again .

Well, yeah.  Folks certainly get fired for less.  That doesn't make TSO's point about the amount of resources allocated to the QB position any less relevant.  The way the QB situation has been handled the last 2 seasons and moving forward is beyond poor, no matter how you feel about Kirk or Alex.  I think the underlying point is that not having those resources impacts Alex and the team moving forward.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Speaking of disingenuous, I’m not sure why people keep disparaging Fuller to make the trade for Smith look better.  Well, actually I know why, I just think it’s bs.

 

He was coming off a major injury, in his rookie year, and was thrust into the starting lineup.  So yes, he didn’t play well.  After a year removed, a year of experience under his belt, he looked like a heck of a corner - probably better than any we’ve had in ages.  Teams literally could not run wr screens against us because of him.  He also took away slant routes and tied for the team lead in INts.  He changed the game for us, IMO.  

 

He also had 2 years left on a rookie contract.  So he was arguably the player with the best value on the entire team (money to performance ratio).  I, and others, have mentioned giving him up was a lot like giving up a 1st round pick... but a 1st round pick gets paid a fair bit more and even they have relatively high bust rates.  Of course, to be fair, a first round pick comes with a 5 year contract... but still, Fuller had all the makings of being a stud for us with high value.  

 

I’m just hopeful that Gray (and Manusky) were consulted pre-trade and they opined that Holsey (and Moreau?) had a lot of promise in the slot.  I’m afraid that wasn’t the case though.  Here’s hoping it all works out.  

Edited by skinny21
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, skinny21 said:

Speaking of disingenuous, I’m not sure why people keep disparaging Fuller to make the trade for Smith look better.  Well, actually I know why, I just think it’s bs.

Right there with you.  I see it quite often.  "Just a slot corner" who was "awful his first year and good the next" misses a ton of context.  Kid was coming off an injury in his not so hot first season.  All you heard was about how much of a film junkie the kid is and he had one hell of a sophomore season.  There is a reason why KC specifically wanted him - because he's on the up and he's dirt cheap for two more seasons.  Losing Fuller wasn't just about losing a top slot corner, it was about losing a top slot corner that makes under 1M per season.

Edited by BatteredFanSyndrome
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/22/2018 at 1:39 PM, crabbypatty said:

No.. I remember the score being 21-3 at the half though.

Them being unable to score anything in the second half was disappointing, but not Smith's fault they scored 19 unanswered (well in a roundabout sort of way, since the offense didn't put them away)

Smith was 24 of 33 for 264 with 2 td's and no int's..

 

Did you miss the Giants games the last 2 years? Or the Eagles game to start the season? Both cowgirls games?

Those were wilt games led by our own KC.. I liked the guy but his duds when it counted really sucked. I hope he continues that tradition in Minny.

 

 

KC is long gone.  This is about Alex Smith.  And I did happen to catch how awful he looked against the Giants last year.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now