Murphs56 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 I already took a vacation to the Bahamas after Griffin's first start. Too Soon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 ...... Why do they let jokers like her write for the city paper where the team is located? I'm sure they can find better than her Better being what? A pro-hommer agenda as it's the main home town paper? Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I_Bleed_B&G Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 I already took a vacation to the Bahamas after Griffin's first start. Too Soon? Danny boy and the Shanahans took a celebratory vacation to the Bahamas after the Rams agreed to trade us the pick to land RG3. So I would say...Not not to soon lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 In all fairness I don't think that we should have a parade for a rookie QB that won a game against a defense that was in a large amount of disarray. true. but i think the 'parade' people are more few and far between. still, winning a game- a game that some analysts have said could be the best debut by a rookie QB ever- in a place thats extremely difficult to win (NO 8-0 last year) is not an insignificant thing. after 20+ years, essentially, of crap at the QB position, i reserve the right to be excited by that kind of performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWFLSkins Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Venomous is a bad word. Antagonistic, yeah. Venomous, probably not. Maybe "not written from an unbiased point of view" is a better way of putting it. It was written to antagonize. What did she expect Shanahan to not plan to get him into a rhythm in his first game? Short term strategy? I that would be a long term strategy, easing him in and making him confident. I think Sally is drumming up hits as well. -Griffin showed that he is an excellent executor of a terrifically conceived short-term strategy, against a New Orleans Saints team in disorder. It started with six consecutive passes behind the line of scrimmage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrJL Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 the problem is RGIII doesn't seem the type of guy who needs this sort of reminding. And I don't know if I believe the Skins went with an easy game plan for the rookie. A lot of the plays they threw out seemed the same sort of stuff they've tried the entire time the Shanahans' have been here. They just worked this time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I_Bleed_B&G Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Better being what? A pro-hommer agenda as it's the main home town paper?Hail. No, its always a negative tone with her regarding the skins. Not asking her to be a homer but it seems she is a hater more than a homer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowfire Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 I too have been a Skins fan my entire life, through good times and bad. I am also extremely excited for the future of this Franchise with RG3 at the helm. However, this is not a negative article on RG3. She simply states that this is one game and teams are inevitably going to get film on him and are going to make adjustments to make it more difficult for RG3. That doesn't mean RG3 will fail, it simply means his success goes hand in hand with how he responds to the adjustments teams make after watching film on him and finding his tells. I dont see where she "reached for something negative" or disrespected his hard work. Did you read the article? Yes I read the article and the statement "Buried under the cooing overpraise and the extravagant raving from Hall-of-Famer analysts" is totally uncalled for. To imply he doesn't deserve the praise he is getting is nothing but biased reporting on her part and ruins any valid point she is making. I guess she knows more than these "Hall-of-Famer anyalysts" and that their praise means really nothing because it is just "extravagant raving". I guess the bigger question is all those that are stating some of us need to read the article and they don't see anything wrong with the article need to possibly read it better themselves. She may have some points that are vaild but it does not change the fact she starts off the article basically ridiculing those that have praised his work and basically saying it is undeserved. So did we read the same article? HTTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 No, its always a negative tone with her regarding the skins. Not asking her to be a homer but it seems she is a hater more than a homer i think its fair to say that the above generally has represented her articles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCClybun Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Better being what? A pro-hommer agenda as it's the main home town paper?Hail. No. I think maybe people like Rich Campbell, or John Keim, or Rich Tandler, who have no problem doling on criticism when it's due but don't feel the need to, are completely absent from the Post. Mark Maske is okay, Mike Jones is totally useless. We've got some pretty good beat guys who aren't going to sit around stroking the Shanahans egos when thing go wrong. Only a fool would want blind homerism. Alls someone like me asks for is for an even hand when applying criticism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 No, its always a negative tone with her regarding the skins. Not asking her to be a homer but it seems she is a hater more than a homer More often than not I wouldn't disagree with that assessment of a Jenkins article. But I didn't get that from that one personally. Seemed pretty balanced and impartial to me as to an objective view on the situation, and not a fan one like we naturally fall into on here. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I_Bleed_B&G Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Just look at her picture... If I looked liker her, I'd be bitter all the time too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphs56 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Danny boy and the Shanahans took a celebratory vacation to the Bahamas after the Rams agreed to trade us the pick to land RG3. So I would say...Not not to soon lol lol, i know, that's why i said it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowfire Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 More often than not I wouldn't disagree with that assessment of a Jenkins article. But I didn't get that from that one personally. Seemed pretty balanced and impartial to me as to an objective view on the situation, and not a fan one like we naturally fall into on here. Hail.[/quote This is balanced and impartial to you "Buried under the cooing overpraise and the extravagant raving from Hall-of-Famer analysts"? Not trying to get in a big pissing match on here but come on that's not antagonistic to you at all? You really think that part of the article is neccessary to make an unbiased point? HTTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 ..... This is balanced and impartial to you "Buried under the cooing overpraise and the extravagant raving from Hall-of-Famer analysts"? Not trying to get in a big pissing match on here but come on that's not antagonistic to you at all? You really think that part of the article is neccessary to make an unbiased point? ..... No, the opening could of been worded far better. I wouldn't argue or condone her there. But your nit-picking in so far as the overall context of the article. Which to me was a pretty objective view on the situation. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 There's really two ways to look at RGIII's performance. Of course he will face tougher defense throughout the season and better pass rushers. However, he is still a rookie, going up against an actual NFL defense for the first time ever. Steve Spagnola was the D-coordinator on a Superbowl Defense, and has been touted ever since. Even if the Saints personnel on defense is exactly the best, you'd imagine he would have had plenty of play designs drawn up to try and confuse RGIII being that he is a rookie. It's not like RGIII just took on Alabama to open his NFL season, he did face and perform quite well against another NFL team. Does 1 game mean the world? Of course not, but it is one hell of a start to his career and could be a sign of things to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCClybun Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 More often than not I wouldn't disagree with that assessment of a Jenkins article. But I didn't get that from that one personally. Seemed pretty balanced and impartial to me as to an objective view on the situation, and not a fan one like we naturally fall into on here. Hail. I think some of her criticism's were invalid. She speaks of the six passes behind the line of scrimmage to start the game. What she doesn't mention is that those six passes were all decisions Robert, where had a run/pass option, and could dictate which part of the field he wanted to throw to. She says he didn't throw the deep ball very well, which is sort of baffling to me since we didn't throw deep a lot and the one time I clearly remember throwing deep, Aldrick had a shot at it in the end zone. "His performance reading the defense at the line of scrimmage seemed excellent, but also strict; it was difficult to tell just how broad or narrow his audible package was." What does that mean? Maybe he just made good pre-snap reads and went through his progressions accordingly. A week ago the world wouldn't shut up about how the Redskins were running into an unstoppable juggernaut in the Saints. No one was talking about how much they were in disarray then; the lost of their coaches and player was only going to make them stronger. Then Will Smith came off suspension and suddenly we had an even worse chance of winning. Then we win, and it's "Oh, well he beat a team in disarray." There's tempering expectations, and then there's slowly trying to remove credit for him playing a solid game. Perfect? Hell no. He pulled the ball down on a boot and missed Moss wide open in the end zone. He botched some hand offs, pulled the ball when he could've handed it off. He had a very good game for a rookie, but he's still a rookie. Like I said; it was more antagonistic than that. It sought to remove the credit for a good game. Which is a really good way to subtly get pissed off Redskins fans to flock to your article to tell you how wrong you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowfire Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 No, the opening could of been worded far better. I wouldn't argue or condone her there. But your nit-picking in so far as the overall context of the article. Which to me was a pretty objective view on the situation. Hail. I wouldn't call it nit-picking at all I am simply reminding you and others that when all you say there is no problem with the article maybe you should consider what is being said. I already said she had some valid points but as a Redskin fan I have a BIG problem with her biased opinion and lack of respect for our QB. I am not accusing you of this but it irritates me when people say some of us don't read the articles and just react to the thread title when maybe its not us that are not paying attention to what's being written. HTTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MusicCitySkin Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 You know, for all intents and purposes, would anyone blame RG3 for letting anything go to his head at this point? Just so we're keeping track, he raised a college football program out the depths of the BCS, was undoubtedly the most electrifying college player in the 2011-2012 season, won this little award called the Heisman trophy, forced a team with the 6th overall pick in the NFL Draft to trade several picks in order to move up to a spot where they could safely pick him, won the starting QB job after the first day of OTAs, put together an impressive preseason where he threw zero interceptions, and then carried all that success over into the first game of the regular season, where he led a 2011 bottom 10 offense to 40 points and also the most yardage by any offense in the first week, all while turning the ball over zero times. Despite ALL of this, he has remained nothing but humble. If he was the type of person to let fame and hype get to his head, don't you think it would have happened already? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 I wouldn't call it nit-picking at all I am simply reminding you and others that when all you say there is no problem with the article maybe you should consider what is being said. I already said she had some valid points but as a Redskin fan I have a BIG problem with her biased opinion and lack of respect for our QB. I am not accusing you of this but it irritates me when people say some of us don't read the articles and just react to the thread title when maybe its not us that are not paying attention to what's being written. HTTR I think we'll have to agree to disagree in the main here. Some points, that both yourself and NLC have raised, I can appreciate. Others, I think your looking for things and reaching to try exemplify and give more credence to your overall assertion on the piece. One thing I do think your being WAY over the top with though is the ' ..... lack of respect for our QB' line. We might not agree with all she wrote. Hell, we might find genuine points to query. But if that passes as a lack of respect for RGIII, I'd sure as heck hate to see someone REALLY go to town on him. He had a great game Sunday. I don't think I could of scripted it any better if I'd tried. But raising points on certain things, both within the game and going froward, isn't disrespecting him when it's valid. And even less so when she gives him his rightful props in other aspects of Sunday's game. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 I read the article. What exactly is the negativity everyone is talking about (many I'm assuming did not read it)? The article is essentially warning about the hazards in reading too much into one good game. We all know that he int going to have great games every week and that rookie QBs have hard lessons to learn. Sally is talking about why his off the field qualities will see him through the hard times: That’s why RGIII’s biggest asset is not his legs or his arm, but his head. By all accounts, he is working hard to keep it from being turned. But there is one trajectory we can already identify: Griffin’s level-headedness. He appears to be trying to keep his ears closed to overpraise, yet open to instruction. That’s a pretty neat trick in someone so young How dare she! That evil negative woman! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 true. but i think the 'parade' people are more few and far between.still, winning a game- a game that some analysts have said could be the best debut by a rookie QB ever- in a place thats extremely difficult to win (NO 8-0 last year) is not an insignificant thing. after 20+ years, essentially, of crap at the QB position, i reserve the right to be excited by that kind of performance. Don't get me wrong, I'm excited as well. I also know Sally Jenkins' history of Redskins "bashing". RG got off on the right foot and he wowed the Redskins faithful with his performance. He wowed me, that's for sure. I think that it's important to remember that it was just one game and we have no idea how "bountygate" will effect the defense of the Saints this season. It's possible that they were afraid to hit too hard for fear of suspension. It's possible that the Saints defense was in disarray with the loss of Gregg Williams. It's equally possible that RG3 thrashed a defense that will turn out to be very good this season. For me, it's just too early to put any sort of context into his performance. I'm happy with RG3 right now. I want to see how he reacts with a performance that is less than satisfactory. I want to see him take the good with the bad and use it to help him improve his game. I don't want people to over-react if he goes out and lays two clunkers in the next two weeks. It's bound to happen and I worry that this city will turn on him as quickly as they've anointed him the most important player in Washington DC. From what I read of the Jenkins article (and no way no how would I read all of her drivel) it didn't seem to me like she was doing anything other than trying to be objective. She didn't seem to jump and announce him the starting QB for the next 10 season that would lead the team to countless Super Bowls. I can agree with that. I am excited but I don't want to be let down by the Washington Redskins like I have been for the past two decades. One very good performance from our number 2 overall pick QB against a suspect defense isn't going to make me forget all of the times over those years that I've been super excited after game 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 To be blunt, you guys spazzing so much on this ought to be on Read Only for a week for being such dumbasses. First, Sally (who I have also worked over for hack jobs when merited in the more distant past) has written a number of quite favorable and still honest articles about the 'skins in the last year. Keep up. Second, there is nothing out of line about that article. I expect more than a few won't even read it, or stop and think if they do, before they "go full retard." Best remember, this is not a board where you can always count on it being ok to just be another iggy with a keyboard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blindlywewander Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 She's exactly right. I thought it was a great article. Don't call her a moron. She's just rational. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsTight Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 This article is nothing but a waste of time and an insult to anyone with common sense. Please write about something that we haven't heard year after year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.