This was the Shannys' best shot

[CGSKINS]

I'm going to say this again. When healthy( and RG3 Will be healthy in 2014) RG3 is the starter,RG3 is the better QB, RG3 is a play maker. Kirk Cousins is not even on the same level as RG3(when healthy).

 

Please stop with these idiotic post of  "Kirk should be the starter" "Lets trade RG3" STOP IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

RG3 isn't  going anywhere so if you don't like him than go root for another team.

[BleedBNG]

I saw more fire out of Mike and Jim than I have all season on the sideline or booth. I think they really wanted this game. 

This was their best swing and they got a foul tip. 

I think they wanted this one badly...

 

Then they should have gone for the jugular and shown some guts. Instead of the FG's, they should have gone for the first's. I'm sure the players would have wanted to. Seriously, with the way the season had gone, what did they have to lose?...

 

 

...pfffft!

[Skinsinparadise]

I'm going to say this again. When healthy( and RG3 Will be healthy in 2014) RG3 is the starter,RG3 is the better QB, RG3 is a play maker. Kirk Cousins is not even on the same level as RG3(when healthy).

 

Please stop with these idiotic post of  "Kirk should be the starter" "Lets trade RG3" STOP IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

RG3 isn't  going anywhere so if you don't like him than go root for another team.

 

 

Am with you here 100%.  Its stunning to me how soon people forget.  RG3 practically had the keys to the city last year.  OK, one knee surgery later which arguably was the fault of his dense head coach, RG3 playing a few bad games in a row, along with and a head coach determined to slam RG3 as he heads out the door -- and some people are willing to go along and give up.

 

The guy is 23 years old, he had a magical rookie year.   This isn't just simple sophomore slump. There is an obvious explanation for it all.  It's VERY normal for a player coming off of an ACL injury on their plant leg to be effected by it in year 1.  The guy IMO deserves a break.    

 

Talking about slumping for some games, check out these:

 

11-27  108 years 40.7% completion rate

8-19    142 yards  42.1%

12-23  123 yards 52.2%

15-31  210  yards 48.4%

10-18  139 yards  55.6%

 

This is for the QB that the NFL pundit types like to love these days.  They say of the rookie QBs he's the one who stands head and shoulders over the others, no sophomore slump, etc.  BS.   I like Russell Wilson but he has had some horrible games this year too.  The difference is he won most of those games where he didn't play well.  No one gives it any attention because his roster is built in a way where all the pressure isn't on him.  He could play like crap and win anyway.  To say that Seattle's defense and special teams is by a mile better than ours -- is a major understatement.  

 

RG3 cannot play poorly and have the team survive it.   Shanny has built a garbage roster.  That relies mostly on RG3 and Morris to shine, they have to offset the rest of the players.  You notice Shanny with his leaks is trying to build the case that the season's failures are all about the QB.  In doing so, he condemns his own roster building.   This roster is built in a way that if the QB isn't hot, your chances are dead because there is little else going for it. 

[skinsmania123]

RG3 against Dallas: 19/29 246 0/1 9/77

 

Cousins against Dallas: 21/36 195 1/1

 

Sure Cousins got sacked less, but did it matter?

 

The problem with this team hasn't been the QB. It's been the AWFUL special teams, which gave the Cwoboys an easy and early 7 points. And the defense not being able to get off the field in crucial situations. Dallas converted 2 4th downs included the game winner on 4th and Goal from the 10.

I think last year RG3 was so special that his "specialness" elevated a very mediocre squad.  And this year because of his injury, the mental getting up to speed etc. he played just like the rest of the team.   This train wreck called a football team is a combined level of mediocrity on all fronts starting with the coaching staff. 

[Skinsinparadise]

I think last year RG3 was so special that his "specialness" elevated a very mediocre squad.  And this year because of his injury, the mental getting up to speed etc. he played just like the rest of the team.   This train wreck called a football team is a combined level of mediocrity on all fronts starting with the coaching staff. 

 

For sure.  I recall that year when they started 3-6 and the defense looked like crap, Shanny was real defensive about it and said its the injuries that are crippling the team and this is a top 5 defense when healthy.  Actually, that's when he started losing me.  I recall a Mike Lombardi interview around the same time and he said having worked with both Shanny and Belichick, the main difference in their thought process was Belichick was always worried that he didn't have enough good players, whereas Shanny would convince himself and try to convince others he had a super roster whether true or not.   Playing off of that statement, it hit me back then, this dude really does think he has one of the best defensive rosters in the league, and while I am no expert, on its surface that statement seemed ridiculous.     It was actually proven to be ridiculous this year when he brought back that same roster and they were one of the healthiest teams in the league.  

 

So this year the excuse changed from injuries to the cap penalty.    Before the season he said that this is the deepest roster he's had here, and declared Super Bowl or bust.    When the season started going bust, he said the problem with the team ironically is their lack of depth.   And while most team's depth is driven by finding talent in the late rounds -- not one of Shanny's strengths aside from finding Rbs.   According to Shanny not so.  Its really about going on FA spending sprees.   If that truly was the case under Vinny we would have had the deepest team in the league. 

[RandyHolt]

Mike seemed to have pushed all in on Cousins as a desperation move to validate that RG3 was the sole source of the Team Shan failures. Thinking if we beat Dallas at home, well hey, that is our super bowl anyways; and maybe much will be forgotten. Cousins was put into position to save the day, and maybe Mike's career.

 

Indeed, RG2s dad was not the one tanking special teams and defense, nor the offense. Contradicting what the national media pawns believed that you would buy into. Credible sources my ass. 

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

RG3 cannot play poorly and have the team survive it.

Shanahan's roster building in a nutshell.

[ncr2h]

Mike seemed to have pushed all in on Cousins as a desperation move to validate that RG3 was the sole source of the Team Shan failures. Thinking if we beat Dallas at home, well hey, that is our super bowl anyways; and maybe much will be forgotten. Cousins was put into position to save the day, and maybe Mike's career.

 

 

So Mike would have been validated if Romo sits to pee hadn't converted a 4th & goal from the 10 yard line?

[RandyHolt]

So Mike would have been validated if Romo sits to pee hadn't converted a 4th & goal from the 10 yard line?

 

Mike may have felt vindicated had Cousins dominated the entire game, culminated by it leading to a win.  

 

Too bad though, he came close to throwing ~ 4 INTs and with a minute left needing a measly FG, our offense looked about the worst it has looked all year.

 

Sorry but your guy you pushed all in on, failed you. Don't get too bent over it. Its just a game of QB controversy Mike is trying to stir up as a final shot at Dan. I am surprised you are still towing the party line after yet another embarrassing loss.

[TSO]

 

I like Kirk Cousins but thought he was pretty ordinary against the worst defense in the league last Sunday, and was flat out bad in crunch time in that last drive.  Cousins in relief this year, granted a small sample, has been bad.  So am assuming you are talking about the Atlanta game.  Maybe Cousins Atlanta performance was slightly better than RG3 against SD, the Bears and the Vikings.  But IMO RG3 out played Cousins in the three games I mentioned compared to all of Cousins other performances.  And agree RG3's games late in the season were bad. 

 

To the point of this thread, I agree that Shanny wanted a big performance out of Cousins badly to make the point you are trying to make here.  But it just didn't work out for him.  Cousins came a peg down from Atlanta IMO as opposed to building on that momentum.    So Shanny didn't get the result he wanted which it seemed to be, heck am a brillaint coach its that dude RG3 who is costing us games.  Now he's 0-2 with Cousins and out of excuses.

 

I'd have to disagree here. I thought Kirk performed okay against the Cowboys, and better than Robert did against them earlier in the year. Though that's not saying much. Furthermore, with Kirk performing the way he is, we've been more competitive, throughout the ENTIRE GAME and not just in stretches. The fact of the matter is, we lost both of these games by one point and it was the other team that had to make plays in the final quarter to survive. Before, it was the opposite. We'd either be completely out of it and had to try for a miraculous come back or we'd have to drive at the end after doing nothing for what seemed like an entire half. (I know you can claim the Falcons game was like the latter, but to me it was more of a back and forth type game)

 

That might sound like a small difference, but to me it's not. The team has been more competitive, period. Kirk is doing things that Robert was struggling with all year and that has made it easier on the other parts of our team to do their jobs as well, period. And that's ok. That's not implying that Robert sucks or will never be the guy. He just wasn't this year coming off of a major knee injury, hardly a damning occurrence considering he's only a second year QB. 

 

As much as everyone wants to point towards how bad our D and Special Teams are, and rightly so to an extent, they completely forget the part where the offense has also helped in putting them in bad positions for much of the year. Too often we'd go entire quarters without converting a first down. That's incredibly hard on the rest of the team. Since Kirk has been playing, we're not as inconsistent. We move the ball more consistently and, at the very least, change the field position because of it. That helps both the D and Special Teams. I think everyone can see, whether or not the stats show it, that the rest of the team is playing better for longer stretches than they have the entire year. The O, D and ST all still have their stupid moments, of course, but now they're much less frequent.

 

Just what I'm seeing. It's something hard to show in stats, I know, but I haven't seen anything to prove what I'm seeing wrong.    

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

I'd have to disagree here. I thought Kirk performed okay against the Cowboys, and better than Robert did against them earlier in the year. Though that's not saying much. Furthermore, with Kirk performing the way he is, we've been more competitive, throughout the ENTIRE GAME and not just in stretches. The fact of the matter is, we lost both of these games by one point and it was the other team that had to make plays in the final quarter to survive. Before, it was the opposite. We'd either be completely out of it and had to try for a miraculous come back or we'd be the ones trying to drive at the end to tie it or win it by a slim margin.

That might sound like a small difference, but to me it's not. The team has been more competitive, period. Kirk is doing things that Robert was struggling with all year, period. And that's ok. That's not implying that Robert sucks or will never be the guy. He just wasn't this year coming off of a major knee injury, hardly a damning occurrence considering he's only a second year QB.

As much as everyone wants to point towards how bad our D and Special Teams are, and rightly so to an extent, they completely forget the part where the offense has also helped in putting them in bad positions for much of the year. Too often we'd go entire quarters without converting a first down. That's incredibly hard on the rest of the team. Since Kirk has been playing, we're not as inconsistent. We move the ball more consistently and, at the very least, change the field position because of it. That helps both the D and Special Teams. I think everyone can see, whether or not the stats show it, that the rest of the team is playing better for longer stretches than they have the entire year. The O, D and ST all still have their stupid moments, of course, but now they're much less frequent.

Just what I'm seeing. It's something hard to show in stats, I know, but I haven't seen anything to prove what I'm seeing wrong.

I don't know man.

I felt AlMo was the driving force against Dallas. Kirk didn't screw up much but he didn't do much himself to win.

Against the Falcons, he made more plays but made more mistakes as well.

I guess my point is that I think his performance has been a bit overstated. But if appreciate how fast he gets the ball out though

[TSO]

I don't know man.

I felt AlMo was the driving force against Dallas. Kirk didn't screw up much but he didn't do much himself to win.

Against the Falcons, he made more plays but made more mistakes as well.

I guess my point is that I think his performance has been a bit overstated. But if appreciate how fast he gets the ball out though

 

Pierre Garcon was absolutely killing the Cowboys for about 3 Quarters, who was throwing him the ball? AlMo was awesome, of course, but I wouldn't say he was the "driving force". On one drive, for sure... after the Cowboys were getting torched by Garcon the entire game.

 

I know what I'm seeing. It doesn't matter, though. So many here want to be attached to the conspiracy theory of Mike trying to find excuses and failing, so they're blaming Kirk for it all. It's annoying. He has played better and more consistently than Robert and the entire team has looked better for it. Whether or not anyone admits that (without putting Robert down like he was the only problem of course) to me just shows whether or not they have an agenda. 

 

If Mike really wanted to prove that everything was Robert's fault, I don't see him being so far off. The team has generally played better and more consistently to me. I know I've been more into the games since I don't know how long, that's for sure. We haven't had any epic collapses in where every part of the team fails miserably, something we've seen in a ton of games this year.

 

However, I don't think that's what Mike was trying to do. I think he knows the team has many issues and it wasn't just Robert. I think he also knows, and rightly so, that Kirk was a better option to at least minimize the impacts of our other weaknesses more than Robert would have. That much has been proven to me.

 

And I'm also not willing to gloss over the impact of the cap penalty as well as the trade for Robert and how it affected this "garbage roster building". I stated BEFORE GOING INTO THIS SEASON WHEN EVERYONE WAS PRAISING THIS FO AND MIKE SHANAHAN that, unfortunately, because of what we gave up for Robert and because of now what was the second year of cap penalties Robert HAD TO BE THE GUY and had to over compensate for the rest of the team.

 

I didn't see a problem with that and wouldn't call that garbage roster building. It's smart to go all in on your QB in the NFL these days. They mask a TON of weaknesses. When Robert didn't and couldn't do it this year, we saw what we saw. I was just waiting for Robert to "turn it on" all year. He didn't. At no point has he looked like the guy last year, even when he's played well. That's okay to me. I'm not in total melt down mode like so many here. I'm comfortable with how we got here and don't think Mike is the evil villain who destroyed this team.

 

I could go back to this offseason and, heck, before this offseason and quote so many of you who are absolutely trashing everything Mike has done here now where you were saying how great of a job this FO has done building a young and upcoming roster with great potential. Getting a franchise QB who had the single best rookie season in the history of the NFL. Heck, maybe we drafted two franchise QBs. That alone is awesome. Drafting a stud LT, RB, OLB and now, if he can stay healthy, a stud TE. Drafting guys like Riley, Jenkins, Helu, Amerson, Aldrick Robinson, Hankerson, Neild and Crawford who have all already contributed, improved and have yet to reach their ceilings. And guys like Hurt, Gettis, Compton, Rib, Thompson, Rambo, Phillip Thomas, Keenan Robinson, Brandon Jenkins and Jamison who the jury is still out on but all have potential, some with great skill sets that can make them dominant players in the NFL. And let's not forget Bernstine, who had a career ending injury but was looking pretty good during training camp and preseason and made the team in 2012. And now we had another safety draft pick, Phillip Thomas, go down this year before the season. That's pretty unfortunate.  

 

 

How about Cofield, Bowen and Garcon in FA? Heck, Garcon alone is huge for our organization because, for the life of us, we could NEVER find a stud WR anywhere ever, other than Santana Moss in how many years. I'm tired of everyone pointing out the mistakes made in personnel every chance they get, of which they are FAR FEWER than the bright spots since Mike has been here. It's as if every team in the NFL gets 100% of their personnel decisions correct. It's ridiculous.       

      

But, yeah, we're 3-12 now and none of that matters. I get that. I'm certainly not going to try and change anyone's minds. I just refuse to so easily let go of the notion that we were moving in the right direction, a notion almost EVERYONE in the entire football world could see going into this season. To me, that's not something that just disappears after one bad year in which your franchise guy you gave up so much for couldn't carry the team and you're dealing with the second year of terrible cap penalties.

 

I REFUSE TO JUST GLOSS OVER THAT. 

 

 If we get an entirely new coaching staff, I'm hoping they continue what Mike has started and don't blow the whole thing up, because, if they do, I fear we're in for just another failure in a long line of failures. We'll see, I guess. But I worry about the culture that could come back here, because I might be one of the few who see how good Mike has been about letting guys who earn playing time play, and playing no favorites, but I see it.              

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

I'm one of the people who vociferously argued that our roster was fine and good enough to support the RGIII trade. This was in the face of a consensus that we'd be giving up two top 10 picks, not one. The fact was that knowledgeable posters on this board knew the OL sucked, the 2010 and 2011 draft classes stunk outside 2 players . That Mike and Kyle were not doing great on offense.

You cite our draft picks, but how many people other than Redskins fans even know any of them?

" Riley, Jenkins, Helu, Amerson, Aldrick Robinson, Hankerson, Neild and Crawford who have all already contributed, improved and have yet to reach their ceilings. And guys like Hurt, Gettis, Compton, Rib, Thompson, Rambo, Phillip Thomas, Keenan Robinson, Brandon Jenkins and Jamison who the jury is still out on but all have potential, some with great skill sets that can make them dominant players in the NFL."

All these guys are for the most part, guys. We were high on guys like Justin Tryon, Marko Mitchell, Kevin Barnes, and Chris Horton once upon a time. Listing Mike Shanahan's draft picks in an authoritative way is not an argument.

Lots of guys flash for a few games or a few plays. But that doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things. It's been 2 years and very few of the 2010 and 2011 guys are any good outside the first rounders. And it's not like they were great in college either, nor were they dominant athletic specimens. For example, Jarvis Jenkins literally has one good TC to his name and he's supposed to make up for not having JJ Watt.

Now some of those guys may pan out but to rebuild a team, you need more, a lot more.

As for our FAs, I only see two real successes, Cofield and Garcon. Bowen gave us one good season pretty much. Morgan is a #4 getting #2 money. Carriker got overpaid after one good season. We resigned a bunch of replacement level guys to sizable contracts instead of...trying to replace them.

And no, your QB is not supposed to have to play like a MVP to mask your crappy roster. Bill Polian got fired for that. Meanwhile the Niners Seahawks and Packers can survive mediocre QB play because of their quality drafting. Kaep was noticeably worse than RGIII for a good chunk of the year. They're making the playoffs. Hell, the Rams might go 8-8 with Kellen Clemens starting 9 games.

We need to stop grading Mike Shanahan on a curve because he's not Vinny. In reality, he just gets a better failing grade than Vinny did.

[daveakl]

I don't know man.

I felt AlMo was the driving force against Dallas. Kirk didn't screw up much but he didn't do much himself to win.

Against the Falcons, he made more plays but made more mistakes as well.

I guess my point is that I think his performance has been a bit overstated. But if appreciate how fast he gets the ball out though

Garçon owned the game until Dallas changed the coverage. Then our whole offense went to Crap. The great KC included.

[Skinsinparadise]

 The fact of the matter is, we lost both of these games by one point and it was the other team that had to make plays in the final quarter to survive. Before, it was the opposite. We'd either be completely out of it and had to try for a miraculous come back or we'd have to drive at the end after doing nothing for what seemed like an entire half. (I know you can claim the Falcons game was like the latter, but to me it was more of a back and forth type game)

 

That might sound like a small difference, but to me it's not. The team has been more competitive, period. Kirk is doing things that Robert was struggling with all year and that has made it easier on the other parts of our team to do their jobs as well, period. And that's ok. That's not implying that Robert sucks or will never be the guy. He just wasn't this year coming off of a major knee injury, hardly a damning occurrence considering he's only a second year QB. 

 

 Since Kirk has been playing, we're not as inconsistent. We move the ball more consistently and, at the very least, change the field position because of it. That helps both the D and Special Teams. I think everyone can see, whether or not the stats show it, that the rest of the team is playing better for longer stretches than they have the entire year. The O, D and ST all still have their stupid moments, of course, but now they're much less frequent.

 

Just what I'm seeing. It's something hard to show in stats, I know, but I haven't seen anything to prove what I'm seeing wrong.    

 

You have selective memory.   They blew big leads under Robert, too.   The Vikings game for example, heck we were even going toe to toe with the 49ers and Denver until the whole game blew apart in the 2nd half.  

 

As for how the team plays under Kirk, I don't get all the excitement.  He played poorly in relief of Robert in a couple of games.  He plays good, not great against a weak Atlanta team.  And then he plays mediocre against the worst defense in the league.  The offense had plenty of three and outs in the 2nd half against Dallas and went into hibernation.   It struggled in the red zone. He's been all right, nothing great. 

 

I hate to be bashing Kirk because I like him and agree he has potential but there is a reason why sports talk shows this week covered the topic has Kirk Cousins diminished his trade value through his play.       

[TSO]

You have selective memory.   They blew big leads under Robert, too.   The Vikings game for example, heck we were even going toe to toe with the 49ers and Denver until the whole game blew apart in the 2nd half.  

 

As for how the team plays under Kirk, I don't get all the excitement.  He played poorly in relief of Robert in a couple of games.  He plays good, not great against a weak Atlanta team.  And then he plays mediocre against the worst defense in the league.  The offense had plenty of three and outs in the 2nd half against Dallas and went into hibernation.   It struggled in the red zone. He's been all right, nothing great. 

 

I hate to be bashing Kirk because I like him and agree he has potential but there is a reason why sports talk shows this week covered the topic has Kirk Cousins diminished his trade value through his play.       

 

No, no selective memory. And that is entirely my point. We haven't had those epic collapses in which all phases of the team perform miserably all at once, like in the Broncos and 49ers games. We've been more consistent under Kirk, and I'd hardly classify his play as "poor". But if you want to, that's fine.  

[TSO]

I'm one of the people who vociferously argued that our roster was fine and good enough to support the RGIII trade. This was in the face of a consensus that we'd be giving up two top 10 picks, not one. The fact was that knowledgeable posters on this board knew the OL sucked, the 2010 and 2011 draft classes stunk outside 2 players . That Mike and Kyle were not doing great on offense.

lol, knowledgeable guys? You mean the negative nancies who always complain? And then when the team does poorly loudly proclaim how right they are? You know, I'm almost at a point where I just want to become one of those guys so that when the next failure occurs here I can bang my chest. Oh, and if we do well I'll just go into hiding or act like I never said anything and was with it all along. You know, like last season how the majority of those "knowledgeable" guys acted.

 

You cite our draft picks, but how many people other than Redskins fans even know any of them?

" Riley, Jenkins, Helu, Amerson, Aldrick Robinson, Hankerson, Neild and Crawford who have all already contributed, improved and have yet to reach their ceilings. And guys like Hurt, Gettis, Compton, Rib, Thompson, Rambo, Phillip Thomas, Keenan Robinson, Brandon Jenkins and Jamison who the jury is still out on but all have potential, some with great skill sets that can make them dominant players in the NFL."

All these guys are for the most part, guys. We were high on guys like Justin Tryon, Marko Mitchell, Kevin Barnes, and Chris Horton once upon a time. Listing Mike Shanahan's draft picks in an authoritative way is not an argument.

lol, those guys you listed that we were "high on" actually support my point. It's not even close. We've got A LOT more guys with WAY BETTER skill sets here through the draft. I didn't list them authoritatively, either, I specifically stated exactly what they've done and where they're at in their careers.

 

Lots of guys flash for a few games or a few plays. But that doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things. It's been 2 years and very few of the 2010 and 2011 guys are any good outside the first rounders. And it's not like they were great in college either, nor were they dominant athletic specimens. For example, Jarvis Jenkins literally has one good TC to his name and he's supposed to make up for not having JJ Watt.

Now some of those guys may pan out but to rebuild a team, you need more, a lot more.

Disagree. It does mean a lot. Players "flashing", especially young ones, means you can keep working with them. That's what a rebuild is about. Otherwise, it wouldn't be called that. You wouldn't have to build anything. Seems to me that's what we're wanting here. And your example is just one poor one that forgot to include Ryan Kerrigan in it. Jenkins AND Kerrigan is supposed to make up for not having JJ Watt. I think with a better coordinator, both of those guys will play better as well.

 

As for our FAs, I only see two real successes, Cofield and Garcon. Bowen gave us one good season pretty much. Morgan is a #4 getting #2 money. Carriker got overpaid after one good season. We resigned a bunch of replacement level guys to sizable contracts instead of...trying to replace them.

Bowen is a success. He does what he came here for and we didn't break the bank to get him. When he's in and he's healthy he's our best End. Carriker was an unfortunate situation because injury, so throwing him out there is incredibly ingenuous and totally hindsight is 20/20. Furthermore, we haven't signed that many high priced FAs other than Garcon, which is EXACTLY how their play has stacked up. Garcon is clearly the best FA and he's the one we paid the most to.

Morgan was a mistake, but you're mentioning mistakes that I already said occurred. The difference is, I'm not going to kill an FO for making a few mistakes that are easily correctable via FA. The same FO that has us going into this season with little money pushed forward EVEN AFTER A SEVER CAP PENALTY. That is awesome to me, period.

 

And no, your QB is not supposed to have to play like a MVP to mask your crappy roster. Bill Polian got fired for that. Meanwhile the Niners Seahawks and Packers can survive mediocre QB play because of their quality drafting. Kaep was noticeably worse than RGIII for a good chunk of the year. They're making the playoffs. Hell, the Rams might go 8-8 with Kellen Clemens starting 9 games.

We need to stop grading Mike Shanahan on a curve because he's not Vinny. In reality, he just gets a better failing grade than Vinny did.

Yes, yes absolutely your QB is supposed to play like an MVP to mask the roster that has been restricted due to the high price he cost to get him here as well as a severe cap penalty. This is the NFL now, by the way. Don't know where you've been. Your QB is supposed to ALWAYS PLAY like an MVP in order to have a chance in this league NO MATTER WHAT, unless you have a historically awesome defense which happens now and then.

This FO has hit well on its first rounders, so you'd have to assume that is a starter right there already missing as well as 4-6 via FA at the least. Who knows how many of those guys would've been studs. So, yeah, he needed to play like he did last year to mask our deficiencies. Your comparisons continue to omit that. I get it, we like to throw up other teams that have had success because we look smart doing it, but none of them compare to our situation even REMOTELY so. The team that comes closest, and I have said this previously, is the Lions. Their roster was in complete shambles when Shwartz came in like ours, but they haven't had to go through this cap penalty either. He was also fortunate enough to have the first overall pick and get his franchise QB the day he started.

So, Vinny has nothing to do with how I grade Mike Shanahan. He gets his grade based exclusively on the factors solely attributed to our situation. With what was the worst roster situation in the NFL handed to him 4 years ago and with a franchise QB playing like one last year, he won the NFC East. Something ths franchise hasn't done in over a decade. I get that it's nice and easy to gloss over that now because of our current suckage, but I don't want to if that's okay with you. Sound good?

[Skinsinparadise]

No, no selective memory. And that is entirely my point. We haven't had those epic collapses in which all phases of the team perform miserably all at once, like in the Broncos and 49ers games. We've been more consistent under Kirk, and I'd hardly classify his play as "poor". But if you want to, that's fine.  

 

 

58.5 completion rate, 4TDS-5INTS, 70.7 QB Rating, 44 QBR Rating. He's 0-2.

 

Kirk speaks well, very nice dude.  And has potential.  But his bottom line stuff the same stuff we grade RG3 on, he has been OK at best.  We don't grade RG3 on a curve and just take his best performances, we look at everything.    Cousins shouldn't be graded any differently.

 

The idea that Cousins has been very good and that he has made other facets of the team better -- to me is just running with Shanny's warped spin.      I just don't see any evidence of it.    If you are still a big Shanny backer, that's cool.  But I think by making this point by extension you are being harsh on RG3.  I get why Shanny wants to do it, he obviously doesn't like him and wants to crap on him as he heads out the door.    In case you are curious RG3 has better stats than Cousin on every category I put in this post.  And I don't think RG3 played well this year.   But am holding Cousins to the same standards.  I am not going to tout a QB that hasn't won a game yet and has put up a  weaker completion rate, TD to INT ratio, QBR rating and QB rating.

 

And none of this is to slam Cousins I like him.  I think he's classy and has a good future.  But to me when the accolades for Cousins extends to IMO undeserved heights and how the team is better with him at the helm -- it just feels like am debating a Shanny surrogate.   And I think Shanny has been downright cruel in how he has tried to batter RG3 as he heads out the door.

[TSO]

^^Well I guess that's where we disagree. I don't think anyone is trying to "batter" Robert on the way out the door. And the same way you say you feel like you're debating a Shanahan surrogate when anyone wants to say Kirk has played better and more consistently, and thus it has helped the team be more competitive, I feel I'm debating a Shanahan-basher who is following blindly the theories out there about him and his son trying to burn the whole thing down on their way out.

Again, put up the stats all you want. I'm not going to get into those lying stats. Kirk has played better and more consistently than Robert (specifically the the last few games Robert was in) and it's obvious to my eyes. If you refuse to see that, that's ok. It's all a bit subjective, I agree.

I've already stated that Robert played better in stretches throughout the entire season, but Kirk has been more consistent since he's been in which, granted, has been a small sample.

But don't sit there and tell me anyone is being unfair when we both know Robert had some of his best games passing when both Reed and Garcon were out there, so throwing up Kirk's stats when all he's had is Garcon is quite unfair as well.

That's why I don't want to play the stats game. It means nothing right now. Those who want to downplay Kirk's performances will say he's played against weaker defenses and blah blah blah but then omit how he's missing the second best receiving option on this team.

I'm grading Kirk based solely on how I see his decision making, footwork and pocket presence thus far and they've all been better than Robert's this season. Naturally, when that is happening and we're moving the ball more consistently, the other phases of the team are able to have an easier job (Special Teams doesn't have to do as much for field position, defense doesn't have to defend offense's given short fields).

It's not a big deal to say that and I certainly don't need anyone telling me it's because of blind loyalty to Shanahan. I simply have had more fun watching the last two games than the vast majority of games this entire season because there's been more to get excited about. That's just me, though.

[Skinsinparadise]

^^Well I guess that's where we disagree. I don't think anyone is trying to "batter" Robert on the way out the door. And the same way you say you feel like you're debating a Shanahan surrogate when anyone wants to say Kirk has played better and more consistently, and thus it has helped the team be more competitive, I feel I'm debating a Shanahan-basher who is following blindly the theories out there about him and his son trying to burn the whole thing down on their way out.

Again, put up the stats all you want. I'm not going to get into those lying stats. Kirk has played better and more consistently than Robert (specifically the the last few games Robert was in) and it's obvious to my eyes. If you refuse to see that, that's ok. It's all a bit subjective, I agree.

I've already stated that Robert played better in stretches throughout the entire season, but Kirk has been more consistent since he's been in which, granted, has been a small sample.

But don't sit there and tell me anyone is being unfair when we both know Robert had some of his best games passing when both Reed and Garcon were out there, so throwing up Kirk's stats when all he's had is Garcon is quite unfair as well.

That's why I don't want to play the stats game. It means nothing right now. Those who want to downplay Kirk's performances will say he's played against weaker defenses and blah blah blah but then omit how he's missing the second best receiving option on this team.

I'm grading Kirk based solely on how I see his decision making, footwork and pocket presence thus far and they've all been better than Robert's this season. Naturally, when that is happening and we're moving the ball more consistently, the other phases of the team are able to have an easier job (Special Teams doesn't have to do as much for field position, defense doesn't have to defend offense's given short fields).

It's not a big deal to say that and I certainly don't need anyone telling me it's because of blind loyalty to Shanahan. I simply have had more fun watching the last two games than the vast majority of games this entire season because there's been more to get excited about. That's just me, though.

 

 

Ok, get it,  with Cousins it isn't about stats and isn't about wins.  It's just that you enjoyed the last 2 games.  Yeah they did play close games and if that's your criteria, OK.   Personally I hated the Dallas game.  To let the Cowboys come back from the deficit and then the Redskins offense looked so inept on the last drive.  That loss hurt.  Yeah the Vikings game was entertaining, too.   The Eagles game came down to the wire.    The Giants game was tight too. So were the wins especially against SD and the Bears and the Raiders.  

 

But I hear ya, it was much easier to watch than the Chiefs game which Cousins did his part too of looking bad -- the last two games were an improvement off of that.   Ditto the SF game which was depressing.   The irony is I really wish you were right and Cousins has been very good.   Nothing would make me happier about the team than you coming on a thread on Monday after Cousins lights up the Giants saying I told you so.    And I do think Cousins has potential but I totally get why sports radio took calls this week on the subject of whether Cousins has diminished his trade value after last week.   I'd love to see Cousins actually win one and go a game without a crippling INT.  And I'd like him to end the season where he has more TDs than INTs.

 

It's depressing to me that we don't have a #1 pick, and nothing would get me more excited predraft than recouping a #1 via a Cousins trade.  But right I think we'd be lucky to get a late 2nd rounder.  

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

lol, knowledgeable guys? You mean the negative nancies who always complain? And then when the team does poorly loudly proclaim how right they are? You know, I'm almost at a point where I just want to become one of those guys so that when the next failure occurs here I can bang my chest. Oh, and if we do well I'll just go into hiding or act like I never said anything and was with it all along. You know, like last season how the majority of those "knowledgeable" guys acted. 

So because the fact that people predicted the failures years in advance is inconvenient to your argument, yo simply dismiss it. Gotcha

ol, those guys you listed that we were "high on" actually support my point. It's not even close. We've got A LOT more guys with WAY BETTER skill sets here through the draft. I didn't list them authoritatively, either, I specifically stated exactly what they've done and where they're at in their careers. 

They're "young guys with potential". How much? Who knows.

Disagree. It does mean a lot. Players "flashing", especially young ones, means you can keep working with them. That's what a rebuild is about.

And few of them have flashed enough for them to even be considered prospective starters, let alone quality starters in the top half of the league. Guys like Hurt, Robinson, Neild and Hankerson look like solid depth. What makes you think they'll be anything more? They're not raw physical specimens or ultra productive, they're just average prospects.

And your example is just one poor one that forgot to include Ryan Kerrigan in it. Jenkins AND Kerrigan is supposed to make up for not having JJ Watt. I think with a better coordinator, both of those guys will play better as well. 

So who hired Jim Haslett AND stuck with him with better DCs on the board? That aside, Kerrigan is above average at most, he's a hustle player on a bad team who gets overrated by homer fans. He is a nonfactor when Orakpo is out of the game - see last year for example. Jenkins got hyped up due to onw training camp after a pedestrian college career.

Bowen is a success. He does what he came here for and we didn't break the bank to get him. When he's in and he's healthy he's our best End. Carriker was an unfortunate situation because injury, so throwing him out there is incredibly ingenuous and totally hindsight is 20/20.

Bowen hasn't been good in 2 seasons. Resigning Carriker was good, but not to that contract.

Furthermore, we haven't signed that many high priced FAs other than Garcon

We've signed a lot of medium-sized contracts for replacement level production which is just as bad.

Yes, yes absolutely your QB is supposed to play like an MVP to mask the roster that has been restricted due to the high price he cost to get him here as well as a severe cap penalty. This is the NFL now, by the way. Don't know where you've been. Your QB is supposed to ALWAYS PLAY like an MVP in order to have a chance in this league NO MATTER WHAT, unless you have a historically awesome defense which happens now and then.

And that's why Andrew Luck, another QB who's been mediocre this season, is going to the playoffs. That's why Carson Palmer is possibly going to the playoffs. That's why Joe Flacco is still in the mix. Because they played like MVPs. The Colts got 4 TOs against the Chiefs. Luck put up a mediocre statline that game. Has RGIII ever gotten help like that this year?

Your comparisons continue to omit that. I get it, we like to throw up other teams that have had success because we look smart doing it, but none of them compare to our situation even REMOTELY so. The team that comes closest, and I have said this previously, is the Lions. Their roster was in complete shambles when Shwartz came in like ours, but they haven't had to go through this cap penalty either. He was also fortunate enough to have the first overall pick and get his franchise QB the day he started.So, Vinny has nothing to do with how I grade Mike Shanahan. He gets his grade based exclusively on the factors solely attributed to our situation. With what was the worst roster situation in the NFL handed to him 4 years ago and with a franchise QB playing like one last year, he won the NFC East. Something ths franchise hasn't done in over a decade. I get that it's nice and easy to gloss over that now because of our current suckage, but I don't want to if that's okay with you. Sound good?

The Rams were in a worse situation too. I'd argue the Bucs were too. And we had avenues to get draft assets that other teams didn't but Shanny went all in on a win now approach instead of attempting a real rebuild. He got caught with his pants down in 2010 and screwed up 2011 by trading down endlessly to make up for the depth he didn't draft in 2010.

I really fail to see why people make excuses for Shanahan. The fact that he needs MVP level play from his QB to barely make the playoffs should say it all. Good teams who get MVP level QB play look like the Broncos or Saints or last year's Patriots, not a 10-6 wild card team.

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

Pierre Garcon was absolutely killing the Cowboys for about 3 Quarters, who was throwing him the ball? AlMo was awesome, of course, but I wouldn't say he was the "driving force". On one drive, for sure... after the Cowboys were getting torched by Garcon the entire game.

 

I know what I'm seeing. It doesn't matter, though. So many here want to be attached to the conspiracy theory of Mike trying to find excuses and failing, so they're blaming Kirk for it all. It's annoying. He has played better and more consistently than Robert and the entire team has looked better for it. Whether or not anyone admits that (without putting Robert down like he was the only problem of course) to me just shows whether or not they have an agenda. 

 

If Mike really wanted to prove that everything was Robert's fault, I don't see him being so far off. The team has generally played better and more consistently to me. I know I've been more into the games since I don't know how long, that's for sure. We haven't had any epic collapses in where every part of the team fails miserably, something we've seen in a ton of games this year.

 

However, I don't think that's what Mike was trying to do. I think he knows the team has many issues and it wasn't just Robert. I think he also knows, and rightly so, that Kirk was a better option to at least minimize the impacts of our other weaknesses more than Robert would have. That much has been proven to me.

 

And I'm also not willing to gloss over the impact of the cap penalty as well as the trade for Robert and how it affected this "garbage roster building". I stated BEFORE GOING INTO THIS SEASON WHEN EVERYONE WAS PRAISING THIS FO AND MIKE SHANAHAN that, unfortunately, because of what we gave up for Robert and because of now what was the second year of cap penalties Robert HAD TO BE THE GUY and had to over compensate for the rest of the team.

 

I didn't see a problem with that and wouldn't call that garbage roster building. It's smart to go all in on your QB in the NFL these days. They mask a TON of weaknesses. When Robert didn't and couldn't do it this year, we saw what we saw. I was just waiting for Robert to "turn it on" all year. He didn't. At no point has he looked like the guy last year, even when he's played well. That's okay to me. I'm not in total melt down mode like so many here. I'm comfortable with how we got here and don't think Mike is the evil villain who destroyed this team.

 

I could go back to this offseason and, heck, before this offseason and quote so many of you who are absolutely trashing everything Mike has done here now where you were saying how great of a job this FO has done building a young and upcoming roster with great potential. Getting a franchise QB who had the single best rookie season in the history of the NFL. Heck, maybe we drafted two franchise QBs. That alone is awesome. Drafting a stud LT, RB, OLB and now, if he can stay healthy, a stud TE. Drafting guys like Riley, Jenkins, Helu, Amerson, Aldrick Robinson, Hankerson, Neild and Crawford who have all already contributed, improved and have yet to reach their ceilings. And guys like Hurt, Gettis, Compton, Rib, Thompson, Rambo, Phillip Thomas, Keenan Robinson, Brandon Jenkins and Jamison who the jury is still out on but all have potential, some with great skill sets that can make them dominant players in the NFL. And let's not forget Bernstine, who had a career ending injury but was looking pretty good during training camp and preseason and made the team in 2012. And now we had another safety draft pick, Phillip Thomas, go down this year before the season. That's pretty unfortunate.  

 

 

How about Cofield, Bowen and Garcon in FA? Heck, Garcon alone is huge for our organization because, for the life of us, we could NEVER find a stud WR anywhere ever, other than Santana Moss in how many years. I'm tired of everyone pointing out the mistakes made in personnel every chance they get, of which they are FAR FEWER than the bright spots since Mike has been here. It's as if every team in the NFL gets 100% of their personnel decisions correct. It's ridiculous.       

      

But, yeah, we're 3-12 now and none of that matters. I get that. I'm certainly not going to try and change anyone's minds. I just refuse to so easily let go of the notion that we were moving in the right direction, a notion almost EVERYONE in the entire football world could see going into this season. To me, that's not something that just disappears after one bad year in which your franchise guy you gave up so much for couldn't carry the team and you're dealing with the second year of terrible cap penalties.

 

I REFUSE TO JUST GLOSS OVER THAT. 

 

 If we get an entirely new coaching staff, I'm hoping they continue what Mike has started and don't blow the whole thing up, because, if they do, I fear we're in for just another failure in a long line of failures. We'll see, I guess. But I worry about the culture that could come back here, because I might be one of the few who see how good Mike has been about letting guys who earn playing time play, and playing no favorites, but I see it.              

yeah...

 

I don't think what I said warranted an essay.

 

I have no agenda against Kirk and I don't believe I've posted anything on here that would make it seem like I do. Like seriously, where the hell did all that come from? lol.

 

Morris had his best game in months last Sunday and I don't think it was a coincidence that the passing game took off at the same time. I never said that Kirk was bad or sucked or anything. I don't think him playing makes much of difference when compared with Rob. Kirk's two games were better than Griff's last few but neither really made plays to win said games and that's what a wannabe elite team needs. Kirk doesn't jump out to me as a guy that will win you ball games IMO. He looks like a solid Jon Kitna/Kyle Orton? type. Nothing wrong with that at all.

 

All the other rhetoric you posted was completely irrelevant.

 

But that was a HELL of a tangent you went off on though man. 

[Burgold]

No, no selective memory. And that is entirely my point. We haven't had those epic collapses in which all phases of the team perform miserably all at once, like in the Broncos and 49ers games. We've been more consistent under Kirk, and I'd hardly classify his play as "poor". But if you want to, that's fine.  

Maybe I'm misreading you, but the Cowboys game and the Broncos game were almost exactly the same phenomennon.  In the Broncos match, we built a 14, maybe even a 17 point lead into the second half before Manning decided he was going to obliterate the defense which he did.  Then, the mighty Broncos defense adjusted to what we did well in the first half and we couldn't counter and became utterly ineffective.  Same story with the Cowboys except the Broncos are a far superior team.

 

I actually remember leaving the Broncos game feeling okay and hoping that we'd turned the corner and were finally getting our act back together.

[Skinsinparadise]

I just caught an episode of First Take, Stephen Smith (granted he's just a fan like we are) echoed our point here, saying after watching Cousins the idea of a QB controversy in DC is ridiculous, you could his ceiling isn't high, he doesn't think the Skins could get more than a 3rd rounder for him. 

[Brokenstriker]

incomplete passes off the hands of intended receivers

interception off the hands of intended receiver

hit to the helmet on the signature special team first punt (cowboys start near their endzone instead of 1st and goal)

facemask against Wilson who had contain on Murray's one and only long run (cowboys backed up near their endzone instead of 1st down at the 50)

pass interference against Garcon on 3rd and game on the line play late in the 4th qtr (Skins covert and kill the clock)

 

Shanahan may not be that good

Cousins may not be that good

 

but they didn't have anything to do with these 4 game changing plays and multiple incompletions