I still say we need Matt Jones

[pjfootballer]

After the Griffin thing, I don't care where a guy was drafted or even if he was drafted.  I go by the old Cowboys Coach Jimmy Johnson's adage- give me 53 of the best football players and put them on the field.  If he ends up a bust, he's a bust and a wasted pick.  But for every wasted pick, you get guys like Kelley for free.  Not every pick in every round is going to work out and the faster fans realize that, they less anxieties they'll have over "lost picks." 

[TSO]

10 minutes ago, pjfootballer said:

After the Griffin thing, I don't care where a guy was drafted or even if he was drafted.  I go by the old Cowboys Coach Jimmy Johnson's adage- give me 53 of the best football players and put them on the field.  If he ends up a bust, he's a bust and a wasted pick.  But for every wasted pick, you get guys like Kelley for free.  Not every pick in every round is going to work out and the faster fans realize that, they less anxieties they'll have over "lost picks." 

 

I'm going to assume this was directed at me. If so, it was unnecessary. I don't care about where he was drafted. I care about WHY he was drafted and acknowledge his physical talent is something worth working on. Just like it was for Griffin, until it became 100% obvious it wasn't going anywhere and the coaches/GM felt that way, as well.

So long as the coaches and GM think Matt's worth developing, I will to. If they don't, I will concede to their thinking because they have way more information than I do. I won't make grand proclamations about a developing player because I lack the information necessary to do so.  

Also, I enjoy trying to be objective about a player and consistent in how I assess them. I like to be able to recognize their positives as well as the issues they have to work on. Oh, and I'm a Redskin fan that enjoys rooting for their success, so long as they're not aholes taking advantage of the team.

In this case, that goes for every RB on the roster as well. I'll love it just the same if Kelley takes the job and runs with it. I really love what Thompson brings to the table, though I understand why the coaches don't want to overuse him and am glad they don't.    

[pjfootballer]

20 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

I'm going to assume this was directed at me. If so, it was unnecessary. I don't care about where he was drafted. I care about WHY he was drafted and acknowledge his physical talent is something worth working on. Just like it was for Griffin, until it became 100% obvious it wasn't going anywhere and the coaches/GM felt that way, as well.

So long as the coaches and GM think Matt's worth developing, I will to. If they don't, I will concede to their thinking because they have way more information than I do. I won't make grand proclamations about a developing player because I lack the information necessary to do so.  

Also, I enjoy trying to be objective about a player and consistent in how I assess them. I like to be able to recognize their positives as well as the issues they have to work on. Oh, and I'm a Redskin fan that enjoys rooting for their success, so long as they're not aholes taking advantage of the team.

In this case, that goes for every RB on the roster as well. I'll love it just the same if Kelley takes the job and runs with it. I really love what Thompson brings to the table, though I understand why the coaches don't want to overuse him and am glad they don't.    

Actually no, it wasn't directed to you.  That's why I mentioned Griffin.  I myself held on too long to the notion that Griffin was "worth saving" because of where we drafted him.  A lot of fans felt the same way because there was always that Andrew Luck comparison hanging over our heads and decades of futility at the position.  I finally came to the realization that after last year, it was time to move on from Griffin.

My point was, for every Adrian Peterson drafted in the first round, there was an undrafted Curtis Martin Arian Foster out there. You should know by my posts by now in any of the threads talking about Matt Jones, that nowhere have I said "get rid of the guy, he's done."  I'm not ready to give up on him by any means.  He's still raw and has a lot to learn.  I think next year will be his telling year (year 3) and if he doesn't get it next year, it's time to cut bait and move on.  I'm not ready to throw Jones out yet, but he has a year and a half to prove he can play at a high level in this league.

I feel like I've been pretty objective with Jones.  I see some good.  I see some bad.  Unfortunately at this point, his bad is outweighing his good and costing us turnovers.

Hell, I've been one of the BIGGEST supporters of Trent Murphy in this forum, who is one of the players just constantly raked over the coals by our fans.  I think you are lumping me in a group of haters, when, while I'm not on your side of the fence, I'm not on their side either.  I'm staying medium at this point.

[TSO]

Just now, pjfootballer said:

I think you are lumping me in a group of haters, when, while I'm not on your side of the fence, I'm not on their side either.

 

Didn't lump you with anyone, just addressed your point directly as I thought it was directed at me, but no worries.  

Which side of the fence do you think I'm on? Your points about Jones are pretty much exactly how I feel, btw.  

[pjfootballer]

1 minute ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

Didn't lump you with anyone, just addressed your point directly as I thought it was directed at me, but no worries.  

Which side of the fence do you think I'm on? Your points about Jones are pretty much exactly how I feel, btw.  

I think you are on the "keep him and develop him" for a couple more years.  I think you really want this pick to pan out (not for personal reasons) because it was a high pick (3rd). We've been a team bereft of picks for so long under the previous years and now Scot is supplying us not only "with" picks but is actually turning quality out of those picks, that it pains us when he does miss.

Hell, I want ALL of our picks to succeed.  It eats at me that Kyshon Jarrett's career is done and he was only a 6th.  I've been starved for a winner for so long, that I'm "all in" with Scot and sometimes I have a hard time admitting when he misses on a pick (and he has and will). 

For the record, I've been "anti" Chris Thompson since we drafted him, up until last year.  So many fans made him out to be this "super great pick" and fawned over him for so long.  But all I saw were injuries and no production when he did play.  I called for his roster spot many times.  Glad I was wrong.  He's been our most steady back the last 2 years, including Alfred.

[Koolblue13]

1 hour ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

Because, technically, you said "he's never been a starter", when he was to start this season. But that wasn't even my main point, so I have no idea why you went off on this tangent. It's kind of weird, I wasn't saying anything about that. 

The post of mine you originally responded to had little to do with that and was more about pointing out your flawed logic with the "he'll never be" (blanket statement) but qualified with "most likely" (contradicts the blanket statement). I thought that was funny and indicative of everything I've been saying about how many approach this topic. 

Other than this season, he's never been the starter.

My opinion is that will never be.

There's always a chance I'm wrong.

[TSO]

On 11/9/2016 at 0:43 PM, pjfootballer said:

I think you are on the "keep him and develop him" for a couple more years.  I think you really want this pick to pan out (not for personal reasons) because it was a high pick (3rd). We've been a team bereft of picks for so long under the previous years and now Scot is supplying us not only "with" picks but is actually turning quality out of those picks, that it pains us when he does miss.

 

Well, I can say you're definitely off about where I'm at on Matt. 

I've repeatedly stated that 3 years is enough for me to feel like a young player can be judged properly, though I still defer to the team's staff over my own opinion. I also don't think Matt Jones' draft status means anything. I don't care about that, at all. The only thing that matters to me regarding his draft status is that I recognize the reasoning behind drafting him that high from a physical standpoint, and what he can bring to the team if he solves his issues.

I expect us to miss on draft picks. In fact, I expect us to miss on most draft picks (like 55-60%), but I'm satisfied that, with Scot, I feel like we can hit on a solid percentage consistently enough to elevate our talent levels to be among the upper tier of teams.        

When you say "I think you really want this pick to pan out...", I just have to laugh and think people have truly forgot the foundation of their fandom sometimes. Because, truly, shouldn't we ALL want every player on this team to pan out in general? Even if we don't believe they will, shouldn't that desire show at all times? 

Or is it more important to be right? And be obnoxious about it in the process? 

[TSO]

3 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Other than this season, he's never been the starter.

 

Yeah, I obviously know that, since I've mentioned it 1,000 times.  

3 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

My opinion is that will never be.

 

Except you stated it factually, and not as an opinion, which is what I pointed out. The "most likely" qualifier was funny because it contradicted your "never" statement. Never means never, right? You didn't say "likely". You didn't say "my opinion". You said "he'll never be", but then put in parentheses "most likely". I found that funny and indicative of how conversations revolving Matt seem to go.

   Yeesh, I'm utterly confused why this has dragged this long. 

4 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

There's always a chance I'm wrong.

 

Of course there is, and it'd be nice if that was mentioned more often, instead of the blanket statements, as well as (at the very least) an acknowledgment of his skills or positives that has the team being patient enough to prioritize his development. 

 That's all I'm asking for, KB. Is that too much?

[RedBeast]

This thread teminds me of so many other individual player threads. orakpo? Murphy? Etc  

If we are gonna rely on the draft? Than some cakes just take longer to bake, and than some never rise at all. But we must be patient and make these decisions over time, while growing the stable underneath as well. But remember that the draft is alot like craps and sometimes we gotta pay the price to roll them dice.

[abdcskins]

He's got talent.  He's a strong runner.  He just needs to be more decisive.

[Koolblue13]

43 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

 

   Yeesh, I'm utterly confused why this has dragged this long. 

 

 

 That's all I'm asking for, KB. Is that too much?

Of course I'm stating my opinion, what else could i post?

I've given him plenty of credit, when he's earned it and I'm fine letting him earn the job.

I admit to being wrong pretty often. it happens a lot.

As for this part I quoted. And I've said this before. It's going on this long because of you my friend. This tireless crusade you're on to save Matt Jones has you feeling against a wall.

We just let probably the fans favorite player leave and replaced him with a guy who's never given any reason not to doubt.

There are glaring holes in his game that almost everyone sees. I also see why the potential and hope is there also.

If he plays and is dancing, fumbing and getting injured again, he's going to be drilled for it.

[PortisBetts]

Sometimes, a little time on the bench can really change the direction of a player. Hopefully, this is one of those times. He has the prototypical size and speed, but he needs to stop dancing, be more decisive, and most importantly, hold onto the damn ball.

[TSO]

52 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

As for this part I quoted. And I've said this before. It's going on this long because of you my friend. This tireless crusade you're on to save Matt Jones has you feeling against a wall.

 

My tireless crusade? To save Matt Jones? You serious? Like, I can't believe you are that lacking in self awareness and reading comprehension on this matter! 

Would you like to count up the posts I have defending him (in which I constantly qualify everything I say with a recognition of his issues) versus the posts you have doing otherwise on this board since the offseason and see who is on what lame ass crusade!? 

This one just pissed me off, KB. It's not even close, man, so just shut it with that. Want to take a guess at the ratio? Look in the damn mirror before you come at me with something so ridiculously hypocritical like that. 

Lame lame lame lame. 

[RedBeast]

47 minutes ago, PortisBetts said:

Sometimes, a little time on the bench can really change the direction of a player. Hopefully, this is one of those times. He has the prototypical size and speed, but he needs to stop dancing, be more decisive, and most importantly, hold onto the damn ball.

I agree. Somebody likened him to Stephen Davis a while back, who evidently also took a few years to develop. That would be great if he bloomed into a back like that. I agree that a little pine can inspire many. I am not ready to toss in the towel on him yet.

Edit...For the Great Crusade, use if needed.

 

[CTskin]

The title of this thread is "I still say we need Matt Jones." I completely disagree with the "need" part. But, the fact is that he has 2 1/2 years on a cheap rookie deal, so he shouldn't be going anywhere any time soon. After this coming off-season, if he isn't one of the three best RBs on the roster, then at that time he should be released.

With the exception of patience, RBs usually show their skills immediately... After 300+ carries we know for sure. He still runs too upright and with not half the power expected from a beast like that. Alf, at 30 lbs less, moved piles better.

He stays for now, but not because he's necessary for us to win.

[Warhead36]

Remember it took Stephen Davis a few years to get going too. Didn't really get going until year 4 when he ran for 1400 yards in 1999. You don't just let young talent go for nothing. Keep him on his rookie deal and see if he pans out.

Before 2015 people were talking about moving on from Jordan Reed too. Now he's probably our most reliable offensive weapon.

[wit33]

Its more difficult to get behind a guy when concerns are about motivation and running tougher. These question marks go against what the Skins brass talk about building. He's a young man, maybe the motivation comes at some point, but it certainly makes his path to success difficult with those added hurdles. 

Kelley is exactly what the Skins need as far as a back that will keep the offense flowing and gain positive yards. It would be nice if he could provide nice gash runs and allow the play action game to open up a bit more. 

[Wildbunny]

7 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

Before 2015 people were talking about moving on from Jordan Reed too. Now he's probably our most reliable offensive weapon.

Totally different. People were arguing of his health problems and many concussion injury which somehow makes it unreliable. Which is quite true, guy has never had a full season. Skill have never been the problem with Reed.

But that's an another topic and another thread.

[Long n Left]

17 hours ago, pjfootballer said:

My point was, for every Adrian Peterson drafted in the first round, there was an undrafted Curtis Martin out there. 

Just for the sake of correctness, Curtis Martin was a 3rd round pick.

[pjfootballer]

10 minutes ago, Long n Left said:

Just for the sake of correctness, Curtis Martin was a 3rd round pick.

Correct.  I might have been thinking of Arian Foster. 

[Unbias]

The problem I have with Matt Jones is that there's a history of showing flashes, but never consistently delivering. That was his entire college career and it's mapped over to his pro career so far. At what point do you just say he is who he is? 

Even if that's the case he could be a decent 5-10 touch guy, but ultimately those guys rarely stick with the same team for that second contract. 

Moving forward I really like the Kelly/Thompson split backfield. Kelly is the fall forward runner that has looked a lot better in the open field than anticipated. There's some ALMO to his game. Thompson is a receiving mismatch who is a functional runner. They play off each other's strengths really well. 

[Warhead36]

11 hours ago, Wildbunny said:

Totally different. People were arguing of his health problems and many concussion injury which somehow makes it unreliable. Which is quite true, guy has never had a full season. Skill have never been the problem with Reed.

But that's an another topic and another thread.

I guess, but the point is you don't just toss aside young talent that doesn't work out right away. At worst you get them dirt cheap on their rookie deals and use them as cheap depth.

[CBass1724]

I don't really agree with the Stephen Davis comp.  He was behind Terry Allen for a few years and was used at FB a lot in 98 before his breakout season in 99.

Davis at least passed the eye test when watching him back then before he broke out.  You could just tell watching him run that he had "it" and could run downhill very well.  Jones doesn't pass that test with me.  There's nothing he does that other generic guys can't do.  Matt Jones = JAG 

But I do agree that you use these guys on their cheap rookie deals until you can't anymore.  No sense in cutting someone like that, but just don't become too attached.

[Wildbunny]

1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

I guess, but the point is you don't just toss aside young talent that doesn't work out right away. At worst you get them dirt cheap on their rookie deals and use them as cheap depth.

I'm fine with that. I just disagreed on the comparison.

[Darrell Green Fan]

On 11/9/2016 at 5:03 PM, CTskin said:

The title of this thread is "I still say we need Matt Jones." I completely disagree with the "need" part. But, the fact is that he has 2 1/2 years on a cheap rookie deal, so he shouldn't be going anywhere any time soon. After this coming off-season, if he isn't one of the three best RBs on the roster, then at that time he should be released.

With the exception of patience, RBs usually show their skills immediately... After 300+ carries we know for sure. He still runs too upright and with not half the power expected from a beast like that. Alf, at 30 lbs less, moved piles better.

He stays for now, but not because he's necessary for us to win.

This is exactly how I see it as well.  I was a big believer going into the season but you are right, at 300 carries you know what you have. Fumbles aside Matt Jones simply is not a good back by NFL standards.  The yards he is getting are a result of good blocking, every NFL back gets those yards.  The problem is Jones never seems to get yards on his own.