wysknz1 Posted November 27, 2016 Share Posted November 27, 2016 It's Sunday and it still hurts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stefanskins Posted November 27, 2016 Share Posted November 27, 2016 3 hours ago, RedskinsMayne said: We we gotta play some tough games ahead though, most of them are on the road... i think we could loose to the vikings and then cardinals, and the giants game is looking very tough. we already beat Minnesota Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted November 27, 2016 Share Posted November 27, 2016 2 hours ago, DM72 said: I tend to agree that there's a little too much chest pounding for losing a winnable game against Dallas. But you say Kirk's overachieving? Whatever. Wait, so people are upset we are overachieving? After decades of underachieving wouldn't that be a welcome change? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM72 Posted November 27, 2016 Share Posted November 27, 2016 3 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said: Wait, so people are upset we are overachieving? After decades of underachieving wouldn't that be a welcome change? He pretty much was saying that Kirk is really not this good. He's playing over his head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted November 27, 2016 Share Posted November 27, 2016 Just now, DM72 said: He pretty much was saying that Kirk is really not this good. He's playing over his head. Yes...and I am still befuddled, after years of over-paying people, and getting less than stellar production, that when we get players that "overachieve" that's a bad thing? Some people just want to ****, I guess... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 3 hours ago, DM72 said: But you say Kirk's overachieving? Yea ... you disagree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 Overachieve has a negative connotation. It makes it sound like he's not really this good and will eventually fall off. I don't think he's overachieving. I think he's living up to his talent and the coaching/system/skill players around him are helping him maximize it. After all, it takes a village to raise a QB... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 1 minute ago, Warhead36 said: Overachieve has a negative connotation. It makes it sound like he's not really this good and will eventually fall off. I don't think he's overachieving. I think he's living up to his talent and the coaching/system/skill players around him are helping him maximize it. After all, it takes a village to raise a QB... I love Kirk. He's proven us all wrong, me especially, I never thought he'd be this good. I still think we fix LG and C, and we'll become much more potent in the red zone. He's a great fit for Gruden's system, and he's done it with a mediocre running game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 For the first time in my life, the team has put together back to back competitive seasons with a core of mostly young talent I'm quite content right now. Dallas will get theirs soon enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSSkinz Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 2 hours ago, Gregpeck99 said: Yea ... you disagree? I think Kirk can get better, he could definitely learn to use his legs more for extending plays or just running for 4 - 7 yards when nobody is open or when he gets flushed. We've seen flashes but not consistency in these areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 29 minutes ago, jschuck12001 said: I think Kirk can get better, he could definitely learn to use his legs more for extending plays or just running for 4 - 7 yards when nobody is open or when he gets flushed. We've seen flashes but not consistency in these areas. This is one of my few bones of contention with the coaching staff: lack of play-action bootlegs on the goal line. If someone has the resources to find out how often we call that in the redzone, I'd appreciate it. It seems like thay suits Kirk's skill set, and it's so effective down low like that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moondog Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 2 hours ago, Gregpeck99 said: Yea ... you disagree? Absolutely. Ever since he turned it on last year he has consistently performed at an extremely high level. He had two bad games to start the year where I think he was stressing and trying to do too much. Since then he's settled right back into his groove. Games 3-6 weren't stellar but you could see him rounding back into form. When a guy puts up the numbers he has over 20+ starts, it's not overachieving....it's who he is. That's a very good sample size. In two huge primetime games over the past week or so he threw 800+ yards and six TDs with zero turnovers. All the evidence is there in more than enough of a sample size, kirk is the real deal. He's not overachieving, this is simply who he is man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 I feel good about where the franchise is as far as big picture. I think 2016's outlook is still a bit cloudy however. Through 12 weeks of the season I can say for certaint that the current 'Skins team *SHOULD* be in the playoffs. The big question however is; Did the September/October 'Skins miss too many opportunities against teams they should have beaten to where an unexpected extra loss down the stretch will cost them a playoff spot? At 6-4-1 they control their own destiny for a playoff berth, but the teams "in the hunt" are making their case too and they aren't going away anytime soon. The NYG also to me are still too much of a mystery, who is to say 3 weeks from now they are even the 5th seed? I have no idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovemaskins Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 10 hours ago, moondog said: Absolutely. Ever since he turned it on last year he has consistently performed at an extremely high level. He had two bad games to start the year where I think he was stressing and trying to do too much. Since then he's settled right back into his groove. Games 3-6 weren't stellar but you could see him rounding back into form. When a guy puts up the numbers he has over 20+ starts, it's not overachieving....it's who he is. That's a very good sample size. In two huge primetime games over the past week or so he threw 800+ yards and six TDs with zero turnovers. All the evidence is there in more than enough of a sample size, kirk is the real deal. He's not overachieving, this is simply who he is man. Don't argue with that dude bro. He's just playing devil's advocate. That's his thing and he always takes the negative side. I think he enjoys stirring up the board. I heard a stat the other day. In the last 20 games Kirk Cousins has thrown for 4000 40tds and 11 int. Only Brady has better numbers over that span and I don't think those numbers included the Green Bay game. Right now, Cousins is playing like an elite top 3 QB. He's right there with Brady, Rodgers (Just outdueled him in primetime) and Roethlisberger and I say only getting better and more confident. I was thinking the other day that our window is now officially open. We just need a another DLineman to pair with Swaggy P, a monster linebacker beside Compton and a real NFL Free Safety. We have everything else. I also don't want to pick between Garcon and Jackson. I say re-sign them both. We have the money and neither should command more than we're paying now. Both back around 6-7M per keeps the offense humming, and our defense infused with young talent makes us a real contender considering we're scoring 20+ a game. Yea, the future is bright and I too want another piece of Dallas in January! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 12 hours ago, jschuck12001 said: We've seen flashes but not consistency in these areas. Wikipedia definition: Overachievers are individuals who "perform better or achieve more success than expected." The implicit presumption is that the "overachiever" is achieving superior results through excessive effort. In a teaching context, an "overachiever" is an educational label applied to students, who perform better than their peers when normalized for the instructor's perceptions of background, intelligence or talent. In the workplace context, individuals who are deemed to be overachievers are those with the drive to complete tasks above and beyond expectations and who set very high career goals for themselves. I think this is an accurate description of KC at this point in his development given his history of being a 4th rounder. My main point is despite Kirk's unexpectedly fine work of late ... he has not yet shown he can carry an otherwise less than mediocre Team on his back ... and "chest pounding" now is premature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 11 hours ago, NoCalMike said: At 6-4-1 they control their own destiny for a playoff berth, but the teams "in the hunt" are making their case too and they aren't going away anytime soon. The NYG also to me are still too much of a mystery, who is to say 3 weeks from now they are even the 5th seed? I have no idea. It's interesting...in 2015, 2012, 2007, and 2005 we were never in a position this strong. Granted, we are only half-a-game clear of 2-3 teams that are vying for that last spot, but in the past we were generally 1-2 games back with 5-6 games to play. I hope another team (Tampa, Minnesota, Philly, New Orleans) doesn't "Redskin" us this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 4 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said: It's interesting...in 2015, 2012, 2007, and 2005 we were never in a position this strong. Granted, we are only half-a-game clear of 2-3 teams that are vying for that last spot, but in the past we were generally 1-2 games back with 5-6 games to play. I hope another team (Tampa, Minnesota, Philly, New Orleans) doesn't "Redskin" us this year. Tampa could--although yesterday's win was more about Seattle's complete offensive ineptitude than anything else. I think Minnesota is cooked--they OL sucks, Bradford sucks, they have no running game. They have a good defense, but we just put up almost 400 yards on them. They've gone 1-5 since starting 5-0. The Giants are doing what the Giants seem to do every couple of years--pull **** out of their ass with smoke and mirrors. I am wholly unimpressed with them. Really need GB to step up and get their head out of their asses tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 1 minute ago, Riggo#44 said: Tampa could--although yesterday's win was more about Seattle's complete offensive ineptitude than anything else. I think Minnesota is cooked--they OL sucks, Bradford sucks, they have no running game. They have a good defense, but we just put up almost 400 yards on them. They've gone 1-5 since starting 5-0. The Giants are doing what the Giants seem to do every couple of years--pull **** out of their ass with smoke and mirrors. I am wholly unimpressed with them. Really need GB to step up and get their head out of their asses tonight. I agree that Tampa seems the most legit. I'm also not even worrying about New York until we get a bit closer (there also could be advantages to being the 6-seed). The only thing about Minnesota that scares me is that they have the lightest schedule of everyone left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 The Bucs schedule is tough. They gotta play at the Chargers next week who are better then their record suggests and they have to play the Cowboys too(go Cowboys! hate saying that...). They also have two games left against the Saints. I don't think they finish better then 3-2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 8 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said: I agree that Tampa seems the most legit. I'm also not even worrying about New York until we get a bit closer (there also could be advantages to being the 6-seed). The only thing about Minnesota that scares me is that they have the lightest schedule of everyone left. Minnesota has to play Dallas (which, you just fully expect Dallas to **** the bed in that one after playing nearly flawlessly against us, don't you?), go to Green Bay, and have Indy. They've already lost to the Bears once. Tampa has to play Saints, Cowboys, Saints in successive weeks, and their defense is only slightly better than ours. They could be 0-3/1-2 in those games. The Eagles schedule might do them in after Cincy--Giants, Us, Ravens, Cowboys. Ravens are wildly mediocre, but their defense is good, and they play the Iggles at home. Really, really need the Packers to get their **** together for 1 game. **** the Giants. What paper tigers. Their 6 game win streak consists of a combined opponent winning percentage of .317. Only the previously mentioned mediocre Ravens are over .500....by 1 game. They beat the 4-7 Rams, 2-9 Bears, 0-10 Browns, 5-5 Eagles, and 3-7-1 Bengals. The only beat the Browns by more than 6 points in that stretch--they gave up 300 to Josh freaking McCown... They finish out the rest of the season against teams at or over .500, including the Cowboys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTskin Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 The Giants are the worst 8-3 team I've ever seen. I greatly look forward to that game. No more Barry-bashing, please. The Cowboys did to us what they've done to every team this year. There's no scheming that Barry could have done to overcome our talent deficiency. The only way to beat the boys is to out-duel them and unfortunately red zone problems cost us an honest chance at this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 My point wasn't that the Giants were great, it's that I am more concerned with protecting a playoff spot than I am passing the Giants for the 5-seed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildbunny Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 6 minutes ago, CTskin said: The Giants are the worst 8-3 team I've ever seen. I greatly look forward to that game. No more Barry-bashing, please. The Cowboys did to us what they've done to every team this year. There's no scheming that Barry could have done to overcome our talent deficiency. The only way to beat the boys is to out-duel them and unfortunately red zone problems cost us an honest chance at this one. Interesting fact about our D against Dallas. We punted once. Dallas punted twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTskin Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 6 minutes ago, Wildbunny said: Interesting fact about our D against Dallas. We punted once. Dallas punted twice. When I say out-duel, I'm more referring to us having a higher number than them on the scoreboard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildbunny Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 1 minute ago, CTskin said: When I say out-duel, I'm more referring to us having a higher number than them on the scoreboard. I know, but at least our D did their part by forcing one more stop than them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.