Redskins Raiders Post Game Assessments

[Art]

4 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

I suspect you are being more critical of Kirk because he is your QB and it was a terribly disappointing loss.  But the numbers really aren't close, Carr was totally lost last night and was horrible.  Both had no running game and faced similar pressure, both had drops by receivers. 

 

Kirk vs Philly:

 

23/40/240 1 TD 1 Pick  QBR:  34.8  Rating 72.9

 

Carr vs Washington

 

19/31/118  1 TD  2 Picks  QBR:  3.5  Rating 52.9

 

That's not really the point DGF.

 

Carr performed miserably against us, in large part, because we had their number and overwhelmed them.   He didn't leave anything on the table.   Even his two interceptions were well thrown balls we just grabbed.    He didn't miss wide open guys consistently or throw so wildly off target as to be disconcerting as Kirk did against Philly.

 

Put another way, though Carr clearly played worse against us than Cousins did against Philly, Carr did so BECAUSE of us.  Kirk just played badly.   If Kirk connects on NORMAL QB throws against Philly we win.   Carr didn't miss anything.   He had nothing to go to.   Kirk played very well last night.   He made several BIG throws that were accurate and tremendous.   Again, if he's MILDLY that accurate against Philly we're 3-0.   The problem with Kirk isn't that he can have an off game because the other guys are whipping us.   That happened against the Giants last year and it wasn't so much that Kirk played badly, but they just took it to our offense.

 

The problem is sometimes Kirk appears to have no idea where he's throwing the ball and it's NO WHERE CLOSE.   In 2015 it took him basically 9 games to NOT just overtly suck.   Last year fewer.   This year apparently just one with some average No. 2.   I can live with Kirk just sucking on opening day if he plays 13 games like last night for sure.   But he did, and has, sucked on opening day in the three years :).

[Hail4Life]

The Defense was something special to watch...my god!  All I know is Zach Brown is just a beast!

[ANONYMOUS SOURCE.]

6 hours ago, Mr. Sinister said:

 

 

You could pretty much see after that hit, Lynch was like "Yup, no mas, see y'all later"

 

I cried tears of joy. Haven't seen D like that since I was a teenager

 

 

I tend to make dumb Jokes on the fly when I get amped up on big plays. After that hit I looked at my wife and asked her " Do you know what went through Lynch's mind just then? ....... Swearinger!"

I thought it was comedy gold but the wife is a Mechanical Engineer and they can't process humor so I had to laugh by myself ?

[skinsfan35yrs.]

21 hours ago, Burgold said:

One more thing to bring up. We had two bad turnovers that in years' past would have turned into an avalanche and collapse. That goal line stand was amazing. They persevered. They withstood the goofs and a lot of penalties that made me close to cursing the refs. Seemed liked they were really trying to kill the Redskins, but that the 'skins just kept coming up with a better play no matter how many times the refs stole a first down.

so true about the Refs, take for instance, just how do the patriots only have one penalty with just minutes left in the game? 

[skinsfan35yrs.]

21 hours ago, TheItalianStallion said:

I was expecting our D to be improved but not this much. Holy crap what a performance. I was expecting our QB/WR connections to be less than what they were last year in the early part of this season, so I'm not worried about that yet. 2 bad turnovers and only coming away with 27 points prevent me from giving the team an outright A, but still a strong -A. Well done skins!

yeah happy about the offense but with almost 500yrds of offense you would have thought the score was 52 to 10. 

[skinsfan35yrs.]

21 hours ago, Taylorcooley1 said:

Speaking of not getting carried away... but looking at the way the defense has performed from Week 1 to week 3 is phenomenal especially with Jared Goff last I seen leading the league in passing yards the level of performance I've seen rise in the last three games makes me think of a Super Bowl defense we have the secondary and it looks like the defensive line as well to possibly have one not getting carried away not getting carried away

Why would we pull for the Raiders now I think they play the Broncos next I guess I'm confused here

probably because they play the gnats, feebles and cowpies. All in december which is weird

[skinsfan35yrs.]

20 hours ago, Stefanskins said:

think Moses only had 1 FS...right?...i've noticed him getting real close to a false start a few times, in every game this season...wonder why?..either way, yes he had a great game

i noticed that too, everytime i expected to see a yellow flag flying but some how it was timed so close the refs didnt call it

18 hours ago, Rogue Jedi said:

Swearinger represented #36 better in one game than Su'a ever possibly could.

thought the same as I watched him take down "least mode"

[RandyHolt]

I loved Allen's hand fighting GIF on his sack. What a total stud,he abused his man proper. H/T to Bullock as per usual with the GIF. 

 

It may just be me and Manusky but I will take  Allen and Ioannidis for all snaps over our backups all game long on Monday,  goal line etc aside. I remain convinced there are DL yes professional athletes in the game that can play 30 minutes a week without endurance issues.  I think we have 2 in 95 and 98. 

 

It's nice to not rotate in backups and then have to blitz to get any pressure since it's easy for OCs to know its coming. I bet QBs love seeing the slow backups trotting out and our studs terrorizing them on the previous drive standing on the sideline. OL too.

 

To prove my theory wrong, I assume studies have been done that prove that teams win more games when their undisputed starters on the DL do not play extensively.  I will counter with William Perry on the 85 Bears playing on offense. I bet no one can name the backup DLs on that team.

 

You remember the names. Dent. McMichael. Fridge. Dan Hampton.

[skinsfan35yrs.]

12 hours ago, Peregrine said:

Exactly this.  One of the very telling things about this year has been how improved the playcalling is.  How do you know?  Because players are in position to make plays.  Thats ALL coaches can do, put them in position.  This year we have left a lot of points on the board from bad drops, to missed throws, but it means players are in position to make plays.  On the defensive side, even in the Eagles game the playcalling was so good that we were always in position to make plays.  We dropped 4-5 interceptions in that one, and missed 3-4 sacks.  

 

I really really really hope Manusky, Tomsula, and Gray have made the difference and this is a long term change for the good, because if so, this team can be scary good.

the worry some thing for me will be that they are so good that next year owners will be calling them to head coach or move up the ladder to higher positions on coaching staff 

[Veryoldschool]

21 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

I loved Allen's hand fighting GIF on his sack. What a total stud,he abused his man proper. H/T to Bullock as per usual with the GIF. 

 

It may just be me and Manusky but I will take  Allen and Ioannidis for all snaps over our backups all game long on Monday,  goal line etc aside. I remain convinced there are DL yes professional athletes in the game that can play 30 minutes a week without endurance issues.  I think we have 2 in 95 and 98. 

 

It's nice to not rotate in backups and then have to blitz to get any pressure since it's easy for OCs to know its coming. I bet QBs love seeing the slow backups trotting out and our studs terrorizing them on the previous drive standing on the sideline. OL too.

 

To prove my theory wrong, I assume studies have been done that prove that teams win more games when their undisputed starters on the DL do not play extensively.  I will counter with William Perry on the 85 Bears playing on offense. I bet no one can name the backup DLs on that team.

 

You remember the names. Dent. McMichael. Fridge. Dan Hampton.

 

I don't recall the substitution pattern of the '85 Bears but they didn't have to stay on the field very long teams were lucky to get back to the LOS and opponent QB were happy if they could walk off the field under their own power.  I remember watching them knock 2 Dallas QBs out the game during 1 especially suffocating performance.  Two QBs in one game, never seen anything like it before or since.

[skinny21]

@RandyHoltAre you taking into account that the more you play these guys, the less fresh they are down the stretch (like, say, when we make the playoffs)?  Particularly the rookie.  It's a long season.  

 

The good news news is that those two don't play in the base defense.  It's just crazy to me that Manusky almost has two different defenses.  In the 3-4, Anderson, Galette, McClain, Hood, McGee and Everett come in.  With the nickel D, in come Kerrigan, Smith, Allen, Ioannidas, Fuller and Nicholson.  And yesterday we saw Compton and Spaight subbing too.

 

It's a radical shift from normal, and might just be genius.  I'd think it limits the amount of info some of the young guys have to process too.  

 

 

 

I have no comments about the historical angle though.  

[Panninho]

Watched the condensed game on gamepass one more time. We have praised Zach Brown a lot, and he derserves every piece of it but man...Martrell Spaight was all over the place as well. What a great game from our linebackers.

[wilco_holland]

7 hours ago, skinsfan35yrs. said:

the worry some thing for me will be that they are so good that next year owners will be calling them to head coach or move up the ladder to higher positions on coaching staff 

 

Greg Manusky, 51, HC experience non. Players coach. Tough guy. D mind. I think he is a Mike Zimmer type of HC. It took Zim a long time to get a HC job. So I think we are pretty safe. He needs to really coach a couple of great years to get noticed as HC material. 

 

Jim Tomsula, 49, HC experience 2 years. Players coach. Long time position coach. In his long career Jim was only once a d-coordinator, in Europe. His HC stint was meh. So I think people in the league see him as a great position coach and motivator but not D-coordinator. Worse case might be if some team offers him Assistant HC d-line coach. 

 

Torrian Gray, 43, HC experience non. 16 years DB positon coach, 15 of does in college. We have seen some crazy promotions with DB coaches, think Raheem Morris and Mike Tomlin. Only I think right now people might be scared about his pro-experience. If he can coach our DB's great for the next two or three years, people will be interested to talk to him for other positions. But right now I think it's to early. 

 

So we are safe I think for at least a couple of years. Also because names like Vrabel, Austin, Cooter, Toub, McDaniel (all potenital HC next season), don't have a direct connection with these guys. So it's unlikely they would bring one of our two position coaches in to be there D-coordinator. 

[Darrell Green Fan]

13 hours ago, skinny21 said:

I hear ya', but...  

 

I wasn't basing my opinion on the statistics (which obviously favor Kirk).  Yes, both faced pressure and both had some drops by receivers.  

Carr to me looked like he didn't know where to go with the ball because the defense took (almost) everything away.   Kirk's problem looked different to me.... he was inaccurate.  He missed (not overlooked) throws to open receivers.  At times it was due to pressure in his face, but at other times he simply let his footwork go by the wayside and it caused numerous poorly thrown balls.  I'd argue the Eagle's defense didn't shut down our receivers, but our defense absolutely shut down the Raiders receivers.  Part of that falls on coaching, and part is talent in the secondary (I think our secondary is superior to the Eagles'... maybe by a wide margin).  

Cousins had plenty of opportunities to capitalize vs the Eagles but couldn't.  Carr went up against a defense that allowed almost nothing positive - he didn't just miss a bunch of throws.  

 

I'm not throwing Kirk to the wolves, he had a bad game, but I wasn't mad at him for it... I just wanted him to clean up his accuracy (and was certain he would), and he did.  

 

Of course, part of the problem with this conversation is that my side of this argument is made in context of my previous statements about Kirk.  I can't expect someone just seeing this (and my previous post) to appreciate that context.  That context includes my unwavering support for Kirk, recognizing mitigating factors for his poorer outings and more, and that context allows me to be honest with myself when judging poor performances by Cousins.  crap, that last line sounds trite... oh well

 

Anyway, I don't think my judgement here involves bias because Kirk is my team's qb, but I will acknowledge that perhaps my memory is incorrect and that Carr played worse than Kirk.  

 

Edit:  @Burgold, @nonniey

Brian Mitchell mad an interesting point that since Crowder didn't really play much in preseason, these first few games are his first attempts in live action.  Saw no reason he wouldn't have it cleaned up.  As you said Burgold, Crowder has been a dynamic returner for us.  The two muffs are concerning, but he's earned the right to continue (for now).  

 

@Voice_of_Reason I'm not sure I'd call guys like McClain, Anderson and Galette backups.  They're starters in our base D.  Same with Everett vs Nicholson and Fuller vs... uh... whoever (a Dlineman, I presume?).  

 

I still don't see it and numbers simply don't back your case.  The Raiders had less than 100 yards of offense until the final minute, their 10 points were gifts.  At least Kirk had his moments.  Both QBs struggled but Carr was far worse by every measuring stick, including inaccuracy..

[Darrell Green Fan]

12 hours ago, Art said:

 

That's not really the point DGF.

 

Carr performed miserably against us, in large part, because we had their number and overwhelmed them.   He didn't leave anything on the table.   Even his two interceptions were well thrown balls we just grabbed.    He didn't miss wide open guys consistently or throw so wildly off target as to be disconcerting as Kirk did against Philly.

 

Put another way, though Carr clearly played worse against us than Cousins did against Philly, Carr did so BECAUSE of us.  Kirk just played badly.   If Kirk connects on NORMAL QB throws against Philly we win.   Carr didn't miss anything.   He had nothing to go to.   Kirk played very well last night.   He made several BIG throws that were accurate and tremendous.   Again, if he's MILDLY that accurate against Philly we're 3-0.   The problem with Kirk isn't that he can have an off game because the other guys are whipping us.   That happened against the Giants last year and it wasn't so much that Kirk played badly, but they just took it to our offense.

 

The problem is sometimes Kirk appears to have no idea where he's throwing the ball and it's NO WHERE CLOSE.   In 2015 it took him basically 9 games to NOT just overtly suck.   Last year fewer.   This year apparently just one with some average No. 2.   I can live with Kirk just sucking on opening day if he plays 13 games like last night for sure.   But he did, and has, sucked on opening day in the three years :).

 

This is typical fan behavior.  When their team loses it's all because of what they did, not the opponent.  When they win again it's all because of their team's effort, other team had little to do with it.  You say it was mostly Kirk, the Eagles fans saw a game where their defense played great and forced bad QB play.  You can't have it both ways, if you are going to give most of the credit to the Washington defense you need to acknowledge the roll the Eagles defense played in that outcome as well.

 

So what we are left with is two defenses who played very well resulting in opposing QBs struggling.  And Carr clearly struggled worse by every measuring stick.  His two picks were simply bad throws although I agree not as bad as Kirk's high miss off his back foot while under pressure.  Carr's  first pick was a balloon that hung up long enough for the safety to cover it.  Go look at it again, he threw a floater  and Nicholson was already in position to grab it.  He didn't come from across the field in the blink of an eye,  he was no more than 10 yards away and had plenty of time to get to it.  That was a floater into double coverage and an easy pick. The second was a throw right into coverage as well.  Had Kirk made those throws you would blame him, and rightfully so.  When Carr makes those throws it's nothing more than great defensive plays.

[LetThePointsSoar]

One more post game random thought... We are one non pass interference call (that was ****ing PI and Pryor was practically assaulted before the ****ing ball arrived) and /or one phantom fumble recovery that was clearly an incomplete pass away from being 3-0.

 

 

Let that sink in... 

[RandyHolt]

9 hours ago, Veryoldschool said:

 

I don't recall the substitution pattern of the '85 Bears but they didn't have to stay on the field very long teams were lucky to get back to the LOS and opponent QB were happy if they could walk off the field under their own power.  I remember watching them knock 2 Dallas QBs out the game during 1 especially suffocating performance.  Two QBs in one game, never seen anything like it before or since.

 

Good point - but I'll counter that I think the Bears offense was rather listless and suspect their D faced their fair share of snaps. Walter Peyton and trying not to laugh as I type this.... Jim McMahon was their offense. A shout out is due to Willie Gault I suppose.

 

But we shouldn't have had to sub at all Sunday night just like da bears. We had a long rest week upcoming - 8 days and a bye week looming, our offense led with 38 TOP, so our defense actually played less than 22 minutes and only faced 48 plays. That is one play every 27.5 seconds facing 48 consecutive snaps. That doesn't factor reality and resting from change of possession, reviews, timeouts, TV timeouts, injuries, measurements, penalties, end of quarter and halftime. I cannot be the only one that thinks subs were not needed short of the situational stuff.

 

Did anyone watch the Dallas game?

 

Jon Gruden was sounding off on Lawrence being off the field, and at how Arizona should use the opportunity to pass.  Beautiful timing to support my posts of the past 24 hours.  He was ranting about how Lawrence had been in the backfield all night, and when he was not playing was when Arizona scored. It was 3rd and 1 and Arizona ran a sneak (which Gruden predicted they would) and they ended up having to settle for a FG and of course, lost doing us no favors. They showed Lawrence on the sideline.

 

Trivia - was Lawrence A: Taking Oxygen B: Breathing Hard C: Hunched Over D: Sitting Down E: hands on hips F: showing any signs of fatigue whatsoever, or G; None of the above.  The answer is G.  He was standing there mouth closed waiting to get back in.

 

I wish Arizona would have passed.

[Darrell Green Fan]

1 hour ago, LetThePointsSoar said:

One more post game random thought... We are one non pass interference call (that was ****ing PI and Pryor was practically assaulted before the ****ing ball arrived) and /or one phantom fumble recovery that was clearly an incomplete pass away from being 3-0.

 

 

Let that sink in... 

 

We kind of let that bad call on the "fumble" go because Kirk was so bad that day few of us felt he would have taken the team down and scored.  While that may he true I'm not convinced it was totally fair.  Kirk has led game winning, game tying, or late go ahead scores many times in his time here.

[RandyHolt]

7 hours ago, skinny21 said:

@RandyHoltAre you taking into account that the more you play these guys, the less fresh they are down the stretch (like, say, when we make the playoffs)?  Particularly the rookie.  It's a long season. 

 

No, but that is a good point to consider, and a good overall post. Another point to consider may be a league wide attempt to minimize player injuries for the overall betterment of the game.  Spread out the snaps help with CTE concerns.

 

Later in the year when the guys ridden hard start to slow, then play the backups more, or more simply, when players are visibly gassed after a long drive, getting schooled.  Rest starters in blowouts, big leads, and consider bye week timing, long gaps between games, learn the players stamina levels, and monitor for nagging injuries or drop offs in play.... I think there are ways to effectively use the best players in all critical situations but most coaches (before Manusky?) seem to blindly rotate DL.

 

I don't think we were in our faux base 3-4 at all Sunday night.  I am stalking the internets for snap counts.  The googles do nothing, as the sites are not yet updated for week 3 but this site shows a trend from game 1, to game 2, to Manusky using our 2 studs more....

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/snapcounts

 

https://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/reports/snap-counts/

 

I like my theory that Manusky went foot on the neck and used Allen and Ioannidis extensively. I think its why we dominated. Gimme them snap counts, oh and per my usual stop calling us a 3-4. We don't even have a NT.

[Reaper Skins]

17 hours ago, pjfootballer said:

I have a bad case of Ionnidis and I don't want to get rid of it.

my case of VernonDavis has been running wild lately

[Art]

3 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

This is typical fan behavior.  When their team loses it's all because of what they did, not the opponent.  When they win again it's all because of their team's effort, other team had little to do with it.  You say it was mostly Kirk, the Eagles fans saw a game where their defense played great and forced bad QB play.  You can't have it both ways, if you are going to give most of the credit to the Washington defense you need to acknowledge the roll the Eagles defense played in that outcome as well.

 

So what we are left with is two defenses who played very well resulting in opposing QBs struggling.  And Carr clearly struggled worse by every measuring stick.  His two picks were simply bad throws although I agree not as bad as Kirk's high miss off his back foot while under pressure.  Carr's  first pick was a balloon that hung up long enough for the safety to cover it.  Go look at it again, he threw a floater  and Nicholson was already in position to grab it.  He didn't come from across the field in the blink of an eye,  he was no more than 10 yards away and had plenty of time to get to it.  That was a floater into double coverage and an easy pick. The second was a throw right into coverage as well.  Had Kirk made those throws you would blame him, and rightfully so.  When Carr makes those throws it's nothing more than great defensive plays.

 

DGF. uh, no.

 

Cousins missed wide open guys against Philly.   He threw high, consistently.   He was drastically off target on anything deep.   That wasn't Philly.   That was us.   Yes, Philly blitzed, but when you have a 5-8 guy wide open for a TD AND you correctly throw it to him, if you actually throw ANYTHING mildly NORMAL it's a score, and when you don't it is disconcerting.

 

THAT is where Kirk often struggles to become a fan favorite.   No one cares about a game where he doesn't shine because the other team is in good coverage or whipping the offensive line or circumstances dictate a game he'd struggle.   If his passes are generally in the right area it's fine.   He said on his pass to Doctson that could have gone the other way.   Amerson could have picked it.   That would STILL have been a great ball.   Perfectly thrown.   To a man in a one on one situation.   If we lose it we can live with it.   The ball was thrown well.

 

One of the announcers and Gruden commented on the red zone play where Kirk just took a couple yard run for a field goal attempt instead of forcing it.   THAT is a decision he doesn't always make either.   But did against the Raiders.   Kirk's problem isn't that he can have bad games.   It's that there are things he does that NO really good QB does as consistently.   As I said, if he has his horrendous starts to seasons down to one game, we can live with it.   But you can't reasonably question his play against Philly as being in any way good.   He missed a ton.   Watch the Game Pass on NFL.com with the coaches tape.   It's UNREAL how much he missed.   Scary really.   But, he threw some great balls against the Raiders that make you believe he's excellent.   If he could get rid of the wildly terrible play like he had against Philly he'd be a sure bet Top 5 guy.   Because he HAS that potential otherwise.

[TheGreek1973]

On 9/25/2017 at 12:18 AM, skinzplay said:

 

A sight for sore eyes!! Those guys were swarming like killer bees out there. I really like that we can get to a QB with just a 4-man rush. That coverage in the secondary was excellent. The defensive coaching staff is impressing me.

That is how the pukes won against the Cardinals yesterday they were getting there with 4 and even 3 men rushes.  AZ must have the worse OL in the league.  Can't wait to play them, Kerrigan, Smith, Anderson, Ioannidis and Allen will have 10 plus sacks combined.

[skinzplay]

1 minute ago, TheGreek1973 said:

That is how the pukes won against the Cardinals yesterday they were getting there with 4 and even 3 men rushes.  AZ must have the worse OL in the league.  Can't wait to play them, Kerrigan, Smith, Anderson, Ioannidis and Allen will have 10 plus sacks combined.

 

Let's hope so, Greek! I'm warming to this defense. I'll be the first to admit that I wanted Wade. But Manusky, thus far, looks to be getting it done, and there's a stark change of mentality (not to mention quality of coaching) since he took over.

[TheGreek1973]

15 hours ago, Art said:

 

That's not really the point DGF.

 

Carr performed miserably against us, in large part, because we had their number and overwhelmed them.   He didn't leave anything on the table.   Even his two interceptions were well thrown balls we just grabbed.    He didn't miss wide open guys consistently or throw so wildly off target as to be disconcerting as Kirk did against Philly.

 

Put another way, though Carr clearly played worse against us than Cousins did against Philly, Carr did so BECAUSE of us.  Kirk just played badly.   If Kirk connects on NORMAL QB throws against Philly we win.   Carr didn't miss anything.   He had nothing to go to.   Kirk played very well last night.   He made several BIG throws that were accurate and tremendous.   Again, if he's MILDLY that accurate against Philly we're 3-0.   The problem with Kirk isn't that he can have an off game because the other guys are whipping us.   That happened against the Giants last year and it wasn't so much that Kirk played badly, but they just took it to our offense.

 

The problem is sometimes Kirk appears to have no idea where he's throwing the ball and it's NO WHERE CLOSE.   In 2015 it took him basically 9 games to NOT just overtly suck.   Last year fewer.   This year apparently just one with some average No. 2.   I can live with Kirk just sucking on opening day if he plays 13 games like last night for sure.   But he did, and has, sucked on opening day in the three years :).

So Art let me get this straight.  KC played badly but our OL didn't have anything to do with this against the Eagles?  That terrible INT when he overthrew Crowder he did it by having great protection?  Maybe you and I were watching a different game I don't know.  

[Art]

Just now, TheGreek1973 said:

So Art let me get this straight.  KC played badly but our OL didn't have anything to do with this against the Eagles?  That terrible INT when he overthrew Crowder he did it by having great protection?  Maybe you and I were watching a different game I don't know.  

 

Cousins was absolutely under pressure against the Eagles.   Professional QBs are often under pressure.   If you're suggesting that for Cousins to throw a normal ball he must have perfect conditions then you are making a case against Cousins.   Cousins had time, an open guy, and simply nutted the pass.   Our offensive line did not play at all well against the Eagles.   Fairly, the bulk of the team played like garbage and did things you simply don't anticipate or expect, so it wasn't just that Cousins was off while everyone else was on.   In large part our slow starts may end up being a preparation and training thing as it does seem to take us a few games to get our land legs back and play actual football again.

 

But, Cousins being the most important player, who is the guy you are going to sink a tremendous amount of money in, can get away with a terrible throw here and there.   Against Philly he was so wild it was almost as if he was new to the offense.   Which, by now, should be his immense strength.   While much of the team played badly against Philly, Cousins, playing MILDLY like a Top 10 QB, and we win that game.   You can't watch it, and his throws, and feel much differently.   He made great throws under pressure against the Raiders.   Most QBs throw fairly well against pressure.   If you believe Cousins needs perfect protection to play well then we don't need to put money into him.   His money means HE can make a play when others fail to.   

 

Against the Raiders he did make plays -- and others made plays for him which was also nice.   Against Philly his lack of making anything and inaccuracy was a core reason we lost.   Likewise, our offensive line's poor play was as well.   The difference is when we pay Cousins a ton, our offensive line will get worse, not better.   So if you need a great line for him to play well, then pay the line not him.   Or you need to expect he'll make the line better by making plays.   Manning did that with the Colts.   For years they were the best line in football.   He leaves and they are the worst, with the same players.   The QB makes others better.

 

I'm still unsure Cousins does enough to be a Top guy.   But he CAN because there are times he absolutely does.