A Confidence I Haven't Had in 25 Years

[MassSkinsFan]

It's ironic that the confidence thread has morphed into the Negative thread.

 

I for one don't buy into that horse hockey. Not one ****ing bit. 

 

This team is too ragged at the moment to win out. I accept that. But I also think with a few more talent acquisitions, and with an effort to retain some of the vital core players on this team, we could have something special here. Just not in 2017.

 

But I fully expect these guys to fight all the way to the finish. That's how this team is now. That's one of the reasons they give me confidence still. Hail.

[kleese]

1 minute ago, MassSkinsFan said:

It's ironic that the confidence thread has morphed into the Negative thread.

 

I for one don't buy into that horse hockey. Not one ****ing bit. 

 

This team is too ragged at the moment to win out. I accept that. But I also think with a few more talent acquisitions, and with an effort to retain some of the vital core players on this team, we could have something special here. Just not in 2017.

 

But I fully expect these guys to fight all the way to the finish. That's how this team is now. That's one of the reasons they give me confidence still. Hail.

 

What happened for me in regards to this thread is that essentially the “pause” button was hit. I don’t feel terribly different about our situation than I did when I posted it after the Chiefs game. However, we are 5-7 and even though I think injuries played a HUGE role in that, it’s still 5-7. 

 

So it’s hard to sit here and say my confidence level hasn’t been shaken at all; that really wouldn’t be true. But I also cognitively recognize that the team I described back then is simply NOT PHYSICALLY the same team now. S it’s just sort of a purgatory for me in that regard. 

[MassSkinsFan]

1 minute ago, kleese said:

 

What happened for me in regards to this thread is that essentially the “pause” button was hit. I don’t feel terribly different about our situation than I did when I posted it after the Chiefs game. However, we are 5-7 and even though I think injuries played a HUGE role in that, it’s still 5-7. 

 

So it’s hard to sit here and say my confidence level hasn’t been shaken at all; that really wouldn’t be true. But I also cognitively recognize that the team I described back then is simply NOT PHYSICALLY the same team now. S it’s just sort of a purgatory for me in that regard. 

 

I can agree with that. The attitude is different and to me that is telling/encouraging.

 

But we're not going to the playoffs this year and we might not even break even. I just hope they can carry the positive steps they made this year into next year with a healthy and hopefully more talented team.

[kleese]

3 minutes ago, MassSkinsFan said:

 

I can agree with that. The attitude is different and to me that is telling/encouraging.

 

But we're not going to the playoffs this year and we might not even break even. I just hope they can carry the positive steps they made this year into next year with a healthy and hopefully more talented team.

 

It’s just going to be a holding pattern until we see what happens with Kirk. If he is back next year then I think we can reasonably hope to build on what we have— and what we have is a lot more overall talent/depth than we’ve had in awhile. I think staying the course is a wise decision. 

 

If he isn’t back, then it will basically be impossible to rationalize how we can carry any momentum into 2018 unless they have some sort of secret genius back up plan. 

[LightningBuggs]

5 hours ago, skins island connection said:

The only confidence I have is, this team will never be anything more than an 8-8 maybe 9-7 team at best with the current coaching/FO in place.

The entire organization is inept, clueless as to how to properly run and organization, sign/trade players, drafting physical athletes, and coaching that doesn't seem to get it until its too late.

 

If Snyder did actually care, he would take a step back and look at the big picture, and see that failure is running amok through this organization and its affecting everyone, including the ones who put the greenbacks in his pocket.

 

It starts with Bruce Allen, who needs to be fired ASAP. He has done nothing but take a paycheck from the team, and he has ruined every team he's been a part of.

S&T staff; all of them must go. They are flat out not doing their jobs when half the team is injured.

Jay Gruden; I've been wishy-washy with him, but just when he looks like he's making progress, he falls on his face, usually on national t.v. I'm not gonna shed a  tear if he's sent packing.

Cousins; good QB but has no pocket awareness. Could be the playcaller's design, but he does tend to play poorly when the heat is on.

 

I'm pretty much done with this season, and until Snyder makes changes, especially with Allen, it won't get better.

Time to hand out pink slips Dan.

 

Yup.  Completely agree.  And there is evidence to back this up.  The only franchise to not win 11 games in a season in the last 26 years.

 

And it's not going to improve.  Even if Allen is fired, Dan will just find another yes-man to take his place.  Then we'll start this whole process all over again.

 

As it is, this is a really mediocre football team.  It's not Browns bad, but we can see them pretty closely in the rear view mirror.  The roster is poorly constructed, and the coaching staff is unable to coach those players up and make them appear more competent than some of them are.

 

One play summarized this team for me last night.  About 2:30 left in first half. Cousins completes a short pass to Doctson who gets out of bounds, stopping the clock briefly until the ball is set by refs.  Down 17-0, I'm thinking, "Ok Kirk, the clock is gonna start when the ball is set, so get them to the line and get one more play off before the 2 minute warning."  What happens?  Kirk shows no urgency.  He's trying to hear the play call in his headset.  Finally slowly gets the team to the line and starts barking out a long count and snaps the ball just after the refs blow the whistle for the 2 min warning.  Stupid.  On Kirk's part and the coaches part.  Good teams get that extra play off easily.  Just watch any other NFL team not named the Browns on Sunday and you'll see it. 

 

Kirk's reaction.  He shrugged his shoulders and threw his hands up like he didn't realize that the 2 minute warning was coming. 

 

You gotta be aware of the situation there.  And the coaches need to make you aware of that in practice.

[kleese]

10 minutes ago, LightningBuggs said:

 

Yup.  Completely agree.  And there is evidence to back this up.  The only franchise to not win 11 games in a season in the last 26 years.

 

And it's not going to improve.  Even if Allen is fired, Dan will just find another yes-man to take his place.  Then we'll start this whole process all over again.

 

As it is, this is a really mediocre football team.  It's not Browns bad, but we can see them pretty closely in the rear view mirror.  The roster is poorly constructed, and the coaching staff is unable to coach those players up and make them appear more competent than some of them are.

 

One play summarized this team for me last night.  About 2:30 left in first half. Cousins completes a short pass to Doctson who gets out of bounds, stopping the clock briefly until the ball is set by refs.  Down 17-0, I'm thinking, "Ok Kirk, the clock is gonna start when the ball is set, so get them to the line and get one more play off before the 2 minute warning."  What happens?  Kirk shows no urgency.  He's trying to hear the play call in his headset.  Finally slowly gets the team to the line and starts barking out a long count and snaps the ball just after the refs blow the whistle for the 2 min warning.  Stupid.  On Kirk's part and the coaches part.  Good teams get that extra play off easily.  Just watch any other NFL team not named the Browns on Sunday and you'll see it. 

 

Kirk's reaction.  He shrugged his shoulders and threw his hands up like he didn't realize that the 2 minute warning was coming. 

 

You gotta be aware of the situation there.  And the coaches need to make you aware of that in practice.

 

Funnny I’m watching thinking the EXACT opposite and it’s something I think Kirk and Gruden do poorly. They go TOO fast and conserve TOO much time in those situations. There was NO reason to run another play before the 2:00 warning. The mistake on that drive was calling the TO after the long play to Crowder. They should have let the clock roll. We left 59 seconds on the clock for absolutely no reason. 

[TheItalianStallion]

6 hours ago, Capt'n Obvious said:

 

Agreed. I think sometimes us Skins fans have a tendency to overrate our players. This team is not talented enough even with all of their players healthy. 

 

They have no #1 or #2 receivers on the roster. Doctson can catch all the 12 yard TD's he wants, he is invisible for the most part until garbage time. Crowder is a decent slot receiver, but drops too many balls and shouldn't be allowed to return any more punts as long as he is here. The teams best DL is a rookie that they were gifted in the first round this year, the line has completely fallen apart without him. Phil Taylor wasn't going to be a savior with Allen. I think Norman and Breeland are extremely overrated. Norman has been getting torched all year, I don't care how many peanut punches you attempt, cover the damn receiver you're lined up against. Breeland has turned a couple good games in four years into being consistently overrated. Swearinger is constantly out of position, but because he is in hype videos people think he is a great safety. I won't even get into Pryor, or the teams overall plan at wide receiver heading into last offseason. 

 

Bottom line is the best player is a left tackle, and then the dropoff is steep after that. Trent is the only elite player on this team. Injuries or not, this team would not have won more than nine games anyway. Philly still runs away with the division regardless, and I would not have favored the Skins over any of the teams currently in the playoffs in a playoff game, regardless of injuries.

 

The Skins are who they have been in the last 25-30 years, an embarrassment.

 

 

I don't agree with that. With Allen our defensive front might've actually held up against their OL. If our OL had been better at keeping Kirk upright we would've sustained more drives and kept their OL off the field more. If our OL wasn't so dinged up we could've let Davis (with CT and Reed out, he is perhaps our only consistent pass catcher) go out for passes rather than keep him in to block.

 

Another issue we've had is this inexplicable problem of ours. Last year our inexplicable problem was our struggles in the RZ. We've fixed that this year, but now we inexplicably have 3 or so major unforced errors per game. What I was telling myself for a while was "once we fix that and get everyone healthy, we'll be fine," but it's becoming apparent that our unforced errors probably aren't going anywhere this year. I kinda see it as just a single-year anomaly, like our RZ woes of last year, and that we'll do better next year. I hope, anyway.

 

Course, one wonders if another inexplicable problem will emerge next year, and if so, what It'll be........

[TD_washingtonredskins]

1 hour ago, kleese said:

 

It’s just going to be a holding pattern until we see what happens with Kirk. If he is back next year then I think we can reasonably hope to build on what we have— and what we have is a lot more overall talent/depth than we’ve had in awhile. I think staying the course is a wise decision. 

 

If he isn’t back, then it will basically be impossible to rationalize how we can carry any momentum into 2018 unless they have some sort of secret genius back up plan. 

 

Do the circumstances matter to you? Personally, having Cousins back on another one-year deal (either tag) won't do anything for me. I'd go into 2018 the way I went into 2017...interested in either winning or losing 11 games. Anything in between seems like a waste with the QB situation in limbo. 

[Burgold]

10 minutes ago, TheItalianStallion said:

 

I don't agree with that. With Allen our defensive front might've actually held up against their OL. If our OL had been better at keeping Kirk upright we would've sustained more drives and kept their OL off the field more. If our OL wasn't so dinged up we could've let Davis (with CT and Reed out, he is perhaps our only consistent pass catcher) go out for passes rather than keep him in to block.

 

Another issue we've had is this inexplicable problem of ours. Last year our inexplicable problem was our struggles in the RZ. We've fixed that this year, but now we inexplicably have 3 or so major unforced errors per game. What I was telling myself for a while was "once we fix that and get everyone healthy, we'll be fine," but it's becoming apparent that our unforced errors probably aren't going anywhere this year. I kinda see it as just a single-year anomaly, like our RZ woes of last year, and that we'll do better next year. I hope, anyway.

 

Course, one wonders if another inexplicable problem will emerge next year, and if so, what It'll be........

"What might have been" is a tough thing, but imagining this team with a healthy o line, Reed, Thompson, and for the hell of it Garcon... not to mention Allen, Foster (or another middle linebacker), etc. is what makes this season so frustrating to evaluate.

 

We have been playing with a second and third unit for much of the season and that doesn't answer every complaint, but it can't be ignored either.

[kleese]

Just now, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

Do the circumstances matter to you? Personally, having Cousins back on another one-year deal (either tag) won't do anything for me. I'd go into 2018 the way I went into 2017...interested in either winning or losing 11 games. Anything in between seems like a waste with the QB situation in limbo. 

 

Part of me would prefer a one year deal for the very reason you just stated. I am on record saying that the leveling out to mediocre is OK with me. But I also know that at some point you do need to make a move. And with next year being year 5 of Gruden and year 4 of Kirk as a starter, I think it would be the year to move. Meaning, another year where we hovered between 7-9 wins probably means that it just isn't good enough-- and in that case losing either or both wouldn't crush me because you wouldn't have that far to fall anyway. I think the circumstances of this year allow me to move the finish line so to speak down the road a bit to next year. Next year would then be a "put up or shut up" type of season. I would probably say playoffs or bust for sure.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

2 minutes ago, Burgold said:

"What might have been" is a tough thing, but imagining this team with a healthy o line, Reed, Thompson, and for the hell of it Garcon... not to mention Allen, Foster (or another middle linebacker), etc. is what makes this season so frustrating to evaluate.

 

We have been playing with a second and third unit for much of the season and that doesn't answer every complaint, but it can't be ignored either.

 

I don't doubt that this team was better than its record will ultimately show. I would even go on a limb and say that, with health and a couple breaks, this team may have been the best we've seen in 20 years. In a parallel universe, I could see the 2017 Redskins winning 11 games or more this year. 

 

To me, the issue is that they were built for 2017 which poses two problems...

 

1) Win-now teams should have a higher ceiling than 11 wins

2) If and when things do go south with injuries or bad breaks, there's no longevity to look forward to

 

It's quite possible that Cousins, Brown, and a handful of other key contributors aren't here post-2017. That's where my confidence is shaky. 

[Burgold]

4 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

I don't doubt that this team was better than its record will ultimately show. I would even go on a limb and say that, with health and a couple breaks, this team may have been the best we've seen in 20 years. In a parallel universe, I could see the 2017 Redskins winning 11 games or more this year. 

 

To me, the issue is that they were built for 2017 which poses two problems...

 

1) Win-now teams should have a higher ceiling than 11 wins

2) If and when things do go south with injuries or bad breaks, there's no longevity to look forward to

 

It's quite possible that Cousins, Brown, and a handful of other key contributors aren't here post-2017. That's where my confidence is shaky. 

I agree although I am still pretty pleased with the draft. Nicholson, Allen, and Perrine at least have contributed. We've seen others take a step from year one to two like Ionaidus. So, the cupboard is not bare.

 

As for the Cousins' thing, I put that in it's own cupboard. This team has misplayed that hand about as badly as a team can plus Cousins has been a greedy son of a gun (now, all athletes are greedy son of a guns so that's not really saying much, but he has been a very unwilling dance partner).

[kleese]

1 minute ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

I don't doubt that this team was better than its record will ultimately show. I would even go on a limb and say that, with health and a couple breaks, this team may have been the best we've seen in 20 years. In a parallel universe, I could see the 2017 Redskins winning 11 games or more this year. 

 

To me, the issue is that they were built for 2017 which poses two problems...

 

1) Win-now teams should have a higher ceiling than 11 wins

2) If and when things do go south with injuries or bad breaks, there's no longevity to look forward to

 

It's quite possible that Cousins, Brown, and a handful of other key contributors aren't here post-2017. That's where my confidence is shaky. 

 

I think the two you mentioned (Brown and Kirk) are the only ones that will really have any sort of ripple effect. I don't necessarily think we were in "win now" mode or at least not in "win ONLY now" mode. We had a solid number of young to very young players contribute this year. I think we are well prepared to lose a guy like Breeland for instance. Fuller looks very good and we drafted Moreau and Holsey last year, both of whom have played a little now. So we can potentially replace Breeland without having to really invest in that position.

 

Assuming Kirk is back, I don't think we have THAT many obvious holes to fill-- re-signing Brown is definitely key though. And maybe the injuries from this year prove to be a slight blessing next year-- our OL returns intact-- the only one we will likely lose is the one no one will be sad to see go. And now we have some guys that got a taste this year and Roullier as an example is someone who "benefited" from the injuries because he did well given his opportunity. So if Kirk comes back, you are set at QB and along the OL (maybe add one FA and/or some more depth). You are set at TE in terms of having to invest anything major. I also think we are pretty much set at WR depth-- between Doc, Grant, Crowder, and Harris I think we have some good options there from the #2-5ish type WRs. We obviously lack a main target. I would assume that and at least adding some competition for Perine would be top priority on offense. Both of those things are doable.

[LightningBuggs]

1 hour ago, kleese said:

 

Funnny I’m watching thinking the EXACT opposite and it’s something I think Kirk and Gruden do poorly. They go TOO fast and conserve TOO much time in those situations. There was NO reason to run another play before the 2:00 warning. The mistake on that drive was calling the TO after the long play to Crowder. They should have let the clock roll. We left 59 seconds on the clock for absolutely no reason. 

It appeared to me that the team's intent was to run another play before the 2 minute warning but they couldn't execute it.

 

Alas, it's safe to say that you and I don't view this team the same way.  And that's fine.  In the end, we both want the same thing from this franchise.

 

Have a good weekend!

 

[skinny21]

Based on this year’s roster...

 

Offense - We need a #1 receiver, blocking TE,  and a LG on offense.  We may want a better C and back.  We also may have all 4 on the roster (I’m skeptical of Doctson becoming a #1 receiver, but it’s possible).  

The rest of the starters are good or better.  Not included - re-signing Cousins of course.  

 

Defense - (again, looking at the starters) We need a NT.  We may want a DE (or 2) for our base D.  It’s possible the latter are on the roster already (McClain/McGee/Lanier), but doubtful.  Not included - re-signing Brown, Foster and Breeland.  

 

That might seem like an overly rosy picture, but I think that’s mainly due to the injuries.  Obviously we need even more depth (and for that depth to not be injured as well), but I still believe we are one of the better teams in the league at full health.  

[kleese]

12 minutes ago, LightningBuggs said:

It appeared to me that the team's intent was to run another play before the 2 minute warning but they couldn't execute it.

 

Alas, it's safe to say that you and I don't view this team the same way.  And that's fine.  In the end, we both want the same thing from this franchise.

 

Have a good weekend!

 

 

To me, this singular example is simply a matter of math. If you have 2:00 and you are at your own 40 with three timeouts, the clock is not an issue AT ALL in that situation. Unless you are running the ball up the gut for some reason, you will have plenty of time to score a TD or FG before the half expires. You'd have to almost purposely mess that up to run out of time. The goal in that situation (just like the end of the KC game) is to score without leaving the opponent enough time to respond. Now, if you break a big play and score fast, that's fine. No issue there of course. But in between plays, not only should you not be hurrying that much, you should be actively allowing the clock to run down. After the big play to Crowder we were at approx. the Dallas 25 yard line with three timeouts and about 1:20 remaining. What they should have done is let that clock run all the way down to about 40 seconds left and THEN call the timeout to regroup.

 

The KC game was infuriating. They did the same thing. Called a TO WAY too early in the clock to preserve time for the Chiefs, not themselves.

 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

3 minutes ago, kleese said:

 

To me, this singular example is simply a matter of math. If you have 2:00 and you are at your own 40 with three timeouts, the clock is not an issue AT ALL in that situation. Unless you are running the ball up the gut for some reason, you will have plenty of time to score a TD or FG before the half expires. You'd have to almost purposely mess that up to run out of time. The goal in that situation (just like the end of the KC game) is to score without leaving the opponent enough time to respond. Now, if you break a big play and score fast, that's fine. No issue there of course. But in between plays, not only should you not be hurrying that much, you should be actively allowing the clock to run down. After the big play to Crowder we were at approx. the Dallas 25 yard line with three timeouts and about 1:20 remaining. What they should have done is let that clock run all the way down to about 40 seconds left and THEN call the timeout to regroup.

 

The KC game was infuriating. They did the same thing. Called a TO WAY too early in the clock to preserve time for the Chiefs, not themselves.

 

1,000% agree on this. 

 

Last night's drive had a perfect example of both things you mentioned...

 

After the Crowder play, they called the timeout with way too much time on the play clock. Just let it run down to 1:00 or so and then call the timeout if you even need one. On the flip side, I don't blame them for running hurry-up to score the TD because that wasn't to save clock, that was for an advantage (which worked and got them the TD). 

 

It is funny though, it seems like ANY TIME we score at the end of the game or the half we leave somewhere between 50 second and 1:20 on the clock. It didn't burn us last night, but it's another contributing factor to why our D gives up so many points in those situations. They are mostly responsible, but we don't manage the game well enough to put them in positions to succeed either. 

[skins island connection]

The Redskins had the ball. They were moving the ball. In those times, you must take advantage of the situation and maximize the benefit.

Waiting for the clock to count down, even getting called for the delay, was a momentum breaker, and also allowed the Dallas defense to catch a breath.

 

I'm leaning slightly in LightningBuggs direction on this one. Things like this, catching the defense with 12 men on the field, a la Rodgers, taking advantage of a situation, especially if the offense was struggling overall.

Now, once the play is done and the yards are gained [ hopefully ] then you have the comfort of the 2 minute warning to evaluate the situation and can run the clock down if desired, but teams work on things like this, because it is a game of inches.

[skinny21]

I would have liked to see a run called on the first down prior to the 2 minute warning.  Run the clock down to two minutes, give yourself time to decide what to call of 2nd and 3rd down.  At that point, Dallas (with 1 TO I believe) isn’t going to stop the clock after 2nd down.  

 

If the Skins had failed to convert on 3rd down, Dallas either gets the ball back with well under a minute and 1 TO, or just over a minute and no TOs.  If the Skins do convert at that point, they’d have 1/2 the field to go, a minute left and whatever TOs were remaining.  

 

Hate to critique a sequence so much, but end of halves have been a major issue for our D... they need all the help they can get.  

 

 

[c slag]

What are the odds this many players are injured by this time next year it has to be low

If with less injuries the record is no better by next December I would be all for making drastic changes 

[cakmoney61]

15 hours ago, Burgold said:

I agree although I am still pretty pleased with the draft. Nicholson, Allen, and Perrine at least have contributed. We've seen others take a step from year one to two like Ionaidus. So, the cupboard is not bare.

 

As for the Cousins' thing, I put that in it's own cupboard. This team has misplayed that hand about as badly as a team can plus Cousins has been a greedy son of a gun (now, all athletes are greedy son of a guns so that's not really saying much, but he has been a very unwilling dance partner).

 

Injuries have completely derailed this season.  It's an anomaly, so no one is at fault.  What we did see before all the injuries was a good to very good team with a lot of very young, productive, and developing pieces.

 

The real fly in the ointment is this ongoing saga with Kirk Cousins.  This has to be the offseason where this gets resolved.  Either sign him to a reasonable LTD or let him walk.  I'd prefer the former because I believe the Redskins can win a super bowl with him as the starting QB.

 

It feels like we are in the twilight zone and this nightmare will never end.  Like you, I believe Kirk is also partly responsible for this never-ending story.

 

Added--Also, in a nutshell, this what I got from LightningBuggs' and kleese' dialogue:

 

kleese:  "Why are the Redskins rushing with so much time on the clock?!!"

LightningBuggs:  "And they can't even do that right!!!"

 

Both of you hit the nail right on the head!!!

[Wildbunny]

17 hours ago, MassSkinsFan said:

 

I can agree with that. The attitude is different and to me that is telling/encouraging.

 

But we're not going to the playoffs this year and we might not even break even. I just hope they can carry the positive steps they made this year into next year with a healthy and hopefully more talented team.

 

If we finish 7-9 / 9-7 that would be ok by me. 6-10 a little bit disappointing.

Now, as it's quite obvious we're not going to the playoffs not everything is dark regarding this season. As there's some bright spots here and there besides injuries which should bode well for next year.

- 1st is that some of our youngsters got some freaking playing time experience. Guys like Roulier, Lanier, Spaight, Anderson, Fuller. They all got some incredible experience that they hopefully can use to carry over next year.

- As we've played lots of differents line ups with guys being up and downs, we can tell that our depth is actually pretty good in many areas. We can still improve on a few positions but it's good.

- I believe that our coaching staff will want to have all those guys back for next year. Almost all of them have played their asses off this year and thus they deserve a shot to the 53 next year. So I expect both Hopkins and Rose compete next year for the kicking duties. Roulier compete with Long for the C job with Bergstrom in the mix. Sprinkle vying for more than a spot at the TE position. All of these competitions should up the roster talent on the team overall.

 

So, that's a year where our season got derailed by injuries and tough schedule (who expected the Vikings and Saints go like this after finishing 3rd last year?). In which we faired quitly well. So, confidence is still here for me, even if this season ends up being disappointing on some points.

[hail2skins]

41 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

So, that's a year where our season got derailed by injuries and tough schedule (who expected the Vikings and Saints go like this after finishing 3rd last year?). In which we faired quitly well. So, confidence is still here for me, even if this season ends up being disappointing on some points.

Looking at it right now, does anyone anticipate that our schedule is going to be any easier next season? The NFC South may well send three teams to the playoffs and the AFC South has improved. And we may well have to face Aaron Rodgers from the NFC North.

 

And that isn't even counting our division. Even assuming Kirk is back and with average health, I still have trouble seeing us stacking up well against Philly or Dallas, whether its at their place or at FedEx. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

Something I think escapes a lot of folks is how injuries also play a role in effectively running a two minute/hurry up offense.  It's a much easier task to let the QB take the reigns when you have a primary group of guys that understand the plays/concepts on the field.  I get just us as upset as anyone thinking "just let Kirk do his thing" rather than the clock running down, and huddling to call plays all the time.  But I've gotta believe there is a reason for it that has nothing to do with Kirk and/or Jay's inability to to be effective doing it.

[skinfan2k]

Sometimes you have to take a step back to take 2 steps forward.  Look at teams like Jacksonvile, Tenn, New Orleans or Carolina this year.

 

The makeup of htis team is there.  We need to add playmakers and real talent to the D-line.