Redskins 49ers Post Game Assessments

[dyst]

29 minutes ago, Xameil said:

Hello...you there McFly....I said it before and I'll say it again...

 

THE 49ERS ARE NOT BROKE. They lost most of there games by 3 or less. As Gruden said to the team. That 49ers team could easily have been 4-1. Look at their previous games.

Good teams don’t go 0-6. I know their games have been close but they lose because they are bad. I get what your saying though.

[Warhead36]

I think people need to grasp that this year in particular, the NFL is very close and very parody ridden. Nobody really stands out as being great. The Eagles are hot right now, but even they had to kick a 60 yard FG to beat the awful Giants at home and were in a dogfight against the terrible Chargers.

 

People need to actually watch the league, not just the Redskins.

[88Comrade2000]

We are what we are.  At our heart, we are mediocre.  The team had the best team on the ropes for a while, at their place. Eventually lost that game.  Today, we played on of the worst teams in the league and we allowed them to almost beat us.

 

The NFC is going be competitive, though Green Bay will be one less team; since Aaron Rodgers is gone likely for the entire season. This team needs to play like it did against Oakland, week in and week out.  If we don't; then this team will lose to the better teams and give the worse teams a shot of beating us.

 

We aren't as bad as I thought we would be but we not as good as some think we are.

 

I think after this season plays out; you should be able to reach a conclusion on where you think Gruden will take us. I think they are certain coaches who can only take you to a certain level but can't take you to the next. Gruden has pulled us from the sorry ass team he inherited to that 7-9 win level.  I just don't think he can take us beyond that.  Yeah, this season is only 5 games in, but I am starting to harden my position on where I think Gruden can take us.

[worldpost]

People just need to remember that half..  yes almost HALF of our defense is out or missed significant time..   We should be happy we aren't 2-3..

[Warhead36]

6 minutes ago, Rdskns2000 said:

We are what we are.  At our heart, we are mediocre.  The team had the best team on the ropes for a while, at their place. Eventually lost that game.  Today, we played on of the worst teams in the league and we allowed them to almost beat us.

 

The NFC is going be competitive, though Green Bay will be one less team; since Aaron Rodgers is gone likely for the entire season. This team needs to play like it did against Oakland, week in and week out.  If we don't; then this team will lose to the better teams and give the worse teams a shot of beating us.

 

We aren't as bad as I thought we would be but we not as good as some think we are.

 

I think after this season plays out; you should be able to reach a conclusion on where you think Gruden will take us. I think they are certain coaches who can only take you to a certain level but can't take you to the next. Gruden has pulled us from the sorry ass team he inherited to that 7-9 win level.  I just don't think he can take us beyond that.  Yeah, this season is only 5 games in, but I am starting to harden my position on where I think Gruden can take us.

We are much better than mediocre. We are pretty good, if we can stay healthy we'd be damn near elite in today's NFL where really nobody is elite.

 

This is just how the NFL is. Everyone's hyping the Eagles right now, but people forget they blew a double digit lead at home to the awful Giants and needed a 60+ yard FG to win. They also struggled to beat the Chargers who were winless until this week.

 

The Falcons also had a 17-0 lead at home and blew it, but they actually LOST.

[SkinsGuy]

19 minutes ago, AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy said:

Game Day Thread - F

 

I know.  Folks wonder why I don't hang around the board when the game starts. That's the reason.

 

Game day threads are the sewer lines of this board. I usually don't wade into them (until the game is over maybe).

[Skinsfan1311]

I'll take it!  Don't care if it's "ugly" Wins are tough in the NFL

[CTskin]

32 minutes ago, LavarArringtonMachine said:

 

 

But some consider the 49ers and Raiders good teams on here.

 

A combined record of a whopping 2-10....  there is alot of alcohol being consumed today or the knowledgeable fan is becoming extinct.  Simply incredible!

The raiders aren't the same team now that they were before they played us. After they got dominated in dc Carr suffered the back injury and then ej manuel took over qb duties. Today Carr played and said his back was still bothering him; he shouldn't have been rushed back. I hope you realize how negatively poor qb play effects a team.

43 minutes ago, TheShredder said:

Nah, this game just proved that next week is another opportunity.  Every game is different. Philly is beatable and very capable of making mistakes. 

Agreed. I said it the other day, but the eagles have only beaten two good teams and in both of those games they forced two turnovers in their opponents red zone, which I believe they turned into 4 tds. Yes, they have a studly dline, but it should be a different game if we take care of the ball... And hopefully we get healthy. 

[SkinsGuy]

13 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

We are much better than mediocre. We are pretty good, if we can stay healthy we'd be damn near elite in today's NFL where really nobody is elite.

 

This is just how the NFL is. Everyone's hyping the Eagles right now, but people forget they blew a double digit lead at home to the awful Giants and needed a 60+ yard FG to win. They also struggled to beat the Chargers who were winless until this week.

 

The Falcons also had a 17-0 lead at home and blew it, but they actually LOST.

 

True. It is a week-to-week league.

 

Look at the Steelers. They looked HORRIBLE against the Jaguars last week.

 

Then this week, they come out and beat the undefeated Chiefs.

 

The Redskins didn't look great today in a victory. Next week, though, they may come out and whomp the Eagles.

 

You never know.

[Rufus T Firefly]

1 hour ago, worldpost said:

People just need to remember that half..  yes almost HALF of our defense is out or missed significant time..   We should be happy we aren't 2-3..

I definitely noticed the absence of Norman today.

[Warhead36]

1 minute ago, SkinsGuy said:

 

True. It is a week-to-week league.

 

Look at the Steelers. They looked HORRIBLE against the Jaguars last week.

 

Then this week, they come out and beat the undefeated Chiefs.

 

The Redskins didn't look great today in a victory. Next week, though, they may come out and whomp the Eagles.

 

You never know.

The funny thing is, I actually think we've been fairly consistent, after Week 1 anyway, at least compared to the rest of the league.

 

We've scored 27, 27, 20(should have been 24), and 26(should have been 27), while giving up 20, 10, 29, and 24(7 via fumble TD).

 

People scream we're inconsistent, but compared to the rest of the league, we're probably one of the most consistently solid teams.

[SkinsGuy]

4 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

The funny thing is, I actually think we've been fairly consistent, after Week 1 anyway, at least compared to the rest of the league.

 

We've scored 27, 27, 20(should have been 24), and 26(should have been 27), while giving up 20, 10, 29, and 24(7 via fumble TD).

 

People scream we're inconsistent, but compared to the rest of the league, we're probably one of the most consistently solid teams.

 

Oh, our offense has definitely been consistent (after week 1). Even with the WRs not totally up the par.

 

The defense is coming along. I feel they only had problems today because of the injuries. Norman, Breeland, Nicholson (for a while), Allen. Even Zach Brown didn't look his best as he is getting over an illness.

 

I feel this team is on the rise. 

[LavarArringtonMachine]

29 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

We are much better than mediocre. We are pretty good, if we can stay healthy we'd be damn near elite in today's NFL where really nobody is elite.

 

This is just how the NFL is. Everyone's hyping the Eagles right now, but people forget they blew a double digit lead at home to the awful Giants and needed a 60+ yard FG to win. They also struggled to beat the Chargers who were winless until this week.

 

The Falcons also had a 17-0 lead at home and blew it, but they actually LOST.

 

 

We are mediocre but we hopefully are trending upward.  Is what it is.

[AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy]

53 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

330 yards, 3 TDs, and he gets a C.

 

I hope you don't teach in real life.

Kirk gets a C because of his lack of leadership today and his terrible deep throws.  Our offense relaxed and I'm holding him accountable for that.  He's the franchise guy, that's his unit.  He's gotta do a better job of keeping them focused.  I'm on record of wanting to sign Kirk long term.

 

You know, it is possible to hold Kirk accountable/criticize him and to also want to sign him to a long term deal.  Some of us can walk and chew gum at the same time. 

 

[NoCalMike]

The Redskins have been consistently inconsistent. It's a weird thing to say, but their play on the field has been up and down but it usually results in about the same amount of points on the scoreboard regardless.

 

Other teams in the NFL look super one week and mediocre the next, while the 'Skins have just looked like a borderline good team every week (with the exception of Week 1 maybe).

 

Even the Raiders game, while the Redskins statistically dominated it, they only scored 27 points. If you hid the score and looked at the stats you'd assume some kind of 42-10 level beatdown.

 

The Redskins are still working their way into being a good team.

[Warhead36]

18 minutes ago, AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy said:

Kirk gets a C because of his lack of leadership today and his terrible deep throws.  Our offense relaxed and I'm holding him accountable for that.  He's the franchise guy, that's his unit.  He's gotta do a better job of keeping them focused.  I'm on record of wanting to sign Kirk long term.

 

You know, it is possible to hold Kirk accountable/criticize him and to also want to sign him to a long term deal.  Some of us can walk and chew gum at the same time. 

 

What the hell does lack of leadership even mean? How do you quantify that? And how is leading back to back scoring drives in the 4th quarter of a close game lack of leadership? Once again a Cousins hater comes up with some arbitrary random thing to hate Cousins on. Last year he "wasn't clutch" but obviously that can't be used anymore.

 

Its fine to criticize him, I've done it myself, but good grief be reasonable. If 330 yards and 3 TDs is a freaking C then you have the most insane standards I've ever seen all because he missed on a couple deep throws(never mind the deep shot he converted on with Davis on the final TD drive). Show me a QB who hits every deep throw. Most only hit one a game and miss the rest, they're low % high reward plays.

 

Giving him a C grade today is absolutely absurd and shows a lack of NFL understanding.

11 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

The Redskins have been consistently inconsistent. It's a weird thing to say, but their play on the field has been up and down but it usually results in about the same amount of points on the scoreboard regardless.

 

Other teams in the NFL look super one week and mediocre the next, while the 'Skins have just looked like a borderline good team every week (with the exception of Week 1 maybe).

 

Even the Raiders game, while the Redskins statistically dominated it, they only scored 27 points. If you hid the score and looked at the stats you'd assume some kind of 42-10 level beatdown.

 

The Redskins are still working their way into being a good team.

There is no such thing as consistency in the NFL, not this year. It doesn't exist.

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

330 yards, 3 TDs, and he gets a C.

 

I hope you don't teach in real life.

 

 

I'd give Kirk a C or C+ overall. On the whole he was pretty uneven. His stat line looked pretty good but remember there were a whole lot of YAC yards we got off of RB screens and dump offs, especially in the first half. His short throws were fine, his intermediate throws were very up and down (sometimes literally), and his deep throws were awful (those back to back INT passes, obviously with one called back, were both mind numbing). He seemed to be a different QB on different drives. He'd have a great drive where he looked in command, in rhythm, and was precise with his throws. Then he'd follow it up with a couple of drives where he'd look tentative and be very off. Then he'd have another good drive. Then look off again. But he did make a couple really good plays with his legs at the end when it counted and we got the W so it is what it is. Kirk was Kirk IMO. 

 

And if you're talking about passing stats you should just say 2 TDs. One nice throw to Doc and a RB dumpoff to Perine who took it the rest of the way (nothing wrong with that...Kirk had good protection and went through is progressions well and found Perine as the open guy).

[AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy]

3 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

What the hell does lack of leadership even mean?

It means getting your troops in line and leading them in a manner that should be expected from a guy who wants 25 mil per.  I bet Kirk would give himself a C.

[Warhead36]

3 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

I'd give Kirk a C or C+ overall. On the whole he was pretty uneven. His stat line looked pretty good but remember there were a whole lot of YAC yards we got off of RB screens and dump offs, especially in the first half. His short throws were fine, his intermediate throws were very up and down (sometimes literally), and his deep throws were awful (those back to back INT passes, obviously with one called back, were both mind numbing). He seemed to be a different QB on different drives. He'd have a great drive where he looked in command, in rhythm, and was precise with his throws. Then he'd follow it up with a couple of drives where he'd look tentative and be very off. Then he'd have another good drive. Then look off again. But he did make a couple really good plays with his legs at the end when it counted and we got the W so it is what it is. Kirk was Kirk IMO. 

 

And if you're talking about passing stats you should just say 2 TDs. One nice throw to Doc and a RB dumpoff to Perine who took it the rest of the way (nothing wrong with that...Kirk had good protection and went through is progressions well and found Perine as the open guy).

First off, that's the West Coast offense. Watch Brady play. That's pretty much all they do. If it were so easy, anyone could do it.  But that's why most QBs in the league suck.

 

And again there is that consistency word. No QB scores on every drive. Show me one that does.

 

2 passing TDs, and one rushing TD on a beautifully executed read option. He absolutely gets credit for that.

[Mr. Sinister]

20 years of mostly wtf Redskins football had me prepared for today. Saw it coming a mile away. Typical 0-fer football team, QB gets demoted or knocked out, so of course they'd score 17 unanswered pts, along with all the other malarkey.

 

 

[JSSkinz]

We definitely lack the ability to put teams away, our 3 wins shouldn't have been as close as they were.  

 

 

[Warhead36]

2 minutes ago, AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy said:

It means getting your troops in line and leading them in a manner that should be expected from a guy who wants 25 mil per.  I bet Kirk would give himself a C.

Again this is a nothing argument that can't actually be proven.

 

We scored on back to back drives in the 4th to put the game away. Is that not "putting the troops in line and commanding them?" Is it Cousins's fault Davis fumbled a football too?

 

Stafford got paid the big bucks and threw two pick 6s today. Watch the NFL.

Just now, jschuck12001 said:

We definitely lack the ability to put teams away, our 3 wins shouldn't have been as close as they were.  

 

 

So does every team in the NFL every week. Look at the scores. EVERY game this week has been a one score game or was a one score game(Jags/Rams and Saints/Lions were one score games until the last ~5 minutes). Exceptions were Pack/Vikings because Rodgers got hurt and Texans/Browns because the Browns have gotten blown out every week(compared to the 49ers who have been in every game they've played losing by 2 or 3 every week save for Week 1).

[zoony]

Take the win, hope we get healthy and ready for philly

[mistertim]

Just now, Warhead36 said:

First off, that's the West Coast offense. Watch Brady play. That's pretty much all they do. If it were so easy, anyone could do it.  But that's why most QBs in the league suck.

 

And again there is that consistency word. No QB scores on every drive. Show me one that does.

 

2 passing TDs, and one rushing TD on a beautifully executed read option. He absolutely gets credit for that.

 

The issue is that he's consistently inconsistent. He plays very up and down this way more often than not. And I'm not even going to get into the Brady comparisons again...that horse has been beaten to death and buried and you digging up its corpse will do nothing but cause a stench.

 

Again, there's nothing wrong with RB screens or dumps if they're there and working, but coming out and just saying "he had 330 yards and 3 TDs" gives a misleading impression IMO that he was airing it out and making tons of plays through the air which really wasn't the case. One nice intermediate throw to Doc, one RB dumpoff that Perine took in for the score. The read option was nice but has nothing to do with how he looked passing the ball which, IMO, was very mediocre overall.

[zoony]

4 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

First off, that's the West Coast offense. Watch Brady play. That's pretty much all they do. If it were so easy, anyone could do it.  But that's why most QBs in the league suck.

 

And again there is that consistency word. No QB scores on every drive. Show me one that does.

 

2 passing TDs, and one rushing TD on a beautifully executed read option. He absolutely gets credit for that.

 

I seriously think the kirk haters just watch highlights of other games