Let's All Get Behind Alex Smith! Or Not!! (M.E.T.) NO kirk talk---that goes in ATN forum

[Morneblade]

39 minutes ago, Peregrine said:

It was another good job of game management by Smith, outside of the one bad pick.

 

That pick was 100% Jordan Reed. I've never seen Jordon just give up on a route. I think he was trying for a holding/PI call, that was was just terrible.

 

Quote

I think hes good at that.  I think we will be in trouble when we find ourselves behind in games, as I dont think he has the ability to lead many comebacks.  

 

Agreed

 

Quote

I mean, its game 3 now, and we are starting to really see what he was known for in KC; not throwing to WRs.  Anyone not named Tyreek Hill in KC getting the ball was simply a RB or TE.  Yesterday, while granted he only threw 12 completions in the entire game, showed more of his deep preference for TEs and RBs.  The only WR to even have a single catch, outside of the 4 for 39 yards by Crowder, was Richardson with the first drive TD catch.  He only attempted 1 other to Richardson, and his only three throws to Doctson were two PIs and a ball thrown out of bounds.

 

And I think thats all well and good while we can pound the ball and just play good defense with a lead, I just hope we have a solution in mind for when we find ourselves behind to a good team and need to throw the ball to our receivers a lot.

 

Yep. I'm not sure we do. For one, I don't think we have a WR group that can help much. Doctson shouldn't even be out there, and I'm not that high on Richardson either. I;d MUCH rather see what Mo Harris can do than Doctson at this point. He can't be much worse.

[JSSkinz]

45 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I’d just like to go on record and say that I’d be tickled pink if somehow the Redskins turn into a defensive, run the football kind of team that only needs 20 throws from the QB on a given week.

That's the only way we're gonna win more than we lose, there's really no other path for this team, at least not this year.

[Sandy Monk]

54 minutes ago, Peregrine said:

I mean, its game 3 now, and we are starting to really see what he was known for in KC; not throwing to WRs.  Anyone not named Tyreek Hill in KC getting the ball was simply a RB or TE.  Yesterday, while granted he only threw 12 completions in the entire game, showed more of his deep preference for TEs and RBs. 

 

While you do have a point to agree over, there are some differences going on now in 2018 KC vs 2017.

 

They went out and signed Watkins for 3 yr 48 million, and they did this for a notable reason. KC also has Conley back now from injury. Throughout his career, and aside from Hill, Alex has had pretty underwhelming WR talent.. yet has had much better fortune with TEs/RBs. He definitely doesn't have the arm superiority of a Mahomes; that's not at all the point. The point is, Smith has so far given more attention to the weapons on his team that are the superior players, is all. JR and CT are better than any of the WRs, I'd think. 

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, NoCalMike said:

 

Oh I agree it isn't enough. He still is not earning the role he has been given. I was just saying at least his presence was.......somewhat felt? LOL.

 

So he's basically like a silent fart?

[JoeJacobyHOForRIOT]

Alex Smith was really good yesterday.... 

[Hitman#21]

1 hour ago, Morneblade said:

 

That pick was 100% Jordan Reed. I've never seen Jordon just give up on a route. I think he was trying for a holding/PI call, that was was just terrible.

 

 

Agreed

 

 

Yep. I'm not sure we do. For one, I don't think we have a WR group that can help much. Doctson shouldn't even be out there, and I'm not that high on Richardson either. I;d MUCH rather see what Mo Harris can do than Doctson at this point. He can't be much worse.

ALBERT WILSON had 63 catches last year. They just beat the Packers by 2 TD some people are ridiculous. 

[DJHJR86]

2 hours ago, Peregrine said:

It was another good job of game management by Smith, outside of the one bad pick.

 

The pick wasn't even his fault.  Reed did not run the correct route.

[HogsVa7]

We need to understand that Alex Smith is still trying to get chemistry with the players and the offensive system. When Alex played the Cardinals week 1 there was a lot of checkdowns but it worked and we had a lot of yards after catch. Week 2 same thing with Alex with the check downs, but the Colts had a great game plan to stopping us and making Alex try to beat us. Our defense gave up 21 points which isn’t bad, but also forced turnovers to get us back in the game. Yesterday Alex showed, not to just the team and fans but everyone that he’s a winner and a good QB and has something to prove.He only threw 20 times but taking that deep pass to Richardson early set our offense up. Which led to AP running on the defense and keeping things open. I remember on one play on third down Alex scrambled left and dove for the first down. Just seeing that on tv it’s like his play yesterday was trying to tell us don’t worry we’re going to win football games. He’s still figuring things out on this team but he’s a vet and from what I saw yesterday with him it’s only going to get better the more he plays with us.

[Morneblade]

27 minutes ago, Hitman#21 said:

ALBERT WILSON had 63 catches last year. They just beat the Packers by 2 TD some people are ridiculous. 

 

 

What are you even trying to say here?

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Last week the media championed Cousins for going "toe-to-toe" with the amazing Aaron Rodgers and willed his team to a tie, and how it showed Kirk was on the edge of greatness.

 

This week no one in the media is talking about how Smith not only went "toe-to-toe" with the amazing Aaron Rodgers but severely out-performed him in the 1st half, instead saying that the Packers defense isn't that good and maybe they shouldn't be playing an injured Rodgers because he's injured and has an injury, don't forget... and, oh, don't forget the Packers played an OT game last weekend so they were probably still really tired, poor things.

[mistertim]

10 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

 

What are you even trying to say here?

 

Yes, I too am confused by that post. 

 

The point is...

Albert Wilson is....awesome?

The Skins beat the Pack by 2 TDs so they're awesome?

 

 

 

So.....OMG...ALBERT WILSON = THE REDSKINS

 

 

[Bigmuss1]

2 hours ago, Why am I Mr. Pink? said:

 

Alex played a great first half, Alex is a very good Qb but ..  Kirk > Alex all day. 

You mean, when I get a little pressure I FUMBLE Kirk??  

[Veryoldschool]

What a victory!  I confess I was one of the many timid souls who lost faith amidst the debris of the Colt loss and predicted a Packer thrashing.  Now we all have new hope and confidence and best of all Alex Smith who seemed like another cruel Andy Reid joke last week looks like the man Skins fans were hoping for and can now embrace in earnest! 

[wit33]

4 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

How do you chicken and egg it and isolate the variable of QB?  Andy Reid is known for example as a winner.  Jim Harbaugh in SF, too.  So when he's had those coaches Alex is a winner.   But before that he was a loser?   That's how it runs down if you go through his career mark.  Both Harbaugh and Reid have built good teams.  They both had success AFTER Alex left too.  Harbaugh had his best season after he jettisoned Alex.  Looks like Reid might be poised to do the same.

 

None of that is a shot at Alex.  None of it really has anything to do with Alex.  It's about the theory of winning and losing QBs.  I don't think there is such a thing -- I think there are good and bad Qbs.  Yeah some have that "it" factor in big games.  That's not been Alex's rep. But regardless, he does enough to win.  I said on this thread multiple times that Alex is a playoff QB if he has a playoff roster.  If this team won't make the playoffs it won't be because of his play but others not being up to snuff.  Said so many times.

 

 

Which QBs goals aren't centered on putting their teams in position to win?  And if so I'd presume their coaches would dump them pretty fast.

 

The QB position is a large variable to any team. Alex warrants credit for being on winning teams in the NFL for his last 7 seasons of starting with two different coaches. Last two winning seasons with Chiefs were teams with below average defenses. 

 

All QBs would love to win and put their respective teams in positions to win games, no doubt. Most are incapable of doing it consistently as Alex does. He appears to have graduated past having to be hyper attentive to his responsibilities. This provides opportunities to focus on intangibles  (situations, field position, score, flow of game etc..). This is a talent/skill/ability that goes beyond stats, arm talent or highlights. He spends a great amount of time speaking about these nuances often. My outside perspective is Alex takes most pride in above skills. 

 

I don’t think Alex is elite, but his intangibles and legs are in my view. His ability to create plays is elite and will hopefully continue to balance out weaker parts of his game. I believe 3 touchdown drives have featured a 3rd down scramble inside the opponents 40 yard line. 

 

I like misdirection and it appeared more succinct this past week. I will be shocked if style is featured like Reid ran last year. Sprinkles of it... sure. 

 

 

4 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

One of the Alex games I rewatched was the Patriots one from last year.  That was arguably not only Alex's best game that season but might have been the best one of his career.  Kareem Hunt in that game had almost 250 yards total.  A lot of razzle-dazzle misdirection in that one.  I've beaten like a drum this off season, if Alex emerges as an upgrade it will likely be because of the running game, RPOs, etc.  So far in both wins the running game was heavily a factor.  Granted yesterday it was more straight forward north-south Peterson grinding it on the ground.    To my eyes, so far I don't see how Alex is an upgrade in arm talent and by that I don't just mean arm strength.  But the running game has been better.  Maybe that's coincidence because Peterson > R. Kelley and Perine.  But nonetheless, its better so I am not taking that away am sticking to it on his behalf.  ?

 

Cardinal game the offense bullied them with run game. Packer game, the pass set up the run. I think we’ll see more early down passing calls by Jay to feature Alex’s strength— accuracy in short passing game. 

 

4 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I have been beating to death for months that I have a hard time getting a feel for the roster.  Frankly, yesterday didn't change that.  I had a good feeling about yesterday the closer we got to it and said so on a thread.  Bouncing back from a bad game has been a hallmark for the last few years.  I want to see them win a couple of big games consecutively.  And to the point of our discussion, I don't think that burden is all on Alex or any QB.  It's the whole team showing up.

 

The only point I am fairly confident about is this isn't a Superbowl roster.  Though I'd love to be wrong on that.  Depending on the week and including even on this thread, I've been this team is an 11-5 one, all the way down to 6-10 after Guice's injury.  If Peterson is his old self and its looking more and more that he might be -- that's my biggest ray of optimism because I've thought the lack of running game has been what has derailed this team in recent years along with their inability to stop the run.  Not too many teams win in December let alone make the playoffs who can't run the ball or stop the run. 

 

Super Bowl? Give the Skins an at bat in the playoffs this year is a success. Close to a crapshoot after that (exception being Patriots). 

 

4 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

If they tread in the 7-9-9-7 range for the next three years, it was a big time wasted trade IMO. Not saying that will be the case.  I don't know.  But I don't have a lot of confidence that this is going to be a great team this year or next.  And that's not a whit because of Alex but the rest of the roster.  And its not that I think we have a bad roster, It's a decent one.  But I don't think you have enough game breakers where its special.  My disclaimer to that is if Reed and Thompson stay healthy the whole season. If that happens, that would get my attention.  In other words, instead if having a bad luck year with injuries, they'd have a really good luck year as to injuries. 

 

You put him in Jax, they likely go 12-4.  

 

Okay, we’re 3 games in... make a prediction, gut feel, or an educated guess on what will happen? I get operating in the gray area, due to the unpredictability of the NFL, but I’m genuinely curious what your convictions are of this years team. 

 

What was the Jags record with Bortles last year? Lol To your point, I believe 25 QBs can start for Jags and come somewhere close or above the 12-4 mark. Outside of Brady, Rodgers and Brees, the rest probably come close that mark. 

[JoeJacobyHOForRIOT]

26 minutes ago, Bigmuss1 said:

You mean, when I get a little pressure I FUMBLE Kirk??  

I don't know if would say Kirk is better than Alex, More exciting ? Yes...More Big Play ability ? YES ....More likely to Drive you down field for the game winner ? Maybe.... More likely to have a **** day and cost you a Win ? YES......

[Bigmuss1]

1 minute ago, JoeJacobyHOForRIOT said:

I don't know if would say Kirk is better than Alex, More exciting ? Yes...More Big Play ability ? YES ....More likely to Drive you down field for the game winner ? Maybe.... More likely to have a **** day and cost you a Win ? YES......

I’m not saying either is better than the other, that means nothing to me.  Kirk is in Minnie and Alex is here.  I just know Kirk has an aptitude to fumble when the D even breathes on him, like he did yesterday.  I hope they both have great seasons, this debate is so meaningless.  

[DJHJR86]

56 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

Last week the media championed Cousins for going "toe-to-toe" with the amazing Aaron Rodgers and willed his team to a tie, and how it showed Kirk was on the edge of greatness.

 

This week no one in the media is talking about how Smith not only went "toe-to-toe" with the amazing Aaron Rodgers but severely out-performed him in the 1st half, instead saying that the Packers defense isn't that good and maybe they shouldn't be playing an injured Rodgers because he's injured and has an injury, don't forget... and, oh, don't forget the Packers played an OT game last weekend so they were probably still really tired, poor things.

 

Rodgers also wasn't helped at all by his receivers.  There were at least 4 crucial drops which could have easily changed the outcome of the game.

[Skinsinparadise]

35 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

The QB position is a large variable to any team. Alex warrants credit for being on winning teams in the NFL for his last 7 seasons of starting with two different coaches. Last two winning seasons with Chiefs were teams with below average defenses. 

 

 

Drew Brees wasn't for example a loser with his 7-9 for three seasons in a row.  And then all of a sudden became a winner again when he got Kamara.  I can go on and on.  Plenty have done so in QB threads.  Don't feel like reliving it here.   The point has been made by plenty using stats.  

 

The one thing I take from your point that flows here is yes a good QB increases your chances to be a winner.  It's tough to stink with a good QB.  You are typically are either mediocre (with a weakish supporting cast), good or very good (with a strong supporting cast).

 

Would Alex Smith be a winner with the 2017 roster the way it unfolded?  I doubt it.  Would he have been a winner with the 2015 roster -- which included a healthy Jordan Reed.  Yeah, I am sure he would be.

 

You giving superlatives to what you like about Alex Smith is irrelevant to me as to the point.  As for these "intangibles" if you study Drew Brees the dude is mega leader, teammates really like him, good guy, the whole 9 yards.  So his up and down track record of being a winner or loser IMO is off the mark if its squarely about him - he isn't a winner or loser but a really good QB who gives his team a chance to win.  He does HIS part to make his team a winner regardless of the outcome.

 

35 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

Super Bowl? Give the Skins an at bat in the playoffs this year is a success. Close to a crapshoot after that (exception being Patriots). 

 

To me that's modest success. I'd like it but not love it.   With this franchise, sneaking into the playoffs, every 3-4 years or so and losing in the first round isn't anything special.  It's nice.  But we aren't entering any new terrain.  Heck we've done it with Kirk, RG3, Brunell even Todd Collins.  Instead, go win a playoff game.   Though to your point, just as a fan I'd be happy to make the playoffs especially because I think its possible they don't.

 

35 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

Okay, we’re 3 games in... make a prediction, gut feel, or an educated guess on what will happen? I get operating in the gray area, due to the unpredictability of the NFL, but I’m genuinely curious what your convictions are of this years team. 

 

 

I've given optimistic predictions the previous two years.  This year, I truly don't know.  Reason being the sample size has gotten bigger as to Jordan Reed's injury history and to a lesser extent Chris Thompson.  I don't think they can survive both of them out like what happened last season.  If that happens, I'd go 8-8 at best.  If its last year's roster (with Thompson-Reed out), I'd go 6-10.  But am counting on the improved defense keeping their floor at 8-8. 

 

Now, if they stay relatively healthy 10-6.  I have to give a disclaimer on the season because the Redskins specifically have a weird situation where their stars are very injury prone.  Heck even Dolphin fans locally in my sphere get it -- they see me wearing Redskins garb and they go is Reed going to be healthy.  Maybe because of fantasy football, people seem to be aware of the injury prone guys.  Peter Schrager who typically is optimistic about the Redskins loves to say this year well I like them but can they stay healthy?

 

My point is yeah the stay healthy idea is relevant to any NFL team but it is especially relevant to the Redskins.  You don't have conversations for example about the Falcons with the disclaimer of well if Julio Jones can stay healthy for a change then they will rock.  It's more of a Redskins thing because of the brittleness of their stars. 

[mistertim]

59 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

Last week the media championed Cousins for going "toe-to-toe" with the amazing Aaron Rodgers and willed his team to a tie, and how it showed Kirk was on the edge of greatness.

 

This week no one in the media is talking about how Smith not only went "toe-to-toe" with the amazing Aaron Rodgers but severely out-performed him in the 1st half, instead saying that the Packers defense isn't that good and maybe they shouldn't be playing an injured Rodgers because he's injured and has an injury, don't forget... and, oh, don't forget the Packers played an OT game last weekend so they were probably still really tired, poor things.

 

I think Kirk will be "on the edge of greatness" until he's 80. 

 

Anyway, yeah I found it funny but predictable how the sports media narrative changed when the Skins handled the Packers. That or they just completely ignored anything about the actual game and focused all of their coverage on the Clay Matthews penalty, even though it had exactly zero actual impact on the result of the game, unlike the one the week before.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

1 hour ago, Califan007 said:

Last week the media championed Cousins for going "toe-to-toe" with the amazing Aaron Rodgers and willed his team to a tie, and how it showed Kirk was on the edge of greatness.

 

This week no one in the media is talking about how Smith not only went "toe-to-toe" with the amazing Aaron Rodgers but severely out-performed him in the 1st half, instead saying that the Packers defense isn't that good and maybe they shouldn't be playing an injured Rodgers because he's injured and has an injury, don't forget... and, oh, don't forget the Packers played an OT game last weekend so they were probably still really tired, poor things.

 

The Vikings/Packers game was a shootout though, where Cousins threw for 425 and 4TD’s, with quite a few highlight dimes in there.

 

Smith was 12/20 with a little over 200 yards & 2 TDS.

 

Two totally different performances from a QB perspective.  Also, I’d be inclined to agree with those saying Rodgers looks gimpy and not himself.  Even more so against the Skins.  Don’t get me wrong, the defense played him well and all but he definitely looks broken.

[Bigmuss1]

3 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

The Vikings/Packers game was a shootout though, where Cousins threw for 425 and 4TD’s, with quite a few highlight dimes in there.

 

Smith was 12/20 with a little over 200 yards & 2 TDS.

 

Two totally different performances from a QB perspective.  Also, I’d be inclined to agree with those saying Rodgers looks gimpy and not himself.  Even more so against the Skins.  Don’t get me wrong, the defense played him well and all but he definitely looks broken.

Ok, it was sunny and dry in Green Bay last week, it was a soggy deluge in DC. Guess weather has nothing to do with athletic performance...

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

11 minutes ago, Bigmuss1 said:

Ok, it was sunny and dry in Green Bay last week, it was a soggy deluge in DC. Guess weather has nothing to do with athletic performance...

 

Not sure what that has to do with anything I said.  Rain, sleet, hail or snow: one game was an exciting shootout with basically double the passing stats that went to OT.  If you had no skin (no pun intended) in the game, I’m sure you would have found the MIN/GB game to be more exciting.

 

I promise you guys if the Skins go to NO and win a shootout against Brees, or even tie - plenty of folks will start talking about the Redskins.

[Skinsinparadise]

6 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

I promise you guys if the Skins go to NO and win a shootout against Brees, or even tie - plenty of folks will start talking about the Redskins.

 

I made a similar point on another thread.  We've had big wins really in just about every recent season.  But back to back big wins as underdogs?  That doesn't really happen much.  The Raiders win was followed by an "almost" win against KC.  The big win against Seattle followed by an "almost" win against Minny.  In 2016, the big win against GB, followed by an "almost win" against Dallas in 2016.    I am highlighting the almost because some (me in that mix) looked at the almost as a good sign.  But the inconsistency continued.  My point is this narrative I don't think is lost by the national media -- you got multiple national guys who touted this team as one that doesn't deal well with prosperity and or they are consistently inconsistent.  So I don't think the media especially the national version of it will get swept away anymore with a big win.

 

That's my long-winded way of saying is do it again and now you are cooking with oil.  And the attention will follow. 

[Bigmuss1]

11 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

Not sure what that has to do with anything I said.  Rain, sleet, hail or snow: one game was an exciting shootout with basically double the passing stats that went to OT.  If you had no skin (no pun intended) in the game, I’m sure you would have found the MIN/GB game to be more exciting.

 

I promise you guys if the Skins go to NO and win a shootout against Brees, or even tie - plenty of folks will start talking about the Redskins.

You mentioned Kirks stats vs Alex stats, one played on a sunny dry day one played in rain.  If you compare the two games please take everything into account.  This is why just grabbing random stats to prove a point is pointless.  

 

One threw a game ending interception and one did not.  One was bailed out by the refs, one didn’t need to be because his team was so far ahead. 

[Vladimir L]

Can we possibly just use Vernon Davis more as a WR. With two TE set we could do some damage in the run game and pass game.