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

[JSSkinz]

2 minutes ago, skinny21 said:

@JSSkinzI think, to @Monk4thaHALL‘s point, you praise him consistently, or at the least say that you’re happy with him publicly, and you don’t treat him as your enemy at the negotiating table (and/or in the media).  

 

From lowballing him early on, to not negotiating for a period of time, (essentially) trashing him in the media - blaming failed negotiations on him, getting rid of both his top targets, franchising him twice... the whole thing felt like it was handled poorly.  

The thing is the main example people use as the "trashing in the media" was the release Bruce put out, now I listened to the Grant and Danny show the same day that was released and Kirk was on there, he said the Redskins sent him the statement before they released it and they were fine with it, then he went on a 5 minute speech about how great Dan Snyder was which was odd.

 

I didn't expect Kirk to trash the organization because it's not how he is but why the long-winded speech about how great Dan is and why say they were made aware of the statement before it went out and they were ok with it.  There are a 1000 things he could have said to stay PC and not offend anyone.  How about "yeah, we were made aware of the statement" and that's it, leave it at that and move on, that's how you make it known you aren't happy and don't agree with the statement and you do it without offending anyone and making the situation awkward.  There are many ways he could have handled that if it was bothering him.

 

The other thing I always read about is after the Cleveland game when Dan and Bruce rushed to RG3 and passed Kirk up without acknowledging him.  What did he expect, that was 2012 and the guy was leading us to a division title, they gave up 3 high draft picks so the fact they were more worried about their main asset shouldn't hurt anyone's feelings. IMO

 

As for the negotiating table, the only feedback Kirk gets on that is from his agent, there's a reason players don't sit in on negotiations, they can't handle it and quite frankly most people wouldn't be able to handle that process, it can be emotionless and downright brutal and most would take it personally.

 

Obviously, his agent did what he could to feed the fire and also leaked info to fit his narrative, that's what a good agent would do.

 

To me the whole thing is so Housewives of "Insert City Here" and it's just a bit ridiculous.  Seriously is Kirk a dog, he needs constant praise, maybe a treat and a walk in the park.

 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

12 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

We'd be a 4 win team. Smith is light years better than Colt.

 

I mean, if you want to build through the draft, that may be a good thing. I don't really think tanking works in football.

 

But, how freaking empty would FedEx be if they had put the season in Colt's hands? Yeesh.

 

Again, that's not far from my take...but until we win a game that isn't dominated by the defense and a good running game, I won't be convinced that Smith has gotten us a W we couldn't have gotten with Colt.

 

I wouldn't be doing it to tank...it would be more of a year with a caretaker while we groomed someone we got in the draft. I wouldn't want to roll with Colt for years on end. 

[JSSkinz]

15 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

You had a choice: Sign him long term or Franchise him and lose him eventually.

 

There was no in between. Kirk happily took the franchise tag money, because, it was a lot of damn money. He took it again, because, of course. But he was never committing here after that.

But doesn't that bother you as a Skins fan that Kirk was so entitled with his 8 good games that its "sign me now or never"?

 

Did he not understand we just blew 2 years of 1st rounders on RG3 and had nothing to show for it.

 

That's pretty much what I'm getting at with my rants today.

 

 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

19 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

You had a choice: Sign him long term or Franchise him and lose him eventually.

 

There was no in between. Kirk happily took the franchise tag money, because, it was a lot of damn money. He took it again, because, of course. But he was never committing here after that.

 

If you weren't ready to sign him before 16, you should have just let him go.

 

We'd probably be playing a second year guy, like, I dunno MAHOMES right now had we just done that.

 

 

Our decision makers need every facade of potential success they can muster to keep us interested. That's why they couldn't walk away from Cousins after he had proven he was capable. 

 

Your point is completely accurate, but they don't have the luxury of making wise, long-term decisions that don't maximize every possible win they can get in a given year. They've used up all their equity and that left having to rent Cousins year-to-year in the hopes of going on a ridiculous winning streak and winning something with him in 2016 or 2017. 

[Morneblade]

2 hours ago, JSSkinz said:

The smart guy who said we were idiots for drafting Guice because of the way his leg kicks out when he runs, noticed you deleted that post.

 

I didn't miss it.

 

 

 

You missed a ton, apparently.

 

Probably because I NEVER said anything remotely like that. Actually, I was a HUGE fan of the pick, and I STILL am. I think he's going to be fantastic. Now that, you can grill me for, if you want. But you have me confused for someone else. Because I've never not been a fan of the Guise pick. And was a fan when he was at LSU.

 

I don't even know what you're talking about, I never even saw a post like that. Kicks his leg out when he runs? WTF?

[JSSkinz]

14 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

You missed a ton, apparently.

 

Probably because I NEVER said anything remotely like that. Actually, I was a HUGE fan of the pick, and I STILL am. I think he's going to be fantastic. Now that, you can grill me for, if you want. But you have me confused for someone else. Because I've never not been a fan of the Guise pick. And was a fan when he was at LSU.

 

I don't even know what you're talking about, I never even saw a post like that. Kicks his leg out when he runs? WTF?

I know, I quoted @Monk4thaHALL, he's the one who said it.  I had the same response you currently have when I read it.

 

I tried to find it the next day because it was one of the most ridiculous posts I've read in some time but he/she deleted or edited it.

[Skinsinparadise]

28 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

Your absolutely right with my position on Kirk, it was never about the talent and I wasn't being sarcastic at all.

 

I really don't want to debate this again but I will say if I'm looking at Kirks 3 year production from 2013 - 2015 I see a trend upward but only in the 2nd half of the 2015 year, that's 1/6 of the total data showing an upward trend and no consistency to lean on when making a decision.

 

So when was the FO supposed to embrace Kirk, was it after the 2015 season, the 2016 season?  When was this supposed to happen for Kirk to feel wanted?

 

Personally, if I was the GM or owner there is no way in hell I would be able to commit/embrace Kirk being my franchise QB until I watched that 2016 season, so the question is was it too late by then? Based on what I've heard from Kirk and his father and other local radio personalities and reporters it was too late by then and for me, that's my issue.

 

The reason why I questioned whether there was sarcasm was I have elaborated on this so many times then even I am sick of hearing my narrative so wasn't sure if you were saying I am being repetitive.  I am definitely guilty as charged as for being repetitive so I'll try to not repeat Monk's points but make some others here supplement his.  This is based on narrative from Keim, Mike Jones, Chris Russell, Grant Paulsen who covered the story some.  Most of it is Keim and Jones.  And even some Cooley, Finlay. 

 

A.  Bruce tried to get Kirk at a discount and he thought he'd be successful doing it -- thought the midwestern-values boy like Kirk would take a below market deal.  He stubbornly persisted with it even though it was clear early on it wasn't going to work.  (Cooley)

 

B. Kirk and his agent understood the team's reluctance in 2016 to pay market value but were floored by the doubling down on a low offer in the beginning of 2017, too. They thought they'd kiss and make up for 2016 but instead they doubled down on the approach.  (Mike Jones)

 

C.  Kirk and his agent saw the tag as the Redskins claiming his market value.  Bruce did not. (all of them)

 

D. Bruce behind the scenes was acrimonious -- as to how and in what way no one said but Kirk's side thought he was acting like a douche (Jones, Russell)

 

E.  Weird stuff in the negotiations happened like they told him a new offer was coming in a week and then they would send the exact same offer a week later (Paulsen) and that's just one example of that which made them question the competence of the FO. 

 

F.  Kirk started thinking Bruce was a douche based on the behavior in his own negotiation but watching how Scot was treated as he was kicked out the door affirmed that.(  Paulsen, Keim, Jones)

 

G. Bruce picked up that he rubbed the Kirk camp the wrong way so he started kissing up.  That helped for awhile.  (Keim)

 

H. There was some skepticism from Kirk's camp that Bruce's behavior was sincere versus just mere desperation when he realized his behavior back fired.  Dan started kissing up at this time, too.  Kirk liked Dan actually more than Bruce.  (multiple ones, Keim part of this, Russell part of this)

 

I. Because of all of this and concern about the team's future with McVay leaving, Kirk decided he wasn't going to sign a LTD in July. (all of them)

 

J.  Even though they turned down the last offer, Kirk's camp thought there was a good chance Kirk would remain with the Redskins and he'd sign in 2018 depending on his chemistry with Jay and Bruce-FO acting nice with him. (Finlay)

 

K.  The press release happened -- reviving the douche narrative about Bruce behind the scenes with Kirk and his agent. (Keim, Paulsen)

 

L.  There was also concern that Bruce would erupt again during the season if something didn't go right.  i always assumed (no confirmation of it though) that meant that Bruce blamed Kirk for losses, etc in the past but don't know.   So that was part of the wait and see if Bruce/FO stay cool during the season. (Albert Breer)

 

M. Bruce decided behind the scenes that Kirk will not be brought back after he didn't sign the July offer.  He didn't want to trade him though either because he was in a win now mode (Finlay)

 

And I personally though wasn't a Bruce guy -- I still gave him the benefit of the doubt through the whole negotiation up until July 2017.  I followed the negotiation like a soap opera.  I was addicted to it. ? I posted whatever articles i can find, radio excepts, etc.  I am sure like anything else some of these things might not be correct but its the best I can do piecing together the narrative.

 

In short, looks like if Bruce played nice with Kirk early in 2017, they would have likely gotten a deal done.  Mike Jones in particular was convinced of that.  But the low ball offer accompanied by some not so nice comments coming from Bruce supposedly soured the negotiation.  And his idiotic press release was likely the final straw.  If I'd hit Kirk on anything here is he was being overly nice publicly but according to some who knew him he didn't feel as nice about the powers that be for real versus how he acted publicly.  

 

Bruce's stamp is so heavy on the Kirk contract its obvious to me even if every narrative isn't true.  I can go and on from so many sources.  Among others, Craig Hoffman during the senior bowl asked whomever he can find about whether kirk is coming back and if not why.  He was told no, and he was told its all about Bruce.  Grant Paulsen who is close with Kirk said on air, one reason why Kirk won't be back -- Bruce. 

 

So yeah Bruce by so many accounts is accountable for both not landing Kirk in negotiation and also being the reason why Kirk was willing to leave.  The only mystery to me is what was Bruce douche's behavior that put Kirk off.  Its as big a mystery as all these stories about Scot's antics but no one described what they were.  I believe Bruce was a douche, I've heard enough people say it but i'd love to know the how and what of it.

 

And I try to keep an open mind on this stuff.  I like Scot for example but heard enough narratives from enough directions to be convinced he was a problem at the end.  Heck actually on the Alex Smith front I used to think it was Bruce's idea but hearing more narratives Bruce didn't come up with Alex as the target, he was the guy who made the deal once the target was identified.  But got little doubt that Bruce and Kirk were very interlinked.   And yeah I do believe the beat guys are correct that Bruce is on notice if the Qb situation blows up.  It makes sense to me

 

 

[Morneblade]

23 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

I know, I quoted @Monk4thaHALL, he's the one who said it.  I had the same response you currently have when I read it.

 

I tried to find it the next day because it was one of the most ridiculous posts I've read in some time but he/she deleted or edited it.

 

 

Ah, ok, that's cool. And I agree, that is a amazing ridiculous post!

[Temper11]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 We have the better O line. 

 

 

I know people keep saying this... and I am firmly in the camp that Smith was awful yesterday, but I don't see the O line being the strength of this team as I'd heard coming in.  Skins couldn't run the ball at all yesterday and Smith was being pinched within moments of receiving the snap on every dropback.  Look at the difference in the pockets that Brees was throwing out of compared to that of Smith's.  Night and day.  AGAIN, SO NO ONE MISSES IT - SMITH PLAYED LIKE **** YESTERDAY.  But the o-line being a strength - meh.

[Morneblade]

Just now, Temper11 said:

 

I know people keep saying this... and I am firmly am in the camp that Smith was awful yesterday, but I don't see the O line being the strength of this team as I'd heard coming in.  Skins couldn't run the ball at all yesterday and Smith was being pinched within moments of receiving the snap on every dropback.  Look at the difference in the pockets that Brees was throwing out of compared to that of Smith's.  Night and day.  AGAIN, SO NO ONE MISSES IT - SMITH PLAYED LIKE **** YESTERDAY.  But the o-line being a strength - meh.

 

I'd like to throw out a couple things. First, I would say that our OL tends to be over-rated by 'Skins fans. I think they are a pretty good pass blocking unit, but not a good run blocking unit. However, being stupid and moving 2 guys around when Lauvao got hurt has really messed up the chemistry. We need to get Roullier back at C, and soon.

 

That being said, and you're not going to like this much, but I think that Smith is part of the reason the OL looks bad. He's just not a good pocket guy. He gets ansy quickly and doesn't move around well in the pocket. He doesn't feel pressure well, feels phantom pressure and doesn't move well inside the pocket. And when I say that, I mean instead of pulling the ball down and trying to run, he doesn't slide around the pocket to avoid pressure while keeping his eyes down field.

[Skinsinparadise]

14 minutes ago, Temper11 said:

 

I know people keep saying this... and I am firmly in the camp that Smith was awful yesterday, but I don't see the O line being the strength of this team as I'd heard coming in.  Skins couldn't run the ball at all yesterday and Smith was being pinched within moments of receiving the snap on every dropback.  Look at the difference in the pockets that Brees was throwing out of compared to that of Smith's.  Night and day.  AGAIN, SO NO ONE MISSES IT - SMITH PLAYED LIKE **** YESTERDAY.  But the o-line being a strength - meh.

 

Better than the Vikings O line doesn't mean strong.  Have you seen the Vikings O line pass block?

 

Among the mistakes in the off season is not upgrading LG or adding good veteran depth. As some say on the O line you are only as strong as your weakest line.  I think that point is a bit extreme but there is some truth to that IMO. 

3 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

That being said, and you're not going to like this much, but I think that Smith is part of the reason the OL looks bad. He's just not a good pocket guy. He gets ansy quickly and doesn't move around well in the pocket. He doesn't feel pressure well, feels phantom pressure and doesn't move well inside the pocket. And when I say that, I mean instead of pulling the ball down and trying to run, he doesn't slide around the pocket to avoid pressure while keeping his eyes down field.

 

that was one of Cooley's points in the off season when he did film review of Alex -- he said he's not fluid in the pocket, bails on his reads too quickly, takes more sacks then he should and for a guy with wheels he doesn't always do a great job of keeping his eyes downfield when on the move.  He liked things about Alex too but that was one of his negatives.

[Morneblade]

1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Better than the Vikings O line doesn't mean strong.  Have you seen the Vikings O line pass block?

 

Among the mistakes in the off season is not upgrading LG or veteran depth. As some say on the O line you are only as strong as your weakest line.  I think that point is a bit extreme but there is some truth to that IMO. 

 

And Cousins has been amazing behind that terrible Vikings OL. Granted, they can't run for ****, but Cousins has been roasting people.

[justice98]

1 hour ago, JSSkinz said:

But doesn't that bother you as a Skins fan that Kirk was so entitled with his 8 good games that its "sign me now or never"?

 

Did he not understand we just blew 2 years of 1st rounders on RG3 and had nothing to show for it.

 

That's pretty much what I'm getting at with my rants today.

 

 

 

You think Kirk thought he was "entitled"?  

[Temper11]

5 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

That being said, and you're not going to like this much, but I think that Smith is part of the reason the OL looks bad. He's just not a good pocket guy. He gets ansy quickly and doesn't move around well in the pocket. He doesn't feel pressure well, feels phantom pressure and doesn't move well inside the pocket. And when I say that, I mean instead of pulling the ball down and trying to run, he doesn't slide around the pocket to avoid pressure while keeping his eyes down field.

 

Yeah... I agree with this for the most part.  I think much of this stems from his early days with the niners in which everygame looked like the one yesterday in which the pocket was just always immediately collapsing right from the snap.  It's resulted, in my opinion, in the following things:

 

- he has "happy feet" when it is apparent early that the line isn't up to the task - and will feel phantom pressure on the few snaps in which the line holds up. 

- he typically gets the ball out quickly, taking his underneath routes instead of waiting for other routes to develop

- he is pretty good about escaping pressure and using his legs to pick up yards and 1st downs.

 

I you can keep him comfortable for 2.5 to 3 seconds, he's really accurate.  If one side isn't holding up, he's pretty good about flushing to the open side and making something happen.  When the pocket just folds in on him - like yesterday - he doesn't do well... happy feet, rushed throws, etc.

 

Again, I'm not putting yesterday's debacle all on the line.  I'm giving Smith plenty of the blame in this one.  It was a total team malfunction.  But Smith is usually much better than what he showed yesterday - IMO. 

[Morneblade]

1 minute ago, Temper11 said:

 

Yeah... I agree with this for the most part.  I think much of this stems from his early days with the niners in which everygame looked like the one yesterday in which the pocket was just always immediately collapsing right from the snap.  It's resulted, in my opinion, in the following things:

 

- he has "happy feet" when it is apparent early that the line isn't up to the task - and will feel phantom pressure on the few snaps in which the line holds up. 

- he typically gets the ball out quickly, taking his underneath routes instead of waiting for other routes to develop

- he is pretty good about escaping pressure and using his legs to pick up yards and 1st downs.

 

I you can keep him comfortable for 2.5 to 3 seconds, he's really accurate.  If one side isn't holding up, he's pretty good about flushing to the open side and making something happen.  When the pocket just folds in on him - like yesterday - he doesn't do well... happy feet, rushed throws, etc.

 

Again, I'm not putting yesterday's debacle all on the line.  I'm giving Smith plenty of the blame in this one.  It was a total team malfunction.  But Smith is usually much better than what he showed yesterday - IMO. 

 

Oh, I agree. Smith, when he feels comfortable is very precise. I just feel that he get ruffled too easy. And that, as you say, might be from playing on bad 49ers teams when he was younger.

[Temper11]

15 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Better than the Vikings O line doesn't mean strong.  Have you seen the Vikings O line pass block?

 

Among the mistakes in the off season is not upgrading LG or veteran depth. As some say on the O line you are only as strong as your weakest line.  I think that point is a bit extreme but there is some truth to that IMO. 

 

The only game I've seen of the vikings this year was this week against Philly.  I didn't notice the line being terrible in that game in pass pro, but that doesn't mean they weren't.  I wasn't watching all that closely... just in a bar with a bunch of friends hoping the Eagles lost. 

 

As far as "better than the vikings line, doesn't mean strong"... I wasn't referring just to you.  As a Smith fan, when he was traded to the skins, much of what I heard was that the skins line was so much better than that of KC's.  Which I was excited about because I know that one of his weaknesses is happy feet when the line struggles.  I might have had too high of expectations based on those earlier chatterings.  I was dreaming of the Cowboys line or something!  ?  Wishful thinking.

[JSSkinz]

48 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

The reason why I questioned whether there was sarcasm was I have elaborated on this so many times then even I am sick of hearing my narrative so wasn't sure if you were saying I am being repetitive.  I am definitely guilty as charged as for being repetitive so I'll try to not repeat Monk's points but make some others here supplement his.  This is based on narrative from Keim, Mike Jones, Chris Russell, Grant Paulsen who covered the story some.  Most of it is Keim and Jones.  And even some Cooley, Finlay. 

 

A.  Bruce tried to get Kirk at a discount and he thought he'd be successful doing it -- thought the midwestern-values boy like Kirk would take a below market deal.  He stubbornly persisted with it even though it was clear early on it wasn't going to work.  (Cooley)

 

B. Kirk and his agent understood the team's reluctance in 2016 to pay market value but were floored by the doubling down on a low offer in the beginning of 2017, too. They thought they'd kiss and make up for 2016 but instead they doubled down on the approach.  (Mike Jones)

 

C.  Kirk and his agent saw the tag as the Redskins claiming his market value.  Bruce did not. (all of them)

 

D. Bruce behind the scenes was acrimonious -- as to how and in what way no one said but Kirk's side thought he was acting like a douche (Jones, Russell)

 

E.  Weird stuff in the negotiations happened like they told him a new offer was coming in a week and then they would send the exact same offer a week later (Paulsen) and that's just one example of that which made them question the competence of the FO. 

 

F.  Kirk started thinking Bruce was a douche based on the behavior in his own negotiation but watching how Scot was treated as he was kicked out the door affirmed that.(  Paulsen, Keim, Jones)

 

G. Bruce picked up that he rubbed the Kirk camp the wrong way so he started kissing up.  That helped for awhile.  (Keim)

 

H. There was some skepticism from Kirk's camp that Bruce's behavior was sincere versus just mere desperation when he realized his behavior back fired.  Dan started kissing up at this time, too.  Kirk liked Dan actually more than Bruce.  (multiple ones, Keim part of this, Russell part of this)

 

I. Because of all of this and concern about the team's future with McVay leaving, Kirk decided he wasn't going to sign a LTD in July. (all of them)

 

J.  Even though they turned down the last offer, Kirk's camp thought there was a good chance Kirk would remain with the Redskins and he'd sign in 2018 depending on his chemistry with Jay and Bruce-FO acting nice with him. (Finlay)

 

K.  The press release happened -- reviving the douche narrative about Bruce behind the scenes with Kirk and his agent. (Keim, Paulsen)

 

L.  There was also concern that Bruce would erupt again during the season if something didn't go right.  i always assumed (no confirmation of it though) that meant that Bruce blamed Kirk for losses, etc in the past but don't know.   So that was part of the wait and see if Bruce/FO stay cool during the season. (Albert Breer)

 

M. Bruce decided behind the scenes that Kirk will not be brought back after he didn't sign the July offer.  He didn't want to trade him though either because he was in a win now mode (Finlay)

 

And I personally though wasn't a Bruce guy -- I still gave him the benefit of the doubt through the whole negotiation up until July 2017.  I followed the negotiation like a soap opera.  I was addicted to it. ? I posted whatever articles i can find, radio excepts, etc.  I am sure like anything else some of these things might not be correct but its the best I can do piecing together the narrative.

 

In short, looks like if Bruce played nice with Kirk early in 2017, they would have likely gotten a deal done.  Mike Jones in particular was convinced of that.  But the low ball offer accompanied by some not so nice comments coming from Bruce supposedly soured the negotiation.  And his idiotic press release was likely the final straw.  If I'd hit Kirk on anything here is he was being overly nice publicly but according to some who knew him he didn't feel as nice about the powers that be for real versus how he acted publicly.  

 

Bruce's stamp is so heavy on the Kirk contract its obvious to me even if every narrative isn't true.  I can go and on from so many sources.  Among others, Craig Hoffman during the senior bowl asked whomever he can find about whether kirk is coming back and if not why.  He was told no, and he was told its all about Bruce.  Grant Paulsen who is close with Kirk said on air, one reason why Kirk won't be back -- Bruce. 

 

So yeah Bruce by so many accounts is accountable for both not landing Kirk in negotiation and also being the reason why Kirk was willing to leave.  The only mystery to me is what was Bruce douche's behavior that put Kirk off.  Its as big a mystery as all these stories about Scot's antics but no one described what they were.  I believe Bruce was a douche, I've heard enough people say it but i'd love to know the how and what of it.

 

And I try to keep an open mind on this stuff.  I like Scot for example but heard enough narratives from enough directions to be convinced he was a problem at the end.  Heck actually on the Alex Smith front I used to think it was Bruce's idea but hearing more narratives Bruce didn't come up with Alex as the target, he was the guy who made the deal once the target was identified.  But got little doubt that Bruce and Kirk were very interlinked.   And yeah I do believe the beat guys are correct that Bruce is on notice if the Qb situation blows up.  It makes sense to me

 

 

I'll take them one at a time.

 

A. What year was this, if it was 2015 Kirk hadn't proved himself so not sure why it would be below market value but I'm assuming you're talking about the offer before the 2017 season, the one where Kirks dad is on record in Nov 2017 saying that Kirk would not have signed after the 2016 season.

 

B. Whatever, I just posted the tweet from Kirks dad, is his dad a liar? Does Mike Jones know more than Kirks dad?

C. Yes, that makes sense, no argument there.

D. Russell also said on the Junks 2 weeks ago that people in the building, as well as players, thought Kirk was fake, you can easily find that podcast and it wasn't some long drawn out discussion about Kirk but he threw that in there and moved on and nobody asked him any questions about it.

E. Ok, more sources without anything real to back it up.

F. Really, the same Scott that when speaking on the record about Kirk said "I don't see special", I still remember Kirks face at the town hall when Grant told him Scott said that.  Why would he be upset at that, local reporters and media guys know Scott had issues, Czaban talked about it on his show briefly and said there were reasons to get rid of Scott but he wouldn't elaborate, the media liked Scott so they've buried a lot of the dirt.

G. Not really anything to respond to on that.

H. Maybe that's why he went on a 5 minute tangent about how he liked Dan on the Grant and Danny show.

I. I've said the whole time he wasn't going to sign a LTD after the 2015 season, now you posted proof from media sources and I posted proof from his father.

J. Sure they did.

K. I listened to all of that show and Grant and never heard him say anything about that release being an issue, I only heard it here on ES.  Kirk was on that day and once again why did he say the things he said and the long "I love Dan" tangent along with the fact he said they reviewed the statement before it was released?  Just doesn't make sense for grown men to be so sensitive when dealing with large amounts of money.

L. So Bruce had to be a good boy and if so Kirk may like him, ok.

M. Kirk decided he wasn't signing, once again his Dad's tweet, is his dad being untruthful, remember he's a pastor at a large church down here in Florida not too far from me?

 

Most everything you posted that has to do with Kirk being wronged by the organization (Not contract related) is from an unnamed source and it's murky, never any follow up or any real confirmation from a direct source or quote. My opinion is based on data that's quoted from Scott, Kirk, and Kirks dad.  Now I can't defend Bruce Allen but that was never the reason behind my post.

 

My angle is that he was never planning on signing here after we passed up the counteroffer after the 2015 season and nothing you wrote has changed that opinion, sorry.

 

Now let's be clear my thoughts are NOT about Kirks talent, my issue with him is strictly concerning the contract negotiation.

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

23 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

And Cousins has been amazing behind that terrible Vikings OL. Granted, they can't run for ****, but Cousins has been roasting people.

 

Kirk's stats are insane.  I got zero doubt that this thread would be a shrine to Alex if he had a 10-2 TD-INT ratio and was on pace for over 5000 yards and a better than 70% completion ratio.

 

The thing about Cousins is so many have said so many things about him in the past that I think its tough to do a 180.   So if you believe he's the main cause of all the tough losses in recent years and or as a Redskins fan it bothers you that he wanted to leave here -- those are tough emotions to shrug off.  But the people who fell that way and also don't like Bruce -- tough for me to avoid preaching to them because IMO if they get over those emotions I think they'd see there is a positive value for Kirk to kill it this year. 

 

I would go out of my way to say on Kirk's thread when he had a bad game.  I do the same thing here about Alex-- good game-bad game, etc.   If I just like Alex but don't love him -- some jumped down my throat about him like I don't support him.  Normally, that's a strange drill.  But again i think that's wrapped up in the emotion around Kirk.  And heck the emotion about Kirk started with some back to the RG3 dynamic.  And I can relate I liked RG3 through 2013 until I saw I was wrong. 

 

I don't think Bruce-Dan are evil people.  I think they can be obnoxious jerks -- impatient and not smart football people.   However, being a jerk and evil are different things.  I've done multiple things with the Redskins Charitable Foundation they do really cool stuff and they have a lot of cool people in that building who I've interacted with some. 

 

I got hammered for someone on another thread for "hypocrisy" because I said if Bruce and Dan can win their way, I'd give them a break and go on that ride.   That is true.  Look if they are going to do weird things for me like let Kirk go and replace him with a 34 year old QB who has lesser talent in my view -- and it actually works.  I'd have to be dense to just resist it.  I'd just say I was wrong.  If they win the Superbowl with Bruce at the helm then I'd have to say their weird FO structure works. I try to take pride of being flexible and changing macro position if my position is proven incorrect.  And its happened before. 

 

But I don't expect that to happen.  The Dan-Bruce way hasn't been successful.  They've botched the QB position many times.  They haven't earned the benefit of the doubt from me.  So if it looks and walks like a duck to me -- its a duck unless they one day surprise me the other way.  And no 8-8 to me to not the new holy grail of success -- the Snyder years haven't been great but am still not lowering myself to celebrating mediocrity even if its better than being bad. 

[Temper11]

21 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Better than the Vikings O line doesn't mean strong.  Have you seen the Vikings O line pass block?

 

Among the mistakes in the off season is not upgrading LG or veteran depth. As some say on the O line you are only as strong as your weakest line.  I think that point is a bit extreme but there is some truth to that IMO. 

 

I understand this a little and goes to what I was saying about Smith's play in a recent post.  If there is one guy that is constantly getting beat, but the rest are holding up, I think Smith can do a decent job of learning from that early in the game and then compensating for it... rolling away from that side, or whatever.  I think he has a harder time, like last night, when the line just folds on all sides and he is pinched.  Tends to just not "sit" well in that collapsing pocket for as long as he can.  Looks unsettled, looks off balance, rushes the throw, etc.

 

I'm not a QB guru or anything... I played TE most of my playing days, so take my opinions with a grain of salt.  All of them just come off of my impressions from following his career for a long time now.

[Skinsinparadise]

24 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

I'll take them one at a time.

 

A. What year was this, if it was 2015 Kirk hadn't proved himself so not sure why it would be below market value but I'm assuming you're talking about the offer before the 2017 season, the one where Kirks dad is on record in Nov 2017 saying that Kirk would not have signed after the 2016 season.

 

 

 

Check my point "I".  I said kirk decided as he got closer to the contract deadline he wouldn't sign the contract at that point and I explained why too with all the stuff leading up to it.  The sweet spot like I said was the beginning of 2017 and no Kirk didn't decide no way no how at that point.  

 

24 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

I

B. Whatever, I just posted the tweet from Kirks dad, is his dad a liar? Does Mike Jones know more than Kirks dad?

 

 

He's not a liar.  Just reread my post more carefully.  You think I am not aware of his dads comments?  They were very public. We digested it to death on the Kirk threads.  Ditto other comments that came out in a SI story. 

 

24 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

 

D. Russell also said on the Junks 2 weeks ago that people in the building, as well as players, thought Kirk was fake, you can easily find that podcast and it wasn't some long drawn out discussion about Kirk but he threw that in there and moved on and nobody asked him any questions about it.

 

 

 

So what.  It has nothing to do with anything I said.  Russell by the way just minutes ago blasting Bruce on air, saying Dan is upset at him.  i am gathering he's going to elaborate shortly.

 

24 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

I

F. Really, the same Scott that when speaking on the record about Kirk said "I don't see special", I still remember Kirks face at the town hall when Grant told him Scott said that.  Why would he be upset at that, local reporters and media guys know Scott had issues, Czaban talked about it on his show briefly and said there were reasons to get rid of Scott but he wouldn't elaborate, the media liked Scott so they've buried a lot of the dirt.

 

 

Grant Paulsen said Kirk liked Scot even though Scot had some skepticism about Kirk. He liked him as a person.  But you are missing the forrest for the trees.  Kirk's issue wasn't that Scot was fired -- his issue was the behavior around it.    Scot by the way in the fall of 2017 said at that point the Redskins needed to do whatever they can to lock Kirk up LT.

 

24 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

 

I. I've said the whole time he wasn't going to sign a LTD after the 2015 season, now you posted proof from media sources and I posted proof from his father.

 

 

 

The post from the father which we digested a ton on the Kirk thread -- you didn't discover some new sexy smoking gun in the discussion -- is all about WHEN Kirk decided he's not coming back.  Kirk himself talked about it in his 106.7 interview after the July deadline that he decided about a week or so before the deadline - he's not taking the deal.  Only thing that I can recall that contradicts that is one of the people covering the story said kirk made up his mind in the Spring.  But either way Kirk wasn't closed from the get go.  

 

24 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

 

K. I listened to all of that show and Grant and never heard him say anything about that release being an issue, I only heard it here on ES.  Kirk was on that day and once again why did he say the things he said and the long "I love Dan" tangent along with the fact he said they reviewed the statement before it was released?  Just doesn't make sense for grown men to be so sensitive when dealing with large amounts of money.

 

 

What Keim (who is no flame thrower) said they knew he'd do a press release.  But they were surprised about the editorial portion of it.  That put them off.  But like I said if you want to blame Kirk for playing nice publicly and that being a bit phony -- that seems to be true according to some of the people who covered the story. 

 

24 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

 

Most everything you posted that has to do with Kirk being wronged by the organization (Not contract related) is from an unnamed source and it's murky, never any follow up or any real confirmation from a direct source or quote. My opinion is based on data that's quoted from Scott, Kirk, and Kirks dad.  Now I can't defend Bruce Allen but that was never the reason behind my post.

 

 

I am aware of everything you mentioned.  But dude its like any long contract negotiation or for that matter narrative.  Timing and context is part of the narrative.  If you ignore all of that -- you are likely missing a key part of the plot.  What else did these same people say.  When did they say it?  What was going on each period.   Fall of 2015 different than winter of 2016 different from winter of 2017 different from Spring of 2017 different from Summer of 2017.  

 

But look I don't care believe what you want about it.  I've spent so much time (too much) listening to so many different accounts that converged from different places.  (And I am not even using all of it) that i am pretty confident in my take about it.  If you want to believe a different narrative, have at it.   

[HardcoreZorn]

@JSSkinz hats off to you for going down a road I have traveled far too many times. Be careful though, Bruce is mean don’t ya know?! 

 

From my eyes Kirk looks to be the better QB thus far. But doesn’t really change much in my opinion. The amount of hours spent dissecting Kirk and Alex on a week to week basis is bordering on unhealthy. 

 

I would be be far more worked up if we had made a Griffin like trade to replace Kirk. From the looks of it, I don’t think we gave up THAT much to secure competent QB play. Certainly didn’t mortgage our future.

Realistically I don’t know how you watch the end of 2016 and come to the conclusion we should have immediately ponied up market value. It’s certainly not slam dunk. 

[drowland]

1 hour ago, JSSkinz said:

But doesn't that bother you as a Skins fan that Kirk was so entitled with his 8 good games that its "sign me now or never"?

 

Did he not understand we just blew 2 years of 1st rounders on RG3 and had nothing to show for it.

 

That's pretty much what I'm getting at with my rants today.

 

 

 

Not sure why Kirk should care about the picks blown on RGIII.  That’s not his fault.  

 

It’s supply and demand with FQBs.  32 teams and more then half don’t have one, so the price will continue to rise.  And the Skins had to have known if they kept putting that tag on Kirk his price would go up.  

[purbeast]

I find it amusing that people throw around pretend records with pretend games that happened with pretend QB's starting for the Redskins in games that have already happened, and talking about the record like it is fact.

[Veryoldschool]

1 hour ago, JSSkinz said:

But doesn't that bother you as a Skins fan that Kirk was so entitled with his 8 good games that its "sign me now or never"?

 

Did he not understand we just blew 2 years of 1st rounders on RG3 and had nothing to show for it.

 

That's pretty much what I'm getting at with my rants today.

 

 

 

I find this post strange.  I don't know what you mean by 8 good games or sign me now or never but why should the fact that the Skins squandered picks on Griffin have an impact on Kirk's salary?  Also, the Skins actually blew 3 first round and 1 second round pick (almost a whole offensive line) on Griffin.

[zCommander]

Should have just taken Keenum. Not sure why he was passed over for Alex. I think Case has a better arm than Alex.