What is Wrong with Alex Smith?

[kingdaddy]

5 hours ago, NoCalMike said:

 

There is no reason they can't draft his replacement this offseason though. 

Yep, just like Kansas City did. Do what it takes to move into the top 6 picks if possible and get a future QB...we have to stop fooling ourselves with band aids just to save face. 

[zCommander]

Are there going to be any good QB in the up coming draft and still to be had at #6?

[kingdaddy]

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

 

 

You know when. We all know when ..... not too long ago either ... terps b ball better be decent this year.

That was the plan but they picked the wrong guy...but what a great year thay was. 

[Stefanskins]

47 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

And I like Jay.  But I never bought in that he or anyone else has a magic system.  Moreover, I think Andy Reid is an inventive dude.  Among my more annoying points I'd bet to some on the Alex thread was I didn't buy that Reid was limiting Alex's ability to be prolific.  I've followed Reid too closely over the years to believe that he was a problem.  He's a smart dude and inventive.

 

yeah, we all know reid...he coached the eagles for 14 years...which is another reason why i am vexed...

 

[ncr2h]

12 minutes ago, Stefanskins said:

maybe an easier schedule this year though...we went through a murder's row for like 10 games last year...

I know that's what i had heard he was great at...and appeared that way in the first two or so games...honestly, we'd be better off with RG3...do the ravens still have him on the squad...

That thought crossed my mind actually. I'm as big an RG3 hater as they come. That being said, if Alex Smith is only giving you about ~50th percentile passing efficiency, and is basically giving you nothing with his legs (he's on pace for essentially the same yardage as Cousins from last season, but with fewer TDs)...why not bring in a read option guy who can at least give the run game a big boost? Maybe not RG3, but someone along those lines.

 

If we're going to win games with running and defense, why not just embrace that fully and get a QB who actually adds value to the rushing attack?

[Stefanskins]

38 minutes ago, zskins said:

 

What is so bad about him as a vet is that when he sees the box being stacked he is still running a run play. I mean sell the run and let them stack up and then just throw the damn ball. It is so basic and yet so trivial to Alex most of the times.  

 

seems to me, and i could be misremembering, but we had a lot more action pre-snap by the line/te...and he did audible a little in the first twoish games...does seem like they never do it now...maybe because of our injuries taking their toll on the OL lately?...dunno...but i do know this, please do away with that "motion the wr over 15 yards deep behind the qb thats already in shotgun position" play...wtf is that?? its not even aesthetically pleasing...eh, fade finally worked...

[Stefanskins]

41 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

I've always took rhythm passing to mean throwing timing based pass plays on schedule.  Throwing to a spot at the end of your drop. 

1

yes, two different types of rhythms y'all are talking about ...a qb can get into a rhythm by hitting a rhythm pass... a couple of times...

[Stefanskins]

24 minutes ago, ncr2h said:

That thought crossed my mind actually. I'm as big an RG3 hater as they come. That being said, if Alex Smith is only giving you about ~50th percentile passing efficiency, and is basically giving you nothing with his legs (he's on pace for essentially the same yardage as Cousins from last season, but with fewer TDs)...why not bring in a read option guy who can at least give the run game a big boost? Maybe not RG3, but someone along those lines.

 

If we're going to win games with running and defense, why not just embrace that fully and get a QB who actually adds value to the rushing attack?

I've always liked tyrod taylor...and he usually has a decent td/int ratio...

[Morneblade]

Guys.....................................

 

The trade deadline has past. We can't trade for anyone. All we can do is sign a guy that doesn't have a job, like Sam Bradford, who was just cut by the Cardinals.

 

That is quite literally all we can do this year as far as getting another QB is concerned. And to be blunt, unless we're tanking and going for a top 5 pick, for a draft that looks to have a pretty weak QB class, I can't say I recommend doing that.

[CutPryorNow]

I've already posted a semi lengthy opinion on this topic, but I will try to come at the topic from a different angle this time. Do I dislike Andy Reid? Absolutely and I live here in Kansas City. Does my dislike distort my view point some? Probably so, but he was a fkn Eagle for too many years so I get a pass on my disdain for his rather large butt. The argument really isn't about Alex Smith, Gruden, Reid or Mahomes. It's about the multiple Grade A+ offensive weapons the Chiefs have. Mahomes is good and fits what they are trying to do in KC, but look at what Smith did with the same weapons. Tyrek Hill is just a good of a deep ball tracking threat as D. Jackson is and was when he wore a Skins jersey, but Hill is also the quickest receiver in the league and runs all kinds of routes. Kelce the jerk is a top 5 tight end and then you have Hunt as well. Smith is an above average QB who is a good leader and doesn't turn the ball over a lot. He can take you to the playoffs but that's about it. And he can still do it with this team, but he is too conservative at heart to be relied on for too much else unless you put him on a team that has the amount and caliber of weapons that the Chiefs have. It's about the weapons not the delivery

[JoggingGod]

7 minutes ago, CutPryorNow said:

but look at what Smith did with the same weapons.

Smith had less than half the production with the same weapons and looked as terrible as ever after the first 5 weeks.

[JSSkinz]

Alex Smith

 

“It’s tough to play against a good football team when you’re multiple scores down, period,” Smith said. “As much as you’d like to come back and do that, it’s just rare.”

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2018/11/05/by-choosing-building-blocks-over-playmakers-redskins-created-big-imbalance/?utm_term=.16e8f514e986

[CutPryorNow]

Just now, JoggingGod said:

Smith had less than half the production with the same weapons and looked as terrible as ever after the first 5 weeks.

Enough of this. He sucks and Bruce Allen is a loser.

I don't like Allen either and would prefer we had someone more dynamic at QB but that doesn't change the fact that we are 5-3 and my above post puts your ass in the dirt

[JoggingGod]

Just now, CutPryorNow said:

I don't like Allen either and would prefer we had someone more dynamic at QB but that doesn't change the fact that we are 5-3 and my above post puts your ass in the dirt

Lol 5-3 isn't impressive. We're gonna finish 8-8 and all the "BUT ALEX WINS" people will disappear.

[CutPryorNow]

1 minute ago, JoggingGod said:

Lol 5-3 isn't impressive. We're gonna finish 8-8 and all the "BUT ALEX WINS" people will disappear.

You do have some funny posts. 5-3 has never been impressive unless you are playing the Patriots every single week. I get your rant and even agree with it but it lacks substance. Now try again

[JoggingGod]

1 minute ago, CutPryorNow said:

You do have some funny posts. 5-3 has never been impressive unless you are playing the Patriots every single week. I get your rant and even agree with it but it lacks substance. Now try again

4 of their wins were from playing the worst teams in the league or bad bounces.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

3 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

 

I will assume you are kidding about the knowing more than everyone else, as otherwise it would be extremely arrogant. I will just leave it at that. 

 

  

 

Well, I've never been accused of being arrogant. Right, gang?

[Morneblade]

Just now, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

Well, I've never been accused of being arrogant. Right, gang?

 

Never.

 

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

27 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

Guys.....................................

 

The trade deadline has past. We can't trade for anyone. All we can do is sign a guy that doesn't have a job, like Sam Bradford, who was just cut by the Cardinals.

 

 

How has Sam Bradford never played here? Seriously. He was born to be a Skin.

[Destino]

4 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

Well, I've never been accused of being arrogant. Right, gang?

 

You’ve become Fred Jones in my head now.  

[zCommander]

22 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

How has Sam Bradford never played here? Seriously. He was born to be a Skin.

 

He was released like 2 days ago. Maybe the FO is looking into it... lol

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

4 hours ago, KDawg said:

Never did that other than to say you're pushing an agenda against commentary that isn't there...

That’s exactly it though, the commentary is there.  I will say that for the most part it has ceased this week, which is interesting because I actually think he had his best performance of the season.  Primarily because there was one drive sprinkled in there where he was decisive, planting and firing, in addition to a nice scramble.  But my god, he just will not let the ball go and when he gets those feet happy, he gets nothing on the throw and it’s a wobbler. Too often.  My opinion of his play last weekend aside, the folks willing to say Alex has been good or better have been dwindling by the week.  But they do still exist and go on silly QB W/L record rants typically paired with a hyperbolic jab about Cousins turning it over.  It’s odd to me that you don’t see these posts.  They can be wildly dispersed in any number of threads.  Much less prevalent now that most everyone has thrown in the towel.  I’ve been living this QB drama here forever, I’m well aware of what the discussion has been about.   

[wit33]

On 11/3/2018 at 3:29 PM, thesubmittedone said:

 

It’s been some time since I really dug into a debate here... so I’ve got some built up energy to expend, lol. This’ll be fun. 

 

This post is like a 9min Alex Smith drive. 

 

Quote

 

For someone who is so concerned with "overpaying average to above average" QBs, I'm surprised you call $10.8 million of cap space harmless. No, it's not. Like you said, the goal is to have the least amount possible, so the fact that it's a very real possibility should be discussed and should be included in any talk of what Alex costs over three years.  

 

No, it’s not ideal, but manageable. If Alex is out after 3 years, then deal diminishes in value, no debate from me. 

 

Quote

 

 

The fact that you consider what I said an "attempt" to "decrease the gap" of Kirk's contract and Alex's says a lot. The only thing I "attempted" was to introduce a basic economic principle in that one should discuss every factor that goes into Alex's contract, including the dead cap as well as the assets we lost to acquire him from KC. I compared it, at the end, to Kirk's contract since it's constantly brought up by those, like you, who "attempt" to increase the gap and act like Alex is this massive bargain over the course of the next three years.

 

I’ve not spent much of any in comparing contract of Alex and Kirk. Once Kirk was gone, I was ready to find value in the next guy. 

 

I don’t believe Smith is a “massive bargain”, but for 2018 season he’s the #15 ranked QB in terms of pay and will be 10.4% or lower throughout his remaining years. As stated previously, Skins lose out on deal if Alex continues below average play and team is forced to get out of deal after year 3. 

 

Smith's deal represented some value in current QB market at time of signing. Admittedly, his play hasn’t lived to #15 ranked salary for this season. 

 

 

Quote

 

 

 

So my entire point is that after three years, it's likely we'll move on from Alex both based on the structure of the contract itself along with his value as a QB and finally his age. Here, you're essentially admitting that after the 3 year period much will likely change. You just don't want to accept that the most reasonable position to hold is that we'll move on. There is plenty evidence to suggest that's what will happen, including the history of contracts similar to his. 

 

Yes, I understand team is afforded realistic options after year 3 to get out of deal, but this isn’t uncommon in contracts. Right? 

 

Quote

 

Smith's contract doesn't gain value as the years stack up because his price also goes up in 4th and 5th years considerably.  

 

This is false. 

 

As the guaranteed money decreases in a player’s contract the value of contract increases for team. Leverage shifts from player to team. For example, Smith has incredible leverage for 3 years, it then shifts to the team in years 4 and 5, due to guarantees. 

 

Smiths deal jumps to 24.4 and 26.4 for years 4 and 5. This should easily put him in the 10% or below of team cap for those years, when factoring salary cap inflation. After another below average performance it’s difficult to write this with a straight face, but I still have belief he can return to average to above average QB play. 

 

 

Quote

 

Either way, even if you don’t accept that as the most reasonable position, you still need to include the entire cost when discussing his contract over a three year period versus a four  or five year period, as doing so leaves out significant cap ramifications as well as what we’ve lost in acquiring him. 

 

I agree with this. I have chosen to be more shortsighted with this season, as I’ve mentioned a few times that everything should be blown up if team doesn’t make playoffs and I will have been wrong about roster and direction of team. No excuses for me this year. I still believe this, even with the recent reported injuries.

 

 

Quote

 

 

I said vague at best, disingenuous at worst. Hopefully you were just too vague and/or general for me.

 

This isn't about Alex's plans. I'm sure he'd love to play until he was 50. But he's not the kind of guy you want to pay the type of money that contract has for him in his 4th and 5th year just on his abilities alone. Factor in his age and, yes, it becomes very difficult to see him here after 3 years. I’m not applying some innovative or unique ideas to contracts that have guaranteed versus non-guaranteed years in them. 

 

50 is much different than 37 or 38 his age in 4th and 5th years of deal. I get what you’re saying though. I don’t think it’s unimaginable for him to play this long. Once again, it’s difficult to write this after another below average game from Alex and team. 

 

 

Quote

 

 

 

You are conflating two issues here incorrectly. One can both be satisfied with the direction of the roster overall while being frustrated at the trade in terms of resource management. The latter is also separate, to a degree, from how Alex is viewed as a QB. I mean, are you saying that being satisfied overall means no one can recognize any faults or mistakes made on the way? 

 

I can get with this. Of course not, so many layers to it all. I apologize as I lumped you in incorrectly with crowd of not believing in roster coming into season. 

 

 

Quote

That's ok to value those intangibles, but I'd hesitate to say a rookie would need to sit under Smith for more than one year. Jay has already shown an ability to develop QBs quickly with Dalton and we've seen Mahomes need no more than a year to gain whatever he needed to from Smith, if that was even a thing at all. 

 

Who knows what the situation will call for. I don’t disagree with anything you stated above. Once again, value exists in Alex leading a franchise with a young guy being his understudy. 

 

 

Quote

 

So, yeah, I shudder at the nonchalance of your statement there to "draft a rookie whenever". I think it's a bit more urgent than that, and with good reason. 

 

 

I think it's important we address the position as soon as we can, but I'm a proponent of a pretty extreme version of BPA where I assign very little weight to need (I believe need is much more of a factor within Free Agency, as do most teams when they discuss this, including ours), so I definitely wouldn't want to go into a draft saying "we need to spend a 1st or 2nd" or whatever.

 

I don’t disagree with this completely. With that said, it’s always in teams best interest to tell media/fans that the player chosen was the “BPA”, right  lol. I don’t always think that’s truly the case. 

 

I agree their shouldn’t be a pre determined decision that a QB will not be chosen in rounds one or two if FO feels a franchise QB is sitting there. You got me.

 

 

Quote

 

 

Make believe? My goodness. It's a totally reasonable assumption that Alex will be here for three years and no more. The structure of the contract itself suggests that along with the other factors I've previously stated. 

 

It’s the norm for teams to have “outs” after guaranteed money decreases. The structure isn’t unique to Alex is part of my point. 

 

Quote

 

So, according to you, I'm ripping your position from my "...make believe NFL world of zero dead cap". I mean, what!?

 

Point being, the pre tense of this argument is a hypothetical of Alex being cut after 3 years. I’m not arguing this as an ideal situation. I’m simply stating the damage is modest in terms of cap hit. 

Quote

 

You're all over the place, honestly. We are NOT discussing how much dead cap is reasonable for an NFL franchise to carry within a year. If we were, then maybe I can see where you're coming from. You yourself have stated that the lesser the better, obviously, so taking ANY amount of dead cap from ANYONE'S contract into account when discussing their cap hits is significant.

 

This is exactly what I’m saying. Of course the less the better in terms of dead cap. 

 

For example the Chiefs are carrying 3.3 million in dead cap for Alex this year. 

 

Quote

You've went from discussing Alex's cap hit within a three year window (which is where I posited the very reasonable economics of including his dead cap hit that occurs immediately after) to discussing his contract as a 4-5 year deal. Those are two different discussions with different numbers involved. We'll get to that.    

 

Layers were added to discussion from yourself, which is awesome! I simply have shared and corrected those who felt Alex was being paid a top 10 salary for 2018 season. He ranks #15 for the 2018 season, there’s no debating this. 

 

 

 

Quote

 

It's just as likely that Alex is not worth a single penny more than they paid him and that he maximized his value. We don't know if the Skins even negotiated at all what the price would be to bring it down to what is acceptable to them. We do know, from reliable sources, that another team didn't want to pay him as much as we were willing to. 

 

This is bogus news for those to make jabs at organization. The Browns were in a completely different situation and at the time appeared set on taking Baker with #1 overall pick. Of course they’re not going to be willing to commit long term. This as you would say is disingenuous. There were reports 5-7 teams were interested and the Skins were aggressive in their pursuit and made it happen. 

Quote

 

As far as this very weird and arbitrary ranking you keep mentioning about QBs 8-25... man, that is, uhm, weird and arbitrary to be totally redundant.

 

This is completely arbitrary lol.

 

Please point me in direction of a list that’s not arbitrary of QBs 8-25? My premise rests on guys 8-25 aren’t going to be elite (obviously young guys excluded) and shouldn’t be paid like it. Smith wasn’t a QB I was clamoring to get, but the team got him at a fair number, when considering his previous contract with Chiefs, 2017 season and current ridiculous state of QB market for the average to above. 

 

Quote

 

There are so many problems with it I don't even know where to begin. 

 

First, who are these QBs in your mind that rank there? 

 

Elite: Brady, Rogers, Brees, Ben, Wentz, Rivers, 

 

Wilson, Newton, Ryan (Borderline), Stafford, Kirk, Smith, Flacco, Prescott (proven with a good team, a great season can be had), Dalton, Goff, *Luck (coming back to elite), *Mahomes (soon to be of not already), Smith, Carr, Jimmy G

 

Okay, 7-21 with some nuances. I guess their can be three tiers. 

 

How would you rank your “official” not arbitrary list of QBs?

 

 

Quote

 

Second, to think the value of QB #8 is anywhere near the value of QB #25 in terms of "moving the needle" is outrageously simplistic and would be devastating to any FO who applied that line of thinking. Imagine a GM saying “meh, pay QB #25 about the same as QB #8, doesn’t make much of a difference either way”. ? 

 

Example being Alex Smith was the number rated passer and arguably a top 10 QB in 2017 and in 2018... well, you know 

 

 

Quote

 

I’d imagine him being instantly fired. 

 

For instance, there's no way we made the Alex trade and paid him what we did thinking he's going to be around QBs #20-25. I find it utterly confounding that someone like you who's been constantly proliferating his fear about overpaying "average to above average" QBs has no problem overpaying for one that has played below average thus far.

 

No, I didn’t think he’d be at his floor (QB #20-25) in more games than not to date. I thought he’d fall in category of being able to execute a good game plan and struggle when with a poor game plan. With his lone ace in the hole being his legs. 

 

 

Quote

 

Now, I get that we all hope Alex will improve, and I believe he will as well, but right now it should be a major concern, right? Shouldn't you be real worried we've got a below average QB (according to your own words) right now at a price you think is average (disagree with that myself, but for the sake of this argument)? And, if you aren't worried, doesn't that belie your entire philosophy, since you're just happy we're 5-2 and overpaying him hasn't hurt us, which means the whole "overpaying" thing you constantly harp on is way overblown? 

 

His play doesn’t warrant his pay at this point. My expectations coming into season were not for him to be a top 10 guy or better than Kirk as a whole. My medium expectations combined with his per year cap has helped stomach his play up to this point. Though, I do feel he contributed greatly to the Cardinal and Packer games. 

 

Quote

 

Finally, you're viewing these QBs as totally static entities versus the dynamic ones they are in reality. QB #8 can become QB #5; and QB #20 can become QB #25; and QB #13 can become QB #7 or regress to QB #19; etc... 

 

 

Of course this can happen. I understand I’ve said the “8-25” QB ranking many a time, but I agree nuances to list exist. 

 

The elite would qualify as more static static entities. For example, Brady, Rodgers, Ben, Brees have been “static for 10 plus years. 

Quote

 

A good Front Office will operate with foresight, valuing what players will become and paying them accordingly versus what players have been without projection. They’ll also recognize strengths and weaknesses properly so as to surround them with personnel that highlights those strengths and minimizes those weaknesses. Which increases their chances of progression. 

 

I agree with this 100%. 

Quote

 

I'll just leave it there, though. There are a ton of reasons I can get into why this obsession you have with "QBs 8-25 not moving the needle enough" is, again, weird and arbitrary.

 

Once again, I understand guys that fall in the area of ranking has a share of nuances. I don’t value a tier 2 guy that much more than a tier 3 guy (or whatever “arbitrary” list someone wants to concoct)  it a great deal if the QB doesn’t have a chance to be elite though. 

 

Quote

Anyone paying attention will recognize that Kirk's deal isn't really that ground-breaking, especially once the novelty of the phrase “the first fully guaranteed contract ever” wore off.

 

False. No running away from this. Kirk signed a groundbreaking deal that had never been done before. Mission accomplished for Kirk and reps. In a lot of ways, it reminds me of LeBron leaving Cavs for Heat, in that it was the first of its kind. Then how Bron started trend of signing one year deals with player option for year two. This was done to maximize leverage and wait for new tv deals to take place.

 

Kirk will be primed to hit another huge pay day after the next collective bargaining agreement. China ching! 

 

 

Quote

 

The reality is, most NFL contracts are for 2-3 years. After that, most contracts either get renegotiated or the team moves on as they enter the non-guaranteed portion of the contract.

 

The team gains value in contract in later years (as I discussed earlier in this way too long post of yours). The Vikings will not be afforded opportunity of low guarantees in years 4 and 5 of deal or gain value in cap inflation. 

Quote

 

Furthermore, that non-guaranteed portion of the contract usually has pretty hefty yearly sums in it. For instance, Alex's contract in his 4th year goes up about 35% in terms of cap hit when compared to his first year cap hit and about 12% more from his third year - in other words, it's a significant chunk of change and likely as much, if not more, than he'd get as an unrestricted FA. 

 

You’re focusing on the wrong nuance. The cap will inflate a great deal in 3 years time, and should leave Alex at around the 10% of team cap number. 

 

 

 

 

Quote

The interesting thing here is I didn't actually state whether it was good or bad, I just said it's important that we include that amount when discussing Alex's cap hits for the next three years. Now, I think it's horrendous as a whole when you take into everything we've spent on the position from 2016 and on, but I digress.

 

Kirk situation was unique, but we know where we fall on that. 

 

Im open to fact you may be proven right with your other comrades on Alex Smith and his contract. 

Quote

 

 If we're going to look at it in terms of a three year contract, then the dead cap hit in the 4th year absolutely matters as it's part of the portion guaranteed to him and we're only benefiting from his services for those three years. 

 

 

 

Quote

 

If we're looking at it in terms of a 4 year or 5 year deal, then suddenly the AAV that @Morneblade was unjustly criticized for posting is actually more correct. Because then Alex's deal suddenly becomes worth more than a total of $71 million guaranteed (including the dead cap), it becomes a total of $90 million for 4 years (including $5.4 million dead cap) or $111 million for 5 years (no dead cap since that's the full term). The non-guaranteed portion becomes a part of the contract. 

 

Not unjustly at all. His logic and now appears to be yours is to attach a 23.5million per year salary to Alex, as if he’s being paid that in year 2018. A 23.5 million dollar hit in 2018 is different than 2022.

 

Alex only accounts for 10.4% of cap this season, because he’s being paid $18.4million. Team appeared to structure contract with understanding cap will increase each year, and keep Alexs cap hit around 10%. 

 

Quote

 

Do you see the difference? It's economically unjustified to jump all over the place and talk about Alex's contract either as a three year deal or more than that without including the total costs (and, yes, the assets given up in the trade should absolutely be included).  

 

I still don’t see it in economics you’re presenting. 

 

Yes, I choose to discuss Alex’s contract as it’s own entity. Not a right or wrong. 

 

Quote

 

 

Seems like a lot of "stuff happens", often unprecedented and just as often an unnecessary hindrance, when it comes to the Skins' top executives.  

 

No argument. I don’t think Skins FO is great and often times I’ve been upset with moves made. Was crushed when Scott was dismissed. Felt he was most important person in the organization— including players and coaches. 

 

 

Quote

 

I mean, geez, what's the point of this if you're just going to throw out comments like "stuff happens" and downplay anything that doesn't fit into the positive reinforcement you're looking for? Oh well, Fuller, oh well, 3rd rounder, oh well dead cap, oh well Alex is playing well below average or worse right now, meh meh meh, stuff happens. 

 

I see your point. I didn’t like losing Fuller in the least and who knows how it will all workout. 

 

These are type of decisions that are magnified when a team doesn’t have an elite QB. 

 

Quote

 

Come on, now. ? 

 

 

Again, you're doing some serious conflating of positions here. I’m not even sure why you’re bringing this up in a thread about Alex, but ok.

 

I’m going to address this point by point since you went there because I've liked the direction of this roster before you ever started posting here consistently. Maybe you should try really getting a grasp of where I'm coming from and going through the posting history before you tell me what I've made clear? I'm going to provide links to some of those posts so you can do just that. 

 

I am guilty of lumping you in with others who weren’t high on roster. My apologies. 

Quote

 

In terms of being fiscally responsible, I think the FO under Bruce has actually been irresponsible there more often than we think. No, they don't go crazy in Free Agency and spend big on over the hill players like they used to, but they do give out too many contracts to bargain bin players who end up contributing little value and, on the aggregate, take up a considerable amount of cap space. Instead of quality it’s quantity, so it’s not like they’re actually saving. The positive is that we can generally get out of those contracts easily, but the problem is that the collective production from those players doesn’t amount to the cap space they take up, never mind that it can delay the development of other younger players as they take up reps. 

 

Fiscally irresponsible? Some day we’ll have to look at some of the heralded franchises and compare free agency spending and guys “working out”. I don’t think the gap is as severe as you might think. 

 

Quote

 

And, of course, two franchise tags in a row at the QB position is anything but "fiscally responsible". So it's definitely a lot more nuanced than just, "oh, they're being fiscally responsible". In some ways, yes, in others, heck no! 

 

Won’t go into this too much, but the situation called for it in my view. Should the Skins have gotten a 2nd or 3rd round pick via trade before start of 2017 season, sure. They’ll get a 3rd round in 2019 draft and value of Kirk starting in 2017. 

Quote

 

Valuing draft picks? That's been pretty good overall as has been our college scouting the last few years. I've never stated otherwise and was probably one of the most ecstatic members on this board when we selected interior Dlinemen in the 1st round the last couple years. Still, I'd like to see someone within the organization who excels at personnel-evaluating be able to implement an overarching vision and build the team accordingly. I think it's important it all ties together, and there’s so much more to team-building than just hitting on draft picks (for example, Payne is the perfect complement to Allen since one is better at occupying blocks and space while the other is better at winning one on ones, that’s the kind of stuff we need more of). Hence why most successful organizations have that kind of a person leading the charge.

 

I cant disagree that I’d like to hear about defined rules, but it appears to be working for all parties involved. This season is the make or break for me though, I’m all the way out of team crumbles and doesn’t make postseason. Don’t care about any injuries or other excuses. Playoffs must happen. We potentially will be on same side in a few months. 

Quote

 

 

 

 

 

Developing younger players? No one on this board has defended Jay Gruden and his staff more than I have. One of the most significant justifications I give for said defense is the fact that they've excelled at developing younger players.

 

I’m with you all the way on this. Main reason why I’ve held on so long with this regime. The fear of turnover is terrible. 

Quote

 

Consistency through the organization? Again, in some ways, yes, in others no. Hiring a GM, firing that GM, then not replacing that position shouldn't ever be considered a display of "consistency". Jay getting saddled with RG3, having to wait until Scot convinces Dan to start Kirk, and then losing the guy he developed after two consecutive franchise tags is not “organizational consistency” (and I think the QB can be considered an “organizational” figure, or as many like to label it, “the face of the franchise”). They’ve improved their college scouting department considerably, so that’s good. It seems like they’ve elevated the right people as well within the scouting department like Kyle Smith, which is key and certainly helps maintain consistency. But that took far, far too long under Bruce. He’s going on 9 years here! 

 

Dan, Bruce, Jay, Eric, Kyle. 

 

Quote

 

 

It was frustrating to see that not h

Instead, we let both Djax and Garcon go. We signed McGee and McClain instead of a legitimate difference maker at the position. Suffice to say, it was disappointing and panned out as expected. We were extremely fortunate Jonathan Allen fell to us in the draft, but that was really dangerous to go into it assuming we’d be able to get him. That is not a way to live as a Front Office. And we saw how fast the fall off occurred as soon as he got hurt, which proved once again that the resources put into the position was lacking. 

 

Hated losing Djack. McGee ended up solid last year and unfortunately suffered an injury. Agree McClain was a bum and plan for Dline last year was shortsighted and lazy. 

 

Quote

 

What’s frustrating is that we could’ve been a contender much earlier than we are now, and it didn’t take a rocket scientist to see it. It just took better executive leadership from Allen to where they understood the moment and got slightly more aggressive. Knowing when to strike and when not to is important. Being flexible enough to adapt no matter what your core philosophy is about is key to any successful operation. 

 

Which brings me to my final point. When you ask me if I’m happy we’re 5-2, I’ve got to say, that just comes off as straight up trolling. I mean, really? Of course I am! Why are you bringing that up in a thread about Alex’s issues right now? What does that have to do with anything? Did I post elsewhere suggesting I’m unhappy? For God’s sake, my first post in months was out of excitement regarding the trade for Ha Ha! 

 

I didn’t see anywhere you posting being unhappy about 5-2. My apologies. It’s just different kind of fandom I have to learn to understand. Like damn, how can you be so unhappy with so much and still be happy about a 5-2 record. 

 

I get it more now though. It’s all separate entities for you. You don’t care about being right if team is winning. I’m the same way. 

 

Quote

 

I recognize that the biggest reason for our record has been the defensive play, and specifically the Dline. The next would be Adrian Peterson. Now look up at what I told you how I felt about the team going into the 2017 season and where I was disappointed. What do you see? That’s called vindication. 

 

Pleeeease check the box scores of all wins last year. You will find these elements listed above. 

 

Quote

 

I’m concerned that Alex might not improve enough to make us contenders. That the passing game will limit us. 

 

I’m with you. I thought Alex’s floor was having the ability to execute a good game plan in half the weeks during course of season, but that’s not been the case. 

 

Quote

And we saw Kirk still perform with a decimated Oline and receiving group that didn’t include Richardson last year. 

 

We will get to see how Alex manages team under similar conditions. I thought Kirk was aight under the conditions. 

 

 

Quote

 

Look around the league and tell me who has managed their resources as horrendously bad as that? Do you not understand how that affects everyone within the organization? I’m seeing coaches and players of like or less quality than ours get so much more from their Front Offices while everyone ignores the resources they’ve benefited from and simply hails them as brilliant strategists and awesome players. They then get compared to our guys like it’s apples to apples. Ugh.

 

Its tiresome, but the Kirk situation was unique. I do feel it will become more of the norm though, QBs getting franchised, especially after their rookie deals and/or situations like Bell (not to extreme of in season holdout), players leveraging their prime age value. The norms will change, example being all the trades these days.

 

Business of football is changing and Kirk was/is at the forefront of it. 

Quote

 

I’m extremely happy for Jay and co. I’m very impressed with how the players and coaches have overcome a terribly pedestrian passing offense, which was once the only consistent strength of the team, in obtaining their current record. 

 

Hope they can get something going for the final eight games. Looking ugly. 

Quote

 

It’s perfectly reasonable to be seriously concerned that Alex will remain a liability and that we’ll never be able to truly contend with him at the helm. And that’s not saying he brings zero to the table, just that he brings very little and it’s not enough. It’s not even his fault, but it’s really unfortunate because we were so friggin close. It’s unfortunate because I know damn well who will get attacked and targeted by the fans because of it. It’s unfortunate because I’ve seen how often the owner and his top exec also target the wrong people within the organization and create an atmosphere of division and factionalism that leads to their regression and/or demise, which only renews a cycle of the same thing happening again with whomever replaces them. 

 

It will be fascinating to see how it all plays out. I wasn’t a fan of Kirk the dude, so I don’t share the same upset feelings as it relates to that situation. Old news though. 

Quote

 

Hopefully Alex improves enough that we don’t have to witness all that. I’m praying for that, as much as you’d think otherwise. But, yeah, it’s frustrating that the concern is even there and it can take away from the sheer joy of watching these guys succeed like they are right now. 

 

I don’t ever want to get to this place, but admittedly I’m not far from it if things fall apart this season. If I turn skeptic to most things, that’ll be the day Skins are no longer a priority and I’ll hang it up. 

 

There has to be a random rule for length of post lol. Don’t ever do this to me again. This is all I got on all this. Until next time/subject, be well and root with positivity!! 

[RandyHolt]

9 hours ago, ncr2h said:

He achieved 5.34 adjusted net yards per attempt yesterday. To put that in perspective, there are 27 qualifying QBs (i.e. minimum ~130 attempts) who are averaging better than 5.34 ANY/A this year. Many of them - Dak, Eli, Carr, etc. - are on the hotseat due to their consistent poor play. And they have played more efficiently per dropback than Alex Smith did yesterday. This was not a good game from Smith.

 

It sounds like you may have unreal expectations set upon him from that one year in KC. 

 

We have been decimated by injuries at WR all year, and OL quite a bit too. Oh, and at RB too. Those are big factors in how he will do here.

[TheGreek1973]

I am one of the biggest Alex Smith haters there is.  But you can't put this game on him totally. Second drive two drops by Doctson, if he catches the ball we are in their 30.  Penalties on us which were not.  Non calls, holding and pick on two of their 3 TD drives on Atlanta not called.  one second left on their 20 yard line, easy field goal, holding call on Moses that was laughable the defender fell down on his own.  Dude loses almost his entire OL except Roullier.  You just can't say this was on Smith period.  Bad game, move on.  We still lead the division.