DJHJR86 Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 7 minutes ago, ixcuincle said: If you want to play that game see the Packers and Panthers game In the 2 losses he averaged: 43 attempts, 28 completions, 65% completion, 0 TD, .5 INT (could swing either way), 79.1 rating, 6.13 AY/A In the 2 wins you mentioned he averaged: 28 attempts,17 completions, 61% completion, 2 TD, .5 INT, 99.25 rating, 8.2 AY/A Throw less, win more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morneblade Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 1 minute ago, purbeast said: I'm not sure what your point is. Kirk tried to work with Bruce TO BE HERE. Bruce didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purbeast Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 Just now, Morneblade said: Kirk tried to work with Bruce TO BE HERE. Bruce didn't. Still not seeing what your point is. I already stated that I know Bruce didn't want him here. And Kirk repeatedly said "I want to be where I'm wanted." He probably said that at least 10 times publicly. Basic logic would tell us that also means "I don't want to be where I'm not wanted." And therefore, since Bruce didn't want him here, he didn't want to be here. Move on folks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 @goskins10 With all due respect, I've been around here on the regular since the Alex Smith trade was announced and I couldn't disagree more with this narrative that as a whole the board was primarily, Alex < Kirk. There was a lot of fluff out there, cherry picked stats, etc. all summer long. We aren't making this stuff up. Folks were lining up with every excuse in the book as to why Smith's career numbers, playoff win percentage weren't better, didn't throw deep (Reid's fault), and the list goes on. We heard all about how he was a better leader, more cerebral/diagnosing plays, better in the huddle, more accurate than the last QB, and the list goes on. If you really want to refresh your memory, go back in time and check out the Alex trade thread and a few others. Compare what they were saying then to what they are saying now. RG3/Kirk to Kirk/Alex isn't a great comparison. Kirk had a brief, primarily terrible career prior to taking the reigns from Griffin. Smith has been around forever. At least with Kirk it was "ya never know..." but with Alex you already know. It's also insulting to act like being critical of Alex Smith's play is some symptom of being "angry" about Kirk. Angry, really? Like we're just sitting around steaming, throwing darts at pictures of Alex Smith dumping it to a RB. It's only natural that those of us who never wanted Smith as a QB to begin with and debated with folks about his play all offseason, aren't going to just be quiet now that what we expected is taking place in real time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 @Tsailand @Morneblade @purbeast Ok, while in the back of my head i knew this would likely go this way - the Kirk debate - I was foolishly hoping it would not. We all know the Kirk story - He was perplexed when we drafted him. Played the good soldier until he got the chance to start. Then he was excited to play here and was looking for a long term contract. Bruce foolishly played hardball and did not negotiate in good faith. That pissed Kirk off - I don't blame him. So in the end he did not want to be here. Is it possible this ends that discussion? I am asking a fellow poster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morneblade Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 3 hours ago, purbeast said: Still not seeing what your point is. I already stated that I know Bruce didn't want him here. And Kirk repeatedly said "I want to be where I'm wanted." He probably said that at least 10 times publicly. Basic logic would tell us that also means "I don't want to be where I'm not wanted." And therefore, since Bruce didn't want him here, he didn't want to be here. Move on folks. He also said he wanted to be here, several times And tried to negotiate and sign a reasonable contract shows that. Now, after Bruce basically said "**** you", did he feel good about the chances of being here? Probably not. Does it mean that if Bruce had tried to negotiate in good faith, at any point in the 3 years, that we wouldn't be having this discussion? Likley, because I think Kirk wanted to be here. He just needed someone else to want him here. That person being Bruce Allen. Bruce didn't and that's all that matters. So, because a lot of us thing Bruce Allen is a ****ty guy, and not very good at his job, we want him fired. And the Kirk fiaso is a big reason. So no, we're not moving along until Allen is fired. Better get used to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purbeast Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 12 minutes ago, goskins10 said: @Tsailand @Morneblade @purbeast Ok, while in the back of my head i knew this would likely go this way - the Kirk debate - I was foolishly hoping it would not. We all know the Kirk story - He was perplexed when we drafted him. Played the good soldier until he got the chance to start. Then he was excited to play here and was looking for a long term contract. Bruce foolishly played hardball and did not negotiate in good faith. That pissed Kirk off - I don't blame him. So in the end he did not want to be here. Is it possible this ends that discussion? I am asking a fellow poster. I want it to end trust me. That's why I made that post in the first place. It's annoying as **** to go into ANY thread about Smith and see half the posts about Kirk. Kirk is irrelevant at this point to the Redskins. There's a Kirk thread over in the 'Around the NFL' forum where those people can go circle jerk with Kirk. It's no wonder people laugh at DC as a sports town when you have half the Redskins forum posting about Kirk in an Alex Smith thread. 9 minutes ago, Morneblade said: He also tried said he wanted to be here, several times And tried to negotiate and sign a reasonable contract shows that. Now, after Bruce basically said "**** you", did he feel good about the chances of being here? Probably not. Does it mean that if Bruce had tried to negotiate in good faith, at any point in the 3 years, that we wouldn't be having this discussion? Likley, because I think Kirk wanted to be here. He just needed someone else to want him here. That person being Bruce Allen. Bruce didn't and that's all that matters. So, because a lot of us thing Bruce Allen is a ****ty guy, and not very good at his job, we want him fired. And the Kirk fiaso is a big reason. So no, we're not moving along until Allen is fired. Better get used to it. That's great and all, but how is any of that relevant to a "What is wrong with Alex Smith?" thread? EDIT: Okay I'm done with the Cousins topic I'll just ignore the posters who can't move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 3 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said: @goskins10 With all due respect, I've been around here on the regular since the Alex Smith trade was announced and I couldn't disagree more with this narrative that as a whole the board was primarily, Alex < Kirk. There was a lot of fluff out there, cherry picked stats, etc. all summer long. We aren't making this stuff up. Folks were lining up with every excuse in the book as to why Smith's career numbers, playoff win percentage weren't better, didn't throw deep (Reid's fault), and the list goes on. We heard all about how he was a better leader, more cerebral/diagnosing plays, better in the huddle, more accurate than the last QB, and the list goes on. If you really want to refresh your memory, go back in time and check out the Alex trade thread and a few others. Compare what they were saying then to what they are saying now. I was here too. The very large % of that was from a very few posters - including some new people from KC. 3 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said: RG3/Kirk to Kirk/Alex isn't a great comparison. Kirk had a brief, primarily terrible career prior to taking the reigns from Griffin. Smith has been around forever. At least with Kirk it was "ya never know..." but with Alex you already know. With all due respect that's just a rationalization. It;s exactly the same from someone who was through the entire process also. But we can agree to disagree. 3 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said: It's also insulting to act like being critical of Alex Smith's play is some symptom of being "angry" about Kirk. Angry, really? Like we're just sitting around steaming, throwing darts at pictures of Alex Smith dumping it to a RB. It's only natural that those of us who never wanted Smith as a QB to begin with and debated with folks about his play all offseason, aren't going to just be quiet now that what we expected is taking place in real time. If this does not apply to you - fine. Your following statement is not what was said at all. And no one is saying be quiet - first that would never be my place to say. We have people that decide that. This is a message board - and extreme one for good reason. But if people are being honest, many are being over critical of Alex because they are pissed at the team and Bruce for screwing up with Kirk. That was my point. Not that people are sitting around brooding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTskin Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 You guys have to be ****ting me with the Kirk/Alex thing. There needs to be a thread for "Kirk vs Alex" so that you psychos (I say that with love) can shoot it out there and stop cluttering all of the other threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreek1973 Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 8 minutes ago, goskins10 said: @Tsailand @Morneblade @purbeast Ok, while in the back of my head i knew this would likely go this way - the Kirk debate - I was foolishly hoping it would not. We all know the Kirk story - He was perplexed when we drafted him. Played the good soldier until he got the chance to start. Then he was excited to play here and was looking for a long term contract. Bruce foolishly played hardball and did not negotiate in good faith. That pissed Kirk off - I don't blame him. So in the end he did not want to be here. Is it possible this ends that discussion? I am asking a fellow poster. probably this discussion will never end. Yea I was (and still is) a huge Cousins fan. But I knew with Allen and Synder we would not sign him because both would never admit what major mistake they made back in 2016 where we could have had him for relatively peanuts. What really kills me is two things. After Reid took us for McNabb, we deal with him again and does it to us again by fleecing us ONCE AGAIN. A 3rd round pick and a very promising young CB for a 35 year old Smith?????? Seriously? Again I am going to say it, these two are just lucky we have a DL this year that could by the end of this year be the best in football if it stays healthy. Otherwise those empty seats in FedEx would be more than people going to the games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morneblade Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 10 minutes ago, purbeast said: I want it to end trust me. That's why I made that post in the first place. It's annoying as **** to go into ANY thread about Smith and see half the posts about Kirk. Kirk is irrelevant at this point to the Redskins. There's a Kirk thread over in the 'Around the NFL' forum where those people can go circle jerk with Kirk. It's no wonder people laugh at DC as a sports town when you have half the Redskins forum posting about Kirk in an Alex Smith thread. That's great and all, but how is any of that relevant to a "What is wrong with Alex Smith?" thread? EDIT: Okay I'm done with the Cousins topic I'll just ignore the posters who can't move on. Well, next time keep you BS narrative to yourself, and it wont. Or put me on ignore. I really don't care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 Just now, goskins10 said: I was here too. The very large % of that was from a very few posters - including some new people from KC. It's not a few. Someone just PM'd me about a dozen posts from there, made by many prominent posters in this thread. That was just a small sample. While we had some KC folks chime in to laugh at us, we also gained a few AlexApologists at the same time. I'm not counting any of them. Honestly, I don't have enough time, energy, or care to do a project on it. I will say this though, the very first night the news came out about the Alex trade, the overwhelming reponse from the forum was "OMGz, Reid bent us over again". In fact, I think my post that went something like that got more likes than anything I've ever posted. ? But over time, that narrative started changing and more and more changed their tune probably partially due to all the fluff and just naturally wanting to have some hope as a fan going into the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 Ok, my apologies to the mods for getting this **** storm started. It was bound to come out sometime and will probably be revisited - just not be me. I said my peace - at least some of the being overly critical of Alex is driven by peoples feeling about Kirk. And that we had the exact same situation when Kirk was put in place over Robert. And maybe, just maybe we should give Alex a bit more of a chance since it is just 6 games in. My last post on this point. Please go back to your regular scheduled programming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 I just looked back at some pages on the Alex thread just now just to see if I wasn't losing it. Because I recall a love fest by many about the different things and ways Alex can help the team win versus Kirk. On Twitter I recall it even more intense -- I recall the height of it was some people were celebrating that Kirk wasn't ranked high in the top 100 best players ranking assuming that Alex was going to be ranked higher -- the kicker was he ultimately didn't make the 100 list at all. I recall getting into a bitter exchange or two on that thread and considered by some an Alex hater even though my position ranged from it being a lateral move to slight downgrade. But yeah there was a faze that you weren't one of the cool kids with some if you didn't gush about Alex. I liked but not loved the dude and some didn't like that. ? So I recall the vibe well. Racing to today. I don't think one side has the high ground on presenting their argument the right way. Just from observation you got 2 different styles of the ones that are defending Alex. A. Give him time, too early to judge. B. They use A but then drape in some points that imply that maybe Alex is better without summarizing it that way in macro terms -- hey we win, hey maybe it is about the turnovers. I got no problem in debate with the point A group. It's logical. And i agree with it. Except when people use apples to apples analogies of young QBs starting their career. But as for B, the way some (not all) present their argument will likely elicit debate-discussion and it should IMO. It's sort of like saying hey McDonalds might have better fries than Burger King -- but hey check out those Onion Rings that Burger King has which McDonalds does not -- isn't that a big deal, why discount that? When you do it that way why wouldn't it elicit a Burger King McDonalds discussion? And my point here isn't that everything is Alex versus Kirk or that people can't praise Alex. But that if some are going to highlight something as a big deal in the component of evaluation especially with macro implications to the point -- then the reader is going to presume the person posted it actually thinks its a big deal otherwise why say it? I've said specifically about Alex -- I thought he'd be a good QB. He's been less than that. So I am wrong thus far. I didn't like the trade but that's a different point. I recall my position and sticking to it and see how it plays out. i still think he ends up playing good. But he's had some consistent critics and at the moment their concerns have manifested. Hopefully its just a short sample and the dude picks it up. But I am definitely concerned about what I've seen thus far. So i do take the criticisms a lot more seriously now than before. Guys like Andy Benoit and Spector who covered Alex in KC have it to a tee so far. I hope that changes. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 14 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said: I've said specifically about Alex -- right now he's proving me wrong. I thought he'd be a good QB. He's been less than that. I recall my position and sticking to it and see how it plays out. i still think he ends up playing good. But he's had some consistent critics and at the moment their concerns have manifested. Hopefully its just a short sample and the dude picks it up. But I am definitely concerned about what I've seen thus far. So i do take the criticisms a lot more seriously now than before. Guys like Andy Benoit and Spector who covered Alex in KC have it to a tee so far. I hope that changes. ? The sample isn't short. It's his entire career minus 2017. He's an overdrafted bust, below average QB, who looked ok playing for Harbaugh and Reid. (Who doesn't?) Some Redskins fans somehow thought that with little offensive talent on this team he'd just keep on clicking along in 2017 form as if he had somehow leveled up last season and had actually become better. He's not, it's obvious. it was predictable that suddenly the OL would start getting blamed again and somehow it's all the receivers fault too. Andy Reid sold us Jason Campbells replacement 8 years ago and now he sold us back Jason Campbell to replace an actual franchise QB that dumb and dumber didn't appreciate because he replaced Dan's 2012-2014 BFF. Being a long time Snyder hater (since about the time he forced us to watch Deion Sanders and Jeff George) and Bruce hater (since the day he was hired) it's all very predictable, pathetic and quite hilarious all at the same time. Andy Reid had backup QB's replacing McNabb several times over his years in Philly and doesn't anybody remember that those guys always did just as well, or better, than McNabb and they usually just kept on winning. Then he'd trade the young ones for draft picks. Hell he even had old ass Jeff Garcia go on a winning streak and get them into the playoffs one year when McNabb had them losing to start the year. Trading for a QB with him is like thinking you are getting a good player from the Patriots. It's going to almost always backfire hilariously. Knowing Dan Snyder there is absolutely no other outcome: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbws Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 Nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardcoreZorn Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 16 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said: B. They use A but then drape in some points that imply that maybe Alex is better without summarizing it that way in macro terms -- hey we win, hey maybe it is about the turnovers. Let's expand on this for a second because I think this highlights the crux of the debate. I think we can agree very few people are currently running around the board saying Alex is playing great football. So the point above is about the most "rose colored glasses" take you will currently see. If people (not referring to you, you are fairly balanced on your takes with regard to Alex) want to extrapolate that and use it as a pedestal to stand on and complain about how bad Alex is, how badly we screwed the Kirk situation, rub it in the face of those that presented some optimistic takes in the off season, fine, that's their prerogative. But let's get back to point B. If people don't think not turning the ball over is not important, especially with the way our current run game and defense is playing, then I'm not sure what to tell them. Winning the TO battle and improving field position have a tangible effect on the W/L column. There are some other posters who brought up other nuances of the position and how QB's are responsible for things outside of the stat sheet. Things such as breaking the huddle, getting all 11 in the right alignment, checking to different plays based off the opponents look, leadership, etc. I don't definitively know how much Alex contributes in this regard, but to act as if it's preposterous that QB's impact the game beyond the stat sheet seems silly to me as well. ^ Those are the only takes I currently have seen for the positive. They don't seem super outlandish to me, and certainly don't indicate that Alex is doing everything perfectly. Which brings me to my next point. Why do the above points cause such a raucous? Why no middle ground? It reminds me of all the Bruce debates where I don't understand such hatred, and point out some tangible good that Bruce has brought to the table. But anti Bruce crowd can't take that stance, it's preposterous, causes an uproar, and gets you lumped in with the crowd that had blind allegiance to everything the Redskins FO does. There is a distinct crowd that is way on one side of the extreme whether it be Bruce/Kirk/Dan whomever. And any middle ground is ridiculed, laughed off, and scoffed at. Presenting some positive, and looking for silver linings does not indicate blind allegiance to Alex or that those posters think Alex can do no wrong. And it's kind of amusing to me that pointing out some positive drives that crowd up a wall so hard that they feel the need to rehash how right they are, how wrong Bruce was, how idiotic people were for buying all of the fluff in the off-season, and six games in to boot. This will be my one and only post on the matter because I fear it will spin into another "How could you see it any differently" type back and forth that does nothing but clutter the thread. And again, this is not directed at you. You bring strong points to the table on both ends, and have been very medium on Alex. I am only quoting you because I think point B above was a good discussion point for highlighting the extreme side of things, and how presenting anything in the middle means you are on the other extreme. I wish that weren't the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justice98 Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 He seems a step slower than he used to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audible_Red40 Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 Must. Stay. Away. From. Kirk. Threads.......errrr.....Alex! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morneblade Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 13 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said: Let's expand on this for a second because I think this highlights the crux of the debate. I think we can agree very few people are currently running around the board saying Alex is playing great football. So the point above is about the most "rose colored glasses" take you will currently see. If people (not referring to you, you are fairly balanced on your takes with regard to Alex) want to extrapolate that and use it as a pedestal to stand on and complain about how bad Alex is, how badly we screwed the Kirk situation, rub it in the face of those that presented some optimistic takes in the off season, fine, that's their prerogative. I'll expand on this a little bit. I don't think anyone, including hard core Alex supporters think he is playing well. What is however irritating is that they will continue to point to stats that are team related (wins) when the entire team is much better than it was last year. 13 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said: But let's get back to point B. If people don't think not turning the ball over is not important, especially with the way our current run game and defense is playing, then I'm not sure what to tell them. Winning the TO battle and improving field position have a tangible effect on the W/L column. There are some other posters who brought up other nuances of the position and how QB's are responsible for things outside of the stat sheet. Things such as breaking the huddle, getting all 11 in the right alignment, checking to different plays based off the opponents look, leadership, etc. I don't definitively know how much Alex contributes in this regard, but to act as if it's preposterous that QB's impact the game beyond the stat sheet seems silly to me as well. ^ Those are the only takes I currently have seen for the positive. They don't seem super outlandish to me, and certainly don't indicate that Alex is doing everything perfectly. I think I've mentioned a few times, that because of our running game and defense, being careful, efficient and conservative works on offense. I don't think anyone disagrees that not turning the ball over is a good thing, and helps the team, for reasons you stated. If Kirk had an issue, it was turnovers, and last year the amount of fumbles was really bad. But his OL was horrific, and that accounts for a lot of that. The other things you bring up, there are real issues on how to quantify them. There is the "eye test", but that is flawed, so it becomes less objective, and much more guess work. Has Alex been significant better in any of these areas? From the eye test, I don't see much difference in anything. I don't see audibles, in fact I see less now. Getting in and out of the huddle? I don't see any improvement at all. We don't seem to get out earlier. In fact against Dallas on the goal line after a big AP run, they got out of the huddle with less than 15 seconds to go, and it didn't leave Davis enough time to get into position to block the DT, and the play blew up in our faces. No TD on that drive. Now, if you have the same issues with different guys, It's likely a problem elsewhere. Maybe the calls are getting out late. As far as alignments, once again I don't see a difference in players needed to be moved around/playing being blown up because they were in the wrong place. Leadership? First, what does that mean? Second, how do you measure it? Does having a 5 year contract vs. 3 1 years deals impact it? And if so, how much? So, much of what goes here is nebulous, because it's not really measurable and in some cases, it's hard to define. 13 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said: Which brings me to my next point. Why do the above points cause such a raucous? Why no middle ground? It reminds me of all the Bruce debates where I don't understand such hatred, and point out some tangible good that Bruce has brought to the table. But anti Bruce crowd can't take that stance, it's preposterous, causes an uproar, and gets you lumped in with the crowd that had blind allegiance to everything the Redskins FO does. As mentioned above, they are not something you can easily look at and define, and measure. As to Bruce, I'm not going to go there. 13 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said: There is a distinct crowd that is way on one side of the extreme whether it be Bruce/Kirk/Dan whomever. And any middle ground is ridiculed, laughed off, and scoffed at. Presenting some positive, and looking for silver linings does not indicate blind allegiance to Alex or that those posters think Alex can do no wrong. And it's kind of amusing to me that pointing out some positive drives that crowd up a wall so hard that they feel the need to rehash how right they are, how wrong Bruce was, how idiotic people were for buying all of the fluff in the off-season, and six games in to boot. The issue, with Alex, is that the measurable stuff has not been good. So ignoring that and placing emphasis in intanglible things doesn't help. And when they are someone tangible, there is not real difference, it's tough not to take it very seriously. Basically saying that Cousins was a terrible leader, terrible with audibles and terrible with getting the team in and out of the huddle, saying that Alex is much better at all of these things, and seeing no difference in the 2? Well, yeah...that's probably not going to go over as being "objective". And while that is a overstatement, it's been pretty much what has been carted out. 13 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said: This will be my one and only post on the matter because I fear it will spin into another "How could you see it any differently" type back and forth that does nothing but clutter the thread. And again, this is not directed at you. You bring strong points to the table on both ends, and have been very medium on Alex. I am only quoting you because I think point B above was a good discussion point for highlighting the extreme side of things, and how presenting anything in the middle means you are on the other extreme. I wish that weren't the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 I think it's fair to say that Alex joining a new offense, which is very time-based, and not having the benefit of Hill/Hunt running all over the place wide open, not to mention a stud TE like Kelce was not given enough thought. A lot of us were looking at the best Alex had to offer and not what it truly means to join a brand new team, and then also barely have any time to work with the starters during camp/practice/preseason due to constant lingering injuries. I also think it is fair to say the Smith we are seeing now isn't an accurate representation of his ceiling as a QB. The front office made their decision to go get Alex Smith once the previous guy wanted out. There is nothing more to it then that at this point. With that said, there is also no doubt that since it likely isn't going to happen during the season, the offseason priority is going to have to be to add dynamic players on offense, preferably guys with not just speed, but quickness. I also think it would behoove Jay Gruden (assuming he is still here) to examine Andy Reid's scheme on offense, pick apart what Smith excelled at, and incorporate more of it into the offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: But let's get back to point B. If people don't think not turning the ball over is not important, especially with the way our current run game and defense is playing, then I'm not sure what to tell them. Obviously, I don't think anyone is arguing avoiding turnovers isn't important. But every player is a composite of attributes and liabilities. If we cherry pick every players best attribute and say don't you think that's important -- then pretty much every player comes out the winner. It's about the whole soup. I don't think anyone argues that any player doesn't have an important attribute but what is everything put together. As for Alex, at the moment, I don't know about the dude. Like I said the irony for me is because I was in the "like" but not love category about Alex in that thread and that was considered not strong enough for some of the people there who took me on as too critical. And yeah that thread was full of over the top praise of Alex before the season -- and I get it to a degree, its the new toy and the new toy was intriguing. If he actually picks up his game, it will validate some of things I've said about him on the thread. I am probably square in the middle on him. I didn't like the trade. I didn't love him as a player. But liked him. I had concerns about how he progress as he ages. But I didn't expect a significant downgrade. The thing that jazzed me as the cherry on top was his running skills. But he hasn't looked that impressive on that count. He's been run of the mill on that front. As a passer -- to me so so to less than that. His lack of accuracy surprises me more than anything. The lack of toughness in the pocket and bailing after 1-2 reads, others have warned about. I mostly ignored that in the off season but on occasion I'd post some of those concerns from observers -- and those posts weren't greeted warmly by some people on that thread. As to turnovers with this specific team, I've made the point as you do here that there is some importance to it especially when your other units are really good. My concern though is what if they fall behind? What if they play another explosive offense like the Saints? I'll admit that my frustration with Alex might be an odd one. I've told you before I am unsure about the roster, I thought it was good but needed to see it play out to believe in it. But I've really liked what I've seen. And the more i like it the more frustrated I am with Alex -- because it makes me think wow, imagine if they had a QB, too? And by that I don't mean that Alex doesn't end up that guy. But I am really surprised about his struggles even though some warned on that front. The defense for example keeps giving the offense good field position but they hardly seem to capitalize. This team actually has more SB traits than I considered they would. But I do think if Alex keeps playing like this -- it seems to me it will go down this way. They might grind their way to the playoffs and that's nice. But I think they will get smoked by a more explosive offense once they get there. Is that the end of the world? Nope. It's nice. But I think the team's potential is high if the running game and defense plays like this. But if Alex doesn't improve. It almost seems a squandered opportunity to have a defense like this and Peterson balling to have a subpar passing game. And yeah I know it bugs you when people say this but heck yeah I think it would be different with Kirk. And I honestly didn't think the difference between the two would be this much of a gap but so far it is. 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: It reminds me of all the Bruce debates where I don't understand such hatred, and point out some tangible good that Bruce has brought to the table. But anti Bruce crowd can't take that stance, it's preposterous, causes an uproar, and gets you lumped in with the crowd that had blind allegiance to everything the Redskins FO does. We've been through this rodeo. But I'll try to circle it back to Alex. If you have a guy in charge that you feel is mediocre while also thinking he's doesn't present your company with class -- it elicits a bad macro negative position. If I have an employee working for me who is so so at their job and are a handful personality wise, I'd fire them. If they are so so and I like them -- I'd likely give them a break. Just like you tend to give a break to Bruce and Dan. I got hammered by someone on another thread for saying I'd let go of my criticism if Bruce-Dan was successful -- they saw it as hypocrisy on my end. But actually it brings my point home better than anything. That is, I don't think Bruce or Dan are evil people or even buffoons. They can be jerks. They are often incompetent but not always. They elevated their game from stinking to being mediocre IMO. But I can take successful people like Saban, Belichick, etc for being jerks at times and being arrogant. Because hey the dude might be hard to deal with and might be full of himself but heck he at least has a reason for it. I don't see a middle ground for Bruce and Dan because some of us (definitely me) downgrade them on how they present themselves and by extension the team. Tough for me to celebrate mediocrity but much tougher when their personalities don't make you feel warm and fuzzy. But I can handle Bruce being a jerk and a behind the scenes Machiavellian politician if the dude can produce results. And by that I don't mean 8-8. Now bringing this to Alex, everything I said about Bruce-Dan -- its the opposite with him. He comes off like a good dude. So i am rooting for him and trying to give him a break. I disagree with the angle of comparing him to first time young starters -- I think that's almost insulting to Alex to act like he's some wide eyed rookie or young player who has just been handed the reigns. Jay himself said the team is in a win now mode. If I judged Alex on how he's been so far. To me he's a bust almost on the same level of McNabb. And please don't quote this out of context. I do think it will end up better than that for Alex. And I think its premature to put in the verdict. But for those who were critical of Alex from day 1, I get why they are pounding the dude. He's playing just like they said he would. And frankly I don't have a lot of sympathy for those who touted Alex hard on that thread (and yes there were plenty of people who did it) because I was hammered a couple of times on it for thinking the dude is just good and not great and posting all that I heard about Alex from observers both the good and bad stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander -JB- Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 5 hours ago, DJHJR86 said: Wow, we should trade and get Stephen Gostowski then since his "record" is 145-42! Pretty sure the QB is more important to the team than the kicker, funny guy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsailand Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said: I recall the height of it was some people were celebrating that Kirk wasn't ranked high in the top 100 best players ranking assuming that Alex was going to be ranked higher -- the kicker was he ultimately didn't make the 100 list at all. That list is garbage anyway. Voted on by players. 2 hours ago, SkinsFTW said: Andy Reid had backup QB's replacing McNabb several times over his years in Philly and doesn't anybody remember that those guys always did just as well, or better, than McNabb and they usually just kept on winning. Then he'd trade the young ones for draft picks. Hell he even had old ass Jeff Garcia go on a winning streak and get them into the playoffs one year when McNabb had them losing to start the year. OK, to be fair, McNabb was pretty good at his peak. Andy Reid traded him to us once he was over the hill. Honestly Reid might be the best active coach without a SB ring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJHJR86 Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 12 minutes ago, -JB- said: Pretty sure the QB is more important to the team than the kicker, funny guy! Eh, Justin Tucker would like a word with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.