A New Beginning - Embrace The Noodle

[skinny21]

Was Colt’s 3rd interception after he hurt his thumb?

 

Both times (at least, I seem to recall 2 times - darn memory) that Kerrigan picked off Eli in the same exact way Lawrence picked off Colt, I recall the narrative being “great job by Ryan!”, as opposed to “Eli is so dumb”.  Of course, Manning had a much better resume behind him, so maybe that changes the perception.  

 

Prior to garbage time, Jay called a pass on 1st down right around 50% of the time, which is good.  Of course, it was around 1/3 for the first half+.  

 

Colt’s aggressiveness seemed to pay off most of the time, but man, I’d have liked to see him take the checkdowns more often.  I can’t get on him too much here as 1) he hasn’t started in ages, 2) I’m sure he understood that the O needed to stretch the field to help the run game, 3) he’d seen the missed opportunities in the film room and 4) he was often under duress.  I’ll add that as a backup, playing not to lose isn’t going to do much for your resume (although playing smart will).  On the other hand, this is most likely (still) who Colt is - overly aggressive and therefore mistake prone.  

 

Overall though, the offense performed about as I expected - more scoring, more big plays, more passing, and virtually no run game.  The defense blew the game, IMO.  McCoy would have had to play really, really well to pull this one out (everything else staying the same).  I thought he played well, all things considered.  

[Morneblade]

I think Colt can cut the turnovers down some, but what we got in Dallas is what Colt is. With a couple weeks with the 1's he should get a little better, but like Alex, he is what he is. He's a gunslinger without the gun. He's going to make some plays, and he's going to write some checks that his arm can't cash.

[wit33]

1 hour ago, Taylor 36 said:

It makes perfect sense.  We never took the lead in any game with Alex Smith when we were trailing at any point of the game, even if it was after the first drive.  Colt has brought us back from being down in two different games already, and he's only played in two different games.  That's two times more than Alex.  So, his comment makes perfect sense that he still felt we could win the game even though we were down for the first time this season.  How could you dismiss the last five words of his post?  You even quoted it.

 

If going to use this silly stat that got steam from media and now has become an indictment on Alex, couldn’t it be used as a positive for not relinquishing a lead as well? I don’t care for the stat, just making point it goes both ways. 

[Morneblade]

1 minute ago, wit33 said:

 

If going to use this silly stat that got steam from media and now has become an indictment on Alex as a positive for not relinquishing a lead? I don’t care for the stat, just making point it goes both ways. 

 

But what about the "nuance"?

[TradeTheBeal!]

3 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

If going to use this silly stat that got steam from media and now has become an indictment on Alex as a positive for not relinquishing a lead? I don’t care for the stat, just making point it goes both ways. 

 

The same guys that that pump up the “Colt brought us back” stat are also the first to tell you that “win/loss record as a starter is not a valid qb stat”.

 

Its a confusing world sometimes.

[Taylor 36]

6 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

If going to use this silly stat that got steam from media and now has become an indictment on Alex as a positive for not relinquishing a lead? I don’t care for the stat, just making point it goes both ways. 

I guess it's not enough for you to credit Alex for us having a powering running game, but now he is the reason the defense held a lead?  His job is to score points, which he couldn't do when the other team took a lead because he played scared.  When the team is down by 10 with less than five to go and the QB won't throw the ball further than five yards, the team won't come back and win.  As we never did with Alex.  There was no hope of winning with him unless AP could score first and the defense could keep the lead.  Saying Alex didn't relinquish the lead is silly.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

10 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

But what about the "nuance"?

I literally LOL’d.

 

Damn media “creating” silly stats that make pedestrian QB play look pedestrian.

[Morneblade]

1 minute ago, TryTheBeal! said:

 

The same guys that that pump up the “Colt brought us back” stat are also the first to tell you that “win/loss record as a starter is not a valid qb stat”.

 

Its a confusing world sometimes.

 

Not really. It's pointing out that in 9 games with Smith as a starter, there was exactly zero lead changes. Which, by the way is very odd. While it's really good when you get the lead, out of the gate, it's really bad when the opposing team scores first. And, I"ll point out, just like wins and losses, it's a team stat. However, the odd think is that in the Houston game, Alex goes out and Colt comes in and immediately creates a lead change, for the first time all year, getting a lead for the first time after going behind ALL SEASON. Then, he does it again next week, after the defense gives up a opening drive TD.

 

It's a interesting "nuance". Something to keep an eye on.

[Taylor 36]

7 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said:

 

The same guys that that pump up the “Colt brought us back” stat are also the first to tell you that “win/loss record as a starter is not a valid qb stat”.

 

Its a confusing world sometimes.

Did Colt NOT lead the drives that tied and/or got us a lead in the last two games we played?  Did Alex ever do that?  Defenses are responsible for holding leads by not giving up points.  QB's are responsible for getting leads by getting points.  I'm sorry it's confusing for you.  Maybe you should try following ping-pong.  

[TradeTheBeal!]

My ping-pong game is extremely strong.

[NickyJ]

I've seen a lot of weird opinions over the past few years years. People preferring to lose while "feeling" like they could win, and not enjoying winning because it "feels" like they could lose.... That is a new one.

[wit33]

52 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

But what about the "nuance"?

 

I shared a shade of nuance with providing another angle to no lead changes. Your welcome.  

[TradeTheBeal!]

19 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

I've seen a lot of weird opinions over the past few years years. People preferring to lose while "feeling" like they could win, and not enjoying winning because it "feels" like they could lose.... That is a new one.

 

Maybe, after the Tampa game, Alex should’ve pranced into the locker room hollering catch phrases looking like Greg Marmalard after his third Four Loko.

 

Apparently, a sizable part of the fan base finds that kind of stuff very endearing,

[NickyJ]

1 minute ago, TryTheBeal! said:

 

Maybe, after the Tampa game, Alex should’ve pranced into the locker room hollering catch phrases looking like Greg Marmalard after his third Four Loko.

 

Apparently, a sizable part of the fan base finds that kind of stuff very endearing,

I'm sure Colt McCoy will do that if we lose more games while he throws more interceptions. Because it'll be true. They really do like that lol

[wit33]

1 hour ago, Taylor 36 said:

I guess it's not enough for you to credit Alex for us having a powering running game, but now he is the reason the defense held a lead?  His job is to score points, which he couldn't do when the other team took a lead because he played scared.  When the team is down by 10 with less than five to go and the QB won't throw the ball further than five yards, the team won't come back and win.  As we never did with Alex.  There was no hope of winning with him unless AP could score first and the defense could keep the lead.  Saying Alex didn't relinquish the lead is silly.

 

Shocking, an attempt to push my opinion to an extreme. No one is THE reason for anything during course of a game, I’ve simply stated Alex has contributed to establishing a brand/identity. I could see more of an argument to this point if a history of Alex didn’t exist, but this season is consistent with what he’s done for last half of his career. This isn’t debatable. 

 

Alex isn’t a guy who can consistently overcome deficits, a poor running game, or bad defense... no argument from me. He is average to above average QB who requires support around him. If things are taken care of around him, he will be positive contributor to this situation. He will not LEAD a bad team to 10 wins, but who really can outside the elite and that’s not even a guarantee. 

 

QBs in same spectrum need similar assistance in their own unique ways. Check the box scores of last year’s wins, It will blow your mind. 

[Morneblade]

37 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

I've seen a lot of weird opinions over the past few years years. People preferring to lose while "feeling" like they could win, and not enjoying winning because it "feels" like they could lose.... That is a new one.

 

Not really. No one likes the feeling that if a team scores first, they have not chance to win. Nice Strawman though.

 

20 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

I shared a shade of nuance with providing another angle to no lead changes. Your welcome.  

 

No, you were trying to defense Alex. It's about the only thing you do anymore. So, no thanks.

[NickyJ]

24 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

Not really. No one likes the feeling that if a team scores first, they have not chance to win. Nice Strawman though.

It's not a strawman though. It's literally posted on the last page lol

 

Regardless, as much the games annoy where we're on pins and needles the entire time, winning trumps how I feel in the game. I wanted wins, I got 6-3. I just don't know how anyone can look at us leading the division, and say it would have been better if we had been behind in those games.

[wit33]

21 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

Not really. No one likes the feeling that if a team scores first, they have not chance to win. Nice Strawman though.

 

 

No, you were trying to defense Alex. It's about the only thing you do anymore. So, no thanks.

 

I never got the beat a dead horse line. Can someone share the nuance of this saying? 

 

Or are you the one beating Alex? I get it now  

[skinny21]

1 hour ago, Morneblade said:

I think Colt can cut the turnovers down some, but what we got in Dallas is what Colt is. With a couple weeks with the 1's he should get a little better, but like Alex, he is what he is. He's a gunslinger without the gun. He's going to make some plays, and he's going to write some checks that his arm can't cash.

Yeah, and the thing that scares me is Dallas was really poor in creating turnovers... imagine going against a team that’s more ball hawking.  

 

I also don’t have much hope that Colt can tone down the aggressiveness if the run game gets going.  

 

While he knows the system well, I do think that more starts can maybe help with some of the nuance - like looking off defenders, taking checkdowns, situational awareness and such - things that can help alleviate his aggressiveness a bit.  Or not, lol.  

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

37 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

It's not a strawman though. It's literally posted on the last page lol

 

Regardless, as much the games annoy where we're on pins and needles the entire time, winning trumps how I feel in the game. I wanted wins, I got 6-3. I just don't know how anyone can look at us leading the division, and say it would have been better if we had been behind in those games.

 

Do you really believe that the way we were winning with Alex was sustainable though?

 

Most of the discussion during the early season that a lot of folks didn’t want to hear was anything about luck, refs, can AP keep going like this, wait until some injuries hit, can our D keep creating turnovers, etc.

 

All that stuff is coming back around the other way and that started before Alex broke his leg.

 

 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

I think its possible to have all these positions and I hazard a guess that many share this point of view.  One point here doesn't void the other.

 

A.  Alex played like a mediocre at best Qb.

B.  Colt played like a mediocre at best Qb.

C. Either QB needs other units to lead the way.

D.  When other units lead the way surprise surprise they typically win

E.  When other units don't lead the way surprise surprise they lose

F. Colt deserves more than a 1 game sample to see if he's the new and improved version albeit many of us are skeptical on that front

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2018/11/23/redskins-can-cure-many-woes-with-bonus-day-practice-jay-gruden-says/?utm_term=.7d76f8efa72a

Colt McCoy, has barely worked with the first-team offense in practice and had no reps in the three days between Smith’s injury and Thursday’s 31-23 loss at Dallas because the team only held walk-throughs. The difference, Gruden said, between walk-throughs, when an equipment man is sometimes serving as the third cornerback on the scout team, and an actual practice is immense.

“Colt, in fairness to him, hasn’t had any reps with the [starters] in going through the game plan, going through the plays of himself doing it,” Gruden said. “He’s watching Alex doing it the entire year; he’s watching [previous starter Kirk Cousins] do it the entire year before that. This process of being a starting quarterback is critical and necessary in a quarterback’s [readiness]. The reps will help considerably, too.”

Other players — such as wide receiver Jamison Crowder (who has been sidelined for seven weeks with an ankle injury) and running back Chris Thompson (who has missed six of the past seven games with cracked ribs) — haven’t been able to work with McCoy, either, keeping the team’s new starter from having any connection to the players with whom he needs to build a bond.

Gruden said he hopes Crowder and Thompson will be able to practice next week and play against the Eagles. He believes in those two as playmakers maybe more than any other on the team, and he thinks the offense will take off when both are healthy.

[Voice_of_Reason]

@Skinsinparadise I agree with all points.

 

Let’s hope a long week and more practice reps is what the dr. Ordered.

 

 

[Morneblade]

2 hours ago, NickyJ said:

It's not a strawman though. It's literally posted on the last page lol

 

Regardless, as much the games annoy where we're on pins and needles the entire time, winning trumps how I feel in the game. I wanted wins, I got 6-3. I just don't know how anyone can look at us leading the division, and say it would have been better if we had been behind in those games.

 

Absolutely no one is saying that. What they are saying is that no one likes to feel like as soon as your team goes down at any point in time during the game, the game is over.  I'm going to ask you a pointed question. Are you stupid, and can't understand that, or are you just twisting everyone's words to fit a narrative?

 

Because, to be completely blunt, the excuses and moving of the goalposts and related stuff is getting really old, and it's sad.

 

And I don't think you are that stupid.

 

What we actually want to see is a good football team that can win games. One that can pull away in the 4th quarter, and one that can come back in the 4th quarter. That can bee efficient on offense, and stingy on defense.

 

Alex and Colt are not good QB's. They are different versions of what a sub par QB look like. One is a gunslinger that doesn't have the guns, the other is a ultra conservative guy that no matter what, won't take many chances. Neither are a sound person to built a team around.

 

The difference is one is costing peanuts, the other is costing a ton.

[CrypticVillain]

I expected a more vertical offense... I expected more turnovers. Nothing I saw on Thursday surprised me other than the fact that the Cowboys defense is really nice.

 

That's why I'm still optimistic about the offense with Colt. The only defense we have left that are on the level of the Cowboys is Jacksonville, and possibly Tennessee. The offense will score some points. I can see them averaging about 24 ppg to end the year. 

[NickyJ]

51 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

Absolutely no one is saying that. What they are saying is that no one likes to feel like as soon as your team goes down at any point in time during the game, the game is over.  I'm going to ask you a pointed question. Are you stupid, and can't understand that, or are you just twisting everyone's words to fit a narrative?

 

Because, to be completely blunt, the excuses and moving of the goalposts and related stuff is getting really old, and it's sad.

 

And I don't think you are that stupid.

 

........

 

The difference is one is costing peanuts, the other is costing a ton.

I'll quote his post for you:

 

7 hours ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

Still here and still glad we got McCoy.  For once this season, I actually thought we had a shot to win even though we were losing.  

I don't see anything in there about his contract. Do you? Talk about moving goalposts lol