A New Beginning - Embrace The Noodle

[Skinsinparadise]

25 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

Panthers lost so we are the 6th playoff seed going into next week.

 

To bad the Eagles won.  It has this vibe now that the cowboys will lose to the Saints and then the Eagles are amped up to get into a three way tie with us on MNF.  For some reason an amped up Eagles team in a high stakes MNF game doesn't spell with me a good feeling about that outcome. 

 

If so it would be two back to back prime games where NFC East rivals have a chance at our expense to put themselves in play to take the division and seize momentum

[skins island connection]

2 hours ago, RedskinsLegacy said:

Are you watching the Giants punish the Eagles? AP can have a field day against that beat up defense.

 

 

 Well the Eagles just pulled off the last minute FG to win the game, which means they are now a game back at 5-6.

 now with the Monday night game coming up, do you think the Eagles stadium and players will be fired up? This is their last ditch effort to stay in the game.

 

Gruden, the REAL 'Noodle' in this thing, has 11 days;  11 days, to scheme, to game plan, to get players healthy, to get everyone on the same page, to work with Colt since he's this supposed "QB whisperer" {barf}.

There should be absolute ZERO excuses if this game is lost. If Gruden loses this game, the Redskins are toast and everyone knows it. Mathematically, yes they may still be in the hunt, but everyone knows deep down this season is over.

Gruden should throw out the conservative attitude and realize that pretty much every game from now on is a playoff game. This team wins out and i'll have a different feeling about it, but we've been to this dance before, a couple times, and in every one of those 'must-win games, Gruden dropped the ball.

 

This coming Monday night will be no different.

[RedskinsLegacy]

3 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

That mother****er has been here riding pine for 4 years and you people want to complain he had a short week of practice? That's he does. 4 ****ing years. Gimme a break. Oh, but hes not usually with the first team, right? Everyone else starting for us right now is a back up too. Reed and Doctson are starters and had great games. McCoy blows ass.

He rode the pine because he sat behind a pretty damn good QB. Who do you suppose leads this offense, captain butt fumble? Nobody here called Colt, Joe Montana, nor does anyone expect him to be. But he is all this team has right now, and he gives us the best chance to make the playoffs.

[RedskinsLegacy]

41 minutes ago, skins island connection said:

 

 Well the Eagles just pulled off the last minute FG to win the game, which means they are now a game back at 5-6.

 now with the Monday night game coming up, do you think the Eagles stadium and players will be fired up? This is their last ditch effort to stay in the game.

 

Gruden, the REAL 'Noodle' in this thing, has 11 days;  11 days, to scheme, to game plan, to get players healthy, to get everyone on the same page, to work with Colt since he's this supposed "QB whisperer" {barf}.

There should be absolute ZERO excuses if this game is lost. If Gruden loses this game, the Redskins are toast and everyone knows it. Mathematically, yes they may still be in the hunt, but everyone knows deep down this season is over.

Gruden should throw out the conservative attitude and realize that pretty much every game from now on is a playoff game. This team wins out and i'll have a different feeling about it, but we've been to this dance before, a couple times, and in every one of those 'must-win games, Gruden dropped the ball.

 

This coming Monday night will be no different.

I'm still lost at why the Giants handed the hottest player in the game the ball only 5 times in the second half. Talk about giving a controlled football game away, wow! I was not impressed with Philly at all, i was more impressed with how fast the Giants self destructed and changed a good game plan that was working. Unless Barkley was hurt and just in as a decoy for the 2nd half. But I think you're right Skins Island, there are no excuse to lose this game, none. If Gruden can't have this team ready right now to take over this division, than he never will. The Eagles defense is more beat up than our offense, and they are a prime target for a Monday Night beat down.  If we can't win this game, we sure won't win this division.

[JSSkinz]

43 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

It has this vibe now that the cowboys will lose to the Saints and then the Eagles are amped up to get into a three way tie with us on MNF.  For some reason an amped up Eagles team in a high stakes MNF game doesn't spell with me a good feeling about that outcome. 

 

2

I sure hope that doesn't happen but I agree it sets up nicely for them, I'm sure you watched some of that game and the Eagles aren't good at all but I guess we're not that good either so I would hope at minimum its a close game, if we get embarrassed I think heads need to roll.

[RedskinsLegacy]

Just now, JSSkinz said:

if we get embarrassed I think heads need to roll.

You are absolutely right!

 

[Skinsinparadise]

17 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

I sure hope that doesn't happen but I agree it sets up nicely for them, I'm sure you watched some of that game and the Eagles aren't good at all but I guess we're not that good either so I would hope at minimum its a close game, if we get embarrassed I think heads need to roll.

 

I watched the full game.  The Eagles defense is vulnerable.  Wentz didn't look hot.  They looked uninspired.  Tate hasn't adjusted yet to that offense the way Cooper has in Dallas -- it would be ironic in a bad way if Tate's breakout game though comes against us. 

 

If Dallas loses and the Eagles can regain their footing in a three way tie and leapfrog the Redskins on a tie breaker for now on the national stage on MNF -- somehow I think they'd play inspired that night with those stakes right in front of them.  Conversely, I have some concerns about the makeup-mindset of this team on the big stage as Swearinger eloquently pointed out.  😞

[wit33]

5 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I think you lose some people with the 6-3 stuff. 

 

This was his record at its peak 9 games into the season, disdain is a stretch. If you want to give him .5 in the loss column, I’m cool with it lol. Smith was 6-3.5 as the Skins starter. 

Quote

 

Alex was playing into the 3rd quarter of that game.  He had a 26.8 QBR rating, 29 QB rating in that game -- wretched doesn't sum up what those scores mean.  They were losing by 10 points.  Supposedly, we win in large part because Alex doesn't throw interceptions -- but lets make an exception to that point here and give him an out when Alex threw 2 INTs because we all know in that case those interceptions wouldn't have lost them the game just because just because...and I'd add no comebacks this year from a deficit but that game would have been different just because just because....

 

Call it 6-4, I’m cool with that. I was just saying that disdain would be a stretch when 6-3. 

 

Quote

 

Labeling Alex 6-3 comes off like you want to win an argument versus have a discussion.  

 

I’ve been all about wins for this years group and Alex has contributed to being a winning football team. 

 

Quote

 

I does look this way.  My only difference is I'll give Colt a larger sample size.   But based on what he's been in his career, he deserves that backup status.  But some are saying he's different now.  Didn't look that way against Dallas.  But that was a tough road that game.  So my take is lets see what happens next.

 

It’s not crazy to think Colt can do some positive things, players at his level or worse have. I’m with you and have some optimism left with him. Last week was a bit discouraging, but a big win on Monday is all the medicine I need. 

 

Lastly, let’s understand my argument in relation to Smith continues to be he contributed positively to the team this season. And that he has a track record of doing similar stuff to help his teams win. You can build and win around this. If you want to argue the ceiling of the team with him at the reigns, I get it. 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

 

I’ve been all about wins for this years group and Alex has contributed to being a winning football team. 

 

 

What other player on the team is defined by the record or is it just Alex?

 

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

 

It’s not crazy to think Colt can do some positive things, players at his level or worse have. I’m with you and have some optimism left with him. Last week was a bit discouraging, but a big win on Monday is all the medicine I need. 

 

 

Talk about a dude with high stakes at play in his debut.  First the Cowboys for first place on the national stage -- next week might be versus the Eagles for first place again on the national stage.  Both games on the road.  if you want games with high stakes -- sink or swim implications, wow.  I can't think of a parallel for any of the Qbs we've had over the years. 

 

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

You can build and win around this. If you want to argue the ceiling of the team with him at the reigns, I get it. 

 

If we are stuck with this version of Alex.  IMO you can only build and win around it if you have a really good defense and preferably running game, too.   And then you still have a ceiling just like Jax with Bortles.  Alex ironically right now ranked 25th in QBR just a hair above Bortles. 

 

 In today's NFL which is more passing oriented than ever with QBs putting up video game level numbers -- if I recall I read we got a record level of QBs with 90 plus QB ratings (Alex not among them) its tough to ever be a threat to the big dance when you can't compete via the air.  And by that I don't mean versus Rodgers.  I mean against guys like Matt Ryan, Russell Wilson, Wentz, etc.  

 

And by the way the record books gives Alex that loss against Texas as they should.  I know you aren't arguing otherwise but in case you are interested. 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/S/SmitAl03.htm

 

Not to pick on Alex but i am not excited about ANY QB that is a game manager type who can't move the ball.  I've been down on Dak this year and last as an example.   I am not looking to find the next Trent Dilfer and see if the team can reinvent the wheel and be the Ravens in their Superbowl year eons back.   I am not looking for a QB where opponents are daring that QB to beat them because they are much more fearful of the team's RB.  I want a QB who can strike fear in defenses and who can win games if must be. 

 

Not saying you are saying otherwise but I don't see this as a choice between two extremes.   Russell Wilson who isn't elite, has 23 TDs versus 5 INTs.  The dude can actually throw touchdowns (more than double Alex) and throw the same number of picks.  Philip Rivers also with 23 TDs, 6 INTs.    You can actually move the ball and avoid picks, too.  It's not and either or decision.  The irony is we might have on our roster though the two extremes in play -- that's part of the reason why I think its analogous (even though they are better players than Rex-Beck) to the Rex-Beck discussion.

 

Edit:  this comment I just caught brings it home for me

 

 

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

Trying to build a long term winner through running the ball and defense is foolish. 

 

Data suggests that defensive performance fluctuates year to year and  even though I know most fans won’t believe it, data also suggests that running the ball is no where close to as valuable as passing is. 

 

The goal is to look something like the Steelers. Have a legit QB and weapons that give you a chance to move the ball but also score. That last bit is what we also were missing with the previous administration. 

 

You want a defense that can at least have weeks were they can sorta dominate and at least be opportunistic when they’re getting gashed, which is going to happen 

 

this is why NO ONE ever believed in the Skins this year. It was simply unsustainable and the injuries slightly fast tracked the decline 

 

you see it happen every year. 

 

Buffalo last year. Jags last year. Giants and to a lesser extent, Dallas in 2016

 

The Iggles got some luck but their defense was truly dominant and their offense was racking up yards and points even with Foles 

[Skinsinparadise]

30 minutes ago, BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 said:

Trying to build a long term winner through running the ball and defense is foolish. 

 

 

Yeah I think the mediocre QB conversation gets twisted some when it delves into ball control discussion.  The thing is you can play ball control with a good QB -- its not about having a mediocre QB who doesn't turn the ball over much to execute that offense.  Good QB play is good QB play period. And yeah the best ones (and not saying purely just the elite) can move the ball and also avoid being turnover machines. 

 

Take Seattle, they are ball control driven typically, Russell doesn't throw for a ton of yards but he's dangerous when they have to let loose and win the game in the air.   Cam Newton and Carolina is often a ball control driven team.  Heck Romo's last big year Dallas moved to a more ball control offense and Romo threw much less that year, they went 12-4.    So if people want to argue the value or non value of ball control football -- to me that is a separate conversation. In other words, its a false argument IMO to mire the merits of how Alex played with the value of a ball control offense.  

 

Not saying ball control is the way to go per se but saying that no matter what style of offense you play -- its better to have an above average QB.  A dude who can make plays.  It's not easy to go deep in the playoffs let alone make the playoffs with an offense that isn't multi dimensional.      Heck I recall like yesterday the 2007 season when they had to beat the vikings where both teams were vying for the playoffs and Gregg Williams played with 4 LBS -- 8 in the box the whole game and stopped Peterson.

 

Football Outsiders and PFF guys love to talk about this saying its good to have a good RB but its much more important to have a good QB.   And that disparity is only growing in recent years as new rules help open up the passing game even more. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

You really need both, a QB that can throw it but also a run game to keep teams from pinning their ears back.

 

 

 

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

2 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

You really need both, a QB that can throw it but also a run game to keep teams from pinning their ears back.

 

 

 

 

Balance is key.  And if you can do both, they feed off each other IF AND ONLY IF the play caller mixes things up, uses sequences of plays to set up other plays, and keeps a defense on their heals. 

 

 

[clskinsfan]

On 11/24/2018 at 10:37 AM, 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.

Brother. You can try to prop up Colt's "lead changing" ability all you want. Alex Smith wasnt throwing interceptions on ****ing screen passes. 

On 11/23/2018 at 8:08 PM, Tsailand said:

 

Thank you.  What was Colt supposed to do on that play?

Ummmm. How about not throw the god damn ball?

[Skin'emAlive]

52 minutes ago, BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 said:

Trying to build a long term winner through running the ball and defense is foolish.

 

The plan was never to have Alex Smith lead this team to a super bowl. He was merely brought in to keep us competitive, be cheaper than the alternative without completely throwing in the towel ( starting Colt) and losing the rest of the fanbase, and having the perfect veteran to pass the torch after we drafted our qb of the future in the next draft ( Will Grier). The fact that we have been so competitive even though we have lost 90% of our starting offense this year shows that our plan really wasnt that far off. The last 2 drafts have been spectacular, and it all leads up to next years draft where if we come away with a starting qb, a quick mlb to replace Mason Foster, and another guard to replace Luavo, this team is set to compete against the top teams in the league.

[Rufus T Firefly]

8 minutes ago, Skin'emAlive said:

 

The plan was never to have Alex Smith lead this team to a super bowl. He was merely brought in to keep us competitive, be cheaper than the alternative without completely throwing in the towel ( starting Colt) and losing the rest of the fanbase, and having the perfect veteran to pass the torch after we drafted our qb of the future in the next draft ( Will Grier). The fact that we have been so competitive even though we have lost 90% of our starting offense this year shows that our plan really wasnt that far off. The last 2 drafts have been spectacular, and it all leads up to next years draft where if we come away with a starting qb, a quick mlb to replace Mason Foster, and another guard to replace Luavo, this team is set to compete against the top teams in the league.

Ah, yes. The nonsense argument behind claiming trading youth for aging, expensive players is the way to build for the future.

[JSSkinz]

18 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

Brother. You can try to prop up Colt's "lead changing" ability all you want. Alex Smith wasnt throwing interceptions on ****ing screen passes. 

Ummmm. How about not throw the god damn ball?

Go watch the play again, I haven't heard anyone say that pick was on Colt and that includes the coach, it was a bang-bang play where the ball is snapped and immediately thrown outside to the flat.  That play relies on Moses making that block and even if he doesn't get a clean block and just chips him that's probably enough to keep the defenders feet on the ground or worst case he blocks the pass.

 

I would be more worried about Moses as our starting RT, Colt will be back to backup duty next year, but gravy legs as our future starter at RT is just as scary as Alex Smith leading this team over the next few years.

 

It's all terrifying.

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

28 minutes ago, Skin'emAlive said:

 

The plan was never to have Alex Smith lead this team to a super bowl. He was merely brought in to keep us competitive, be cheaper than the alternative without completely throwing in the towel ( starting Colt) and losing the rest of the fanbase, and having the perfect veteran to pass the torch after we drafted our qb of the future in the next draft ( Will Grier). The fact that we have been so competitive even though we have lost 90% of our starting offense this year shows that our plan really wasnt that far off. The last 2 drafts have been spectacular, and it all leads up to next years draft where if we come away with a starting qb, a quick mlb to replace Mason Foster, and another guard to replace Luavo, this team is set to compete against the top teams in the league.

You don’t extend a 34 year old for 3 years unless you think you can win with them. Otherwise, they would have just signed Teddy Bridgewater. 

 

There’s literally no way they made that trade for Smith to be a bridge QB. If so, they are even stupider than even I thought 

 

[Skin'emAlive]

4 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

Ah, yes. The nonsense argument behind claiming trading youth for aging, expensive players is the way to build for the future.

 

Its not a nonsense argument. We took a chance for 2 years. It didnt work out. We got a boring, but proven winner who has been adept at bringing the heir apparent along ( Kap and Mahomes). This team really doesnt look all that bad for a squad that has been decimated by injuries. I see nothing but positives from this team going forward.

[Skin'emAlive]

2 minutes ago, BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 said:

You don’t extend a 34 year old for 3 years unless you think you can win with them. Otherwise, they would have just signed Teddy Bridgewater. 

 

There’s literally no way they made that trade for Smith to be a bridge QB. If so, they are even stupider than even I thought 

 

 

And.. we have been in 1st place just about the entire season, so what is your point? We were winning with him, even if it was ugly. The irony of it all is that if we didnt turn the ball over 3 times in Dallas, we might have won that as well. Its a winning formula, just as having a good vet leader of a qb to help show the ropes to the next guy is a winning formula. Do you really think this team wont draft a qb with the 1st in next years draft? Our plan was somehow to not draft an heir apparent in the next 2 years with an aging but effective qb?

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

Just now, Skin'emAlive said:

 

And.. we have been in 1st place just about the entire season, so what is your point? We were winning with him, even if it was ugly. The irony of it all is that if we didnt turn the ball over 3 times in Dallas, we might have won that as well. Its a winning formula, just as having a good vet leader of a qb to help show the ropes to the next guy is a winning formula. Do you really think this team wont draft a qb with the 1st in next years draft? Our plan was somehow to not draft an heir apparent in the next 2 years with an aging but effective qb?

Not with an early pick. No. 

 

They got Alex to win now. It’s year 5 of Jay. Year whatever of Bruce. I do believe they would have drafted a QB in the middle rounds just to back him up and possibly take over after he retired 

 

instead, Alex stunk and then got hurt, crippling the team 

 

I don’t attribute any of the early Ws to him. He was a passenger and had he stayed healthy, we’d still be in our same spot as the running game and defense that carried the team has now regressed 

[Rufus T Firefly]

4 minutes ago, Skin'emAlive said:

 

And.. we have been in 1st place just about the entire season, so what is your point? We were winning with him, even if it was ugly. The irony of it all is that if we didnt turn the ball over 3 times in Dallas, we might have won that as well. Its a winning formula, just as having a good vet leader of a qb to help show the ropes to the next guy is a winning formula. Do you really think this team wont draft a qb with the 1st in next years draft? Our plan was somehow to not draft an heir apparent in the next 2 years with an aging but effective qb?

If you want to draft a franchise QB in the first round of the draft, then the most important thing is draft position, which a QB like Smith is going to make worse. 

 

The value of Smith's "mentorship" ability vs that of a random, low-salary veteran QB is not worth giving up Kendall Fuller. It's not worth a 3rd round draft choice. It's not worth forfeiting the chance to tag and trade Kirk Cousins. And it's not worth $71 million. And it most emphatically isn't worth all four.

[Skin'emAlive]

2 minutes ago, BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 said:

Not with an early pick. No. 

 

They got Alex to win now. It’s year 5 of Jay. Year whatever of Bruce. I do believe they would have drafted a QB in the middle rounds just to back him up and possibly take over after he retired 

 

instead, Alex stunk and then got hurt, crippling the team 

 

I don’t attribute any of the early Ws to him. He was a passenger and had he stayed healthy, we’d still be in our same spot as the running game and defense that carried the team has now regressed 

 

AS certainly looked like a shell of himself this year. I dunno if that is due to Andy Reid or because we lost our top 3 options in Thompson, Crowder, and Richardson since pretty much the second week of the season. But that being said, his style of play ( no turnovers ) led us to a 6-3 record. His pick-6 against Houston lost the game. The 3 picks against Dallas lost that game.

 

Yea, its a guarantee that we were going for a qb in the 1st next year. Doubtful that he would start next year. The only question is whether or not we trade up for him.

[Koolblue13]

Just now, RedskinsLegacy said:

He rode the pine because he sat behind a pretty damn good QB. Who do you suppose leads this offense, captain butt fumble? Nobody here called Colt, Joe Montana, nor does anyone expect him to be. But he is all this team has right now, and he gives us the best chance to make the playoffs.

 leave Brittney alone 

I know why he was a back up and it's not just because of who was in front of him. Its because hes not a good enough player to start in the NFL.

 

The butt fumble nickname is as dumb as the short week excuse.

 

[Skin'emAlive]

2 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

If you want to draft a franchise QB in the first round of the draft, then the most important thing is draft position, which a QB like Smith is going to make worse. 

 

The value of Smith's "mentorship" ability vs that of a random, low-salary veteran QB is not worth giving up Kendall Fuller. It's not worth a 3rd round draft choice. It's not worth forfeiting the chance to tag and trade Kirk Cousins. And it's not worth $71 million. And it most emphatically isn't worth all four.

 

The Chiefs moved up from the 27th pick in the draft following a 10-6 record, trading a third-rounder and 2018 first-rounder to the Buffalo Bills to take Mahomes with the 10th pick.