Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=skinsnut;1024639]This is the biggest question to be answered this season.
If RG3 can run a conventional offense, he will have a long career. If not, we will have a very short term window for a Super Bowl run

Ironically, this injury could be the best thing that ever happened to him, IF it forces him to go through his progressions and deliver accurate passes from the pocket....we shall see what the long term future of the Skins will be in yr 2 of RG3. I think the guy is really good..but we haven't seen RG3 without his speed win games yet.[/quote]

That's not true.. RG3 can run the East Coast offense and have a long career if he protects himself.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=skinsnut;1024639]This is the biggest question to be answered this season.
If RG3 can run a conventional offense, he will have a long career. If not, we will have a very short term window for a Super Bowl run

Ironically, this injury could be the best thing that ever happened to him, IF it forces him to go through his progressions and deliver accurate passes from the pocket....we shall see what the long term future of the Skins will be in yr 2 of RG3. I think the guy is really good..but we haven't seen RG3 without his speed win games yet.[/quote]

This is an excellent post. Whether RG can be successful in a more traditional offense isn't all on him tho. Oline personnel and scheme are bigger concerns to me than RG's skill, work ethic etc etc.
Three years in it doesn't look like Mike can put together a line to pass protect against today's defenses. The issue was just masked last season.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=The Goat;1024646]This is an excellent post. Whether RG can be successful in a more traditional offense isn't all on him tho. Oline personnel and scheme are bigger concerns to me than RG's skill, work ethic etc etc.
Three years in it doesn't look like Mike can put together a line to pass protect against today's defenses. The issue was just masked last season.[/quote]

I wonder what our record would have been in the last two meaningful games the Skins have played (SEA/PHI) if Cousins had started.

I also wonder when you factor in injuries if Cousins is not the better long term option at QB over RGIII. Just food for thought.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

To ask RGIII to be a traditional QB would be like asking Payton to be a running QB. You can find a balance but he will never be "pocket" QB.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

Aaron Rodgers isn't just a pocket passer neither is Romo, Kaepernick , Wilson..

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=DynamiteRave;1024599]Seriously? He beasted last season. Why would you want to change something that works? That's taking a hatchet to where you need a screwdriver.

Is it for safety purposes or does he want to be more of a pocket passer, only run when necessary type?[/quote]

[quote=ashvirtually;1024600]Do we [I]know[/I] this or is what we saw last night more of them playing scared?[/quote]


[quote=ashvirtually;1024604]Do we [I]know[/I] this or are we inferring things from all the drama following his injury?[/quote]


To answer you all, this is based off the information from HTTR24/7(LL56). He's the guy that knows all the inside stuff and has said that was the situation. Didn't like the training wheels on him, and didn't really want to run the read option. This was right around the bye week when our team was doing a nose dive. (before any knee injury)

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

RG3 was a great pocket passer at Baylor, in fact arguably the best pocket passer in college football that year. He didn't just run read options at Baylor all day. It was a spread offense with a heavy emphasis on the passing game, specifically from the pocket.

He can pass from the pocket, he as shown both in the NFL and in college he can. NO NFL QB can pass from the pocket when their OLINE is not blocking consistently. He was never comfortable stepping up to pass against the Eagles. Even Manning and Brady struggle when that happens. It has been one game. Let us not act like RG3 all of a sudden became a QB that can only run the read option. He can do anything a quarterback would be asked to do.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=44Deezel;1024620]So he'd rather be blindsided in the pocket vs. seeing everything clearly in front of him while running the ball? Personally, I thought he looked safest last season when he was running out in open space. All he had to do was use the rules to his advantage and get down or run out of bounds. Pretty simple.

If he gets hurt this year, it's going to happen on a bad hit in the pocket. This notion that the pocket's safer is BS. Look how the Eagles blitzed with no threat of the read option. The Skins hardly got blitzed at all last year.[/quote]

I think you are reading too much into it. I don't think Robert is going to stop scrambling and making plays, nor will they stop running Robert all together via designed draws.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=mredskins;1024650]I wonder what our record would have been in the last two meaningful games the Skins have played (SEA/PHI) if Cousins had started.

I also wonder when you factor in injuries if Cousins is not the better long term option at QB over RGIII. Just food for thought.[/quote]

Probably both losses. Especially Seattle. The Skins couldn't run the ball or stop the run against both teams so I would imagine Cousins wouldn't have done very well either.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=NC_Skins;1024676]I think you are reading too much into it. I don't think Robert is going to stop scrambling and making plays, nor will they stop running Robert all together via designed draws. I think he just wanted to move away from the RO as a base offense.[/quote]

That's really interesting to me, and encouraging about RG. He's a smart guy.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=mredskins;1024650]I wonder what our record would have been in the last two meaningful games the Skins have played (SEA/PHI) if Cousins had started.

[B]I also wonder when you factor in injuries if Cousins is not the better long term option at QB over RGIII. Just food for thought[/B][B].[/B][/quote]

Food for thought? [B][COLOR="Red"]NOT![/COLOR][/B]

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

So off of our 4 turnovers from the game, the eagles scored 16 points off them. We lost by 6.

1st Quarter

9:15 Alfred fumbles at the 25 yard line. Eagles score on Mike Vick to DeSean Jackson play. 7 points.

7:20 RG3 throws into triple coverage Intercepted at 46 yard line by Brandon Boykin. 0 points thanks to Perry Riley sacking Vick.

5:01 RG3 pitch to Morris. Fumbles in the end-zone 2 point safety.

3rd Quarter

14:00 RG3 throws a pick to Cary Williams at 31 yard line. LeSean McCoy runs for 36 yard TD run. 7 points.

All of our turnovers occurred in our own territory. Doesn't matter who you play, you can't do that against any team and expect no points.

Also worth noting, we got our first 1st down with 2:00 minutes left in the 1st quarter. The Eagles already had 11 first downs by then.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;1024695]Food for thought? [B][COLOR=Red]NOT![/COLOR][/B][/quote]

Do you have a crystal ball?

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=mredskins;1024697]Do you have a crystal ball?[/quote]

Do you? A while ago, Drew Brees was consider a health risk given his shoulder injuries (which is why Miami didn't take him). Now, I haven't heard anything about him being a health risk, other than his age.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

If Kyle isn't going to call more read option on the assumption that Griffin isn't the threat he was last year, I would like to see A LOT more bootlegs, which he called for Cousins against Cleveland last year. This O-line is poor at pocket protection without the threat of read option, so Kyle may as well create time and space for Griffin in other ways.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

Here is something very interesting I found. While the Eagles fans are all euphoric over Monday Night's win, I was curious to see what the similarities were between Steve Spurrier's first regular season game with the Redskins and Chip Kelly's first game with the Eagles. Here are the stats:

Spurrier's first game: 73 plays, 442 yards of total offense and 31 points.
Chip Kelly's first game: 77 plays,443 yards of total offense and 33 points.

Almost identical numbers in plays, yardage and points. Of course the Eagles win seems more impressive since they scored most of their points in a half, and it was against the division champs. The Redskins' win was against the Cardinals. Still, not a whole lot of difference between the two, though. Both were/are supposed to be offensive geniuses. Other similarities I found is that Spurrier's offense seemed to expose the quarterback to a lot of hits. Kelly's seems to also have that issue - especially once the offense tires and the "foot if lifted off the gas". Any quarterback with less elusiveness is going to get killed - at least from my observation.

That's why any talk (I know it's not here but you know everybody else in football land will be talking) of the Eagles' being a scary team that's going to transform the NFL is way pre-mature. I still have my doubts - especially since it fizzled out in the second half. Most certainly, I could be wrong, but Philly is going to have prove that to me throughout the season.

[QUOTE=mredskins;1024650]I wonder what our record would have been in the last two meaningful games the Skins have played (SEA/PHI) if Cousins had started.

I also wonder when you factor in injuries if Cousins is not the better long term option at QB over RGIII. Just food for thought.[/QUOTE]

I think we could have beat Seattle if Cousins came in up 14-0, but Griff had an AWFUL lot to do with the run we made to even be playing in that game. Sure Cousins beat the Browns but alot of qb's beat the Browns. Also i remember hearing that if Griff didnt stay in the Seattle game and completely tear his tendons etc, that the injuru could have lingered because of several reasons.
As for the Eagles game - Cousins probably would have been sharper in the first half, but Griff had to see live action - so imo it was the right move. Had he been replaced at the half where the hell would his head be at now? Its only one game and i think getting Griff up to game speed , although it was MNF and it was ugly for a while greatly outweighs one game. Its 15 games vs 1.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=Ruhskins;1024698]Do you? A while ago, Drew Brees was consider a health risk given his shoulder injuries (which is why Miami didn't take him). Now, I haven't heard anything about him being a health risk, other than his age.[/quote]

I said food thought he said NOT even a thought meaning he knows something.

And you are using hindsight.

It is not to crazy to think KC goes on to have a good/great career and RG's career is marred with injury.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=punch it in;1024704]I think we could have beat Seattle if Cousins came in up 14-0, but Griff had an AWFUL lot to do with the run we made to even be playing in that game. Sure Cousins beat the Browns but alot of qb's beat the Browns. Also i remember hearing that if Griff didnt stay in the Seattle game and completely tear his tendons etc, that the injuru could have lingered because of several reasons.
As for the Eagles game - Cousins probably would have been sharper in the first half, but Griff had to see live action - so imo it was the right move. Had he been replaced at the half where the hell would his head be at now? Its only one game and i think getting Griff up to game speed , although it was MNF and it was ugly for a while greatly outweighs one game. Its 15 games vs 1.[/quote]


I agree. the first half was like Griffin's pre-season.

Anywho I am just wondering how different it been in those two games if KC was under center.

I do think they need to dial down the hype train with RG. Like running on the field with the flag and all that corny stuff.

[QUOTE=mredskins;1024707]I agree. the first half was like Griffin's pre-season.

Anywho I am just wondering how different it been in those two games if KC was under center.

I do think they need to dial down the hype train with RG. Like running on the field with the flag and all that corny stuff.[/QUOTE]

I hear ya - i think we win both to tell you the truth, but as i said circumstance and the future are better served because he didnt play. I missed the flag thing, but yeah sounds a tad bit over the top. Lol.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=mredskins;1024706]I said food thought he said NOT even a thought meaning he knows something.

And you are using hindsight.

It is not to crazy to think KC goes on to have a good/great career and RG's career is marred with injury.[/quote]

I said "NOT!" meaning I strongly believe that the Redskins should be committed to RGIII as their QB without any reservations or second thoughts.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=skinsguy;1024701]Here is something very interesting I found. While the Eagles fans are all euphoric over Monday Night's win, I was curious to see what the similarities were between Steve Spurrier's first regular season game with the Redskins and Chip Kelly's first game with the Eagles. Here are the stats:

Spurrier's first game: 73 plays, 442 yards of total offense and 31 points.
Chip Kelly's first game: 77 plays,443 yards of total offense and 33 points.

Almost identical numbers in plays, yardage and points. Of course the Eagles win seems more impressive since they scored most of their points in a half, and it was against the division champs. The Redskins' win was against the Cardinals. Still, not a whole lot of difference between the two, though. Both were/are supposed to be offensive geniuses. Other similarities I found is that Spurrier's offense seemed to expose the quarterback to a lot of hits. Kelly's seems to also have that issue - especially once the offense tires and the "foot if lifted off the gas". Any quarterback with less elusiveness is going to get killed - at least from my observation.

That's why any talk (I know it's not here but you know everybody else in football land will be talking) of the Eagles' being a scary team that's going to transform the NFL is way pre-mature. I still have my doubts - especially since it fizzled out in the second half. Most certainly, I could be wrong, but Philly is going to have prove that to me throughout the season.[/quote]

You only posted half of the numbers between the two coaches. The other knock on Spurrier was that neglected the D putting everything into the O. How do the defensive numbers compare?

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;1024710]I said "NOT!" meaning I strongly believe that the Redskins should be committed to RGIII as their QB without any reservations or second thoughts.[/quote]

[url=http://www.spike.com/video-clips/3zwmeh/borat-not-joke]Borat - Not Joke | Free Video Clips | SPIKE[/url]

please reference these NOT joke directions please


After reading your post I was inspired to post something like Cousins should be starting and then type "psyche"

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

This thing about Griffin not wanting to run the RO is bugging me.

Plus can we stop saying we have a read option based offense? It's a play-action based system. A play we ran 8 times per game doesn't equate to a base system.

The read option isn't off the table. Otherwise why did they practice it so much and ran it a bunch in preseason games with White?

It's definitely still in the game plan, but depending on game situations sometimes it will be called more often, sometimes less.

We fell behind early against Philly and couldn't get anything going. The RO isn't a threat when the other team knows you're in catchup mode and are going to pass every play.

Too many people are falling into the trap of looking at the results of one game and drawing hardline conclusions about how the other 15 games are going to go.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;1024710]I said "NOT!" meaning I strongly believe that the Redskins should be committed to RGIII as their QB without any reservations or second thoughts.[/quote]

Fair enough.

And I agree at this point you ride the RGIII bus but another major knee injury and the KC bus will start showing up in the rear view mirror.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=Mattyk;1024714]This thing about Griffin not wanting to run the RO is bugging me.

Plus can we stop saying we have a read option based offense? It's a play-action based system. A play we ran 8 times per game doesn't equate to a base system.

The read option isn't off the table. Otherwise why did they practice it so much and ran it a bunch in preseason games with White?

It's definitely still in the game plan, but depending on game situations sometimes it will be called more often, sometimes less.

We fell behind early against Philly and couldn't get anything going. The RO isn't a threat when the other team knows you're in catchup mode and are going to pass every play.

Too many people are falling into the trap of looking at the results of one game and drawing hardline conclusions about how the other 15 games are going to go.[/quote]


Completely right.

We'd be foolish to abandon the offense that had us ranked #1 in the league in rushing and 5th overall.


Did any of you ever think that perhaps we went with a simple game plan for RGIII's first game back not just to protect him, but to ease him back in? Even with a simple playbook, he still struggled. He just needed (needs) rep and once his rhythm and confidence back, we'll roll out everything we ran last season.

And as Matty said, we fell behind and had to abandon the run game to get back into the game, which we did.

The read option did not get him injured, trying to run through defenders on scrambles instead of getting down our to the sidelines did.

Griffin is one of the most competitive players in the league. Why wouldn't he want to run what works?

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

At his press conference followng the game, Griffin was asked if he had gotten more comfortable in the second half and if that was the reason for the improvement. In describing the offensive woes and the improvements in the second half, Griffin responded with his "can't-get-rights" comment and followed that by saying the team used the passing game to get a spark in the second half.

He then made the remark "but that's not who we are as a team" and talked about getting the run game fixed. Not sure how that fits into the RO debate but it struck me as a recognition that we are a run oriented team first [I]and[/I] that he buys into that.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;1024721]At his press conference followng the game, Griffin was asked if he had gotten more comfortable in the second half and if that was the reason for the improvement. In describing the offensive woes and the improvements in the second half, Griffin responded with his "can't-get-rights" comment and followed that by saying the team used the passing game to get a spark in the second half.

He then made the remark "but that's not who we are as a team" and talked about getting the run game fixed. Not sure how that fits into the RO debate but it struck me as a recognition that we are a run oriented team first [I]and[/I] that he buys into that.[/quote]

After leading the league in rushing last year it's quite obvious the type of team we are. The run sets up everything in this offense.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=firstdown;1024711]You only posted half of the numbers between the two coaches. The other knock on Spurrier was that neglected the D putting everything into the O. How do the defensive numbers compare?[/quote]

Spurrier vs Kelly

PTS........ 23...... 27
FD......... 14...... 25
TotYds.. 257...... 382
PassYds. 187....... 308
RushYds. 70...... 74
TO.......... 1...... 3

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=Mattyk;1024714]This thing about Griffin not wanting to run the RO is bugging me.

Plus can we stop saying we have a read option based offense? It's a play-action based system. A play we ran 8 times per game doesn't equate to a base system.

The read option isn't off the table. Otherwise why did they practice it so much and ran it a bunch in preseason games with White?

It's definitely still in the game plan, but depending on game situations sometimes it will be called more often, sometimes less.

We fell behind early against Philly and couldn't get anything going. The RO isn't a threat when the other team knows you're in catchup mode and are going to pass every play.

Too many people are falling into the trap of looking at the results of one game and drawing hardline conclusions about how the other 15 games are going to go.[/quote]



yeah I think we'll see more RO sunday wouldn't u think?

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;1024727]yeah I think we'll see more RO sunday wouldn't u think?[/quote]

I would think so as long as we don't get off to another shitty start

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

yeah no joke, typically before last year I'd say we get smoked this week but for the reason of RG3 alone I'm really confident in this team now and I still believe we win the division.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=Mattyk;1024714]This thing about Griffin not wanting to run the RO is bugging me.

Plus can we stop saying we have a read option based offense? It's a play-action based system. A play we ran 8 times per game doesn't equate to a base system.

The read option isn't off the table. Otherwise why did they practice it so much and ran it a bunch in preseason games with White?

It's definitely still in the game plan, but depending on game situations sometimes it will be called more often, sometimes less.

We fell behind early against Philly and couldn't get anything going. The RO isn't a threat when the other team knows you're in catchup mode and are going to pass every play.

Too many people are falling into the trap of looking at the results of one game and drawing hardline conclusions about how the other 15 games are going to go.[/quote]

I think from everything that's leaked out, there are hints that he doesn't want to run it. Would you agree with that? We had the ball a few times when the game was close and it was not run.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=Mattyk;1024714]Plus can we stop saying we have a read option based offense? It's a play-action based system. [/quote]

Maybe I overlooked it, but I haven't seen where we've stated that the read option was our base offense.

[quote=Mattyk;1024714]It's definitely still in the game plan, but depending on game situations sometimes it will be called more often, sometimes less. [/quote]

I think it's very much in the game plan. You'd be a idiot not to use something that was very effective during games.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=NC_Skins;1024762]Maybe I overlooked it, but I haven't seen where we've stated that the read option was our base offense.
.[/quote]

Read what you wrote on post #288

[QUOTE=skinsfan69;1024734]I think from everything that's leaked out, there are hints that he doesn't want to run it. Would you agree with that? We had the ball a few times when the game was close and it was not run.[/QUOTE]

No I don't agree. I think people are reading too far into things.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

Okay, fess up, which one of you is this

[YT]vPJdC5junHQ[/YT]

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

Interesting observation on Hog Heaven -- comparing the Spurrier and Kelly debut games (apologies if this has been posted already):

Kelly's Eagles: 443 yards of offense on 74 plays and 33 points

Spurrier's Redskins: 442 yards of offense on 72 plays and 31 points

Let's hope that Kelly has the same trajectory as Spurrier (7-9 season 1; 5-11 season 2; no season 3)

Hail.

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

without looking it up I believe SS first game coaching was against ARZ am I right?

Re: Skins v Eagles post game thread
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1024726]Spurrier vs Kelly

PTS........ 23...... 27
FD......... 14...... 25
TotYds.. 257...... 382
PassYds. 187....... 308
RushYds. 70...... 74
TO.......... 1...... 3[/quote]

Thanks CRed. Interesting stuff. Spurrier and Kelly had similar offensive debuts while Spurrier did better on defense.