Cousins to start 2015 Season

[Skinzman]

Originally Posted by JGR81

But getting rid of Griff would keep Cousins from looking over his shoulder and remove a message that perhaps the organization lacks confidence in Kirk?

BTW does anyone else think the reason they kept Griffin is that they think that Jerrah Jones might pick Griff up if he was cut....sounds like a Jerry Jones move and Jones would enjoy sticking it to Snyder if he somehow managed to turn RGIII into a good QB!!! And after all who do the Cowboys have as a backup and successor to Romo---Weedon certainly is not there answer! Just a thought!

If you cant handle having a backup QB behind you that might possibly push you, then you cannot handle being a QB in the NFL. If Kirk is worried about RG3, then the Kirk experiment is already a failure. This was the same thing that was said about RG3 when they drafted Kirk.

As for Jerry Jones, him and DS get along fairly well. I dont see Jerry taking RG3 as a way to screw with DS. If he picks him up, it will be because he thinks he still has something left. To me, the main one to worry about is the Eagles if we are going strictly on NFC east teams.

[kct1975]

Originally Posted by JGR81

But getting rid of Griff would keep Cousins from looking over his shoulder and remove a message that perhaps the organization lacks confidence in Kirk?

And that is what I am worried about...that there will be enormous pressure on Kirk to try to be perfect in every game. Also as soon as Kirk has a bad game, Dan Snyder will be pushing for RG3 to take over as the starter.

Originally Posted by JGR81

BTW does anyone else think the reason they kept Griffin is that they think that Jerrah Jones might pick Griff up if he was cut....sounds like a Jerry Jones move and Jones would enjoy sticking it to Snyder if he somehow managed to turn RGIII into a good QB!!! And after all who do the Cowboys have as a backup and successor to Romo---Weedon certainly is not there answer! Just a thought!

That may actually be a possibility...and I agree that it would just be like Jerry Jones to sign RG3, just to piss off Dan Snyder.

[JGR81]

Originally Posted by kct1975

And that is what I am worried about...that there will be enormous pressure on Kirk to try to be perfect in every game. Also as soon as Kirk has a bad game, Dan Snyder will be pushing for RG3 to take over as the starter.




That may actually be a possibility...and I agree that it would just be like Jerry Jones to sign RG3, just to piss off Dan Snyder.

Plus, Jerrah likes the razzle dazzle and don't forget he wanted Johnny Manziel but cooler heads prevailed and Stephen Jones won out and the Cowboys ended up with a much needed OL instead....but still Jerry likes the flash and dash plays and would love the attention if he managed to turn Griffin around....

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by 30gut

It seems many fans along with J are of the mindset you express above.

The flip side, which I'm sure is hard for you to see, is that while Griff isn't a fit for J that doesn't mean he's not a fit in another offense. And IF that is true then it would be a mistake to get rid of Griffin IF J (the reason Griff is gone) fails.

By keeping Griffin the team hedges against a J-Kirk failure.

The 5th year option is still an issut outside of the money (which can be massaged) getting rid of Griff doesn't bring any gain on the football field.

What NFL offense can he run at this point? If you're in your 4th year and and you're still struggling with adjusting protections and can't consistently play from the pocket then it doesn't matter what system is ran. Then factor in the injury history. Griffin is mostly likely done in the NFL within 1 or 2 years.

He should not sniff the field here and the Redskins were stupid fools to pick up that option.

[Brody81]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

What NFL offense can he run at this point? If you're in your 4th year and and you're still struggling with adjusting protections and can't consistently play from the pocket then it doesn't matter what system is ran. Then factor in the injury history. Griffin is mostly likely done in the NFL within 1 or 2 years.





He should not sniff the field here and the Redskins were stupid fools to pick up that option.

It amazing some people still believe Griff will be a good QB in the league.

[Buffalo Bob]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

What NFL offense can he run at this point? If you're in your 4th year and and you're still struggling with adjusting protections and can't consistently play from the pocket then it doesn't matter what system is ran. Then factor in the injury history. Griffin is mostly likely done in the NFL within 1 or 2 years.

He should not sniff the field here and the Redskins were stupid fools to pick up that option.

I am with you, I think some of these guys truly believe the 2012 RG3 will magically resurface if put in the right offense. Here is why it isn't happening:

First, other than Russell Wilson the recent dual threat QBs that were going to revolutionize the quarterback position (RG3, Newton, Kaepernick) have had
their weaknesses exposed by defenses and failed to develop new skills.

Second, The 2012 RG3 had sprinter's speed and an explosive quick first step
which he used to buy more time and keep defense's honest. Injuries have taken away a lot of that speed and explosiveness.

Third, Robert has not acquired new skills to make up for the ones defenses
and injuries have diminished. Lacking pocket presence, putting his body in awkward positions before contact and no instinct to protect himself is guaranteed to lead to more injuries that will further erode his athleticism, the thing he relies on most.

For RG3 to be successful he would need to reinvent himself, learn
how to avoid the rush in the pocket by side stepping and stepping up, learn
how to position his body to minimize contact, and how to see the field better.
In the pocket he doesn't seem to make good choices. I would call him nothing
more than a major project. If you ran our 2012 offense in the 2015 NFL
with the 2015 RG3 he becomes a bug on a windshield in no time flat.

[DYoungJelly]

Originally Posted by 30gut

It seems many fans along with J are of the mindset you express above.

The flip side, which I'm sure is hard for you to see, is that while Griff isn't a fit for J that doesn't mean he's not a fit in another offense. And IF that is true then it would be a mistake to get rid of Griffin IF J (the reason Griff is gone) fails.

By keeping Griffin the team hedges against a J-Kirk failure.

The 5th year option is still an issue but outside of the money (which can be massaged) getting rid of Griff doesn't bring any gain on the football field.

Why would a team build an entire offense around a guy that is as durable as a faberge egg, has become incredibly one dimensional, and has shown no progress in 3 years?

Kyle Shanahan did that already. Griffin broke, and the rest is history.

Now, after completely revamping personnel and coaching staff he can't adapt.

It's basically employing the exact opposite strategy Seattle build their depth and thus success with . Year after year they kept getting younger and deeper.

They also kept plugging in one QB after another until they found a gem in Wilson.

If I understand you correctly, you're advocating continually changing coaches, systems, and possibly personnel; all to accommodate the diminishing skill set of one player who had 1 good year?

Or, at least be willing to change all that if Kirk doesn't work out?

Wouldn't it be quicker, more cost effective, and ultimately more successful to just copy Seattle?

[kct1975]

Originally Posted by DYoungJelly

...If I understand you correctly, you're advocating continually changing coaches, systems, and possibly personnel; all to accommodate the diminishing skill set of one player who had 1 good year?

I wouldn't be surprised if that is the way that Dan Synder thinks.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by DYoungJelly

Why would a team build an entire offense around a guy that is as durable as a faberge egg, has become incredibly one dimensional, and has shown no progress in 3 years?

Kyle Shanahan did that already. Griffin broke, and the rest is history.

Now, after completely revamping personnel and coaching staff he can't adapt.

It's basically employing the exact opposite strategy Seattle build their depth and thus success with . Year after year they kept getting younger and deeper.

They also kept plugging in one QB after another until they found a gem in Wilson.

If I understand you correctly, you're advocating continually changing coaches, systems, and possibly personnel; all to accommodate the diminishing skill set of one player who had 1 good year?

Or, at least be willing to change all that if Kirk doesn't work out?

Wouldn't it be quicker, more cost effective, and ultimately more successful to just copy Seattle?

You raise some interesting questions that aren't in response to my post.

The post you responded was a discussion of where/what is the benefit of having Griffin off the team? Especially if J and Kirk fail?

I have no problem discussing the questions you raise but would also like to have the original intent of the post to which you responded addressed.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by 30gut

It seems many fans along with J are of the mindset you express above.

The flip side, which I'm sure is hard for you to see, is that while Griff isn't a fit for J that doesn't mean he's not a fit in another offense. And IF that is true then it would be a mistake to get rid of Griffin IF J (the reason Griff is gone) fails.

By keeping Griffin the team hedges against a J-Kirk failure.

The 5th year option is still an issue but outside of the money (which can be massaged) getting rid of Griff doesn't bring any gain on the football field.

I can completely see the flip side, but what offense can he run which will not result in him injuried? The key is keeping him healthy, that means every offense style which results in him taking a hit as a runner is out.

So tell me which scheme is that, because pocket passer is clearly out as well.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

I can completely see the flip side, but what offense can he run which will not result in him injuried? The key is keeping him healthy, that means every offense style which results in him taking a hit as a runner is out.

So tell me which scheme is that, because pocket passer is clearly out as well.

Sure, we can get to this entirely different discussion about what offense and whatever else.

But first, I would like to get back to our discussion. What benefit does it bring on the field to have Griffin off the team? After all that's what our discussion was about. Looking at the flip side of booting Griffin off the team. If J and Kirk succeeds great, everyone parks everyone wins. But, if J and Kirk fail and we've also got rid of Griffin where's the benefit there?

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Sure, we can get to this entirely different discussion about what offense and whatever else.

But first, I would like to get back to our discussion. What benefit does it bring on the field to have Griffin off the team? After all that's what our discussion was about. Looking at the flip side of booting Griffin off the team. If J and Kirk succeeds great, everyone parks everyone wins. But, if J and Kirk fail and we've also got rid of Griffin where's the benefit there?

16m+ in cap space to sign players that are good at their jobs, possibly 3m+ this year if someone bites on a trade (not likely). salary cap is a liquid asset that you can always turn into player contracts, and there's cap carryover now. you can't put him back on the field at that price. his knees would be holding the franchise hostage.

[Buffalo Bob]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Sure, we can get to this entirely different discussion about what offense and whatever else.

But first, I would like to get back to our discussion. What benefit does it bring on the field to have Griffin off the team? After all that's what our discussion was about. Looking at the flip side of booting Griffin off the team. If J and Kirk succeeds great, everyone parks everyone wins. But, if J and Kirk fail and we've also got rid of Griffin where's the benefit there?

It removes a big distraction. The guy I saw looking away and rolling his eyes during QB meetings with coaches on the sidelines at the Jax game isn't someone I would want on my team. Then there is everything else,
other than Archie Manning what father of an NFL QB is better known than RG2 and that isn't a good thing. What he says to reporters makes you wonder
how he had such a high grade point average in school. He isn't worth the BS
that comes with him for a back-up QB.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Sure, we can get to this entirely different discussion about what offense and whatever else.

But first, I would like to get back to our discussion. What benefit does it bring on the field to have Griffin off the team? After all that's what our discussion was about. Looking at the flip side of booting Griffin off the team. If J and Kirk succeeds great, everyone parks everyone wins. But, if J and Kirk fail and we've also got rid of Griffin where's the benefit there?

Chico simply responded to your question with a relevant question premised on the simple - RGIII has no value b/c he can't play JG's style and, if any style he may succeed in puts the club at risk of having to pay $16M to an injured and unavailable player which would cripple the of field product. Your response was, as always, either intentionally obtuse or pertinaciously pedantic.

Originally Posted by 30gut

You raise some interesting questions that aren't in response to my post.

The post you responded was a discussion of where/what is the benefit of having Griffin off the team? Especially if J and Kirk fail?

I have no problem discussing the questions you raise but would also like to have the original intent of the post to which you responded addressed.

He did respond to your post and answer the original intent in a perfectly relevant way. Very simply the poster you dismiss as unresponsive believes Griffin has no value to the team "on the field" b/c, regardless of the success or failure of KC & the JG Band, RGIII cannot play in the existing system or a system designed for the QB that existed in 2012. Again, your reply is obtuse and/or pedantic.

Originally Posted by 30gut

You may have missed the post that sparked the current discussion but its this: The 5th year option is still an issue but outside of the money (which can be massaged) getting rid of Griff doesn't bring any gain on the football field.

So, yes the 5th year option is an issue.

But outside of that what is the benefit on the field of not having Griffin on the team, not on the field but on the team?

How does Griffin being gone make the team better?

No. He very clearly understood your point and, unlike you, determined that RGIII being gone does not put the franchise at risk for having to "massage" a $16M cap hit and permits the team to plan and sign players who can perform on the field.

Each of these posters provided reasons as to why Griffin's being off the team helps the team "on the field" by raising relevant, responsive points which you summarily dismiss through rhetorical pedantry of the lowest form. It is a practice you consistently use, is intellectually lazy, and simply tiresome.

We all understand your question and it's loaded nature. B/c folks disagree with the premise of your question, does not mean their answers are unresponsive.

[v8-7]

Even if III improves significantly, he is one hit away from being a $16M liability ..
I hope I am wrong, but what team would want him with his contract ?