RGIII
-
Posts
1,121 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by RGIII
-
-
RG3 > Luck
No comment ;)
Well then it seems I stand corrected. Guess it just goes to show my complete lack of care involving anything that goes on in DC....no offense.
None taken. I try my hardest not to pay attention to a lot of the stuff that goes on around here myself
In all honesty I don't think Indy is as bad roster wise as many. And as far as the Redskins, I am really starting to think Shanny made his reputation early by coaching some LEGENDS of the NFL.
Young, Elway, Sharpe, and a plethora of ALL PRO talent on the early 90 49ers, and the mid to late 90 Broncos.
Since... well... Shanny has had his moments. But one thing comes to the fore front. A "great" QB gets you "great" results.
While I wouldn't discount the notion that the majority of Shanahan's success owes itself to the presence of NFL legends, there's plenty of compelling evidence that he's one of the best offensive minds out there even if he has faults as a head coach. Just look at the relatively improved level of play he's gotten out of virtually every quarterback and running back who has ever played for him (McNabb standing as one of few exceptions - but even he was on pace for a career high or two prior to his benching).
There's also a bit of a chicken or the egg question inherent to practically ALL famous QB-coach combinations. For example, is Bill Walsh regarded as an all-time great without NFL legends at QB or are they NFL legends because of Walsh? It's honestly not much less complicated with Shanahan. The vast majority of Elway's career was spent working with Shanahan (starting long before 1995) and the Broncos only had one playoff win in Elway's entire career where Shanahan was not on staff as a QB coach, OC, or head coach.
At the end of the day, he might not be the best in the league right now or ever but he's still accomplished things that few other coaches have. I'm honestly baffled that you guys were only able to get one ring out of Peyton when Dungy was at the helm. That's a pretty good QB-coach pairing. It's also pretty incredible that Shula didn't get anything from Marino. Goes to show you just how hard winning a Super Bowl really is.
-
Fair enough I suppose. I just dont agree with ya. :-)
Slight edge. Not significant imo.
I want to see you guys break it down
-
Whether you play more of a base front or more of a nickel front (you could argue that for some teams, like the Packers, the nickel front is the base front but let's keep this simple) depends on your personnel/strategy and the personnel/strategy of the opposing team. It's important not to overthink things and forget that it is the opposing offense that tends to dictate defensive personnel first and foremost.
For the sake of clarification, the difference between a 4-2-5 and a 2-4-5 is simply whether or not the guys at the edges of the line have a hand in the dirt. That is all that the x-x-x notation entails. It does imply additional information based on what commonly occurs in the league but there are no hard and fast rules beyond what I just said.
Roles and responsibilities are left entirely to the head coach/defensive coordinator's own prerogatives. A 4-2-5 DE can drop back into coverage just as easily (on paper) as a 2-4-5 OLB but (in the real world) there are advantages and disadvantages to each stance as well as the type of player you typically select for the role.
Now, with that said...
5-2-4 would be a great idea as well. With our speed on defense I think it would be a great idea to rush 5 guys on every play. When we blitzed over the past 2 years it was very effective. Rewatch the Giants game in 09. That was the best game I seen our defense play. We blitzed based off of our speed. It paid off great. So I wondered why we stepped away from it? Now with a bigger defensive line begin insteaded I think we can look to taking more chances. We need one solid corner to make it work. Jerraud Powers is on the watch list for me as well. I know he's been hurt and thats the problem. No one talks about it, but he has been getting hurt for the past 2 or 3 seasons.
The 5-2-4 is more of a goal line defense and would be extremely vulnerable to the pass, it's not something that you want to run outside of limited situations. The 3-4 is often very similar alignment-wise but offers more flexibility at the edges that make it better against the passing game. The edge rushers represent more of a threat to the throwing lanes from a pre-snap read perspective even if both are known to rush with fairly high frequency. The QB has to be held accountable for them in a way he is not with a guy in a three or four point stance and the more accountable a QB is, the more time he has to spend reading the development of the play.
Interesting, are there any LBs in the draft that are particularly well-suited for that 4-2-5?
I like Mychal Kendricks but I don't know all the nuances of Cal's 3-4 defense that he played in. They say he projects well at both ILB or OLB though and has good awareness when he drops into coverage plus really good speed.
I think everyone likes Mychal Kendricks. I doubt he'll make it to the third round at this rate. He'd make for a good 3-4 ILB and 4-2-5/2-4-5 LB if the scouting reports are to be believed, though.
**EDIT**Boy, I don't know how to do the players, when I type them in they are all nice and neat and how they would line up on the field but when it sets it they are all left justified with no spacing. Sorry **EDIT**Try using code tags, it preserves the spacing better (still not perfectly). I'm curious as to exactly what you're envisioning but here's my best attempt based on what quoting you showed:
---------------S1------------S2
--------S3------------------LB1------LB2
-------------------LB3
CB1-------DT1---------NT-------DT2-------CB2Edit: Even with code tags it's difficult... we'll see if I can improve it any
Edit 2: Bingo. The dashes are the key. Doubt I got it right, though.
-
For the 10,000th time, I am a lifelong Giants fan. I started with the Giants since Simms and have suffered through Dave Brown, and Kent Graham as the QBs. I stuck with them with Kerry Collins and kurt Warner. I just like Peyton and Eli. The Giants are still my team and will be after Eli leaves. I just like to follow Peyton and Eli's career at the same time. Not sure why I have to keep apologizing for that.
Agree 100%. I'm still a fan of the Colts, but I will not abandon my love of watching Peyton play. I have lots of family in different states with their own NFL teams. They all enjoyed watching the Colts play ONLY because of Peyton. I started watching the Colts before Peyton arrived and enjoyed watching that much more when he started. You can be a fan of both. Don't know why that's "dirty".
I should probably point out the "players over teams" thing was moreso directed at people who have no team. If you're a lifelong Giants fan then you're just doing what most diehards do and have secondary rooting interests based on somewhat arbitrary criteria (players/coaches/owners/styles of play you like or don't like). Similarly, if you start following a team because of a player and stick with that team then you're also fine in my book.
What irks me are people with no team allegiance who are infatuated with only the player. You don't see it that often but there are Tebow fans like that and us Skins fans were afflicted with Colt Brennan fans of a similar nature (largely people from Hawaii who really didn't care at all about the team before or after the presence of said 5th round pick). There are quite a few LeBron James fans like that also... and James himself represents something else that bothers me: pure frontrunners (Lakers/Yankees/Cowboys type fans).
-
Between Wright, Hill, Jeffery, and Randle you'll probably have your choice of two or even three of those guys at the top of the second. That's not a bad group but WRs are still awfully hard to hit on. The real question will probably be who falls at CB to dissuade you from taking any of them.
-
Colts and Redskins are not close in talent.
You never know. It's difficult to evaluate talent during a complete overhaul. Some teams respond unusually well to that kind of thing, they bring in a bunch of the right pieces to compliment a few existing pieces that play better than expected and it makes for a surprising turnaround. The Broncos defense did that under Mike Nolan during McDaniels' first year as did the Packers under Capers.
If I'm putting money on it, though, the Colts have a lot more to prove and are a season or two behind the Skins defensively (rebuild-wise). Offensively, I honestly think the difference is going to come down to QB play above all else and the draft also stands to make quite the impact. If both QBs were to play equally well and we were to pretend that the draft only consisted of those first two picks, I think the Skins would get more out of their talent at all of the skill positions. That just isn't realistic at all, though, and the Colts acquiring a talented young receiver and TE would dramatically level the playing field.
RG3 ???? I bugs me a bit he refused to workout for Indy. And his comments about being "fine" with backing up Manning bother me a bit. And this guy played with some outstanding talent around him. Just glad I don't have to worry about RG3.Griffin on backing up Manning:
"Definitely I would come in to compete to be the starter but I wouldn't be upset if Peyton Manning was the starting quarterback of the team that I'm on."
"So it would be an honor to sit behind him and learn. I'd hold that clipboard with pride."
Doesn't sound so bad to me.
I think RG3 will be good, but I see it taking a long time for him and Washington to become a relavent team. With the way Snyder runs that show, he would do best to get out of his own way, get a good GM in there, and let everything fall into place.
I have much more confidence in RG3 than I did in Cam Newton, heck I'm still not sold on Newton.
You're a few years behind on the state of the Redskins. We've have had a bona fide GM (Bruce Allen) since the end of the 2009 season. Snyder has since noticeably relinquished much of the influence he exerted before that point. If anyone in the organization is too powerful, it might be Shanahan... after him would be Allen... then Snyder.
If you really need proof, our draft and free agent strategy has been radically different. We've focused on acquiring more younger talent, guys with leadership qualities, and have emphasized second tier value players more than the big names available. It's not necessarily an obvious difference to those who don't follow the team closely when you still see us giving Garcon $42 mil. However, the old way of doing business would have involved substantially outbidding Tampa for Vincent Jackson (likely driving his price up close to highest paid receiver territory).
-
I may have just fractured my skull with my own palm... somebody call 911.
-
The old ball and chain is a Denver born and raised Broncos fan, so I've heard plenty about how thrilled they are out there. Frankly, I can't blame 'em one bit. They've just inherited a heck of a QB and seem to be moving in the right direction under Fox and Elway after the complete and utter fiasco that was replacing Shanahan with McDaniels. Can't say I didn't blame them a ton for backing Tebow so vigorously, though. ;)
On a side note, I don't get people who follow players over teams. It's just a completely alien concept to me and just feels incredibly wrong/dirty. Being a long-suffering fan of a single team just has that effect, I suppose.
-
I suspect the Skins would have tried to trade up for Cam or stood pat and taken Locker at 10 had that happened. The Colts would probably be drafting Griffin this year but there'd probably be a lot of poor, misguided Barkley fans fouling things up.
I think we would have taken the best pocket passer. Judging by these stats I think I know who that is: http://www.extremesk...47&d=1334097611
Show some class, ya troll.
-
One of the charms of a hybrid system is being able to give more looks with the same personnel. To that end, I think it would be unwise to bank on Pagano using completely different personnel groupings between his three and four man base fronts. That means that Mathis is probably going to have to play a fair amount of 4-3 LB (unless another player supplants him as starter).
-
It was a clear flagrant attempt to do damage.. How else can you explain the ripping of of the helmet?
Ripping of the helmet? The only way a player can intentionally and purposefully remove the helmet of another player is by grabbing it and pulling it off via the facemask or underside of the helmet. There are other ways a helmet can come off but a clasping hand is the only way to ensure that it happens if that is your goal. Phillip Daniels did not do that.
In the course of attempting to make the tackle, Daniels tried to get an arm around Manning's shoulders/chest. Due to the fact that Daniels was moving one way and Manning's body was resisting and going in the other direction that arm slipped up, got under the helmet and the helmet was effectively sheared off of Manning's head. Again, none of the markers of an intentional act of ill-will... it's just physics.
Joe Theismann's injury was a freak accident.Peyton Manning's injury was laced with malicious intent.
I see no difference between the two that would point to one being any more malicious than the other. Both were extremely unfortunate hits that you wouldn't wish on anyone, especially as a fellow player.
I for one disagree....that was a two man hit.....been there RG3 That was an attempt at knees and head...you are wrong!
Carter went for the waist, Daniels went for the upper chest. Those were their targets and they had very little conscious control of what happened after initial contact was made.
-
Neither the Colts nor Manning deserve squat in the way of compensation for that play. Football is a tough sport and occasionally things like that will happen, there's really no foolproof way of preventing it. As far as Bountygate is concerned, though...
It's asinine to believe that what happened to Peyton on that play was intentional. I know that looking for someone to blame is only natural and Gregg Williams certainly does seem to fit the bill of the villain as of late but it's a massive leap to say that Phillip Daniels wanted Manning hurt. Daniels is one of the NFL's legitimately good guys and, for that matter, so is the guy responsible for tying Peyton's legs up (Andre Carter). It's an ugly hit because of the way Peyton got bent backwards but it wasn't particularly vicious. Daniels didn't launch himself at Peyton or go for the head or anything, he just tried to wrap up a QB who was still trying to get rid of the ball and very likely wasn't aware of the fact that Peyton was tied up and in a compromising position until it was too late.
The key elements that usually signify a dirty play are all missing from the equation. PeytonGirl said it pretty well in another thread...
The main player involved in that certainly would not have been a part of a bounty program. Daniels was horrified that Peyton was hurt and distraught, going to him and Coach Dungy several times to see if things were okay. It was a freak accident when one player went high and one went low. Daniels has always been blamed for that and I was there and have never thought he did it purposely. Not even now.
-
This is truly sickening. And to think "America" rooted for these losers in Super Bowl XLIV against us. I really wish the Colts could have stomped them! In any case, it is what it is and we just have to live with the results.
I wish someone would investigate into whether Greg Williams had similar schemes going on with some of the other teams he coached. He was the defensive coordinator of the Redskins in 2006, the same year that they tried to rip Peyton's head off ultimately leading the the neck troubles that paved his way out of Indy. It would not surprise me at all if some kind of bounty was taken out on Peyton during that game. Nevertheless, the Colts proceeded to kick their collective butts.
This guy should never coach again...period.
It's already public knowledge that Williams did something similar in DC. Several former players have commented about it: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/post/carlos-rogers-downplays-redskins-bounty-system-under-gregg-williams/2012/04/05/gIQADvAYxS_blog.html
Also worth mentioning that the hit on Peyton was almost certainly not the direct result of any bounty program. Considering the way that play went down and the two Skins players involved (both grade A, class act types), it was just a freak accident that Peyton got all bent up like he did.
-
of course weight means nothing on its own but being 6'5 and 230ish didnt seem to slow him down or hamper his ability in the past, sure question his effort recently but to say a guy is fat when its pretty obvious to the naked eye Vincent Jackson is cut is ridiculous, would I take the guy if he was a free agent and we had the money, I dont know but thats not because he is fat lol, he simply quits on plays at times (kinda like some of our guys did last season0
... what? Let me reiterate and break up what I said:
Jackson is a lean 230
Jeffery has a history of weight issues and has been legitimately fat at times
That's quite the opposite of calling VJ fat. Just pointing out that AJ has tended to not to be anywhere near as lean when he gets up to around 230, let alone when he reportedly ballooned to ~250 territory.
-
CM/Coach Mode:
- Make all the roster moves (Free Agency, Draft, re-sign, release players, etc.) and playbook. Basically franchise mode without playing any of the games.
You can already do this for the most part. Instead of making a distinct mode for it, they just need to add in an option that, if enabled, puts your job on the line so that you can be fired if you perform poorly (NBA 2K series style).
I actually hope they do NOT have a "create a play" mode. The reason it was so problematic in the first place is because it was too easy to exploit defenses.
That's because the AI is rubbish. EA badly needs to overhaul the defensive AI and take a hard look at making line play on both sides of the ball more realistic. You should be able to create plays and have them play out in a way that roughly approximates what you would expect in real life. Unfortunately, that's not possible right now because the game isn't even close to the real thing when it comes to the basics of football (e.g., gap control principles).
Also, they need to improve passing trajectories so that all throws aren't either bullets or moon balls. There has to be something in between.
-
I'd be very wary of guys with character or work ethic issues like Alshon Jeffery during a rebuild. I don't believe it's wise to take those kinds of chances until you've already got your system and overall way of life firmly established. That said, he is still an intriguing high-risk, high-reward candidate in the second round.
Vincent Jackson is 6'5 230lbs is he a fat wide receiver?
Weight means next to nothing on its own. Jackson is a lean 230, Jeffery has a history of weight issues and has been legitimately fat at times.
-
Studies have been done that show no correlation between Wonderlic scores and performance on the field. In fact, with certain positions the numbers even suggest that a lower score may be better (DB and I believe TE). This is a non-issue.
You can get an approximation of a person's IQ by doubling their Wonderlic score and adding 60. For example, a person who scores a 20 on the Wonderlic would have an approximate IQ of 100 ([2x20]+60). That formuula isn't precise enough to truly determine someone's IQ -- it's just a rough estimate. I don't know what this score for Claiborne means if he has some sort of reading disability. If we took his score of 4 at face value, his approximate IQ would be 68, which would barely keep him from being an ingredient in a salad.
Don't buy that at all. Fairly sure that would result in a lot of people in the 140+ range, more than the normal IQ distribution would support.
-
1) What other team, besides the Colts, hold the overall #1 pick in this upcoming draft?
2) What sense does it make to deny the Colts' request for a private workout, if your intention is to be competitive and want to be the #1 overall pick in the upcoming draft?
If you deny the Colts' request for a private workout, you are going against your own stated desire to be chosen #1 overall, and to be competitive. That's the way I see it.
#1 isn't a real question and I answered #2 in the very post you quoted (and acknowledged that any such strategy is certainly not beyond question in other posts). We obviously have a difference in opinion, I'm just pointing out that you guys need to ease off a bit in the firmness with which you hold yours because it is based on practically no hard evidence.
You just seem like you want to argue for the sake of arguing
-
Point 1: RG3 has stated openly in his interview with Gruden that he is competitive and wants to be the #1 overall draft prospect picked in the upcoming draft.
Point 2: RG3 and his agent have denied the Colt's specific invitation for a private workout, per Irsay.
Point 3: The Colts possess the #1 overall draft pick in the upcoming draft.
If we believe the above 3 points as truth, I have a hard time reconciling them with each other. One of those points doesn't belong with the other points. Since I am pretty sure Point 3 is true, it must either be point 1 or point 2 that is faulty.
You can call me biased, but I give more credence to behavior than words. So I am saying that point 1 is not believable.
checkmate
Here we were, having a nice conversation about RG3 and his attitude, and you have to go and ruin it by using logic. Thanks a lot.
Fine, I'll bite. Point 2 only directly contradicts Point 1 if RGIII refuses to work out only for the Colts. However, Adam Schefter has stated that Griffin will not be working out for the Redskins, either, and the Vikings report was erroneous as far as I've been able to tell. If that continues to hold true then it was simply a decision Griffin made with his agent, likely knowing that it would be difficult to improve his draft stock further.
That isn't so hard to fathom, now, is it guys?
-
Maybe they're worried the car is about to blow a gasket!
I get your point, and I don't think the no in itself is a big deal in the outcome of the selection. I just think they've handled it badly.
I agree that, from the perspective of the Colts or any team being denied a workout, the "no" is definitely not a positive although it may not necessarily be a negative either.
For a player that analysts thought of as very smart, this is certainly evidence to the contrary.
You have to make several assumptions about the circumstances involved in order for this to pass as strong evidence of anything. Regardless, I defy you to find a smart person that doesn't occasionally make questionable decisions.
-
Hmm... I'm not trying to say he's a jerk or make some broad statement about his personality. Maybe "ego" wasn't the right word, but I stand by my opinion that his attitude is not ideal. Like ruksak says, this would be a great opportunity to show the world that he's the number 1 guy in this draft. Yet he's passing it up.
I'd still say that it's a mistake to say that this is even a reflection of his attitude. It would be more fair to say that his/his agent's draft strategy is a little boneheaded.
Ok they don't owe anyone an explanation certainly, but your whole mission at this point in your career is to in effect sell your talents to the franchises, now if I'm selling a product that benefits from live demonstration in most cases a refusal to take it to the customer has a huge detrimental effect. Sure it's highly unlikely that we would draft him currently but if he really wanted to become a Colt surely you take any chance you can to make this more likely. Until they comment as to why the blanket refusals it will be painted as a negative.
Image is a huge commodity for pro athletes these days, part of why agents earn their dollars.
At the same time, you also don't want to overexpose your product when you already know that it is in high demand lest it lose its sheen. If someone is extremely interested in buying your car are you going to offer to let him test drive it for a few days? Heck no, you don't want to give him time to pick out all the flaws and concerns, minute though they may be, because that affects the final sale price of the vehicle. You want to give just enough of a taste to expose the buyer to the upside of the car and not much more.
Outside of Skins and Colts fans who are rabidly anticipating the draft and hanging on every word written or said about these two prospects, this refusal will do absolutely nothing to tarnish Griffin's image. It will be completely forgotten unless other, more obvious problems also crop up.
-
Hence why I wondered if they'd commented with their side of events. In this media crazy world everything is picked over and unless you put your version out there people will fill in the blanks.
True enough. They don't owe us an explanation, though, and there's certainly not any real need for one. There's even a high chance that a statement on their part would add to the speculation instead of clearing the air depending on what factors are at play.
-
We're not talking about evaluating the kid. We're talking about what this move says about his attitude/ego.
If a guy in a Lamborghini cuts you off on the highway, you might assume he's a jerk with entirely too much money. However, you really have no idea of what his intentions actually were in cutting you off nor does it necessarily have any bearing on his character whatsoever. Maybe someone else was about to merge into him and he HAD to get over into the next lane quickly. Maybe he misjudged traffic in front of him. Heck, he could be Lamborghini Batman rushing off to go cheer up some sick kids.
In any event, you don't know anywhere near enough to legitimately condemn the man beyond this single incident despite what you want to think. That's what I'm seeing in this thread. Unwarranted condemnation of a guy based on very limited information just because a majority of you want to not want Griffin.
This says absolutely nothing about his attitude or ego unless you know what his or his agent's thoughts and plans are.
-
I have no doubt McNabb is battling through some sour grapes, that he doesn't care much for Shanny, and that his view is tainted by bias.
That doesn't automatically negate what he is saying, though.
I had sour grapes and didn't like a former employer after I was let go from his company, but that doesn't eliminate the validity of any criticisms I might have of the guy or his business ethics.
My posts in this thread have more or less acknowledged the validity to some of what he's said. Mike Shanahan is demanding and he does not get along with people who he feels aren't dedicated. That's what Jake Plummer and McNabb have in common, they didn't work as hard as Shanahan expected them to and they got the boot. Neither were particularly happy about it and both have been somewhat outspoken on the subject of their former coach.
Shanahan is also known for basing his expectations on some of the great players he has worked with before. He wants QBs with the dedication that Elway and Young had and he actively seeks out guys with similar skillsets because he knows how well they can work in his scheme. All running backs are held up to the measuring stick that was Terrell Davis - a truly complete back. That's not always an easy thing to have to deal with but it's understandable given that those guys possessed the qualities that win Super Bowls.
The sense of perfectionism as it relates to the scheme is the same kind of thing you'll find if you go dig up some old Bill Walsh tape. It works but it's not something everyone can live up to and it's probably much harder in a place that hasn't fully established the right culture (as 2010 DC certainly hadn't).
The problem with McNabb is simply that he refuses to take any blame for his own actions (or lack thereof) and is projecting mightily when it comes to his apparent prediction that RGIII and Shanahan will not coexist well due to "ego"
1) I don't think McNabb made any claims against RG3, other than that RG3 was coming out of college and had many skills.
2) McNabb made many claims against the Redskins organization, specifically against the Shanahans, from his direct experience being part of that, as a QB. I think I cannot equate him speaking from his experience and your speaking from what? Were you, or are you part of the Redskins organization as either a player or a coach?
1) I wasn't talking about claims against RGIII, I said claims as they pertain to RGIII (i.e., why McNabb doesn't think he'll be a fit in DC).
2) You can bring the "you don't have first-hand experience" argument to the table if you wish but all it will result is the inevitable conclusion that no one on this forum really knows anything for sure therefore nothing should be discussed based on available information ever. Been down that road before. Practically speaking, I'm just a guy who does his homework and pays a lot of attention to what goes on around the league. I've seen and heard enough from all parties to be comfortable with the assertions I'm making despite not being an employee of the organization. I probably have had more access to the team than the average fan courtesy of knowing quite a few people who know people if we're really splitting hairs but that's neither here nor there in the grand scheme of things.
.
Walter Football Colts Mock Draft [Merge]
in NFL Draft, Scouting, and Free Agent Talk
Posted
5th round is probably too high for Burfict but everything I've heard about the guy paints a far less glowing report of Walter Football's assessment. Apart from having a crummy attitude, there are a lot of people out there that just don't think he has the head for the game even if his personality is kept in check.