We need competition for Suisham

So now your argument is all about leg strength?

I guess you had to move on to something since I already showed you he's in the top 15 in most kicking categories.

Leg strength is overrated. By your standard Janikowski must be the best kicker in the history of the game.

This topic is now officially retarded.

Why would this topic be retarded, if during our playoff loss last season our kicker missed a pretty significant field goal?

Accuracy is certainly more important. But again, but your standards, we need to go sign Morton Anderson. You can't ignore leg strength though...it ranks #2 importance in a kicker.



Note my post about people we could have not invited, cause that is certainly what we did in other cases is just bring in warm bodies. We are gonna have to agree to disagree about "solid" from a year ago. I thought it was OK, but we could not rely on him from long distance, nor could we rely on him when it mattered most. That's important. To not bring in competition means we are completely 100% satisfied with our kicking game, I was not satisfied.



That's the best point you have made...however, you are assuming that the Skins have never made a poor decision. Let us not forget the plethera of poor kickers we have had over the years after Lohmiller.

Um no, I'm not assuming that at all. But as you said we're not the experts, right?

I do remember all the kickers we've gone through which is exactly my point why we should stick with Suisham to let him continue to develop. At the end of the day I see no need to have a worthless kicking competition for a guy who was 29/35 last year, the best season we've had from a kicker since Chip left.

Why would this topic be retarded, if during our playoff loss last season our kicker missed a pretty significant field goal?

Plenty of things went wrong in that game. The game did not boil down to a missed FG. For starters we shouldn't have even been kicking a FG, we should have punched in a TD. But that's a different topic entirely.

Anderson is a better kicker than Suisham. Big deal.

Are you serious? You really believe that????

Nice subjective list there.

Thanks.

Besides, I thought you didn't know anything about kickers and you were deferring to the Redskins scouts?

Here is my post since you are misunderstanding my point:
Seriously????? There was just a bunch of college kickers not drafted across the country, and there was a bunch last year too, and the year before etc....are you seriously saying that there are no kickers out there???

Last I checked, we are not experts on kickers...nor are we scouts...but last I checked, the Redskins employs alot of scouts...ask them where we could find a few. Anyone will work. No one is saying to get a hall of famer to compete, just competition. Competition has never been a bad thing...ever.

I am very knowledgable with all NFL players. I am not knowledgable, and have said on numerous occasions that I am not knowledgable, when it comes to college players. I was asked who we could bring in, I basically said there are tons of college kids we could have brought in. I don't follow college, I follow NFL.

So if there was one out there worth looking at why is he not in camp right now?

That's the million dollar question. Someone upstairs thought that Suisham is worthy of not having competition...just like someone upstairs thought that Spurrier was the next HOF coach, or that John Hall was our next kicker, or Eddie Murray, or Michael Husted, or Brett Conway were all good kickers.
When we win a super bowl, or even go deep in the playoffs, then the FO deserves for me, and everyone, not to second guess.

I'm failing to understand this logic. 81% is not bad, and is only 4% worse than Suisham, but he is MUCH better at kickoffs, and can reach the goal posts from 50+, but that doesn't matter???? I'm not saying Janikowski is better...I'm really not...I'm just saying that competition would have been welcomed. Being mediocre with a big leg is better than being slightly better than mediocre with a wet noodle leg.

We don't really disagree, but for the sake of argument, let's talk about the 4%. I don't think it's totally unreasonable to say a kicker will have 25-50 attempts per season. That's 1 or 2 more misses in a season, that's not an incredible amount, BUT what if they're big kicks? What if they're game winners? It's also the difference between being the 16/17th best kicker in the league vs. the 25th. I was trying to help Janikowski out because they trot him out for some ridiculous kicks.

Just because Janikowski can reach a 50 yarder, doesn't mean much, he only hit slightly above 50%, Suisham was 50%. I'm not saying that their leg strength is anywere near comparable, but I'm saying that a 50 yard field goal is probably 50/50 anyway. I don't think signing a guy just because he can get it there and sacrificing accuracy is worth while.

Also, the reason I removed the 50 yarders is because they were the majority of Janikowski's misses. He was 6/11 last season from 50+. I thought that would bring his 71% FG PCT up a bit, but it didn't make it that much better.

The one thing we do disagree on is that FG% isn't that big of a factor. I want the kicker to make as many FG's as possible, just because he has a big leg, doesn't mean he'll make more and I just don't see kicking into the end zone to be that important. The difference between the 20 and 25 isn't that big of a deal, it's not even that different from 20 to 30. The kick coverage and defense have to do their job. I will say, however, that there is a pretty big difference when it's the 35 or 40.

Now, I will say that having a 50 yarder be out of the question for a kicker is a little ridiculous, but I'm not a huge proponent of trotting a guy out there for a 50 yarder. First of all, the greatest kicker in Redskins history (or at least the only one who made the 70 Greatest list) is probably Mark Moseley. For his career he made 12 of 42 from 50+ yards. Last year, in the NFL, 99 FG's of 50+ yards were attempted and NFL kickers made 47 of them that's 47.4%. Therefore, you have about a 50/50 shot (unless you have Kris Brown 5-5 from 50+...ridiculous) of gaining 3 points or putting your opponent on their own 40+ yard line.

I'm almost of the opinion that a 50 yard field goal is too risky of a play, if it doesn't pay off, you're almost screwed.

Um no, I'm not assuming that at all. But as you said we're not the experts, right?

You are certainly right about that. Then again, there would be no point of a redskins discussion board if we all weren't backseat qb's.

I do remember all the kickers we've gone through which is exactly my point why we should stick with Suisham to let him continue to develop. At the end of the day I see no need to have a worthless kicking competition for a guy who was 29/35 last year, the best season we've had from a kicker since Chip left.

My only problem with that comment is the "worthless kicking competition". That is assuming there is no one out there better than Suisham, which has been my point all along. If he beats the competition, more power to him...but what if we're missing out on the next David Akers. (I know you remember him on the skins, but many probably forgot we had him and let him go).

In the end, I prefer a kicker with a stronger leg...I think we NEED a kicker with a stronger leg. But if Suisham can be consistant, and clutch, I am willing to overlook that. Ultimately I have to accept to Suisham, cause like it or not, he's our guy. I just hope in his "developement" he learns to reach the endzone on kickoffs.

That's probably the most research I've ever done for a post and it was a. about kickers and b. about a post I pretty much agreed with...LOL

We don't really disagree, but for the sake of argument, let's talk about the 4%. I don't think it's totally unreasonable to say a kicker will have 25-50 attempts per season. That's 1 or 2 more misses in a season, that's not an incredible amount, BUT what if they're big kicks? What if they're game winners? It's also the difference between being the 16/17th best kicker in the league vs. the 25th. I was trying to help Janikowski out because they trot him out for some ridiculous kicks.

Just because Janikowski can reach a 50 yarder, doesn't mean much, he only hit slightly above 50%, Suisham was 50%. I'm not saying that their leg strength is anywere near comparable, but I'm saying that a 50 yard field goal is probably 50/50 anyway. I don't think signing a guy just because he can get it there and sacrificing accuracy is worth while.

Also, the reason I removed the 50 yarders is because they were the majority of Janikowski's misses. He was 6/11 last season from 50+. I thought that would bring his 71% FG PCT up a bit, but it didn't make it that much better.

The one thing we do disagree on is that FG% isn't that big of a factor. I want the kicker to make as many FG's as possible, just because he has a big leg, doesn't mean he'll make more and I just don't see kicking into the end zone to be that important. The difference between the 20 and 25 isn't that big of a deal, it's not even that different from 20 to 30. The kick coverage and defense have to do their job. I will say, however, that there is a pretty big difference when it's the 35 or 40.

Now, I will say that having a 50 yarder be out of the question for a kicker is a little ridiculous, but I'm not a huge proponent of trotting a guy out there for a 50 yarder. First of all, the greatest kicker in Redskins history (or at least the only one who made the 70 Greatest list) is probably Mark Moseley. For his career he made 12 of 42 from 50+ yards. Last year, in the NFL, 99 FG's of 50+ yards were attempted and NFL kickers made 47 of them that's 47.4%. Therefore, you have about a 50/50 shot (unless you have Kris Brown 5-5 from 50+...ridiculous) of gaining 3 points or putting your opponent on their own 40+ yard line.

I'm almost of the opinion that a 50 yard field goal is too risky of a play, if it doesn't pay off, you're almost screwed.

I do not think FG% is not a big deal. I do think it is.
We agree on most everything here, and you make valid points. What I will disagree with is the kickoffs. We will kickoff approx 4-6 times a game. If someone is 10 yards shorter than another, that is giving up 40-60 yards per game. I think those yards are important.

All in all, I feel like we agree on most cases.

I do not think FG% is not a big deal. I do think it is.
We agree on most everything here, and you make valid points. What I will disagree with is the kickoffs. We will kickoff approx 4-6 times a game. If someone is 10 yards shorter than another, that is giving up 40-60 yards per game. I think those yards are important.

All in all, I feel like we agree on most cases.

I think we each just put less value on both sides than the other does. I could care less if kicks are coming down at the 10 or the back of the end zone and you're willing to sacrifice accuracy for deeper kickoffs. That just is what is.

Btw, can we get some f*ckin totals on the bottom of NFL.com stat pages? I had to add every attempt and make with the num pad and calculator...weak sauce!

We don't really disagree, but for the sake of argument, let's talk about the 4%. I don't think it's totally unreasonable to say a kicker will have 25-50 attempts per season. That's 1 or 2 more misses in a season, that's not an incredible amount, BUT what if they're big kicks? What if they're game winners? It's also the difference between being the 16/17th best kicker in the league vs. the 25th. I was trying to help Janikowski out because they trot him out for some ridiculous kicks.

Just because Janikowski can reach a 50 yarder, doesn't mean much, he only hit slightly above 50%, Suisham was 50%. I'm not saying that their leg strength is anywere near comparable, but I'm saying that a 50 yard field goal is probably 50/50 anyway. I don't think signing a guy just because he can get it there and sacrificing accuracy is worth while.

Also, the reason I removed the 50 yarders is because they were the majority of Janikowski's misses. He was 6/11 last season from 50+. I thought that would bring his 71% FG PCT up a bit, but it didn't make it that much better.

The one thing we do disagree on is that FG% isn't that big of a factor. I want the kicker to make as many FG's as possible, just because he has a big leg, doesn't mean he'll make more and I just don't see kicking into the end zone to be that important. The difference between the 20 and 25 isn't that big of a deal, it's not even that different from 20 to 30. The kick coverage and defense have to do their job. I will say, however, that there is a pretty big difference when it's the 35 or 40.

Now, I will say that having a 50 yarder be out of the question for a kicker is a little ridiculous, but I'm not a huge proponent of trotting a guy out there for a 50 yarder. First of all, the greatest kicker in Redskins history (or at least the only one who made the 70 Greatest list) is probably Mark Moseley. For his career he made 12 of 42 from 50+ yards. Last year, in the NFL, 99 FG's of 50+ yards were attempted and NFL kickers made 47 of them that's 47.4%. Therefore, you have about a 50/50 shot (unless you have Kris Brown 5-5 from 50+...ridiculous) of gaining 3 points or putting your opponent on their own 40+ yard line.

I'm almost of the opinion that a 50 yard field goal is too risky of a play, if it doesn't pay off, you're almost screwed.

Good post and nice research.