Re: Start John Beck Madness Thread
 

Poor receivers, play calling notwithstanding, Rex has more fundamental challenges. Rex must secure the ball better in critical game situations....or change his name to....Rex Romo. Resist the allure of forcing the ball into coverage. He is getting away with some. He makes foolish decisions at times.
These have been career challenges for him and if he wants to shake that rep....change. For him to succeed, he will need to be conservative, precise and TOTALLY playing within his game ability.
AND BTW before the hate chanting begins. Good Rex is pretty good! Bad Rex needs to go away.

Re: Start John Beck Madness Thread
 

[quote=irish;845392]Yes, Cassel could be plugged in and produce those numbers with NE. I think almost any QB, even a career backup like Beck, could be plugged into NE and produce because of how good a team NE is.[/quote]

So the fact that he set a NFL record for passing yardage in a 3 game stretch has nothing to do with Brady. Any QB can accomplish that feat just because they play in NE. C'mon man. He has a few weapons, I'll give you that, in Wes Welker, Rob Gronkowski, and Aaron Hernandez, but Ochocinco can't run the right routes, and drops easy catches, and Branch is limited in his production regularly and often can't find separation. We have Moss, Cooley, and Davis. I don't believe their talent supremely trumps ours.

Re: Start John Beck Madness Thread
 

I think their system, overall coaching, team mentality, attitude and cohesion does. Pure talent isn't enough to win. Ex. Eagles, Red Sox, Cubs, Heat.....

Re: Start John Beck Madness Thread
 

I think the Eagles game will determine everything.

Re: Start John Beck Madness Thread
 

[quote=hooskins;845426]I think their system, overall coaching, team mentality, attitude and cohesion does. Pure talent isn't enough to win. Ex. Eagles, Red Sox, Cubs, Heat.....[/quote]

I would agree with you on every one of those fronts, and still wouldn't have the audacity to claim that you could plug any QB into that system, and achieve the same mark.

Re: Start John Beck Madness Thread
 

Wow, this thread still going huh? Impressive:)

Re: Start John Beck Madness Thread
 

[quote=12thMan;845442]Wow, this thread still going huh? Impressive:)[/quote]

good job. dont forget to rate it 5 star thread.

:FIREdevil

Re: Start John Beck Madness Thread
 

Beck is awesome.
He should be starting for the Packers.

Re: Start John Beck Madness Thread
 

[quote=fanarchist;845430]I would agree with you on every one of those fronts, and still wouldn't have the audacity to claim that you could plug any QB into that system, and achieve the same mark.[/quote]

If you mean passing yards and TD totals then I do agree, not any QB could produce those numbers for NE. But like a lot of Redskins fans you seem to be stuck on meaningless passing, rushing, defense, etc, numbers. The only numbers that count are 3-1 (for both the Skins and NE) and in that case yes, I think NE could plug any QB in and the team would be 3-1.

[QUOTE=irish;845450]If you mean passing yards and TD totals then I do agree, not any QB could produce those numbers for NE. But like a lot of Redskins fans you seem to be stuck on meaningless passing, rushing, defense, etc, numbers. The only numbers that count are 3-1 (for both the Skins and NE) and in that case yes, I think NE could plug any QB in and the team would be 3-1.[/QUOTE]

With NE's horrible defense? Please. Brady has to put up all those yards and points because the Pats d is giving up almost as much as Brady is putting out.

Re: Start John Beck Madness Thread
 

[quote=irish;845450]If you mean passing yards and TD totals then I do agree, not any QB could produce those numbers for NE. But like a lot of Redskins fans you seem to be stuck on meaningless passing, rushing, defense, etc, numbers. The only numbers that count are 3-1 (for both the Skins and NE) and in that case yes, I think NE could plug any QB in and the team would be 3-1.[/quote]

That's where we differ then. I'd rather see everything functioning in concert for sustained success. Much like NE has had for the past decade. And you are clearly more enamored with what is a tenuous 3-1 start to our season. That being winning one game by 1 point, losing one game without allowing a TD, and winning another game by 7 points to a defense that ranks 26th who were out scored by 18 against Philly, 12 against the Giants, and 30 facing Baltimore. I have a feeling you'll have a change of heart if those "meaningless" numbers begin to reflect, and accumulate in the loss column.

Re: Start John Beck Madness Thread
 

[quote=fanarchist;845472]That's where we differ then. I'd rather see everything functioning in concert for sustained success. Much like NE has had for the past decade. And you are clearly more enamored with what is a tenuous 3-1 start to our season. That being winning one game by 1 point, losing one game without allowing a TD, and winning another game by 7 points to a defense that ranks 26th who were out scored by 18 against Philly, 12 against the Giants, and 30 facing Baltimore. I have a feeling you'll have a change of heart if those "meaningless" numbers begin to reflect, and accumulate in the loss column.[/quote]

A tenuous 3-1 start, that's one of the funniest things I've heard in a long time. 3-1 is 3-1 no matter how it happened. The NFL is a week to week league and all they can do is beat that week's opponent. Once that game is over its over and on to the next game. Win by 1 win by 40 it doesnt matter in the NFL because of how tough it is to win games. If this team averages 20 yards rushing per game and 50 yds passing for the season and finishes 11-5 I will consider them to have had sustained success.

Re: Start John Beck Madness Thread
 

Shanahan said Grossman will be judged on wins and loses, does that mean if the D suddenly gives up for the next 3 games and we lose the next 3 games, Grossman will be pulled simply because we would have more loses than wins? No, Grossman is in control of his own destiny and if he continues to play the way he has been, he will be pulled.

Some of you are so content with 3-1 that your afraid to change anything at this point, I understand that but disagree with the logic.

Re: Start John Beck Madness Thread
 

[quote=irish;845488]A tenuous 3-1 start, that's one of the funniest things I've heard in a long time. 3-1 is 3-1 no matter how it happened. The NFL is a week to week league and all they can do is beat that week's opponent. Once that game is over its over and on to the next game. Win by 1 win by 40 it doesnt matter in the NFL because of how tough it is to win games. If this team averages 20 yards rushing per game and 50 yds passing for the season and finishes 11-5 I will consider them to have had sustained success.[/quote]

Tell me when the last time a team has won a Superbowl without having some form of balance, and barely eeking out wins on a weekly basis, and maybe your case will hold weight. Otherwise go back to playing with your Tonka Toys.

Re: Start John Beck Madness Thread
 

[quote=44ever;845489]Shanahan said Grossman will be judged on wins and loses, does that mean if the D suddenly gives up for the next 3 games and we lose the next 3 games, Grossman will be pulled simply because we would have more loses than wins? No, Grossman is in control of his own destiny and if he continues to play the way he has been, he will be pulled.

Some of you are so content with 3-1 that your afraid to change anything at this point, I understand that but disagree with the logic.[/quote]

Good post. There's no reason to think Mike will stick w/ any particular QB if he thinks the guy in waiting will produce more wins. One thing we absolutely know about our HC is he is all about winning.

I also agree Grossman controls his own destiny outside of Kyle's playcalling and gameplan. Sure Rex can make better decisions and avoid forcing the ball to covered targets. It also seems like it would be damn easy for him start protecting the ball when he's trying to waddle away from rushers. Those things are certainly in his control. On the other hand Kyle could help minimize errors by committing more to the run, especially when we have a hell of a RB corp, and giving Rex more downfield looks rather than lateral ones. Missing Armstrong obviously hurts but still we could throw the deep ball a lot more to Davis and Tana. Play-action should also be worked in more IMO.