PDA

View Full Version : The Redskins are going to the Super Bowl this year


JBCX
09-13-2011, 11:11 AM
Yeah, that's right. I've been high on the Redskins since before the preseason started, and I see no reason not to consider them among the best teams in the NFC this year, and one of the few favorites to play in Super Bowl XLVI.

- The defense will be one of the three best defenses in the NFC this year. If you hadn't noticed, they completely revamped the defense in the offseason by adding solid and/or elite players on all three levels. The front three was re- stocked with Barry Cofield and Stephen Bowen, two emerging young pass rushing linemen. They added one of the most NFL-ready pass rushing DE/OLB prospects in the draft (Ryan Kerrigan) to a roster that already features a Pro Bowl 3-4 OLB (Brian Orakpo). Kerrigan will be the Carl Banks to Orakpo's Lawrence Taylor. They also added a nice young CB named Josh Wilson, and a solid FS in OJ Otogwe, who will play alongside Pro Bowl SS Laron Landry. Because of the tremendous pass rush they will generate with Cofield, Bowen, Kerrigan, and Orakpo, their CBs (Deangelo Hall & co.) will only need to be solid to make this a shutdown unit against the pass.

- Because the defense will be tremendous, the offense will only need to be "solid" and Rex Grossman, who is unfairly maligned for his struggles in a Chicago offense that didn't fit his skillset, will only need to be an effective game manager. Mike Shanahan's system will turn Tim Hightower into a 1200+ yard rusher with ease, and Grossman will be able to take advantage of not only a strong running game (by rolling out and executing play-action fakes) but also a defense that will hold opposing offenses to low scores with regularity (allowing Grossman not to feel the need to take risks, and allowing him to act as a game manager).

- Why are they one of the favorites, if not *the* favorite in the NFC to play in the Super Bowl? Who else will have a defense this good? The Packers, maybe, but their only real consistent pass rush threats are Clay Matthews and BJ Raji. The Redskins can generate pass rush with upwards of four players, and will rarely need to blitz, unlike the Packers. The Saints? Their secondary is too poor and again, they have fewer pass rushers that can defeat one-on-one matchups than the Redskins. The Eagles? They are not nearly as strong up front, all throughout the front seven, as the Redskins. The Bears? They will provide the best competition in the NFC for the title of best defense, but their passing defense will not be nearly as good as the Redskins because their scheme will allow elite quarterbacks to exploit Cover-2 zones. If the Redskins can field the best defense in the NFC, and at least a solid offense with a strong running game that can milk the clock and keep the ball away from other quarterbacks (well within the reach of Hightower and Grossman), the Redskins will be going to the Super Bowl this year.

Jvig43
09-13-2011, 11:14 AM
It's week one god dammit what is wrong with people.

Rosebud
09-13-2011, 11:15 AM
No. Just no.

Rosebud
09-13-2011, 11:16 AM
It's week one god dammit what is wrong with people.

Well Hightower did rush for almost 3 yards per carry last game. He's clearly going to be an elite runner after a dominant performance like that.

Gay Ork Wang
09-13-2011, 11:16 AM
wait for bad rex. seriously just wait for him.

PoopSandwich
09-13-2011, 11:16 AM
It's week one god dammit what is wrong with people.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3n0vBcW5fc&feature=related

jrdrylie
09-13-2011, 11:19 AM
- - Why are they one of the favorites, if not *the* favorite in the NFC to play in the Super Bowl? Who else will have a defense this good? The Packers, maybe, but their only real consistent pass rush threats are Clay Matthews and BJ Raji. The Redskins can generate pass rush with upwards of four players, and will rarely need to blitz, unlike the Packers. The Saints? Their secondary is too poor and again, they have fewer pass rushers that can defeat one-on-one matchups than the Redskins. The Eagles? They are not nearly as strong up front, all throughout the front seven, as the Redskins. The Bears? They will provide the best competition in the NFC for the title of best defense, but their passing defense will not be nearly as good as the Redskins because their scheme will allow elite quarterbacks to exploit Cover-2 zones. If the Redskins can field the best defense in the NFC, and at least a solid offense with a strong running game that can milk the clock and keep the ball away from other quarterbacks (well within the reach of Hightower and Grossman), the Redskins will be going to the Super Bowl this year.

The Bears Cover-2 will be exploited by elite QBs? Last year Aaron Rodgers (who I assume you think is elite) didn't exactly carve up the Bears defense. They were also the first team to really contain Vick. He threw for quite a few yards but that was after the Bears built a big lead. The Packers also have a better defense.

Jughead10
09-13-2011, 11:19 AM
wait for bad rex. seriously just wait for him.

Haha yeah. And if we are going just by week 1 reactions, I'd have to say the Bears are going to the Super Bowl. But this is stupid all around. I don't think any rules are being broken but can we ban for wasting peoples time.

JBCX
09-13-2011, 11:20 AM
It's week one god dammit what is wrong with people.

I've been high on the Redskins since *before* the preseason started.

They have just confirmed my thoughts in all 4 preseason games and now 1 regular season games, and it wil be too late to make bold predictions when they are 12-4 or 13-3 in week 16.

McBain
09-13-2011, 11:20 AM
Radskins 19-0. Book it.

Jughead10
09-13-2011, 11:23 AM
I have seen you mention this before, Barry Cofield is not an emerging pass rushing lineman.

Jvig43
09-13-2011, 11:23 AM
Redskins are SUPSTAAAS!

JBCX
09-13-2011, 11:24 AM
I have seen you mention this before, Barry Cofield is not an emerging pass rushing lineman.

According to ProFootballFocus, he was one of the top 10 pass rushing defensive tackles on a per-snap basis in 2010, and he has looked every bit as good so far in preseason and week 1.

Rosebud
09-13-2011, 11:27 AM
I have seen you mention this before, Barry Cofield is not an emerging pass rushing lineman.

Quit being such a better...sorry, Freudian slip...bitter giants fan. Didn't you see how much worse our pass rush is without him? Who cares if we're missing Tuck and Osi to, they clearly didn't make his job easier for him.

*Reference a meaningless stat that ignores the context in which those numbers were accumulated even if said stat contradicts what your eyeballs show you*

EDIT:
I like this guy, I'm starting to really get a handle on his posting style...

niel89
09-13-2011, 11:30 AM
http://www.nfl.com/player/rexgrossman/2505623/gamelogs?season=2006

http://www.chicitysports.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/rex_grossman_matrix.jpg

You want a Super Bowl? Just follow me.

Monomach
09-13-2011, 11:30 AM
The Bills just beat a playoff team 41-7. SOUPER BOWL!

FUNBUNCHER
09-13-2011, 11:33 AM
YEEESSS!

Um, No. But maybe one day.

The Oline is just average, better than last year but they aren't a dominant ZBS unit.

Hightower is good, but if the Oline isn't neutralizing several Dlineman and a couple 'backers, he simply cannot break free.

Rex seems to have matured as a QB, but I don't think he's good enough to win games on his own and he's a tackling dummy in the pocket.

Yes the D is much improved. But rookie DT Jarvis Jenkins was the SKins best Dlineman and he's out for the year. OLBs Kerrigan and Orakpo are a special tandem, London Fletcher is still ageless, but Rocky McIntosh continues to be a liability in coverage.

The Skins secondary is going to be ABUSED by a legit QB( sorry Elijah!).
LL has a chronic bad hammy and Otogwe is nicked up from TC. Deangelo Hall is still hit-or-miss, a ballhawk with awful coverage discipline. The opposite corner is who??

If the Skins finish 8-8 or 9-7, folks in D.C. will start comparing Mike Shanahan to Joe Gibbs.

Skins are gamers, but they don't dominate in any single phase of the game like great teams are able to do.

Hate to say it, but if the Giants had given Brandon Jacobs 20+ carries in the 2nd half, he would have had close to 100 yards and 3 TDs and NY would have won that game by 7.

Coughlin believes in Elijah too much IMO instead of coaching to his team's strengths as the game plays out.

Splat
09-13-2011, 11:34 AM
5hfYJsQAhl0

prock
09-13-2011, 11:35 AM
The Redskins. Lol.

Ray Lewis/Rice
09-13-2011, 11:40 AM
A good defense can't win you a championship. The Ravens have been trying for years. We won one with a great defense and you guys are no where near that.

cmarq83
09-13-2011, 11:41 AM
Yeah, that's right. I've been high on the Redskins since before the preseason started, and I see no reason not to consider them among the best teams in the NFC this year, and one of the few favorites to play in Super Bowl XLVI.

- The defense will be one of the three best defenses in the NFC this year. If you hadn't noticed, they completely revamped the defense in the offseason by adding solid and/or elite players on all three levels. The front three was re- stocked with Barry Cofield and Stephen Bowen, two emerging young pass rushing linemen. They added one of the most NFL-ready pass rushing DE/OLB prospects in the draft (Ryan Kerrigan) to a roster that already features a Pro Bowl 3-4 OLB (Brian Orakpo). Kerrigan will be the Carl Banks to Orakpo's Lawrence Taylor. They also added a nice young CB named Josh Wilson, and a solid FS in OJ Otogwe, who will play alongside Pro Bowl SS Laron Landry. Because of the tremendous pass rush they will generate with Cofield, Bowen, Kerrigan, and Orakpo, their CBs (Deangelo Hall & co.) will only need to be solid to make this a shutdown unit against the pass.

- Because the defense will be tremendous, the offense will only need to be "solid" and Rex Grossman, who is unfairly maligned for his struggles in a Chicago offense that didn't fit his skillset, will only need to be an effective game manager. Mike Shanahan's system will turn Tim Hightower into a 1200+ yard rusher with ease, and Grossman will be able to take advantage of not only a strong running game (by rolling out and executing play-action fakes) but also a defense that will hold opposing offenses to low scores with regularity (allowing Grossman not to feel the need to take risks, and allowing him to act as a game manager).

- Why are they one of the favorites, if not *the* favorite in the NFC to play in the Super Bowl? Who else will have a defense this good? The Packers, maybe, but their only real consistent pass rush threats are Clay Matthews and BJ Raji. The Redskins can generate pass rush with upwards of four players, and will rarely need to blitz, unlike the Packers. The Saints? Their secondary is too poor and again, they have fewer pass rushers that can defeat one-on-one matchups than the Redskins. The Eagles? They are not nearly as strong up front, all throughout the front seven, as the Redskins. The Bears? They will provide the best competition in the NFC for the title of best defense, but their passing defense will not be nearly as good as the Redskins because their scheme will allow elite quarterbacks to exploit Cover-2 zones. If the Redskins can field the best defense in the NFC, and at least a solid offense with a strong running game that can milk the clock and keep the ball away from other quarterbacks (well within the reach of Hightower and Grossman), the Redskins will be going to the Super Bowl this year.

This can't be serious. So after 1 game against the Giants the Redskins are already a better defensive team than the #2 and #4 ranked defenses last year? NVM the fact that the Redskins allowed the second most yards of any team last year.

Jughead10
09-13-2011, 11:42 AM
This can't be serious. So after 1 game against the Giants the Redskins are already a better defensive team than the #2 and #4 ranked defenses last year? NVM the fact that the Redskins allowed the second most yards of any team last year.

You didn't hear they got Barry Cofield and Stephen Bowen?

Giantsfan1080
09-13-2011, 11:43 AM
The real Wrecks will show up soon enough and make this post look even more disastrous. If you at least said playoffs instead of Super Bowl it wouldn't be nearly as bad.

Rosebud
09-13-2011, 11:44 AM
YEEESSS!

Um, No. But maybe one day.

The Oline is just average, better than last year but they aren't a dominant ZBS unit.

Hightower is good, but if the Oline isn't neutralizing several Dlineman and a couple 'backers, he simply cannot break free.

Rex seems to have matured as a QB, but I don't think he's good enough to win games on his own and he's a tackling dummy in the pocket.

Yes the D is much improved. But rookie DT Jarvis Jenkins was the SKins best Dlineman and he's out for the year. OLBs Kerrigan and Orakpo are a special tandem, London Fletcher is still ageless, but Rocky McIntosh continues to be a liability in coverage.

The Skins secondary is going to be ABUSED by a legit QB( sorry Elijah!).
LL has a chronic bad hammy and Otogwe is nicked up from TC. Deangelo Hall is still hit-or-miss, a ballhawk with awful coverage discipline. The opposite corner is who??

If the Skins finish 8-8 or 9-7, folks in D.C. will start comparing Mike Shanahan to Joe Gibbs.

Skins are gamers, but they don't dominate in any single phase of the game like great teams are able to do.

Hate to say it, but if the Giants had given Brandon Jacobs 20+ carries in the 2nd half, he would have had close to 100 yards and 3 TDs and NY would have won that game by 7.

Coughlin believes in Elijah too much IMO instead of coaching to his team's strengths as the game plays out.

You can't really blame Eli for the OL playing like crap and no receiver other than Nicks being worth a damn in this stupid scheme. Yes we passed the ball too much but that's because Killdrive believes in his stupidly complicated passing game too much and our OL wasn't opening holes in the running game all that well.

Giantsfan1080
09-13-2011, 11:44 AM
Quit being such a better...sorry, Freudian slip...bitter giants fan. Didn't you see how much worse our pass rush is without him? Who cares if we're missing Tuck and Osi to, they clearly didn't make his job easier for him.

*Reference a meaningless stat that ignores the context in which those numbers were accumulated even if said stat contradicts what your eyeballs show you*

EDIT:
I like this guy, I'm starting to really get a handle on his posting style...

Look at the bright side, if we just lost to a Super Bowl team in somewhat close fashion without Tuck and Osi then surely we'll be seeing the Redskins again in the NFC Championship Game.

Jvig43
09-13-2011, 11:44 AM
This can't be serious. So after 1 game against the Giants the Redskins are already a better defensive team than the #2 and #4 ranked defenses last year? NVM the fact that the Redskins allowed the second most yards of any team last year.

This kid is the new reality check. But worse because he makes whole threads posting garbage rather than just jumping into threads already made and spewing out ****. We should all just put him on ignore and hope he stops posting.

Rosebud
09-13-2011, 11:46 AM
Look at the bright side, if we just lost to a Super Bowl team in somewhat close fashion without Tuck and Osi then surely we'll be seeing the Redskins again in the NFC Championship Game.

Good point, TEH GIANTZ ARE GOING TO TEH SUPERBOWLZZZ!!!!!!Z!!!!Z!!!!Z!!!!

thenewfeature06
09-13-2011, 11:48 AM
Why did any of you respond to this thread?

Ray Lewis/Rice
09-13-2011, 11:48 AM
Well all this thread did was give people a reason to bash the Redskins. Some people just want their team to win so bad they will believe anything.

prock
09-13-2011, 11:49 AM
Pretty sure he called Orakpo Lawrence Taylor too

Rosebud
09-13-2011, 11:50 AM
Why did any of you respond to this thread?

Cause trolls are fun?

thenewfeature06
09-13-2011, 11:52 AM
Waste of time and a thread. bie.

vidae
09-13-2011, 12:13 PM
I legit love threads like these. They're so gd entertaining. Keep em coming y'all!

thenewfeature06
09-13-2011, 12:19 PM
-___________________________-

gpngc
09-13-2011, 12:28 PM
I don't get it. What's wrong with the post? Sure he's being a little generous with some of his reasoning but it isn't THAT far off to think the Skins could be a surprise team. And yes, sometimes surprise teams get all the way to the Super Bowl...

I like the Skins, but I don't agree with this prediction. Their OL is NOT fit for the ZBS like someone mentioned. They kept running the stretch play for minimal gains and the Giants defended it with ease. I think more of that will come (but Hightower will still get his yards because they'll feed him so much) They should probably ax Cooley, add a blocking TE, and feature Fred Davis.

But I do think the defense will play much better (I don't think they were THAT much less talented last year, I think their secondary got beat a lot... sometimes that just happens) and having more pass rushers the OP alluded to will help out Orakpo and the CBs.

I would not be surprised at all if they went 10-6 and got in. I expect Tampa, Atlanta, and NYG to have down years and could see the Cowboys missing out again too. That would present a great opportunity for Rex and Shanny. Winning a playoff game - I'd be pretty suprised if they did that...

Also the OP didn't bring up the schedule. It's not difficult at all.

Arizona at home next week, then @ Dallas, then @ St. Louis. They have a real chance to start 4-0 (DAL will be tough)... then PHI, @ CAR, @ BUF, SF. 2-2 in that stretch would be a disappointment. @MIA, DAL, @SEA, NYJ. Again, that's not looking terribly difficult at the moment. Finally, NE, @NYG, MIN, @PHI. That's the toughest 4th of the sked, but they get NE at home, the two middle games are winnable, and the Eagles may be resting their starters by that point - who knows.

It's possible.

Forenci
09-13-2011, 12:43 PM
Sigh threads like this...

This is why we can't have nice things!

MetSox17
09-13-2011, 12:46 PM
Pretty sure he called Orakpo Lawrence Taylor too

Rak is my boy and all, but man that made me lol.

BeerBaron
09-13-2011, 12:50 PM
We saw "Good Rex" this weekend, but "Bad Rex" is always right around the corner. That will prevent the Redskins from being relevant.

Forenci
09-13-2011, 01:20 PM
We saw "Good Rex" this weekend, but "Bad Rex" is always right around the corner. That will prevent the Redskins from being relevant.

I feel as if someone should make a Good Rex/Bad Rex comic. With such witty catch phrases like, "Unleash the dragon!" or "**** it I'm going deep!"

How could it possibly go wrong?

tjsunstein
09-13-2011, 01:23 PM
They have just confirmed my thoughts in all 4 preseason games and now 1 regular season games, and it wil be too late to make bold predictions when they are 12-4 or 13-3 in week 16.
You're an idiot. Do you not know of bye weeks?

sbh15
09-13-2011, 01:44 PM
Yeah, that's right. I've been high on the Redskins since before the preseason started, and I see no reason not to consider them among the best teams in the NFC this year, and one of the few favorites to play in Super Bowl XLVI.

you are high on something, but i don't think it's the redskins :/

Giantsfan1080
09-13-2011, 01:45 PM
Rex or Wrecks was the best I've seen.

703SKINS202
09-13-2011, 01:52 PM
I love your passion as blind as it is.

Raiderz4Life
09-13-2011, 01:59 PM
lmao and he's a self-proclaimed Eagles fan

Monomach
09-13-2011, 02:10 PM
This guy kind of reminds me of Morton.

diesel
09-13-2011, 02:39 PM
"The Redskins are going the Super Bowl this year"


What did Danny Snyder buy up all the tickets this year?

bigbluedefense
09-13-2011, 03:31 PM
Ok, he's clearly way off on his statement, but to be fair, if you take away the fluff and overexaggerating, he does make some valid points.

The Redskins aren't a terrible team. They have significantly improved their roster. They're really only a qb away from being a legit playoff contender. They have a very good front 7 on defense, and they have a good safety duo in the secondary.

Their CBs kind of suck, but with a good front 7 and good safeties they can get away with mediocre CBs for now. On offense, their oline isn't horrible anymore. They have a good run game. They have good TEs. They lack WRs but their WR core isn't pathetic anymore. It's not good but it's not pathetic either.

If they get a CB, WR, and QB, all of which is not out of the question this coming offseason, who's to say they won't be legit?

Shanny has done a great job overhauling this roster. They're not that far away. I can see a respectable 6-10 season out of them, with promise for the future.

senormysterioso
09-13-2011, 03:48 PM
I'd be excited too if I was a Redskin fan. I don't think they've got enough to get through their division, but they finally have a team and not just a loose association of mercenaries and malcontents over there in Washington. They are really buying into what Shanny is selling though, there is reason to be excited about the season.

JBCX
09-13-2011, 04:00 PM
Shanny has done a great job overhauling this roster. They're not that far away. I can see a respectable 6-10 season out of them, with promise for the future.

The Giants will be the ones going 6-10 this year and the Redskins will be 10-6 or better...

bigbluedefense
09-13-2011, 04:02 PM
The Giants will be the ones going 6-10 this year and the Redskins will be 10-6 or better...

That's whassup.

scottyboy
09-13-2011, 04:08 PM
"Kerrigan will be the Carl Banks to Orakpo's Lawrence Taylor"

from now on, every thing you post will be invalid because of this quote and comparison.

Raiderz4Life
09-13-2011, 04:09 PM
"Kerrigan will be the Carl Banks to Orakpo's Lawrence Taylor"

from now on, every thing you post will be invalid because of this quote and comparison.

everything should've been invalidated a long time ago. Dude is the SWDC troll haha

drowe
09-13-2011, 04:21 PM
*posting so I can be notified when this thread gets bumped in 4 months when we're all discussing what the 'Skins will do with their top 10 draft pick*

CC.SD
09-13-2011, 04:33 PM
*posting so I can be notified when this thread gets bumped in 4 months when we're all discussing what the 'Skins will do with their top 10 draft pick*

Barkley!!!

Raiderz4Life
09-13-2011, 05:00 PM
Barkley!!!

NO!!! He's a future Raider!!

Rosebud
09-13-2011, 05:07 PM
The redskins running game wasn't that great and won't be that great for the entire season, and The RexCannon will subsequently look poor the entire season as well.

gpngc
09-13-2011, 05:23 PM
Ok, he's clearly way off on his statement, but to be fair, if you take away the fluff and overexaggerating, he does make some valid points.

The Redskins aren't a terrible team. They have significantly improved their roster. They're really only a qb away from being a legit playoff contender. They have a very good front 7 on defense, and they have a good safety duo in the secondary.

Their CBs kind of suck, but with a good front 7 and good safeties they can get away with mediocre CBs for now. On offense, their oline isn't horrible anymore. They have a good run game. They have good TEs. They lack WRs but their WR core isn't pathetic anymore. It's not good but it's not pathetic either.

If they get a CB, WR, and QB, all of which is not out of the question this coming offseason, who's to say they won't be legit?

Shanny has done a great job overhauling this roster. They're not that far away. I can see a respectable 6-10 season out of them, with promise for the future.

Thank you. Everyone is jumping down his throat because he said Super Bowl. If he said playoffs and the reaction was like this then people need to re-evaluate how they handicap the NFL. There is always playoff turnover.

Jvig43
09-13-2011, 06:32 PM
Thank you. Everyone is jumping down his throat because he said Super Bowl. If he said playoffs and the reaction was like this then people need to re-evaluate how they handicap the NFL. There is always playoff turnover.

First off, he didn't say playoffs, he said superbowl so let's not play the game of hypothetical's because playoffs aren't what he was suggesting. Secondly we already have a thread for this type of thing, hell we have two threads for superbowl winners which this useless post of his could have easily gone into,there is no reason to make this a thread. Lastly (and most importantly) he says stupid **** all the time like this, it isn't his first post. He's easily the biggest troll on this board right now, so he's going to get flamed like he is. Maybe you love to start useless arguments like this (which you tried doing like two nights ago suggesting the Colts losing by so much obviously means Manning > Brady in an unprovoked argument) but the rest of us are tired of people continuously jumping down teams/players dicks over one game, and the first game of the season at that.

gpngc
09-13-2011, 06:54 PM
I just think people who put forth reasoning in a prediction should be allowed to do so without getting crucified. As BBD mentioned, and I agreed with, Super Bowl is very generous, but his actually argument isn't terrible - at least not bad enough to warrant all the hate.

And I don't care what he's said in other threads - I think posts should be judged based on their merits, not WHO is posting them.

And again - you call his prediction "stupid ****." The Pats in 2001 at this time would have been "stupid ****." Rams in 99. Hell, Steelers last year. You don't know for sure that the Skins aren't going to the Super Bowl - you can disagree with it but if he makes valid points I don't think there's any reason for the jokes and "what and idiot" posts. I don't care much if they are there, but it takes away from a good discussion - how good can the Skins really be? And if you watched them in week 1, their D did look pretty ******* good...

Jvig43
09-13-2011, 07:06 PM
I'll repeat I suppose.

A. We have two threads, maybe more that this can go into.

B. Judge a post anyway you want it, this was a pretty bad one and the rest of his are as well, which typically either means he is a very ignorant poster, or just a troll. Either way it's annoying.

C. I never suggested the Redskins couldn't make the superbowl, his argument for it was pretty stupid outside of some ok points, and seriously the biggest issue is that it's week ******* one and based on one game + a preseason (which is hilarious that someone would honestly include the preseason in a reason why team whatever = SB) we don't need a thread about it, unless we want to just let a thread be made about whatever team that does well each week has a chance to go the SB. All 32 ******* teams have a chance of going to the SB, we don't need a thread about each and every one of them and why it's possible.

Raiderz4Life
09-13-2011, 07:09 PM
The preseason argument was weak. The Raiders went like 3-1 or 4-0 a few times..and yea...no SB for us.

bucfan12
09-13-2011, 07:34 PM
Little early people.

Just because hte Redskins beat the Giants week 1, does not mean they're going to the Super Bowl. Yes, it's nice to see that Rex Grossman has matured, but he's still prone to those bone-headed pick 6's that turn ball-games around.

Let's wait and see how the rest of the year plays out. If they're still in the playoff race come week 12, then good for them. But to say Super Bowl after week 1 is non-sense. I mean, even the 49ers are 1-0. Can we say Super Bowl for them? Steelers didn't look like a Super Bowl team in week 1, does that mean they don't have a shot now?

Rosebud
09-13-2011, 08:26 PM
I just think people who put forth reasoning in a prediction should be allowed to do so without getting crucified. As BBD mentioned, and I agreed with, Super Bowl is very generous, but his actually argument isn't terrible - at least not bad enough to warrant all the hate.

And I don't care what he's said in other threads - I think posts should be judged based on their merits, not WHO is posting them.

And again - you call his prediction "stupid ****." The Pats in 2001 at this time would have been "stupid ****." Rams in 99. Hell, Steelers last year. You don't know for sure that the Skins aren't going to the Super Bowl - you can disagree with it but if he makes valid points I don't think there's any reason for the jokes and "what and idiot" posts. I don't care much if they are there, but it takes away from a good discussion - how good can the Skins really be? And if you watched them in week 1, their D did look pretty ******* good...

This would be all fine and good if someone actually made the argument that when Bledsoe and Green would go down with injuries, their backups, Brady and Warner respectively, would start HoF careers. That's not the type of future telling dude's doing. His arguments suck not because of the point he's trying to make, but because he's basing it on the RexCannon staying in check, preseason performances, the Shannahan RB mythology and a defense becoming 2000 ravens caliber thanks to one rookie and two rotational guys who posted huge contract seasons.

NotRickJames
09-14-2011, 12:21 AM
We need a week one overreactions thread so we can condense all the overreactions into one thread.

Bulldogs
12-12-2011, 04:36 PM
*posting so I can be notified when this thread gets bumped in 4 months when we're all discussing what the 'Skins will do with their top 10 draft pick*

I'll be the one to bump this. Hilarious prediction. What shouldn't be missed here is him pimping Barry Cofield on page one.

JBCX
12-12-2011, 06:06 PM
The Skins defense has been good enough to win a Super Bowl, unfortunately, Rex Grossman and John Beck just really suck.

If they get a decent QB somehow, I think this team could definitely challenge for the NFC East and potentially a Super Bowl as early as next year.

I admit my prediction was wrong about this, but that doesnt' change the fact that I'm right about many other things.

Rosebud
12-12-2011, 06:23 PM
I admit my prediction was wrong about this, but that doesnt' change the fact that I'm right about many other things.

...just not football related things...

JBCX
12-12-2011, 06:24 PM
...just not football related things...

I'm right about every other football thing i posted on here.

Bulldogs
12-12-2011, 06:27 PM
I'm right about every other football thing i posted on here.

Must we really bring up the ridiculous list of things again?

JBCX
12-12-2011, 06:28 PM
Must we really bring up the ridiculous list of things again?

Other than this thread, there's nothing you can really bring up that it is starkly incorrect.

bored of education
12-12-2011, 06:34 PM
you prove that your life is not worth living, once again

Bulldogs
12-12-2011, 06:37 PM
Other than this thread, there's nothing you can really bring up that it is starkly incorrect.

Off the top of my head:

Giants and Bears will both miss the playoffs: Unproven so far, Giants are 50/50 in my mind, I think the Bears are done but it helps that Cutler and Forte went down

The Steelers will miss the playoffs: 100% false

JPP is worse than Carlos Dunlap: It's simple not true

Kevin Kolb is a great QB and will lead the Cardinals to the division title: He look absolutely awful at the beginning of the year, the team is better off with Skelton

To be honest, there is probably more too.

JBCX
12-12-2011, 06:43 PM
Off the top of my head:

Giants and Bears will both miss the playoffs: Unproven so far, Giants are 50/50 in my mind, I think the Bears are done but it helps that Cutler and Forte went down


Giants will be one-and-done even if they win the division, which still isnt' guaranteed.

The Bears are still done, and I was right.


The Steelers will miss the playoffs: 100% false


I don't think I made this prediction, did I? If I did, I was wrong, but it was probably some off-the-cuff remark or a series of "maybe" predictions.


JPP is worse than Carlos Dunlap: It's simple not true


Can you use facts to back this assertion up? I personally think that Dunlap is a better pass rusher and more solid in the running game. Until you can prove otherwise, you can't prove that I am wrong on this account.

And don't tell me the sack numbers, because per-snap pressure is more important than sheer volume of sacks.


Kevin Kolb is a great QB and will lead the Cardinals to the division title: He look absolutely awful at the beginning of the year, the team is better off with Skelton


How is it an automatic that Skelton is better? Skelton has looked just as horrible in many games this year. He throws at least 2 INTs in every game.

And I still believe that Kolb will lead the Cardinals to a division championship, but not this year. They need to surround him with a better offensive line.
I personally believe that Kolb will improve dramatically in his second year in Whisenhunt's system.

Rosebud
12-12-2011, 06:46 PM
Is the simple fact that you seem to think a pressure is equivalent to a sack enough to satisfy your craving for proof of your own incompetence?

JBCX
12-12-2011, 06:49 PM
Is the simple fact that you seem to think a pressure is equivalent to a sack enough to satisfy your craving for proof of your own incompetence?

A pressure and a sack are practically identical in terms of importance if the pressure leads to a poor decision that forces an incompletion or a throwaway. If the pressure forces, say, an errant throw that leads to an interception, it is actually *better* than a sack.

PoopSandwich
12-12-2011, 06:57 PM
I'm right about every other football thing i posted on here.

Yeah because Cutler and Forte magically get hurt after you say something you feel like you're some messiah.

cmarq83
12-12-2011, 06:59 PM
How do you know the Giants and Cowboys "rebound"? What are they rebounding to? Maybe the Eagles are just a better team than those two? Do you realize that the Eagles haven't lost to the Giants since early in the 2008 season? And do you realize that the Cowboys have serious deficiencies in their roster (aging O-Line, mediocre secondary) that they've only now tried to rectify? The Eagles basically have more talent across the board than either the Giants or the Cowboys at this point. It was evident last year and it will probably continue to be evident this year, especially after the free agency signings.

The offensive line is actually pretty solid right now. Jason Peters at LT is a Pro Bowl caliber player (yes, he actually is, read profootballfocus), Todd Herremens is a solid LG, they are returning Jamaal Jackson at C, they drafted a plug-and-play RG who was considered by many scouts to be the Logan Mankins of this year's draft, and at RT they are evaluating whether to use Ryan Harris, Winston Justice, or a younger played named Austin Howard. Really, the only questionable spot on the line at this point is RT but there are more than enough competent players competing for that job.

Regarding the linebackers: in a 4-3 scheme the linebackers are the least important part of the defense. As long as the front 4 are effective, and the cornerbacks can cover, the linebackers simply need to tackle stuff in the flat, occasionally cover RB/TEs, and occasionally blitz. It's not hard to find athletic guys in the later rounds who can do all that at least decently - hence, they have a few guys right now (Moise Fokou, Jamar Chaney) who will probably at least be decent at that as long as the front 4 and the secondary operate at a high level. This is the opposite of the 3-4 scheme in which teams such as the Steelers or Patriots can usually find big bodies in the later rounds to play DE and need to prioritize the LB position because in that scheme the LBs do more than the DEs, unlike the 4-3 which is inverted in this regard.



The point of having an explosive offense is that you will more often than not have a lead early. How often did teams stuff the Patriots and establish the run last season? Not often. Sure, in theory it could happen, but the Eagles offense will more often than not establish the lead first. They have too many explosive weapons to do otherwise.

And saying that "more teams are going to come into games with a better gameplan to shut them down" is like saying that more teams next year will have a better gameplan to shut down Tom Brady's offense. You can gameplan for anything, but eventually talent will still beat you. Vick is not as gimmicky as you think; he's far more of a passer than he ever was and I think you'll see that even more so this year.

How about this huge example of fail?

JBCX
12-12-2011, 07:06 PM
How about this huge example of fail?

There is nothing incorrect in those premises.

The fact that the Eagles are having a poor season with an incompetent DC doesnt' mean that those concepts are bad.

Give this team a competent defensive coordinator, and they are probably 8-5 or 9-3 right now.

cmarq83
12-12-2011, 07:16 PM
There is nothing incorrect in those premises.

The fact that the Eagles are having a poor season with an incompetent DC doesnt' mean that those concepts are bad.

Give this team a competent defensive coordinator, and they are probably 8-5 or 9-3 right now.

Besides for the fact that everything you said in there blew up right in your face, you were dead on. Congrats!

JBCX
12-12-2011, 07:18 PM
Besides for the fact that everything you said in there blew up right in your face, you were dead on. Congrats!

The concepts aren't incorrect, though. Sure, the Eagles disappointed, but that doesn't mean that the blueprint can't work with proper coaching staff and personnel. In fact, I wouldn't be shocked if they made a few changes in the offseason (DC, LB, maybe a FS) and were right back in to the Super Bowl picture.

Bulldogs
12-12-2011, 07:18 PM
I've decided Thumper is just Skip Bayless except his ridiculous predictions don't come true.

Rosebud
12-12-2011, 11:14 PM
The concepts aren't incorrect, though. Sure, the Eagles disappointed, but that doesn't mean that the blueprint can't work with proper coaching staff and personnel. In fact, I wouldn't be shocked if they made a few changes in the offseason (DC, LB, maybe a FS) and were right back in to the Super Bowl picture.

Personnel the Eagles don't have.

Rosebud
12-12-2011, 11:15 PM
I've decided Thumper is just Skip Bayless except his ridiculous predictions don't come true.

I actually like Skip Bayless, he at least builds his trolling on something most of the time. Sometimes he does get Thumper bad, but that's usually when his hearts not into it cause he knows he has no cards to play.

whatadai
12-13-2011, 01:59 AM
This is hilarious...

I like his excuses too...anyone can easily say something like him...watch:

I think my prediction that the Indianapolis Colts would go undefeated this season is correct. While they didn't, my premises were still correct. I can easily see them going undefeated next season, all they need is a new GM, head coach, offensive coordinator, defensive coordinator, quarterback, offensive line, wide receivers, tight end, half back, full back, kicker, punter, defensive tackle, defensive end, linebacker, corner back, free safety, and strong safety. Other than that, my premises are correct. Give this team players at these positions and I can see them winning the Super Bowl. Even though I predicted they would do well with their current personnel...since I've been proven wrong...I'll just make excuses that they didn't have the right personnel.

And I said Chicago won't go to the playoffs because Cutler and Forte suck and can't take them that far...and look...I'm right...Cutler and Forte aren't taking the Bears to the playoffs.

ChiFan24
12-13-2011, 02:01 AM
This guy sucks.

JBCX
12-13-2011, 12:34 PM
This is hilarious...

I like his excuses too...anyone can easily say something like him...watch:

I think my prediction that the Indianapolis Colts would go undefeated this season is correct. While they didn't, my premises were still correct. I can easily see them going undefeated next season, all they need is a new GM, head coach, offensive coordinator, defensive coordinator, quarterback, offensive line, wide receivers, tight end, half back, full back, kicker, punter, defensive tackle, defensive end, linebacker, corner back, free safety, and strong safety. Other than that, my premises are correct. Give this team players at these positions and I can see them winning the Super Bowl. Even though I predicted they would do well with their current personnel...since I've been proven wrong...I'll just make excuses that they didn't have the right personnel.


What's funny about this is that this same Colts team, with much of the same players, actually was on pace to go undefeated (had it not been for Bill Polian pulling the players in the last two games) just two years ago.

So in effect, you just bolstered my argument - a 2009 Colts team that had the potential to be undefeated is now the same team, minus its QB, that has the potential to go winless.

Because the premise of the Colts team-building process is correct - it just falls apart without its Hall of Fame QB. With the same LBers, DTs, DEs, CBs, FSs, WRs, TEs, OL, but with a healthy Manning at the helm, this is a playoff team. Just because they are winless now does not mean that the premises behind the Colts roster are incorrect.

Jvig43
12-13-2011, 12:50 PM
This guy sucks.

I don't think anyone would disagree with this.

Whatadai summed up this thread pretty well.

JBCX
12-13-2011, 12:54 PM
I don't think anyone would disagree with this.

Whatadai summed up this thread pretty well.

And I completely disputed his "summary" with cold, hard logic.

Jvig43
12-13-2011, 12:58 PM
I don't think you need to get a better grasp of the term "logic".

prock
12-13-2011, 01:02 PM
And I completely disputed his "summary" with cold, hard logic.

More like a cold, hard strawman.

jrdrylie
12-13-2011, 01:09 PM
I'm right about every other football thing i posted on here.
Nope.

The Giants will be the ones going 6-10 this year and the Redskins will be 10-6 or better...
The Giants already have 7 wins and the Redskins would have to win out to make this half right.

Seattle +14 at Pittsburgh is a big-time money play. That defense looked old and slow last week and I could easily see them giving up a bunch of rushing yardage to the Seahawks and allowing the score to stay within a touchdown.
Pittsburgh: 24
Seattle: 0

Urlacher will intercept Drew Brees 3 times and force 2 fumbles en route to a Bears 40-17 blowout.
Brees threw zero interceptions and won by 17.

There really is no excuse whatsoever for the Eagles to give up more than 14 points, max, in this game.
Cover Nicks with Nnamdi, cover the other guy with Samuel, and then put 8 men in the box on every down to stop the running game.
Giants scored 29

Jay Cutler will be running for his life all game long. Calvin Johnson will blow the top off the Bears' Cover-2.
41-13 Lions
Cutler was sacked twice, Calvin Johnson had under 100 yards, and the Bears won by 24

I think the Lions defensive line will put in a performance for the ages. Rodgers will have his worst game of the season, by far, and will throw multiple interceptions.
Lions 37, Packers 13
Not even close

You were correct about the Buccaneers and Chiefs falling back as well as Von Miller being rookie of the year. You are also strikingly inconsistent. Not too long ago you said that only the Packers, 49ers, and Giants would matter in the playoffs and that one of them would be in the Super Bowl. Then you say very soon after that the Giants won't make the playoffs? You also said that Vontaze Burfict was a future Ray Lewis type linebacker only to later say he was a future bust.

hockey619
12-13-2011, 01:10 PM
More like a cold, hard strawman.

hey, back off. nostradamus is thumper-lite, he wished he could have had thumpers vision. like his prediction in my sig.

or this gem:

I can't wait to bump this thread 5 months from now when the Cards are either the one of the wildcard teams or have won their division and Kolb is putting up 300+ yards in most of his games throwing to Larry Fitzgerald and every Cardinals fan is saying "Dominique Rodgers who?".

yes, yes. the same kolb who has thrown for 300 yards once this year and been matched/outplayed by john skelton. But no, wait...

"you cant judge him yet, give him more time!" or "its his line!" or "my prediction is still true in premise, he just needs to become more talented and then he'll be better!"

which excuse will he choose? can we get a poll on this thing?

Shane P. Hallam
12-13-2011, 01:16 PM
It's funny when people make definitive statements that are wrong and still can't admit to it, lol.

bigbluedefense
12-13-2011, 01:17 PM
Ouch. Just ouch. I mean, sometimes you just gotta take your L and move on.

Like I said earlier in this thread, yes, the Redskins have improved, and they aren't all that far off from being a respectable team if they draft a qb.

But there was so much fail with so many predictions that I don't even know where to begin.

A Perfect Score
12-13-2011, 01:18 PM
And I completely disputed his "summary" with cold, hard logic.

Just because you call it logic doesn't make it so. Let me guess, PFF told you the Skins were going to win, right?

AntoinCD
12-13-2011, 01:29 PM
Regarding the linebackers: in a 4-3 scheme the linebackers are the least important part of the defense. As long as the front 4 are effective, and the cornerbacks can cover, the linebackers simply need to tackle stuff in the flat, occasionally cover RB/TEs, and occasionally blitz. It's not hard to find athletic guys in the later rounds who can do all that at least decently - hence, they have a few guys right now (Moise Fokou, Jamar Chaney) who will probably at least be decent at that as long as the front 4 and the secondary operate at a high level. This is the opposite of the 3-4 scheme in which teams such as the Steelers or Patriots can usually find big bodies in the later rounds to play DE and need to prioritize the LB position because in that scheme the LBs do more than the DEs, unlike the 4-3 which is inverted in this regard.


This right here is so correct...you know as long as you look past players like Richard Seymour, Ty Warren, Gerard Warren, Ron Brace etc who have played DE for the Patriots yet were drafted in the first two rounds(Gerard Warren by another team but still has relevance) and the fact that the only first round LB Bill Belichick has drafted for the Pats has been Jerod Mayo.

JBCX
12-13-2011, 01:38 PM
This right here is so correct...you know as long as you look past players like Richard Seymour, Ty Warren, Gerard Warren, Ron Brace etc who have played DE for the Patriots yet were drafted in the first two rounds(Gerard Warren by another team but still has relevance) and the fact that the only first round LB Bill Belichick has drafted for the Pats has been Jerod Mayo.

What about the Steelers?

Their 3-4 front featured DEs Brett Keisel and Aaron Smith, 7th and 4th round picks, respectively. LBers Woodley and Timmons, however, are high draft picks.

AntoinCD
12-13-2011, 01:40 PM
What about the Steelers?

Their 3-4 front featured DEs Brett Keisel and Aaron Smith, 7th and 4th round picks, respectively. LBers Woodley and Timmons, however, are high draft picks.

I have no qualms with what you said about the Steelers but your point lumped the Patriots and Steelers together. What may be applicable for some 34 teams may not be for others.

sbh15
12-13-2011, 01:42 PM
What about the Steelers?

Their 3-4 front featured DEs Brett Keisel and Aaron Smith, 7th and 4th round picks, respectively. LBers Woodley and Timmons, however, are high draft picks.

they've also spent 2 recent first round picks on ziggy hood and cam hayward

JBCX
12-13-2011, 01:44 PM
Nope.


The Giants already have 7 wins and the Redskins would have to win out to make this half right.


Again, it's a difference of a QB. The Redskins defense is superior to the Giants, but I didn't realize how bad Rex Grossman and John Beck would be. With a different QB, the Redskins win this division because every other team is very mediocre and bad on defense.


Pittsburgh: 24
Seattle: 0


Now you're going to call me out on individual game picks? Can you find me someone who can call every single NFL game correctly? If I could do that, I'd own a private island.


Giants scored 29


And in the rematch, my prediction came true - the Eagles defense completely stifled the Giants passing attack. The first game featured a few costly breakdowns in coverage which led to a handful of big plays which made the Giants' offensive performance look better than it actually was.


Cutler was sacked twice, Calvin Johnson had under 100 yards, and the Bears won by 24


Again, individual game picks. Not impressive calling someone out on those, because we all mess these ups from time to time. I am probably 60% on game picks this year, all told, which is not bad.


You were correct about the Buccaneers and Chiefs falling back as well as Von Miller being rookie of the year. You are also strikingly inconsistent. Not too long ago you said that only the Packers, 49ers, and Giants would matter in the playoffs and that one of them would be in the Super Bowl. Then you say very soon after that the Giants won't make the playoffs? You also said that Vontaze Burfict was a future Ray Lewis type linebacker only to later say he was a future bust.

I never considered the Giants a serious playoff contender. In the NFC, it's all about the Packers, but the Saints, Lions, Cowboys and 49ers all have a chance to upset them, even if it is unlikely, I've maintained this stance for most of the season.

I never claimed that Burfict was a future Ray Lewis. I posed the question of his NFL potential a long time ago when the hype was first starting to gain steam, and then after watching tape of him in the past year came to the conclusion that he is simply not an elite prospect. What's inconsistent about posing a question about a prospect a year or more ago, and then watching him play this year and being turned off regarding his potential?

A Perfect Score
12-13-2011, 01:44 PM
What about the Steelers?

Their 3-4 front featured DEs Brett Keisel and Aaron Smith, 7th and 4th round picks, respectively. LBers Woodley and Timmons, however, are high draft picks.

It also features Cam Heyward and Ziggy Hood, both of whom were drafted in the first round as 5 tech defensive tackles.

The reason that players like Smith and Keisel used to be available in rounds 4-7 was because very few teams ran the 3-4 and as such, their services were devalued by most teams in favor of players who fit the 4-3. It's why teams like the Steelers and Patriots used to be able to draft those players so late, it's because nobody else was targeting the tweeners and situational players that would go on to define the success of the 3-4. It's absolutely impossible to build a defense this way in the contemporary NFL, as most teams now run the 3-4. In fact, if you notice, some of the smarter 3-4 clubs (Patriots, Ravens, etc.) have started incorporating 4-3 looks into their defense because those are now the types of players falling on draft day and as such, offer better value on picks.

Football 101, jack. Try checking it out sometime.

JBCX
12-13-2011, 01:45 PM
they've also spent 2 recent first round picks on ziggy hood and cam hayward

We have yet to see if this new strategy results in Super Bowl wins. I am skeptical that it will.

All of their elite Super Bowl teams (2005, 2008, 2010) featured low round "grinders" playing 3-4 DE.

prock
12-13-2011, 01:47 PM
Now his excuse is "I didn't know how bad Rex Grossman and John Beck would be."

More like "I didn't know anything about football and have never seen either of these guys played before, so I just read PFF and agree with everything they say."

JBCX
12-13-2011, 01:47 PM
It also features Cam Heyward and Ziggy Hood, both of whom were drafted in the first round as 5 tech defensive tackles.

The reason that players like Smith and Keisel used to be available in rounds 4-7 was because very few teams ran the 3-4 and as such, their services were devalued by most teams in favor of players who fit the 4-3. It's why teams like the Steelers and Patriots used to be able to draft those players so late, it's because nobody else was targeting the tweeners and situational players that would go on to define the success of the 3-4. It's absolutely impossible to build a defense this way in the contemporary NFL, as most teams now run the 3-4. In fact, if you notice, some of the smarter 3-4 clubs (Patriots, Ravens, etc.) have started incorporating 4-3 looks into their defense because those are now the types of players falling on draft day and as such, offer better value on picks.


No; the reason that Smith and Keisel were available in later rounds is because their skillset required to play 3-4 DE is not as athletically demanding as the skillset required to play DL in a 4-3. 3-4 DE are instructed to occupy OL in the running game and allow the LBers to flow to the football. Pass rush pressure, in addition, from a 3-4 DE is an added bonus, so 3-4 DEs need not be the athletic freaks that 4-3 DEs usually need to be.

Football 101, jack.

prock
12-13-2011, 01:48 PM
We have yet to see if this new strategy results in Super Bowl wins. I am skeptical that it will.

All of their elite Super Bowl teams (2005, 2008, 2010) featured low round "grinders" playing 3-4 DE.

And elite, early round picks playing linebacker. Like James Harrison, Clark Haggins, Joey Porter, and Larry Foote.

Lol.

JBCX
12-13-2011, 01:50 PM
And elite, early round picks playing linebacker. Like James Harrison, Clark Haggins, Joey Porter, and Larry Foote.

Lol.

Did you forget Lamarr Woodley and Lawrence Timmons? And James Farrior, who was the 8th overall pick?

Brown Leader
12-13-2011, 01:52 PM
And I completely disputed his "summary" with cold, hard logic.
I hope you wrote that with a smile.

jrdrylie
12-13-2011, 01:53 PM
Again, it's a difference of a QB. The Redskins defense is superior to the Giants, but I didn't realize how bad Rex Grossman and John Beck would be. With a different QB, the Redskins win this division because every other team is very mediocre and bad on defense.

How do you not know how bad John Beck and Rex Grossman are? Have you never watched them before this year? This excuse is like me predicting the Packers would miss the playoffs and then when they finish the season undefeated me saying I didn't realize how good Aaron Rodgers is.



Now you're going to call me out on individual game picks? Can you find me someone who can call every single NFL game correctly? If I could do that, I'd own a private island.

We all get games wrong. But you were so specific. And you weren't just wrong about these. You were so far off. You predicted Team A would beat Team B by 3 TDs when the actual result was Team A losing by 4 TDs.

I never considered the Giants a serious playoff contender. In the NFC, it's all about the Packers, but the Saints, Lions, Cowboys and 49ers all have a chance to upset them, even if it is unlikely, I've maintained this stance for most of the season.

You sure as **** did.

The only teams that matter in the NFC are the Packers, 49ers, Cowboys, and Giants. One of those teams is going to represent the NFC in the Super Bowl.

I never claimed that Burfict was a future Ray Lewis. I posed the question of his NFL potential a long time ago when the hype was first starting to gain steam, and then after watching tape of him in the past year came to the conclusion that he is simply not an elite prospect. What's inconsistent about posing a question about a prospect a year or more ago, and then watching him play this year and being turned off regarding his potential?

You sure as **** did

Vontaze Burfict would be a beast of a MLB for the Giants.

Could be the next Ray Lewis.

JBCX
12-13-2011, 01:57 PM
How do you not know how bad John Beck and Rex Grossman are? Have you never watched them before this year? This excuse is like me predicting the Packers would miss the playoffs and then when they finish the season undefeated me saying I didn't realize how good Aaron Rodgers is.


John Beck was an unknown quantity and it was not a stretch to believe that Shanahan could extract a repalcement-level performance from him behind a strong running game and tough defense. I guess Shanahan is a bit overrated as an offensive coach, or Beck is just plain old bad.



We all get games wrong. But you were so specific. And you weren't just wrong about these. You were so far off. You predicted Team A would beat Team B by 3 TDs when the actual result was Team A losing by 4 TDs.


I did that once, for the Bears-Lions game. Once.


You sure as **** did.


That must have been written before the season started, because since the middle of this season, the only playoff contenders I ever backed have been the Packers, 49ers, Cowboys, or Saints.


You sure as **** did

You did see that "could" there, didn't you? And you did see my posts in the Burfict thread in the 2011 Draft forum most recently, didn't you?

AntoinCD
12-13-2011, 01:57 PM
You can't make sweeping general statements about team's philosophies based on a few players. For every Brett Keisel and Aaron Smith there is a Ziggy Hood and Cam Heyward. For every Farrior, Timmons and Woodley there are Harrison, Porter etc.

Why not just say teams like the Steelers have shown they aren't afraid to spend high picks on LBs. That can't be argued with because they have done it in the recent past. But to say they don't pick DEs highly is just false.

CJSchneider
12-13-2011, 02:00 PM
Yeah, that's right. I've been high .

The first six words of the OP explain everything.

Jvig43
12-13-2011, 02:03 PM
How do you not know how bad John Beck and Rex Grossman are? Have you never watched them before this year? This excuse is like me predicting the Packers would miss the playoffs and then when they finish the season undefeated me saying I didn't realize how good Aaron Rodgers is.





We all get games wrong. But you were so specific. And you weren't just wrong about these. You were so far off. You predicted Team A would beat Team B by 3 TDs when the actual result was Team A losing by 4 TDs.



You sure as **** did.





You sure as **** did

Bwhaha JBCX, never post again. You just got called on all of your ****. Just own up and ******* admit you were wrong instead of trying to make some of the most pitiful excuses I've ever seen.

jrdrylie
12-13-2011, 02:03 PM
John Beck was an unknown quantity and it was not a stretch to believe that Shanahan could extract a repalcement-level performance from him behind a strong running game and tough defense. I guess Shanahan is a bit overrated as an offensive coach, or Beck is just plain old bad.

John Beck wasn't unknown. He was absolutely terrible in 4 starts with the Dolphins and then he was so bad he couldn't see the field for three straight years. Nothing unknown about that.

I did that once, for the Bears-Lions game. Once.

And the Bears-Saints game. And the Packers-Lions game.

That must have been written before the season started, because since the middle of this season, the only playoff contenders I ever backed have been the Packers, 49ers, Cowboys, or Saints.

You said this on November 15th.


You did see that "could" there, didn't you? And you did see my posts in the Burfict thread in the 2011 Draft forum most recently, didn't you?

Yes, you said he could. But going from saying he could be the next Ray Lewis to saying he is a future bust in less than a month. That is pretty inconsistent.

JBCX
12-13-2011, 02:10 PM
John Beck wasn't unknown. He was absolutely terrible in 4 starts with the Dolphins and then he was so bad he couldn't see the field for three straight years. Nothing unknown about that.



He barely started in Miami. QBs can often develop later in their careers, as well, in different offensive schemes, like a Rich Gannon or a Kurt Warner or even Steve Young. There's no reason to suspect that John Beck couldn't do the same.


And the Bears-Saints game. And the Packers-Lions game.


I never said anything about a blowout regarding those games.



You said this on November 15th.


Well, regardless of when I said it, I don't consider the Giants a serious playoff contender at this point. I may at one point have considered them a fringe contender, but after watching their defense in recent weeks, I have to rescind that consideration.



Yes, you said he could. But going from saying he could be the next Ray Lewis to saying he is a future bust in less than a month. That is pretty inconsistent.

You've never soured on a prospect after studying his in-game performance? Burfict has been terrible all year, and I wonder why anyone would consider him an elite prospect at this point.

jrdrylie
12-13-2011, 02:13 PM
I never said anything about a blowout regarding those games.


What? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. You absolutely did. I just quoted you saying it. You said the Bears would win 40-17 over the Saints and you said the Lions would beat the Packers 37-13. If you don't believe that you actually said this, go to the previous page where I quoted you.

JBCX
12-13-2011, 02:13 PM
You can't make sweeping general statements about team's philosophies based on a few players. For every Brett Keisel and Aaron Smith there is a Ziggy Hood and Cam Heyward. For every Farrior, Timmons and Woodley there are Harrison, Porter etc.


Ziggy Hood and Cam Heyward have done little to nothing for the Steelers. We don't know if they ever will, or if the new strategy of selecting 3-4 DEs in the higher rounds will ever pay off for Pittsburgh, because it just as easily might lead to a decade of underwhelming defense because they squandered early draft picks on less important positions to the exclusion of more important ones such as LB or CB.


Why not just say teams like the Steelers have shown they aren't afraid to spend high picks on LBs. That can't be argued with because they have done it in the recent past. But to say they don't pick DEs highly is just false.

They have only begun to pick DEs high recently, and this strategy has yet to be tested for effectiveness, obviously, because their defense is still built around an older corps of players. We will see if drafting Hood and Heyward high was the right call only, say, 2+ years from now.

A Perfect Score
12-13-2011, 02:13 PM
He barely started in Miami. QBs can often develop later in their careers, as well, in different offensive schemes, like a Rich Gannon or a Kurt Warner or even Steve Young. There's no reason to suspect that John Beck couldn't do the same.



I never said anything about a blowout regarding those games.




Well, regardless of when I said it, I don't consider the Giants a serious playoff contender at this point. I may at one point have considered them a fringe contender, but after watching their defense in recent weeks, I have to rescind that consideration.




You've never soured on a prospect after studying his in-game performance? Burfict has been terrible all year, and I wonder why anyone would consider him an elite prospect at this point.

NFLDC, the only place John Beck is mentioned with the likes of Rich Gannon, Kurt Warner and Steve Young. This guy has to be the world's most obvious troll, there's no way someone could say that and be serious.

BaLLiN
12-13-2011, 02:15 PM
http://noobsnoobsandmorenoobs.yolasite.com/resources/noob.jpg

Jvig43
12-13-2011, 02:15 PM
NFLDC, the only place John Beck is mentioned with the likes of Rich Gannon, Kurt Warner and Steve Young. This guy has to be the world's most obvious troll, there's no way someone could say that and be serious.

But when called out on it later deny ever mentioning it despite someone quoting the exact comment.....with cold, hard logic.

JBCX
12-13-2011, 02:18 PM
NFLDC, the only place John Beck is mentioned with the likes of Rich Gannon, Kurt Warner and Steve Young. This guy has to be the world's most obvious troll, there's no way someone could say that and be serious.

Explain to me why it is impossible for someone like John Beck to turn into an elite QB.

If I had told someone in 1998 that a journeyman from the Arena league named Kurt Warner would be one of the league's best QBs soon, and would win a Super Bowl, you would have called me crazy.

If I had told someone in the late 90s that 33-year old Rich Gannon, that never did anything up to that point, would be the league MVP and take the Raiders to the Super Bowl, you would have called me crazy.

If I had told someone in 1990 that the 49ers backup QB, who had shown little ability to be a passing threat up that point and played more like a glorified RB, would become one of the most efficient passers in NFL history and play arguably better at times than his predecessor Joe Montana, you would have called me crazy.

So of course, calling me crazy for thinking it was *possible* for John Beck to do something, even at age 29, is perfectly justified.

A Perfect Score
12-13-2011, 02:31 PM
Explain to me why it is impossible for someone like John Beck to turn into an elite QB.

If I had told someone in 1998 that a journeyman from the Arena league named Kurt Warner would be one of the league's best QBs soon, and would win a Super Bowl, you would have called me crazy.

If I had told someone in the late 90s that 33-year old Rich Gannon, that never did anything up to that point, would be the league MVP and take the Raiders to the Super Bowl, you would have called me crazy.

If I had told someone in 1990 that the 49ers backup QB, who had shown little ability to be a passing threat up that point and played more like a glorified RB, would become one of the most efficient passers in NFL history and play arguably better at times than his predecessor Joe Montana, you would have called me crazy.

So of course, calling me crazy for thinking it was *possible* for John Beck to do something, even at age 29, is perfectly justified.

Let's handle each individually, and I'll get to Beck last. Before proceeding though, it's very important to stress, and I'll pause for emphasis because clearly you're having a hard time understanding this...Each of the players you listed is the exception, not the rule. For every one of those players who overcomes their adversary to post a (Borderline) HoF career, there are 87465873645873465 who fail, miserably. Here's some cold, hard logic for you:

Warner - Undoubtedly one of the best stories in the history of the NFL. Grocery store bagboy to NFL MVP is the definition of rags to riches, but assuming Beck could do it simply because Warner did is absolutely asinine. If you look closer, you notice that many of the things that defined Warner's success in the NFL were not attributes Beck possesses: Warner's incredibly fast release, pinpoint accuracy and the talent on his offense (Pace, Faulk, Bruce, Holt, Hakim, etc.) were not things Beck had going for him in Washington. Actually, they aren't things Beck ever possessed. I fail to see any similarities in player or situation here, other then you picking Beck out of the dark to have a similar career path, even though he failed miserably in his first outings with 3 different teams while Warner matured practically overnight in that St Louis offense.

Young - Drafted first overall in like 3 different drafts. How is his career trajectory even remotely similar to Beck's? What attributes does he share with Beck? Why the hell are we talking about Steve Young and John Beck? Why, because Beck was a failure with his original team who got another chance to start. That sound's like a scenario that's only ever happened with those two players, so obviously Beck will turn out like Young.

Gannon - This is the closest of the three, and it's still a pretty obscure connection. Gannon is the only one of the three who was even remotely mediocre before his explosion in success, and even then...He never looked as bad as John Beck. Few do, actually. The guy isn't an NFL starter, plain and simple. He never was. When has Beck ever displayed any sort of talent or consistency in the NFL that would lead you to think he'd be a successful player? Or is the much more likely scenario that you, like most of the annoying, useless, piece of **** attention grabbing whores who populate the planet, just spew random and useless predictions in the hopes of getting one right?

So remind me again, in your logical and clairvoyant sort of way, how Beck's oncoming success in Washington parallels the three HoF players you compared him to?

JBCX
12-13-2011, 02:39 PM
Let's handle each individually, and I'll get to Beck last. Before proceeding though, it's very important to stress, and I'll pause for emphasis because clearly you're having a hard time understanding this...Each of the players you listed is the exception, not the rule. For every one of those players who overcomes their adversary to post a (Borderline) HoF career, there are 87465873645873465 who fail, miserably. Here's some cold, hard logic for you:

Warner - Undoubtedly one of the best stories in the history of the NFL. Grocery store bagboy to NFL MVP is the definition of rags to riches, but assuming Beck could do it simply because Warner did is absolutely asinine. If you look closer, you notice that many of the things that defined Warner's success in the NFL were not attributes Beck possesses: Warner's incredibly fast release, pinpoint accuracy and the talent on his offense (Pace, Faulk, Bruce, Holt, Hakim, etc.) were not things Beck had going for him in Washington. Actually, they aren't things Beck ever possessed. I fail to see any similarities in player or situation here, other then you picking Beck out of the dark to have a similar career path, even though he failed miserably in his first outings with 3 different teams while Warner matured practically overnight in that St Louis offense.

Young - Drafted first overall in like 3 different drafts. How is his career trajectory even remotely similar to Beck's? What attributes does he share with Beck? Why the hell are we talking about Steve Young and John Beck? Why, because Beck was a failure with his original team who got another chance to start. That sound's like a scenario that's only ever happened with those two players, so obviously Beck will turn out like Young.

Gannon - This is the closest of the three, and it's still a pretty obscure connection. Gannon is the only one of the three who was even remotely mediocre before his explosion in success, and even then...He never looked as bad as John Beck. Few do, actually. The guy isn't an NFL starter, plain and simple. He never was. When has Beck ever displayed any sort of talent or consistency in the NFL that would lead you to think he'd be a successful player? Or is the much more likely scenario that you, like most of the annoying, useless, piece of **** attention grabbing whores who populate the planet, just spew random and useless predictions in the hopes of getting one right?

So remind me again, in your logical and clairvoyant sort of way, how Beck's oncoming success in Washington parallels the three HoF players you compared him to?

Beck was underrated as a prospect coming out of BYU. He *was* accurate and had a quick release and a strong mind for the game. If you never studied him, you can't make any claims to dispute this. Clearly you are just grasping at straws here and have never looked at Beck as a prospect, because all you can claim is that he "isn't an NFL starter, plain and simple" without using any actual facts about Beck to dispute my claim, and then resorting to crude ad hominem attacks on me.

Here's a whole disseratation on Beck's potential as an NFL QB which should illuminate some things for you, because clearly you are just shooting from the hip at this point and have no relevant facts about John Beck as a prospect from which to debate me:

http://mattwaldmanrsp.com/2011/07/06/emerging-nfl-talents-qb-john-beck-redskins/

cmarq83
12-13-2011, 02:47 PM
I should be studying for finals, but I'm just too mesmerized by the constant arrogance and stupidity being displayed by JBCX right now.

A Perfect Score
12-13-2011, 02:56 PM
Beck was underrated as a prospect coming out of BYU. He *was* accurate and had a quick release and a strong mind for the game. If you never studied him, you can't make any claims to dispute this. Clearly you are just grasping at straws here and have never looked at Beck as a prospect, because all you can claim is that he "isn't an NFL starter, plain and simple" without using any actual facts about Beck to dispute my claim, and then resorting to crude ad hominem attacks on me.

Here's a whole disseratation on Beck's potential as an NFL QB which should illuminate some things for you, because clearly you are just shooting from the hip at this point and have no relevant facts about John Beck as a prospect from which to debate me:

http://mattwaldmanrsp.com/2011/07/06/emerging-nfl-talents-qb-john-beck-redskins/

I didn't even need to highlight "was", you did it yourself. Being accurate at BYU doesn't translate to being accurate in the NFL. In fact, every time I've watched Beck at the NFL level he's been anything but accurate. He consistently underthrows receivers and a lack of zip on his passes leads to huge errors in the intermediate passing game. But you're totally right, his time at BYU was much more telling of his ability to be a successful NFL passer. I mean, Rich Gannon got better right? You're right though, that super quick release that Beck has is totally going to compensate for his heavy indecision and inability to properly execute a playbook...I mean, Kurt Warner figured it out, and that guy could barely figure out how to properly put the groceries in the bag. Why would we bother to look at Beck's 4 year NFL tenure when we can just say he was underrated in college and compare him to HoF caliber players, hoping blindly that we're right?

Yeah guys, I bet John Beck's career is one more NFL franchise away from taking a HoF turn. If he gets one more shot, JBCX and the guy with the blog will be totally right.

Oh, one more thing...Being an underrated QB prospect in a class that included Jamarcus Russel, Brady Quinn, Kevin Kolb, Trent Edwards and Troy Smith is like being the smartest kid with down syndrome. It means nothing. Actually, that's probably a metaphor you're familiar with, because at this point I'm convinced you just might have down syndrome.

jrdrylie
12-13-2011, 02:56 PM
I should be studying for finals, but I'm just too mesmerized by the constant arrogance and stupidity being displayed by JBCX right now.

Screw finals, nobody cares about your GPA. They only care that you have a degree.

cmarq83
12-13-2011, 03:03 PM
JBCX knew that John Beck was going to turn into the next Kurt Warner, and lead the Redskins to the Super Bowl while he was sitting on the bench after being beat out in training camp by Rex Grossman. Nice call on that one.

cmarq83
12-13-2011, 03:04 PM
Screw finals, nobody cares about your GPA. They only care that you have a degree.

Unfortunately where I live in Massachusetts everyone and their mother has a degree. It really does make a difference :/

Rosebud
12-13-2011, 03:58 PM
And I completely disputed his "summary" with cold, hard logic.

Dear Dumbass
Please wait until Tebow has destroyed logic for good by winning the superbowl before ever claiming to use it yourself, again.

Thanks,
You're adoring fans...

Rosebud
12-13-2011, 04:12 PM
Oh, one more thing...Being an underrated QB prospect in a class that included Jamarcus Russel, Brady Quinn, Kevin Kolb, Trent Edwards and Troy Smith is like being the smartest kid with down syndrome. It means nothing. Actually, that's probably a metaphor you're familiar with, because at this point I'm convinced you just might have down syndrome.

And now I'm sad. Trent Edwards was a good QB prospect before he got broked...

scottyboy
12-13-2011, 05:31 PM
summary of JBCX:

"If the redskins didn't suck so bad, they wouldn't suck so bad. And if I wasn't wrong on all these things, then I'd be right on everything"

Raiderz4Life
12-13-2011, 05:44 PM
And now I'm sad. Trent Edwards was a good QB prospect before he got broked...

Trent Edwards was a good prospect. I wanted him to be our 2nd round pick after taking Calvin 1st =(

SuperPacker
12-13-2011, 05:49 PM
Trent Edwards was a good prospect. I wanted him to be our 2nd round pick after taking Calvin 1st =(

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

Bulldogs
12-13-2011, 05:53 PM
Btw, two pages back Thumper questioned that he actually said the Steelers would miss the playoffs. Here is the quote from early November.


The Steelers are done.

The Ravens and Bengals are going to the playoffs this year and the Steelers will be watching from home.

Jvig43
12-13-2011, 05:56 PM
Is JBCX really thumper? Because that would make alot of sense.

Saints-Tigers
12-13-2011, 06:21 PM
Nooo, JBCX is an entirely different type of tard.

JBCX doesn't fly off the handle and try unfunny personal attacks like Thumper did.

JBCX
12-18-2011, 02:44 PM
Well, the Skins are not going to the Super Bowl but at least we know that they are better than the Giants this year. :)

I was correct about that.

Rosebud
12-18-2011, 03:49 PM
Well, the Skins are not going to the Super Bowl but at least we know that they are better than the Giants this year. :)

I was correct about that.

Redskins > Giants > Pats > Chiefs > Packers. Making the Redskins the best team in the league even if they don't win the superbowl.

NotRickJames
12-19-2011, 02:33 AM
Dear Dumbass
Please wait until Tebow has destroyed logic for good by winning the superbowl before ever claiming to use it yourself, again.

Thanks,
You're adoring fans...

Your*

This was quite the troll thread

Rosebud
12-19-2011, 04:48 PM
Your*

This was quite the troll thread

*foreign* I spellz how I wantz.