Kirk Cousins Development Tracker

[Knightingale]

I don't think that Stability is Mediocrity.

The Skins have not been a stable team since the Gibbs years (first time around) in my opinion. That stability led us to be one of the elite teams of that decade.

Since then we've been a rollercoaster in almost all areas of the team. Most noticeably QB and Coaching staff. We keep changing and changing and changing and looking for that quick fix, and it isn't there. This is football, and there are no quick fixes. Successful plans to reinvigorate a franchise from where we are takes years. And I'm not taking 1 or 2, I'm talking 3, 4 or 5.

We need to get a front office together that can craft a team, we have to establish a system and put a coach in who we give time to develop that system. Then we need upgrades at player skill across the board, and that takes time and multiple drafts.

Honestly I view this as year 1 of something I see as a 3 or 4 year commitment.

Our last Superbowl was 1992. We've now had over 2 decades where we've really not even sniffed elite status.

You want the definition of mediocrity?

In that 23 years we've had 9 coaches and 23 QBs.

That's an average Coach in situ for 2.5 seasons and a change of QB every year. That is NOT the way to get to success in the NFL.

I for one am willing to let Gruden sit in the chair for a while yet. I'm also more than willing to let Cousins have this offence for a while.
Why? Because I'm tired of changing for the sake of changing all the time and spinning our wheels in the mud of mediocrity always looking for the big splashy quick fix.

This team can be good. It's not there yet, but I do believe it's not finally on the way.

Why?

Nothing statistical. I do love Stats and you can pretty much use stats to prove anything, prove both sides of any argument.
I used to listen and read alot of Bill Simmons and I used to agree with one thing in particular that he used to preach. The EYE TEST.

I've watched the Redskins for a long time now, and alot of those years have been brutal.

This 2015 team... it has it's moments where it's painful to watch, but on the whole I just feel like this is a better team. May not be that way statistically or in the Win Loss column right now, but I just feel... better... when I watch them. Even the Pats game this weekend I just felt more positive about them. yes they dropped the ball (literally) and made some clunkers of plays, but I feel like this is a better team and I feel like this is a team that is scratching the surface of it's potential. I'm not saying they're about to set the world on fire or be elite as yet, but I feel like this is a start, a foundation to grow on.

Maybe longterm Cousins is not the answer. Maybe Gruden isn't either. But my gut feel on this team is that it needs more time and stability to find it's place and grow as a team. If we go about chopping and changing things again I just honestly believe we'll be back to square one again.

Of course everyone is entitled to their own feelings and thoughts on the team. I'm not saying anyone else is right or wrong. This is a forum to really tell each other our thoughts and feelings and maybe have a good natured debate about it. These are honestly just my feelings on the subject.



(But if you don't agree with me you're wrong )

 

[McD5]

Kirk's looking good. His accuracy last week really stood out. If he can maintain this level, we likely have our QB.

If he continues to improve from this level, then we definitely have our QB.

 

[Henry]

The problem I have with your argument Smooty is that it doesn't account for the performance or availability of his surrounding cast. Look at Andrew Luck this year - do we really believe he has suddenly become an inept QB - or could his play be influenced by a myriad of other factors? We all know the answer and it's true for all individual players. That doesn't mean everyone is exempt from assessment or criticism. But chalking the arguments of those who see some promise in Cousins as 'emotional' or homeristic optimism is inaccurate. I'll give one example of what I'm talking about. Some say 'Cousins has a QB coach, therefore he should be playing great compared to when he didn't!' Really? Is that a fact? You don't believe having a totally different voice and perspective in your ear might require a little adjustment. What about having two new play callers (and likely some different plays on the menu)?

And the problem I have with your Andrew Luck comparison is that Andrew Luck has proven over the past three seasons that he's a quality player. Cousins over those same past three seasons had proven he's a quality backup.

When a straight A student gets a C, you figure something else is going on.

When a straight C student gets a C, you figure he's still a C student.

I value your thoughts and others (Goal just made a post that he would be surprised to find I agree almost 100% with). Where I take some issue with conventional wisdom is that it's almost always put forth as if the challenge of moving from perennial cellar-dweller to perennial playoff team is a simple one. It's not. It's incredibly complex and multi-factorial. That doesn't mean (before someone says it) that we can't know or guess or pontificate upon what's really going on. But what it does mean is that when saying 'Cousins isn't improving' or 'If Almo got 30 carries a game it would fix our running game' or 'Gruden doesn't know what he's doing' or like statements, we are oversimplifying complex challenges in the extreme.

I think you're overthinking things, B.

When a perennially crappy team plays crappy, it's probably because it's crappy. Sure, the team may secretly be getting better behind closed doors, or this little thing and that little thing suddenly coalesce into real progress and then greatness. But until that actually happens, when a team that has opened it's first 8 games of the season at 3-5 since 2011 suddenly goes, uh, 3-5 ... in 2015, those of us who think we see the problems that keep this team from being successful will feel pretty justified in seeing them.

 

[Smoot Point]

The problem I have with your argument Smooty is that it doesn't account for the performance or availability of his surrounding cast.

I only quote the above to reference the topic we're talking about... I agreed with just about everything you said, and I don't actually disagree with you much. I think where we might disagree is in the evaluation of Kirk's & Jay's performance and the importance of statistics in that evaluation. However, philosophically, I have no problems with anything you said. We do need some type of stability... the franchise has been fragile since Gibbs I era ended... During the Gibbs II era, we started to recapture that, but it was aborted due to our star player dying and that taking a toll on Joe Gibbs & his personal life. You look at the current staff and many of the decisions they have made, and you have to ask yourself if this is the type of stability you want.

What's the best thing in Washington that has given everyone hope? It's Scot McCloughan... Given Scot McCloughan's history, I think we're on shaky ground if we don't work to firm up the foundation before he and the team endure another meltdown. This is why I say it would be better if Scot has the opportunity to clear the decks and build a team the way it needs to be built. The current coaching staff was cobbled together from Bruce Allen's "little black book"... The most respectable guys are ones who aren't attached to Bruce Allen from a past life: Callahan & Fewell... Where have we seen young players improve the most? I'd argue OL & DB (with all the injuries, Fewell has done a masterful job with what he has to work with). IF you think Cousins has improved (already discussed I do not agree), then you'd have to give quite a bit of credit to Cavanaugh.

Now, the reason I place importance on statistics isn't because I feel they paint the whole picture... It's because I feel that assessing more data points paints a more complete picture, limiting the impact of bias on the overall evaluation. Not all data points are valid alone, but all data points together can paint a good picture. It's fodder for another thread, but maybe I'll talk about how I value certain stats and why I don't value others another time.

 

[stevenaa]

Cousins looks better and is growing. It's easy to see. That doesn't mean he's shown he's the guy, or has arrived. He still has a lot to learn through game experience. He looks a lot more comfortable and settled. Late game drives show a ton of improvement. He does need to start trusting himself more. I think he needs to wait an extra tick to let routes develop. Quick decision and release is good, but I think that's one reason he misses out on longer plays.

 

[stevenaa]

Statistics show the end result, they don't give much insight as to the cause. To Boones point, the stats for a QB playing on the run behind a porous line aren't going to be great. If you just look at the stats, you have no context.

 

[micks113]

I only quote the above to reference the topic we're talking about... I agreed with just about everything you said, and I don't actually disagree with you much. I think where we might disagree is in the evaluation of Kirk's & Jay's performance and the importance of statistics in that evaluation. However, philosophically, I have no problems with anything you said. We do need some type of stability... the franchise has been fragile since Gibbs I era ended... During the Gibbs II era, we started to recapture that, but it was aborted due to our star player dying and that taking a toll on Joe Gibbs & his personal life. You look at the current staff and many of the decisions they have made, and you have to ask yourself if this is the type of stability you want.

What's the best thing in Washington that has given everyone hope? It's Scot McCloughan... Given Scot McCloughan's history, I think we're on shaky ground if we don't work to firm up the foundation before he and the team endure another meltdown. This is why I say it would be better if Scot has the opportunity to clear the decks and build a team the way it needs to be built. The current coaching staff was cobbled together from Bruce Allen's "little black book"... The most respectable guys are ones who aren't attached to Bruce Allen from a past life: Callahan & Fewell... Where have we seen young players improve the most? I'd argue OL & DB (with all the injuries, Fewell has done a masterful job with what he has to work with). IF you think Cousins has improved (already discussed I do not agree), then you'd have to give quite a bit of credit to Cavanaugh.

Now, the reason I place importance on statistics isn't because I feel they paint the whole picture... It's because I feel that assessing more data points paints a more complete picture, limiting the impact of bias on the overall evaluation. Not all data points are valid alone, but all data points together can paint a good picture. It's fodder for another thread, but maybe I'll talk about how I value certain stats and why I don't value others another time.

Nice post succinctly put smooty. Mind if I quote you from your other post?

You have to rely heavily on emotion and wanting to have a positive attitude about your team if you think Kirk Cousins has improved from last year. There is nothing wrong with this, but that isn't tangible proof that he is improving."

You just state that your opinion/attitude is not tangible proof of anything. Yet you offer it as much. But I still like your post.

Now let me say the same thing as you on the posted quote, only in the converse. You have to have a negative attitude if you think Kirk Cousins has not improved from the debacle of last year (when we know he wasn't the starter, only the backup to salvage a lost season.) See how that sounds? In other words, we can't offer a conclusion only to support our premise. The conclusion comes last, not first. first you must understand what Cousins was last year before an assessment of the improvement can be made. You are the only one I've seen, including the Cousin haters, that can't see his improvement. Has nothing to do with your or my optimism/pessimism. You don't need stats, just the eye test. The stability of the team, the chemistry that we did not have last year, all has improved the lockerroom. That is huge. You won't see that in the stats, but at some point, we should see it in the record. We have a leader at QB. We didn't last year. This year, we have the same offense as last year, most all expected the same results. By virtue of what we see on the field, most are expecting a competitive team for the division next year. At least I think most, some are sure they want another overhaul if we get less than 8 wins. Again, no one expected 8 wins (OK a couple folks did). Baby steps, Man. the whole front office and the players including McClou are on board. I don't believe that given the history of the Redskins front office, winning the offseason with big do nothing names, is the way we are going back to. We are building it now, and I don't see a teardown again forthcoming, until Gruden's contract is up. Next year is going to be a big year......hang in there. (yes that's optimism, and I'm a devout pessimist ;-)
"

 

[fansince62]

"The problem I have with your argument Smooty is that it doesn't account for the performance or availability of his surrounding cast."

That doesn't seem to have held folks back in previous years. And where is the dividing line? Excuses are like....well...you know the rest of the aphorism.

 

[Smoot Point]

Nice post succinctly put smooty. Mind if I quote you from your other post?

Micks 113,

Thanks for the post... I guess what I'm trying to say is, the only tangible proof we have is the stats. "Eye-tests" are in the eye of the beholder... I offered my own eye-tests also, as you pointed out, but I think it all goes back to the stats supporting the eye-tests. There is nothing wrong with intangible proof, but it always has to be weighed against tangible proof.

People like Cousins and will look for evidence that supports their theory that Cousins has improved. People will hate Cousins and look for evidence that supports their theory that he has regressed (or not improved). I came to the conclusion that he hasn't improved by first looking at the statistics. However, I confess that I have a negative opinion of Jay Gruden and thought he should've been fired after last season, and I became increasingly affirmed in this opinion after the hiring of Joe Barry and subsequent decisions (including the handling of RGIII & the QBs). Nothing has happened that has made me alter this opinion, and my opinion may color some of my comments (like when I see the same poor commitment to the running game for 4-5 weeks in a row). Maybe, I'm just looking for stats that support the theory he hasn't improved by pulling mostly negative statistics because I want to prove the Jay Gruden hasn't developed any of our QBs...

However, I want to say that the stats I'm pulling are pretty much the standard statistics that you would pull out when evaluating any QB. Looking at the 32 QBs who have 100 or more attempts (disqualifies Tony Romo), here is where Cousins ranks by stat:

Completion%: 9th
Att/G: 9th
Yards: 16th
YPA: 31st
YPG: 22nd
TD: 24th
INT: 27th
1st Downs: 7th
1st%: 15th
Long: 32nd
20+: 31st
40+: 31st
Sacks: 4th
QBR: 24th

Cousins played fewer games in 2014, but so have a few of the other QBs in the league (Big Ben, Mariota, etc)... However, let's see where he would've ranked using same stats from 2014 against the same QBs of 2015 (minus Cousins):

Completion%: 23rd (down in 2014) - He's throwing shorter passes, taking fewer chances. Not a big deal, if he has higher numbers in other places.
Att/G: 18th (down in 2014) - He's throwing more passes, probably due to our poor running game.
Yards: 24th (down in 2014) - This is an aggregate over 7 games, and most of the league has played 8... so this isn't a useful stat.
YPA: 5th (up in 2014) - His performance in YPA would be top 5 in the league.
YPG: 7th (up in 2014) - Again, YPG would be in top 10 in the league (this includes a game he was benched in 2nd half)
TD: 24th (same in 2014) - Fewer games in 2014, so technically this is down in 2015....
INT: 27th (same in 2014) - Fewer games in 2014, so technically this is up in 2015...
1st Downs: 27th (down in 2014) - This is an aggregate, so not important.
1st%: 9th (up in 2014) - Again, he's top 10 here if we're talking his 2014 performance.
Long: 2nd (up in 2014) - 1 big play doesn't really matter either year, but his long this year is like 43 yards.
20+: 13th (up in 2014) - This is an aggregate, but it's based on 7 games. Way better in 2014...
40+: 3rd (up in 2014) - This is an aggregate, but it's based on 7 games. Way better in 2014...
Sacks: 4th (up in 2014) - Fewer games in 2014, so technically this is up in 2015...
QB Rating (not ESPN): 20th (up in 2014) - QB Rating... Not really a big difference, but he was better in 2014l.

OK, Interceptions/Attempt are a bit better... Sacks are a bit better (but we have a better OL)... Completion percentage is better in 2015... Across the board, he is nowhere near his stats in 2014. Has he improved, or is he simply a neutered quarterback?

Here are the options:

1) He's limited by Coach & Scheme
2) He's limited by opponents and how they are playing him based on perceived weaknesses
3) He's limited by his own decisions, taking fewer chances intentionally.

Above is the tangible evidence...
Thoughts?

 

[Smoot Point]

"The problem I have with your argument Smooty is that it doesn't account for the performance or availability of his surrounding cast."

That doesn't seem to have held folks back in previous years. And where is the dividing line? Excuses are like....well...you know the rest of the aphorism.

I'd say if the supporting cast is worse than last year, then we have a problem with the GM. Or... If Desean Jackson makes up for the significant drop in our deep game (see tangible stats above), he is the most important person on the offense and he shouldn't be going anywhere this offseason.

I think Desean is important and I don't want him going anywhere, even though he's been injured/ineffective this year. However, OL improvements should account for something.

My arguments almost always point to Gruden & McVay though...

 

[Boone]

Al,
I said the same thing last year. But you raise a good point, ultimately coaches and players are accountable for results. No one is arguing that. What is being argued is what factors are involved in determining growth and potential of future success and where we are in terms of being able to draw definitive conclusions 1 1/2 years into this new leadership group (less than a year for many of them).

It's interesting that when one doesn't like certain data points or feels they don't support an individual view, they're excuses, but when they do, they're irrefutable facts.

I don't know how many posts over the last several months I've read that included 'I'm tired...'.
I totally understand fans are weary of losing but it wasn't 1 1/2 years of Jay Gruden and Company that got Skins fans there and I think folks should ease up on the guy and let the expert GM we hired decide if he's still got potential.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Boone]

And btw Smooty, I appreciate and respect the facts and stats you bring to your posts - even when I don't 100% agree with a conclusion. If I don't respond in detail it's only because I can't pull it off at the moment. Great to have folks who do their homework and care enough to look at the numbers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MikeSr619]

And btw Smooty, I appreciate and respect the facts and stats you bring to your posts - even when I don't 100% agree with a conclusion. If I don't respond in detail it's only because I can't pull it off at the moment. Great to have folks who do their homework and care enough to look at the numbers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I second that. Great posting, smoot.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[McD5]

Smoot, I think you're looking in the wrong direction if you believe Cousins is the problem.

If you watched that game last weekend and came away thinking that Cousins didn't play well, I don't know what to say.

I do like the time you've spent on compiling the stats. That takes effort. I haven't read every page, but did you come across this stat?

Cousins is on pace to throw for 3,908 yards and 20 TDs. No Redskins QB has gone for 3,900 and 20 TDs since Brad Johnson in 1999.

It's not like he sucks...

 

[MikeSr619]

Personally, I think Smoot and the rest of us have the right to feel however we want without being belittled with "I dont know what to say" and all the other ways.

Cousins has thrown for over 300 yards 2 times this year.
Cousins has thrown for under 200 yards 2 times this year.

He has several very hard games and 4 divisional games left. Trying to project stats on to him and then crown them is just hearsay.

 

[Boone]

You think taking his current stats and projecting them out for the rest of the season is 'crowning' him???

Cousins played very well against the Pats. His teammates let him down bigtime. He was one of the only postives in a sea of negatives. That's not a controversial position.

 

[MikeSr619]

Yes, when you try to make the claim he "could be" you are DEFINITELY trying to lead him towards that crown.

"His teammates let him down bigtime" Remember when Griffin said "I cant block for myself" and everyone got on him about selling out his teammates and not being a good team player? It sure seems like when it comes to Jay and Cousins the excuses an defense measurements are lined up in full. Just wish they were even for everyone about everything.

217 yards is not a good against any team. We had 8 (?) dropped passes? He went 22 of 40 for 217 averaging 5.43 yards per throw. He didn't even average a first down on his passes. He went short, he went fast. and that is the norm with him. he currently is the 31st of 32 when it comes to averages right above Ryan Mallett but 9th when it comes to attempts. do you see any problem with that at all?

 

[Boone]

Cousins played very well in the Patriots game. He was ready to go. Others weren't. It was easy to see.

 

[MikeSr619]

Well, I don't agree. I think the dropped passes just made it easier to not pay attention to the short passes and glaring issue with him not going downfield at all. Crowder and Jackson can both stretch the field but there is no reason to when your QB likes to throw it 1 yard to Reed on a 3rd and 8.

 

[Boone]

So he has some huge downfield passes dropped - but you're gonna nail him for short passes... The Carrier drop alone could have been a 50 yard reception Mike. When he plays badly (as he has at times) I'll be the first to get on him. Last Sunday wasn't one of those times.