• Welcome to BGO! We know you will have questions as you become familiar with the software. Please take a moment to read our New BGO User Guide which will give you a great start. If you have questions, post them in the Feedback and Tech Support Forum, or feel free to message any available Staff Member.

Kirk Cousins Development Tracker

Goaldeje said:
Don't want to speak for Tr1 (he's more than capable of that himself), but I believe one of his points (and, imo, it's a salient one) is that Gruden's system should be considered so infallible as to require talent bend to the system rather than the reverse. What has Gruden's system showed to this point that would merit that? The great coaches in NFL History are notorious for devising a system that accentuates their players' strengths, not their weaknesses as Gruden has done to this point.

If Kirk came in and lit the world on fire, an argument could certainly be made in Gruden's favor. Since that has not happened, I think it is perfectly legitimate and acceptable to question Gruden's methods.

Sadly, Kirk and Robert both look worse to me than they did before Gruden got here. This is a totally subjective opinion, mind you, worth precious little, but that's the analysis of my eyeball test. So at some point, we have to ask: who is the QB that will fit Gruden's system? Is Aaron Rodgers the right fit? Who else would fit.

Because frankly, at that point, if you need someone as talented as Aaron Rodgers to execute your system, I'm not very impressed with your system. So why then are we so attached to this system again?
Click to expand...

Just 3 years of success, and 3 playoff appearances in Cincinnati against tougher defenses than our in our division. That's pretty good proof.

On the topic of QB improvement, I've definitely have seen improvement in all 3 QBs so far. I've yet to see an analyst or writer share your opinion.

I also believe that Griffin is still 2-4 years behind the QBs that have run these types of systems in college. It takes time.
 
McD5 said:
Just 3 years of success, and 3 playoff appearances in Cincinnati against tougher defenses than our in our division. That's pretty good proof.

On the topic of QB improvement, I've definitely have seen improvement in all 3 QBs so far. I've yet to see an analyst or writer share your opinion.

I also believe that Griffin is still 2-4 years behind the QBs that have run these types of systems in college. It takes time.
Click to expand...

he was the offensive coordinator under a guy who was a defensive genius and ran the entire thing. Jay is NOT Marvin nor should you keep comparing the 2 jobs like they are interchangeable or he is the reason Cincy won.
 
Yeah, Marvin Lewis didn't have shit to do with the Bengals winning.

You try too hard McD.

What is Jay Gruden's record as an NFL Head Coach?

Answer: Abysmal.
 
Om said:
Sunday against Philly is huge for number 8.
Click to expand...
This is the fact, IMHO.

He cannot, under any circumstances, have a repeat performance of Thurs.

As I said earlier, it won't take a lot for the chanting to start. Even if he's not active.
 
Ax said:
Yeah, Marvin Lewis didn't have shit to do with the Bengals winning.

You try too hard McD.

What is Jay Gruden's record as an NFL Head Coach?

Answer: Abysmal.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's fair, Ax. I get on people as much as anyone for trying too hard to bend facts to fit a notion, but the question was about how the offense succeeded, not necessarily how the team fared in the win column. Gruden was OC in Cincy between 2011 and 13, right?

The offensive stats:

2011 - 20th yards, 18th points
2012 - 22nd yards, 12th points
2013 - 10th yards, 6th points

I guess one can make of that what they want, but it's hard to say he failed to put an improving product on the field, or that by year three he had things humming along pretty good right?
 
McD5 said:
Just 3 years of success, and 3 playoff appearances in Cincinnati against tougher defenses than our in our division. That's pretty good proof.

On the topic of QB improvement, I've definitely have seen improvement in all 3 QBs so far. I've yet to see an analyst or writer share your opinion.

I also believe that Griffin is still 2-4 years behind the QBs that have run these types of systems in college. It takes time.
Click to expand...


All I can tell you is what I see with my own two eyes. Last year especially, both QBs looked worse than under Kyle. I certainly haven't see the kind of progression in their games that we thought would be present.


Om said:
Interesting turn to the conversation. At the risk of derailing the Kirk thread ...

It's hard to come up with a long list of coaches who crafted strong offenses without equally strong QB's, isn't it? Gibbs ... ?

Seems to me no modern NFL offense is going to run very well, or consistently, unless the guy pulling the trigger is at the very least reliably competent. Acknowledging I may be missing/forgetting some example, can anyone think of any other coach whose offensive system is/was so good it achieved sustained success without really good QB's?
Click to expand...

Gibbs is, given this board, the best example of course. But Parcells had success with Simms, Bledsoe, Testaverde, etc, none of whom I would consider ideal franchise QBs. Brian Billick won it all with Dilfer, Jon Gruden won with Brad Johnson, etc. I realize the defense was more responsible for the wins than those QBs, but the fact is they still won. We could certainly have a long discussion about whether Eli is an elite QB - if not, Coughlin has won twice.

Those are the coaches that won it all in the last 15 years or so; if you want to include Jeff Fisher as a guy who has had good but maybe not great talent as a guy who has had a fair amount of success without winning it all, you could.

I think it is FAR easier to win the Brady/Belichick, Manning/Dungy, Tomlin/Cowher/Roethlisburger way, but having a system that ends up being adapted to QB skill level isn't unheard of.
 
Ax said:
So, how's this for a wild theory?

Jay actually loves Griffin.

But, after witnessing the Oline getting eaten alive by a pride if lions, he decided to sacrifice Pick, er um, Kirk, while the new kids learn enough to be counted on not to get Robert killed. Saying it was "Kirk's team" was simply providing him with the same confidence builder he gave Robert when announcing him as the starter during the offseason. Means Jack Shit.

Now Robert, out of the limelight, is allowed to further learn the job out of the view of know-nothing armchair GM's. While the Oline improves it's game. And Gruden banks on either Kirk getting injured, or, his alter ego, Pick, continuing to do what he does best, justifying benching him forever, again.

Oh yeah, this could be happening. :joker:

As for this Sunday, I'm looking forward to seeing, Kirk, take the bull be the horns, or, the eagle by the wings, as it were, and leading us to victory.

If his alter-ego takes charge, there will be chants. And they'll rhyme with, Far Be Thee!
You know it, and I know it.

When they say, "you're the man", you damn well better be, The Man.
Click to expand...

I had brought up a similar thought a week or so back, only with McLovin liking Griffin, and Gruden being given the chance to sink or swim with his QB of choice as an evaluation process.
 
Om said:
I don't think that's fair, Ax. I get on people as much as anyone for trying too hard to bend facts to fit a notion, but the question was about how the offense succeeded, not necessarily how the team fared in the win column. Gruden was OC in Cincy between 2011 and 13, right?

The offensive stats:

2011 - 20th yards, 18th points
2012 - 22nd yards, 12th points
2013 - 10th yards, 6th points

I guess one can make of that what they want, but it's hard to say he failed to put an improving product on the field, or that by year three he had things humming along pretty good right?
Click to expand...

And it was all because of Jay Gruden.

Got it.
 
Om said:
I don't think that's fair, Ax. I get on people as much as anyone for trying too hard to bend facts to fit a notion, but the question was about how the offense succeeded, not necessarily how the team fared in the win column. Gruden was OC in Cincy between 2011 and 13, right?

The offensive stats:

2011 - 20th yards, 18th points
2012 - 22nd yards, 12th points
2013 - 10th yards, 6th points

I guess one can make of that what they want, but it's hard to say he failed to put an improving product on the field, or that by year three he had things humming along pretty good right?
Click to expand...

2011 - 7th in defense, 9th in points
2012 - 6th in defense, 8th in points
2013 - 3rd in defense, 5th in points

He definitely didn't run the defense and they definitely did what they needed to do to win. They also lost every single wild card game they went to while Gruden was there by putting up 10, 13, and 10 points in the 3 games.
 
We've got three average quarterbacks. The old saying is, when you have 2-3 quarterbacks, you don't have any. To make matters worse, the three are not anything alike in their style of play. As as head coach, you can't have a "scheme" , one scheme, that fits all three. Its not a one size fits all offense. Therefore, because of injury, and substandard play, we have rotated quarterbacks. You can't win like that, no matter whose scheme you are running. Once again, yall want to blame Jay for the players poor performance or injury. Wait until McClou gets Gruden his guy. Then you will see a scheme or game plan that makes some sense.
 
Om said:
I don't think that's fair, Ax. I get on people as much as anyone for trying too hard to bend facts to fit a notion, but the question was about how the offense succeeded, not necessarily how the team fared in the win column. Gruden was OC in Cincy between 2011 and 13, right?

The offensive stats:

2011 - 20th yards, 18th points
2012 - 22nd yards, 12th points
2013 - 10th yards, 6th points

I guess one can make of that what they want, but it's hard to say he failed to put an improving product on the field, or that by year three he had things humming along pretty good right?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think people are just frustrated and looking for someone to blame.

There's no question that his offense was very good in Cincy, and that it works. No one (except maybe Goal) questions that.

Even here, WRs continue to be open.
 
Except it isn't the reason they won. It was a part of the reason. And "his offense" failed miserably in the postseason every year.

Also, the Bengals are 3-0 right now...we aren't.
 
tr1 said:
Eli isn't a really good QB. Andy Reid never really had a good QB, but the Eagles were consistent winners.

Should I go outside of the division?
Click to expand...
If blithely dismissing Eli Manning and Donovan McNabb is an indicator of your assessment of what capable NFL QB's look like, don't bother.

Goaldeje said:
All I can tell you is what I see with my own two eyes. Last year especially, both QBs looked worse than under Kyle. I certainly haven't see the kind of progression in their games that we thought would be present.
Click to expand...
I don't see that. Would be interested in how you'd support the notion on Kirk, though.

Gibbs is, given this board, the best example of course. But Parcells had success with Simms, Bledsoe, Testaverde, etc, none of whom I would consider ideal franchise QBs. Brian Billick won it all with Dilfer, Jon Gruden won with Brad Johnson, etc. I realize the defense was more responsible for the wins than those QBs, but the fact is they still won. We could certainly have a long discussion about whether Eli is an elite QB - if not, Coughlin has won twice.

Those are the coaches that won it all in the last 15 years or so; if you want to include Jeff Fisher as a guy who has had good but maybe not great talent as a guy who has had a fair amount of success without winning it all, you could.

I think it is FAR easier to win the Brady/Belichick, Manning/Dungy, Tomlin/Cowher/Roethlisburger way, but having a system that ends up being adapted to QB skill level isn't unheard of.
Click to expand...
Not sure we're really disagreeing here. I was looking for examples of coaches who were able to sustain offensive success without good quarterback play. On the guys you brought up ...

Simms was a damn good QB for a while there. And best in the biggest games. But I won't argue Parcells. I put him right next to Gibbs as a guy who got the most out of the least in modern NFL history.

It's a short list though.

Billick and Gruden couldn't sustain success with their guys. In both cases, they parlayed great defenses and average QB's into one-year lighting in a bottle success.

Fisher had Steve Alcorn. That man was VERY good.

And thought it's not a popular notion, I think 2-time Super Bowl MVP Eli Manning is a pretty darn decent QB, too. Goofy, sure. Helped by good/great defense, yes. But a damn good QB, and best when the lights shine the brightest.

All I'm saying here is that 19 games into Jay Gruden's tenure here, with Robert and Kirk and Colt as his choices of QB, it's hard for me dismiss the man's offense just yet. Given how many times I've seen open men in critical situations NOT getting the ball, I'd really really like to see this offense operate for a few games with someone behind center who can simply find and then hit the open man.
 
McD5 said:
Yeah, I think people are just frustrated and looking for someone to blame.

There's no question that his offense was very good in Cincy, and that it works. No one (except maybe Goal) questions that.

Even here, WRs continue to be open.
Click to expand...
Well, this is target rich. But, I guess I should let it pass.

Beat the Eagles!!!
Go Kirk!!!
 
Ax said:
And it was all because of Jay Gruden.

Got it.
Click to expand...
Seriously?

I thought it was a legit question. Not sure what to make of that dismissive answer.
 
I'm ready for McCoy. He may not be able to do the long ball, but he does an intermediate and short ball with accuracy.
 
MikeSr619 said:
2011 - 7th in defense, 9th in points
2012 - 6th in defense, 8th in points
2013 - 3rd in defense, 5th in points

He definitely didn't run the defense and they definitely did what they needed to do to win. They also lost every single wild card game they went to while Gruden was there by putting up 10, 13, and 10 points in the 3 games.
Click to expand...
Okay ... and the defenses in those three post-season games gave up 27, 19 and 31. Did they do what they had to do to win?

Hey, I'd like to get an NFL expert's inside opinion of why Gruden and Dalton failed in the three playoff games. Maybe there's good film-breakdowns out there we could look at. What if they showed that guys were open in key situations, and Dalton simply missed them? Not saying that's the case, but certainly I'm going to allow for the possibility that the improvement curve I saw in Cincy for an offense with a very young Andy Dalton at QB wasn't a fluke. Particularly given what I THINK I'm seeing here in DC---an offense that seems to get people open, and is begging for competent QB play to take advantage.

I have a bad feeling right now, based on Kirk's play last week, Robert's well-chronicled struggles and Colt's physical limitations, that we're simply not going to get that chance in 2015. And that if that ends up being the case, there won't be a 2016 for Gruden. Not given the history of this franchise over the past 20 years.
 
Om said:
Okay ... and the defenses in those three post-season games gave up 27, 19 and 31. Did they do what they had to do to win?

Hey, I'd like to get an NFL expert's inside opinion of why Gruden and Dalton failed in the three playoff games. Maybe there's good film-breakdowns out there we could look at. What if they showed that guys were open in key situations, and Dalton simply missed them? Not saying that's the case, but certainly I'm going to allow for the possibility that the improvement curve I saw in Cincy for an offense with a very young Andy Dalton at QB wasn't a fluke. Particularly given what I THINK I'm seeing here in DC---an offense that seems to get people open, and is begging for competent QB play to take advantage.

I have a bad feeling right now, based on Kirk's play last week, Robert's well-chronicled struggles and Colt's physical limitations, that we're simply not going to get that chance in 2015. And that if that ends up being the case, there won't be a 2016 for Gruden. Not given the history of this franchise over the past 20 years.
Click to expand...
We all know if the defense is on the field most of the game they will fail due to being tired. If your offense is putting up those horrible numbers most likely that's the case.
 
Om said:
Seriously?

I thought it was a legit question. Not sure what to make of that dismissive answer.
Click to expand...
Nothing personal.

I'm just not willing to credit the Bengals regular season wins, and offensive success, solely, to Jay Gruden. As was the assertion made by McD. Seemingly supported by you.

Mike already pointed out the defensive contribution. And the offense's futility in the playoffs. When it matters most.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 2, Members: 0, Guests: 2)

Help Users
We are all excited to experience the announcement of draft selections IN REAL TIME TOGETHER. If you feel the need to be the first to 'blurt out' the team's picks you are better off staying out of chat and sticking to Twitter. Please refrain from announcing/discussing our picks until the official announcement has been made at the podium. Thanks!

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top