Quote: @Hawkvike25 said:
One bad game from Kirk and everyone is saying we should have drafted Mac Jones...lolz that's funny. If the Browns had Kirk instead of Baker they likely beat us by 30. The OL showed its true colors again yesterday, total doo doo. If Darrisaw is good to go then you play him over Hill. I know it wont happen, but I fully support giving Davis a shot at center because Bradbury aint it.
My statement about Mac Jones has nothing to do with Cousins. It was based on how he has played so far and yesterday's game
Quote: @mblack said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
One bad game from Kirk and everyone is saying we should have drafted Mac Jones...lolz that's funny. If the Browns had Kirk instead of Baker they likely beat us by 30. The OL showed its true colors again yesterday, total doo doo. If Darrisaw is good to go then you play him over Hill. I know it wont happen, but I fully support giving Davis a shot at center because Bradbury aint it.
My statement about Mac Jones has nothing to do with Cousins. It was based on how he has played so far and yesterday's game
Absolutely it does. The reason we didnt draft him is because we have a bad OL and tried to address that by taking the best OT on the board. Rick and Zim are well aware that their times with the Vikings are near the end so why would you draft a QB in the first round instead of trying to address the biggest reason Cousins tends to play poorly? OL was the right call, we will see if Darrisaw was the right pick.
Quote: @Hawkvike25 said:
One bad game from Kirk and everyone is saying we should have drafted Mac Jones...lolz that's funny. If the Browns had Kirk instead of Baker they likely beat us by 30. The OL showed its true colors again yesterday, total doo doo. If Darrisaw is good to go then you play him over Hill. I know it wont happen, but I fully support giving Davis a shot at center because Bradbury aint it.
It's not one game, but 3+ years of watching the exact same thing - totally refusing to make any kind of move to get out of the pocket, poor pocket awareness, holding onto to the ball too long, inability to read a defense pre-snap. I am tired of hearing he needs better protection, the game has changed, QBs do not get to sit in the pocket all day, defenses are too good for that, your QB needs to be able to create on his own and buy more time. A smart QB of like Brady would have torn apart their defense the way they were selling out to stop the run, instead Kirk was content in going into a deep drop and just sitting there. Next week he will throw for 400 against the Lions and we will have several posts again about how we need to stop criticizing Kirk. If you do not mind mediocrity and floating around or under .500 then Kirk is your guy, but to take this team to the next level we need a QB that can play the current NFL game.
Quote: @JR44 said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
One bad game from Kirk and everyone is saying we should have drafted Mac Jones...lolz that's funny. If the Browns had Kirk instead of Baker they likely beat us by 30. The OL showed its true colors again yesterday, total doo doo. If Darrisaw is good to go then you play him over Hill. I know it wont happen, but I fully support giving Davis a shot at center because Bradbury aint it.
It's not one game, but 3+ years of watching the exact same thing - totally refusing to make any kind of move to get out of the pocket, poor pocket awareness, holding onto to the ball too long, inability to read a defense pre-snap. I am tired of hearing he needs better protection, the game has changed, QBs do not get to sit in the pocket all day, defenses are too good for that, your QB needs to be able to create on his own and buy more time. A smart QB of like Brady would have torn apart their defense the way they were selling out to stop the run, instead Kirk was content in going into a deep drop and just sitting there. Next week he will throw for 400 against the Lions and we will have several posts again about how we need to stop criticizing Kirk. If you do not mind mediocrity and floating around or under .500 then Kirk is your guy, but to take this team to the next level we need a QB that can play the current NFL game.
I wont entirely disagree but how much of what you listed is on the OC then? Kirk isn't repeatedly calling plays where he goes into a 5-7 step dropback. Does he need to be more mobile? Absolutely. Mac Jones doesn't make that game any better for us...unless he's able to help Hill not give up 9 pressures to Garrett. Against teams with really good DL we have struggled mightily over the last 3 years and it isnt just Kirk who struggles.
It's difficult in life to know when it is over.....time to move on from Zimmer and Kirk after this season and that is clear to me. Not sure about Spelly so maybe I am unaware of the "over" part at GM level.
But Spelly is responsible for the huge money we will owe Kirk next year so there is that..............
Quote: @Hawkvike25 said:
I wont entirely disagree but how much of what you listed is on the OC then? Kirk isn't repeatedly calling plays where he goes into a 5-7 step dropback. Does he need to be more mobile? Absolutely. Mac Jones doesn't make that game any better for us...unless he's able to help Hill not give up 9 pressures to Garrett. Against teams with really good DL we have struggled mightily over the last 3 years and it isnt just Kirk who struggles.
I agree, what was so refreshing about last week was that we called the game to match Kirk's skills, most of the plays were designed for short drops and quick hitters and we also designed some plays to get him on the move and out of the pocket, all of which worked exceptionally. I felt like I was in a bizarro world yesterday as it seemed like last week never happened. I did not understand how we didn't continue with what worked last week. I do think that a QB with a quick release would give us a better results in this current offense, but it is definitely the OC who needs to game plan around the strength of the team.
Quote: @JR44 said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
I wont entirely disagree but how much of what you listed is on the OC then? Kirk isn't repeatedly calling plays where he goes into a 5-7 step dropback. Does he need to be more mobile? Absolutely. Mac Jones doesn't make that game any better for us...unless he's able to help Hill not give up 9 pressures to Garrett. Against teams with really good DL we have struggled mightily over the last 3 years and it isnt just Kirk who struggles.
I agree, what was so refreshing about last week was that we called the game to match Kirk's skills, most of the plays were designed for short drops and quick hitters and we also designed some plays to get him on the move and out of the pocket, all of which worked exceptionally. I felt like I was in a bizarro world yesterday as it seemed like last week never happened. I did not understand how we didn't continue with what worked last week. I do think that a QB with a quick release would give us a better results in this current offense, but it is definitely the OC who needs to game plan around the strength of the team.
Right. I have been very vocal about my love for Kellen Moore's play calls. Some games Dak throws a bunch, other games they pound with the ball with Zeke and Pollard. Hell, they just put up 36 points on a team that was only giving up 10 a game. You have to be able to adjust based on who you are playing and we all know about Cleveland's DL so why aren't we trying quicker passes and shorter drop backs? Maybe that is Zimmer handcuffing Kubiak and his calls but the stats from yesterday dont lie and almost everyone on offense stunk it up.
Quote: @Hawkvike25 said:
@ mblack said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
One bad game from Kirk and everyone is saying we should have drafted Mac Jones...lolz that's funny. If the Browns had Kirk instead of Baker they likely beat us by 30. The OL showed its true colors again yesterday, total doo doo. If Darrisaw is good to go then you play him over Hill. I know it wont happen, but I fully support giving Davis a shot at center because Bradbury aint it.
My statement about Mac Jones has nothing to do with Cousins. It was based on how he has played so far and yesterday's game
Absolutely it does. The reason we didnt draft him is because we have a bad OL and tried to address that by taking the best OT on the board. Rick and Zim are well aware that their times with the Vikings are near the end so why would you draft a QB in the first round instead of trying to address the biggest reason Cousins tends to play poorly? OL was the right call, we will see if Darrisaw was the right pick.
Sorry to disaappoint you. I started the thread while watching the Pats game just after the TD to Hunter Henry. Before the draft I had been wishing for a QB (as unrealistic as it seemed). After watching Mac Jones a few times and during the championship game I was hoping we draft him and even posted here a few times about it. I was just frustrated seeing him play well yesterday meanwhile we are no closer to a franchise QB still and the OL we were going to fix is still not fixed. It had nothing to do with the Vikings game.
Mac had 19 consecutive passes at one point against a TB defense that was blitzing him relentlessly.
Kirk has admittedly had a lousy OL to play behind this year but he doesn't handle defensive pressure or game pressure well enough to win a superbowl IMO.
I was happy to get Darrisaw... but would have been more than OK in drafting Mac.
fix the OL first, then go find your QB of the future. Pointless to take a QB so high you have to start him immediately, or nearly immediately if you cant protect him, which our line cant do. want to talk sunk costs, how about the first rounder that was spent on Bradbury, he just doesnt have the lead in his ass to get it done, focus on finding the OL first, and then go looking to put your future franchise guy back there and let him learn without fear on every single drop back. Our OL with Zimmers preferred game plan equals David Carr 2.0 IMO, I am curious to see what else we have at center and give Bradbury a week off to get his shit together. Let Kirk make the OL calls from the QB position so that the back up can just focus on his assignment.
|
