Skip to content

Tuck says Redskins O won’t go anywhere without RG3

Washington Redskins quarterback Robert Griffin is sacked by New York Giants Justin Tuck during their NFL football game in East Rutherford Reuters

We now know that Robert Griffin III can make the Redskins offense dynamic.

Whether it is sustainable is another question.

Giants defensive end Justin Tuck said as impressive as RG3 has been, the Redskins aren’t going any place he doesn’t take them.

“I think in this offense, it is all predicated on the quarterback,” Tuck said, via Newsday’s Tom Rock. “If RG3 stays healthy, I think this offense is going to continue to roll.

“But the thing about it is, who wants their franchise quarterback getting hit every play? Every game like that? I think that is what it is going to come down to.”

Griffin’s concussion earlier this year was a scare, and raised a number of questions about how much risk he should put himself at without jeopardizing bigger goals.

“If they had a second RG3 to back him up, which there is none, then you can say that the shelf life of this offense is a little bit longer,” Tuck said. “If he pulls a hamstring or has an ankle injury for a couple of weeks, where do you go then?”

For starter, to Kirk Cousins. The prospect of that apparently doesn’t intimidate Tuck.

Permalink 61 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, New York Giants, Rumor Mill, Washington Redskins
61 Responses to “Tuck says Redskins O won’t go anywhere without RG3”
  1. nyyjetsknicks says: Nov 30, 2012 12:13 PM

    As he plays and gains experience he’ll learn when he needs to run and where’s it’s best to slide or throw the ball away.

  2. tbd3 says: Nov 30, 2012 12:14 PM

    No team wants their starting quarterback to get hurt. It’s a damaging prospect for any team … unless the Cardinals are still starting Lindley.

  3. writebrained9 says: Nov 30, 2012 12:14 PM

    What offense wouldn’t be in trouble without it’s starter?
    The NYG certainly would be.

  4. realitypolice says: Nov 30, 2012 12:14 PM

    Yes, because God knows the Giants offense would keep rolling along if their starter got hurt.

    David Carr, anyone?

  5. superflorio says: Nov 30, 2012 12:16 PM

    Thanks Tuck. I guess you think Victor Cruz would have the same stats with David Carr in the lineup.

    In other news, the sun STILL rises in the East.

  6. bossyrossy says: Nov 30, 2012 12:17 PM

    And the Giants would repeat with David Carr behind center? Thanks for the insight Justin Tuck.

  7. S.Nevada says: Nov 30, 2012 12:18 PM

    The hubris coming from the Giants this past week is a good sign for the Redskins come Monday night.

    The big win over GB and all of the talk tells me the Giants may be nesting up for a big egg laying session.

  8. skinsfan76 says: Nov 30, 2012 12:18 PM

    You can say that about most of the teams in the league without the starting QB. Where would the Giants be without Eli. Look at the Steelers without Ben.

  9. raymondtx says: Nov 30, 2012 12:18 PM

    And guess what, the giants offense will go “nowhere” if Eli gets hurt. Last I checked, David Carr doesn’t scare anyone.

  10. njgiant1982 says: Nov 30, 2012 12:19 PM

    Like it or not, its true. Go Big Blue!

  11. jbl429 says: Nov 30, 2012 12:21 PM

    I think the 49ers may be the only team in the NFL that can replace their starter and not miss a beat.

  12. nygf says: Nov 30, 2012 12:22 PM

    As a Giants fan, please for the love of God, put a lid on it Tuck, and anyone else who feels the need to talk leading up to this game. The Skins have given the Giants their best shot each of the last 3 meetings and will be coming to play in a big way on Monday night. Whatever happened to the “Talk is cheap, play the game” that led the team to a SB 42 victory? If RG’s Skins put up nearly 500 yards of O again, and Eli doesn’t work his magic at the end to offset it, I don’t want to hear anything out of Tuck or anyone else on D. Last week vs. GB was a good start, but the majority of the year has been defined by too much talk and not enough follow through.

    Talk is cheap, play the game.

  13. RussianBreadMaker says: Nov 30, 2012 12:23 PM

    Funny, because Rex Grossman beat the giants twice last year in that offense.

  14. heartinboston says: Nov 30, 2012 12:23 PM

    He’s gonna make a great talking head on a pregane show someday. that’s usually about as insightful as those guys are.

  15. skins23 says: Nov 30, 2012 12:25 PM

    More sound bites from the most annoying and entitled team in the NFL.

  16. waxthat says: Nov 30, 2012 12:27 PM

    Giants would be fine without Tuck. Thats the difference

  17. playin2x says: Nov 30, 2012 12:27 PM

    Giants lost to Rex Grossman twice … Worry about that Tuck .. Secondly why is it that the giants players who continuously talk each week is a defensive end … Tuck, Osi, and JPP … They should hire a spokesperson between them

  18. mjzaky says: Nov 30, 2012 12:31 PM

    Geniuses criticizing Tuck’s comments:

    Read a bit closer. He isn’t just stating that the offense would struggle without RG3. His point is that since that is true, it is unwise to have RG3 take the amount of shots that the read-option and QB run plays expose him to. Eli doesn’t take close to the amount of hits that RG3 does as a direct result of the differences in the Redskins and Giants offenses.

    Derp!

  19. hailrg3 says: Nov 30, 2012 12:32 PM

    Uhhh…Look around the league. Outside of San Francisco, what team is going anywhere without their starting quarterback? Without Eli, the Giants would have been blown out several times this season.

  20. baddegg says: Nov 30, 2012 12:36 PM

    Without Eli how far with the Giants go? What is your point?

  21. romosmicrodongs says: Nov 30, 2012 12:37 PM

    I don’t know how many skins games you guys have been watching lately, Tuck, but the only time RG gets hit is when he stays in the pocket. he goes horizontal for the sideline or slides if he is a runner.

  22. oranjellojones says: Nov 30, 2012 12:37 PM

    In other news Water is wet. Thank You Captain Obvious…err Justin Tuck. He’s not even being completely accurate or he hasn’t been paying attention in film study. Griffin took some dumb and big hits early in the season but since the Atlanta game the coaches have called much fewer plays that put him in trouble and he has learned to avoid contact with slides, throw aways and running out of bounds in a way he WASN’T doing pre-Falcons game.

    So while he’s right that no one wants their quarterback taking the number of hits say a Vick does, he’s wrong in implying that Griffin is still doing that. What makes this even more ironic is his quarterback was the one who lowered his shoulder and went for yardage instead of making the safe slide play last week.

  23. cfoster0039 says: Nov 30, 2012 12:40 PM

    I understand and completely agree with what Justin Tuck is saying, but isn’t this pretty standard for any team and their franchise quarterback?

    Look at how the colts did without Manning and before Luck.

    How about the Steelers without Roethlisberger.

    Broncos w/out Manning?

    What would the Falcons look like without Matt Ryan?

    I think the only team that this does not affect (or did not a few years ago) was the Patriots when Brady went down. Granted they did not make the playoffs but they still went 10-6.

    Thanks Mr. Tuck, or should I say captain obvious (ala John Madden.)

  24. baddegg says: Nov 30, 2012 12:40 PM

    mjzaky says:Nov 30, 2012 12:31 PM

    Geniuses criticizing Tuck’s comments:

    Read a bit closer. He isn’t just stating that the offense would struggle without RG3. His point is that since that is true, it is unwise to have RG3 take the amount of shots that the read-option and QB run plays expose him to. Eli doesn’t take close to the amount of hits that RG3 does as a direct result of the differences in the Redskins and Giants offenses.

    ———————-

    Actually, since RGIII’s concussion, he doesn’t really take that many hits in the running game. He has learned to run out of bounds and slide. I watch every game and have really noted the difference.

  25. jwreck says: Nov 30, 2012 12:46 PM

    njgiant1982 says: Nov 30, 2012 12:19 PM

    Like it or not, its true. Go Big Blue!
    ________
    Of course it’s true, that isn’t the point. And you can’t “like it or not”: it’s simply a fact. Kind of like Tuck saying “If you put a dirtbike engine in a Porsche, it’s not going to run well.”

  26. skinsfan91 says: Nov 30, 2012 12:47 PM

    RGIII doesn’t take more hits than other QB’s. Watch the games. People think he’s just running straight up and down, down the middle of the field and just getting blasted every other play. Idiots. He’s quite good at avoiding contact at the end of his runs.

  27. mjzaky says: Nov 30, 2012 12:48 PM

    RG3 is amazing, no doubt in my mind as a Giants fan that that is true, but how are the Redskins going to fix that defense when they mortgaged so much of their future to get him?

    That secondary is god-awful. That doesn’t bode well in a conference that has 3 Superbowl MVP all-pros, a 5000 yd passer, etc . I think the Redskins will find themselves in a position to contend, much more so than before they drafted RG3, but I don’t expect them to seriously challenge for a championship until they fix that D.

  28. raideralex99 says: Nov 30, 2012 12:50 PM

    Tuck is actually right on this one … it’s only a matter of time before RG3 gets injuried if he keeps running.
    If Favre was a running QB he would have retired 15 years ago.

  29. n0hopeleft says: Nov 30, 2012 12:51 PM

    The same people on this site that say that the Giants wouldn’t be where they are without Eli are the same people that say he’s overrated.

    Grow a pair and decide which it is.

  30. yousuxxors says: Nov 30, 2012 12:54 PM

    I love tuck but that is one of the dumbest things he has ever said … Of course their offense will suck without their stud qb. Im pretty sure if eli got hurt the giants offense would do nothing.

  31. bison4me says: Nov 30, 2012 12:56 PM

    This dude loves to run his mouth. Ok, fine, the offense struggles without RG3, but it’s not like the NFL fears the Ginas with David Carr behind center either.

  32. cooklynn17 says: Nov 30, 2012 12:58 PM

    RussianBreadMaker says: Nov 30, 2012 12:23 PM

    Funny, because Rex Grossman beat the giants twice last
    year in that offense.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    The Skins went 5 and 11 lasy year and the Giants won the Superbowl

    Is it still Funny?

  33. Mr. Wright 212 says: Nov 30, 2012 1:04 PM

    All these geniuses commenting, yet virtually none of them possess the comprehension skills of a cadaver…

  34. mightymightylafootball says: Nov 30, 2012 1:13 PM

    The irony of Tuck’s comment is that the Giants would be about the same if Tuck himself went out…

  35. flabbylovehandle says: Nov 30, 2012 1:16 PM

    These Giants are spending an awful lot of time thinking and talking about RGIII. Seems like he’s really gotten into their heads. Good, keep blabbering, because the more you do, the weaker you look.

  36. iceburgskin202 says: Nov 30, 2012 1:21 PM

    The concussion seems to have taught RG3 a lesson. Since that game he hasn’t taken any real bad shots except for Steelers ( flipped) and Dallas ( in pocket result touchdown) other than that he hasn’t ran the ball that many times and when he has he is getting down or going out of bounds. He is a pocket passer that runs when he has to. Tuck seems like he is using reverse psychology he knows the giants have trouble stopping the run. Can’t wait for Monday!!! HTTR!!!

  37. bigbluenationdb says: Nov 30, 2012 1:21 PM

    Tuck is saying that the design of the offense is predicated around RG3s ability to put pressure on the defense.

    If the Skins had to go to the back up they would have to change their entire offense to a more traditional pro style offense. Right now the Skins are running a glorified college read option.

  38. iceburgskin202 says: Nov 30, 2012 1:28 PM

    @bigbluenation your team is setup to stop teams like GB and the Pats pass happy teams. Y’all struggle when a team lines up and makes all those pass rushers play run.

  39. goodellisruiningtheleague says: Nov 30, 2012 1:30 PM

    Can it just be monday night already?

  40. tarheelpirate says: Nov 30, 2012 1:30 PM

    I disagree with Tuck’s assessment of the Redskins’ offense. RGIII does make the offense dynamic, but it is the run game that makes this offense go. Like most NFL QBs, and good run game makes for better protection, and better protection makes a better QB. Without the success of the run game, RGIII would struggle. The coaches are calling plays brilliantly for RGIII, giving him simple reads. Because of the run game, receivers are open and the young QB doesn’t have to go through many progressions. Stop the run and keep him in the pocket, he will struggle, but that is easier said than done.

  41. oaktown49er says: Nov 30, 2012 1:31 PM

    All you talking bad about David Carr, watch out. As a Niner fan I remember him coming in for Smith against Carolina, I’m telling you he almost got a first down that game, it was so close.

  42. bison4me says: Nov 30, 2012 1:32 PM

    bigbluenationdb says:
    Nov 30, 2012 1:21 PM
    Tuck is saying that the design of the offense is predicated around RG3s ability to put pressure on the defense.

    If the Skins had to go to the back up they would have to change their entire offense to a more traditional pro style offense. Right now the Skins are running a glorified college read option.
    ====================================
    The zone read is only a small percentage of what the Skins run, the formations do have a college look but that’s by design. The actual plays that they run out of those formations are the same core Shanny plays he’s run for years.

  43. inthearex says: Nov 30, 2012 1:35 PM

    I think all of you miss the point while trying to be snarky with you’re remarks. You don’t see the giants sending eli out on fly routes to get hung out to dry for Ryan Clark. I think Eli’s run for that first down last week was the longest in his career.

  44. rg3some says: Nov 30, 2012 1:40 PM

    Thanks Captain Obvious, other than SF who else could succeed w/out their QB either ?

  45. enrifer says: Nov 30, 2012 1:50 PM

    Just watch out for the play action fake to the running back and you’ll be good

  46. blu4l1fe says: Nov 30, 2012 2:16 PM

    All this talk is nonsense. And I am not even defending or siding with his comment. But it also is something that he or some of his teammates haven’t done in the past. AGREE Skin fans?

    Oh, I am sorry, I forgot, other players, specially Skins players, NEVER talk before the lead up to any game.

    Whatever! All of this back and forth with us fans will be regardless come Tuesday morning or, more importantly, come January when one of these teams aren’t playing anymore.

  47. bkostela says: Nov 30, 2012 2:19 PM

    harharharhar put david carr in and see how many games the giants win… now i’m original just like the rest of you.

    eli has never missed a game in his career, so why would the giants have to worry about their backup? eli’s playing style doesn’t exactly put him in harm’s way. he is among the least-sacked quarterback in the league every year. RG3 has already sustained a concussion due to his playing style, and a few weeks after the concussion his coach still asked him to streak down the sideline and get leveled by ryan clark.

  48. jwreck says: Nov 30, 2012 2:33 PM

    cooklynn17 says: Nov 30, 2012 12:58 PM

    RussianBreadMaker says: Nov 30, 2012 12:23 PM

    Funny, because Rex Grossman beat the giants twice last
    year in that offense.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    The Skins went 5 and 11 lasy year and the Giants won the Superbowl

    Is it still Funny?
    _________________
    That is why it’s funny. If the Redskins beat the Giants twice and won the Super Bowl, while the Giants went 5-11, it wouldn’t be at all interesting, but because it was the other way around, it’s hilarious. Not important; significant; or something anybody’s going to remember 15 years from now, just very, very funny.

  49. jaymc1988 says: Nov 30, 2012 4:04 PM

    giants are going to bury bobby griffin

  50. baddegg says: Nov 30, 2012 4:50 PM

    bkostela says:Nov 30, 2012 2:19 PM

    eli has never missed a game in his career, so why would the giants have to worry about their backup?
    ————————-
    No, Eli is invinsible, like Iron Man.

  51. rtant2013 says: Nov 30, 2012 5:12 PM

    Wow thanks for stating the obvious Tuck, any team would be in trouble if their starter went down. But wait didn’t the Redskins 3rd stringer beat your team twice last year? Yeah, I believe all trash talking should be by a team that didn’t get beat by Rex Grossman twice in one year

  52. theclaim says: Nov 30, 2012 5:26 PM

    playin2x says:
    Nov 30, 2012 12:27 PM
    Giants lost to Rex Grossman twice … Worry about that Tuck .. Secondly why is it that the giants players who continuously talk each week is a defensive end … Tuck, Osi, and JPP … They should hire a spokesperson between them

    The concern stems from the fact that the Giants D line is losing their collective “Subway” endorsements to RGIII. Go team Jared!

  53. rg3andthensome says: Nov 30, 2012 6:26 PM

    You’re right Tuck….I mean I forgot….Everyone has 2 Andre Johnsons, Calvin Johnsons, Hakeem Nicks, Drew Brees, Eli Mannings, Peyton Mannings, Matt Ryans,

    Need I go on? Stupid way to think Tuck….Stupid. Skins will beat the Giants Monday night and stay relevant.

  54. cometkazie says: Nov 30, 2012 6:43 PM

    I bet Justin learned that big word at Notre Dame.

  55. roadtrip3500 says: Nov 30, 2012 10:14 PM

    All the people bringing up David Carr coming in for Eli…

    No one was afraid of Jeff Hostetler in 1990 either. He seemed to do the job pretty well when Simms went down.

  56. rgiv says: Nov 30, 2012 10:15 PM

    Wow Mr. Tuck,

    You are talking like you see him as some sort of MVP. I mean, if they are so awful without him. Know what I’m say in’?

  57. NJJohn says: Dec 1, 2012 9:56 AM

    Surprised no one has pointed out that the Giants wouldn’t win without Eli either or that the Redskins beat them twice last year.

  58. Mr. Wright 212 says: Dec 1, 2012 2:57 PM

    I’d love to see some of these guys’ academic scores who comment here. The American education system is an abject failure. No one can comprehend; just take the defensive stance regardless of what it is said.

    At no point did Tuck assert that merely removing the starting QB makes them weaker. He, whether patently articulate or not, intimated that subjecting Griffin to as many hits as he does in that read-option (plus the downfield pass and the runs where he’s taken big hits) isn’t conducive to the long-term health of the team’s franchise player.

    How David Carr and all the other (un)clever nonsense that most of you have spouted off on here, came about, is beyond me.

  59. backindasaddle says: Dec 1, 2012 7:53 PM

    Tuck is absolutely right.

  60. wtfredskinsftw says: Dec 2, 2012 2:26 AM

    A. Rodgers of G.B. might not make it the entire year if he stays in the pocket. QB’s take harder shots staying in the pocket than RGIII does running.

  61. Mr. Wright 212 says: Dec 2, 2012 1:44 PM

    It ain’t the hard shots, it’s the cumulative effect of constant hits while running the football. RBs only last 3-4 years for a reason…

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!