Darth Tater

He did play a lot of hero-ball last season, watch his highlights. Playing hero-ball does not necessarily cause the QB any TD-interception problems as playing hero-ball is only an issue when it doesn't work. Big thing is that it does tend to cause you're sack rate to be higher than it should be and it could lead to bad TD-interception ratios if you don't have the personnel to support the play. We got one of the best 50-50 guys and other guys that are used to making contested catches along with an above average oline which increases the probability Carson's form of hero-ball is successful. Playing hero-ball is what destroyed Carson's 2020 season but also was the primary reason his 2017 season was so great. Playing his form of hero-ball when you have the skill-set to do it can also be a plus for the type of offense we run.

Problem is that stories of this type have happened a lot during Snyder: 1999 with Brad Johnson (mostly the first half of the season). 2001 with Pat Ramsey (bit of a stretch) 2005 with Brunell 2006 with Campbell 2012 with Griffin 2016 with Kirk (more a fail on our side) 2018 with Smith (more due to events out of our control

Carson regressing to his status quo is still better than anything we've had at QB since Kirk Cousins. Carson's biggest problem is a tendency to play hero-ball at the wrong time. Given that we have Terry and guys that are used to winning contested passes and an oline that is pretty good, him playing hero-ball may not be that much of an issue. Especially if we resign McKissic or find a quality replacement for him.

If the ghost of whoever Dan murdered had not reached up and infected Smith's leg, I believe Smith would have been our starter through last year.

That is even darker than mine😭

I am a little worried that we could go 10-7 without great QB play. Had the 'Girls and the Feebles stayed in 2020 mode, we might have gone 10-7 with TH. Now, with what might be a schedule we better match up against along with an injury free season, I could see us still needing a franchise signal guy to step up and a mid-round number 1 probably doesn't fit the bill. XXX Only way Watson even considers coming here is if he actually does time in prison and we have a new owner and a new stadium with no leaks and strong railings when he gets out in 5 to 10 years. He was at FedEx the day Alex Smith's career basically ended. I believe that if Smith doesn't break his leg, our argument would be over whether we should have extended him last season.

I also suspect there is a chance that Reich might be our OC next year since unless he gets lucky, he'll be fired after this season. First, IF Washington has a season like they must for Rivera to remain, it is likely that Scott will get tapped for one of the HC positions available in 2023. Second, IF Washington doesn't, Rivera will be forced to make changes if he wants to remain (OC is one of the common ones). A third long-shot is that we replace the whole staff IF we fail (but can we even find one unless Dan sells?)

A big thing is that the Colts now have nothing at QB and no assets to fix the issue. Now, given the rest of the team, I do think they'd be in play for the major FAs. Of course, only things that would give me a positive would be some sort of surprise (like Luck unretires or Sam Ehlinger turns out to be some sort of second coming of Tom Brady).

IF the pick next year is upgraded to a 2 then it is almost certain a top QB next year is out of the question. If and when the playoffs are out of the question, Wentz will be benched. In any case, IF we still need a QB going into 2023, we don't want a lame duck front office in charge of selecting him because that is what our FO will be if we don't go at least 9-8 this season (and that was set in stone BEFORE this trade)

Wentz is a ginger, sort of. He is going to be 30 by seasons end. The trade is not with Reid.

Why? If you don't have a winner by year 3, you are almost guaranteed to be a fail. Since the founding of the NFL, only 1 coach of a non-expansion team took more than 3 while those who had 4 or more in similar situations were mediocre at best. So, if we don't win next season, we will only not have a new coach in 2023 because we can't find one.

If your Wilson, you remember that Denver does have very recent positive history on this sort of thing (albeit with a FA). Washington did something similar back in 2010 (albeit, a hell cheaper with a team that had almost no talent) that was a fail. You also know that Denver can outbid Washington and are not in your division, so they are more likely to put together a deal that might intrigue your client (who has to agree to let you go elsewhere). You were about 2, 3 and 4 the last time Washington even went to the playoffs for multiple back to back years. In the time Dan has owned the team, they've gone from an historic top-10 franchise to a bottom-10. You'd be playing for one of the most toxic fan-bases I've ever seen.

I get the feeling that the whole noise coming from the Washington team has been about preparing us as best they can for disappointment.

He also outplayed Hurts, at least according to Minshew's people.

Wow, my thoughts almost exactly. At the end of the day we are going to end up with Trubisky and draft a QB.

Losing games when you are the better team is a good predictor of over-all failure. I suspect that is because you have leadership with no credibility and, while QB is important to get you over the hump from mediocrity to playoff contender, a roster bad enough to successfully tank cannot be helped that much by a QB (in Watson's best year, Houston still only won 4 games, part of the reason Luck's Colts were really just high-end mediocre was that they never gave Luck tools). Further, no team in the NFL has had long-term success tanked and many teams in recent years that might have are still just mediocre to suck.

The Trubisky narrative seems to me that somebody is either preparing the fan-base for him or trying to make the fan-base excited with any other choice of the low-tier options. Don't think he would be a superior bridge as either he is a successful recovery project (and a rookie this year is redundant) or he is a fail (and the rookie is the better option now). A good bridge guy is one that is good enough but no better until the rook is ready. If the bridge guy is actually good, it is usually because he was already on the roster (Smith with Mahomes) and/or is a premium guy getting old (Farve with Rodgers). History, specially when you have multiple examples for all decades since 1950, has EVERYTHING to do with it.

Totally disagree here. Had Ron not won as many games as he did, NFL history tells us that we'd have to win the 2022 championship or face another 2-3 years of rebuild, minimum, probably have the current staff in 2023 and then will probably have to go thru a minimum of 1 coaching staff. Remember, no coach in NFL history that started two ten or more loss seasons, has ever taken that team to anything but mediocrity. In fact, only 1 guy coaching a non-expansion ever started out with 3 consecutive non-playoff years and went on to any success with that team and few finished well if none in first two. We have our own example. Losses are the most consistent tell that it is time to move on. While not nearly as great of a tell you've got a good coach is quick success. Lombardi had the Pack killing it in his first year after taking over a team with 11 straight non-winning seasons. Don Shula took over a 3-10-1 team that had never even had a winning season and had them in the playoffs that year. Gibbs took over a 6-10 team and had them competing for a playoff spot in his first year (a 7 point loss to Buffalo on Nov 29 was what ended it). Holmgren took over a Pack team that had only been to the playoffs twice since St. Vince, in year 1 they only missed the playoffs thanks to a Dallas fumble. While not as impressive since he did miss the playoffs for the next two years, Payton took a team that had only two winning seasons since 1993 to the conference game in his first year. Reid took over a KC team that had 4 10+ loss seasons over the previous 10 years, in his first year the team went to the playoffs. McVay took a team that had 6 10+ loss seasons in the previous 10 to the playoffs in year 1 relying on a QB that had looked like a bust the previous year. All of these coaches have won championships and only 1 has not seen more than 1.

Oops, I originally wrote the player was born and wanted to change that to before their parents had met.

Actually by a positive light I am referring more as a team that is a winner on the field. Last time we had a poor season and turned around to a consistent winner was going from 7-9 to 4 straight winning seasons (3 of 10 or more) was before many players parents born. They remember a team that has one mediocre year good enough to get to the playoff followed by suck or at least low-level mediocrity. I don't think TH is a top-half of the league QB. I was just saying that if a given poster thinks our roster is not top-half, THEY must believe that TH is. I am also saying that Washington is more just not a destination that players think of when asked as opposed to a no destination.

I would say that anyone who disagrees with this must be a TH fan. You don't go 7-10 with a below par roster unless you have an above par QB. The problem is that no player currently in the league probably remembers us in a very positive light. Even before the current stuff came to light, you had us messing up the Kirk Cousin situation, problems with the training staff and a dump of a stadium.

No a Watson. Remember, Watson said he was not going to play for Houston again a month or two BEFORE the **** hit the fan and Houston even had a deal in place that could, at least in part, fix the damage Kelly did. There was even an early narrative, never gained traction irc, that the accusations were actually pushed by the organization, the NFL or the city. Further, Rodgers situation is more like Brady 2020 except that Rodgers is not a FA. Rodgers will be your guy for 1-2 years. Wilson probably has 5-7.

My biggest issue is that the only reason a nearly 71 year old Caroll would consider letting Wilson go is if he either knows Wilson is done or Wilson is going to pull a Watson.

More about my disgust with the team and my inability to just not give a flip anymore. Further, when I did my retirement planning, my 'splurge' was going to be season tickets (or at least a lot of one-off purchases), so probably a bit of depression that it may not happen and not for financial reasons.

If the Commanders hit big on a QB without making the team boring, I think I can become a die-hard fan of this expansion team.