Darth Tater

After doing some research on Wentz, my new order of QBs that were actually available to us has Wentz at the top.

1 hour ago, SoCalSkins said:

If he was playing hero ball he would have worse than a 27-7 int ratio. This is the nfl, you need to throw 50/50 balls. The dude has a cannon. His deep ball int is better than some punts. 

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.

14 minutes ago, Jabbyrwock said:

 

Sounds like poorly written fan fiction.  Wentz seduces the fan base with anomalously good quarterback play only to hurt us in the long run.  We'll call it "50 shades of Ginger".

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

11 minutes ago, Conn said:

If Wentz balls out I don’t really see how that could be a problem for us, assuming he can stay healthy. Then he’d know he was “the guy” and Rivera would have a feel for his personality and if it was a good long-term fit. Unless we think he’s a sociopath capable of hiding his real self for an entire season, Wentz balling out and (presumably, if we’re talking hypothetical extension) gelling well with the coaches and team seems like it could be only good. In that case I’d assume we’d feel good about committing  to him?
 

I realize to some it could seem like a trap but this isn’t like Albert Haynesworth balling in a contract year type stuff—Wentz is known to be a hard worker and dedicated to his craft. His issues were over his fit with management and his sensitivity towards not feeling committed to. So if he’s going to “return to the status quo” I’d think it will be noticed by the staff before committing.

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.

1 hour ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

The media pundits applauded the Alex Smith trade/deal, our 2019 draft taking Dwayne Haskins, spending big money on Landon Collins, etc. etc.

 

How did all those turn out?

 

The more pundits and fans pile on about how they don't like it, the more inclined I am to love it. 

 

 

 

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.

3 minutes ago, MartinC said:

 

Here is a scenario to consider. We have a weak schedule (on paper) and a motivated QB with several chips on his shoulder and lots to prove in what is effectively a make or break contract year. That translates into a much improved record and some pretty good QB play statistically with some highlight reel plays. End of the season we extend Wentz to a new big deal. 

 

Then on 2023 everything reverts to the mean - but with us holding the big contract and guaranteed money on Wentz.

 

Just something to cheer everyone up with.

That is even darker than mine😭

9 minutes ago, CommanderInTheRye said:

 

I wouldn't mind us trading back to acquire another first round pick in NEXT years qb super-stocked draft as a hedge in case we are still looking for a signal caller in 2023.

 

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.

1 hour ago, The Consigliere said:

 

 

I do agree w/this 100% which is why I'd s can any coach w/1 year on his contract and in a win or get fired kind of season before they did crazy trades. We've seen innumerable examples over the years of GM's and GM/Coaches and coaches simply seizing the future of a franchise, and throwing it out the window for a desperate attempt at a post season run and stupid, gullible owners, buying their bs and accepting it rather than firing them and blocking the trade. 

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).

7 minutes ago, CobraCommander said:

Se we're totally screwing ourselves out of a top QB next year. The year that is supposed to be good for drafting a QB.

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.

40 minutes ago, zCommander said:

 

Let's put on the breaks here and give Ron at least 5+ years first. I am just tired of the coaching carousel. 

 

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.

17 minutes ago, dyst said:

Definitely hurts. Granted it’s possible he didn’t want to come here, which is absolutely because of Snyder. If not, then we should not be outbid. Trade draft picks and players, whatever it takes to get a franchise QB. 

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.

9 minutes ago, KDawg said:

I told all of you that you need to brace for disappointment. Some were there already before I said that of course. Some listened. Some didn’t. And here we are. The two big fish that were “available” aren’t Commanders.

 

Starting at Quarterback, MITTTTCCCCHHHHHHH “ONE HOP GRASSHOPPER” TRUUUBBBIIIISSSSKKKYYYYYY

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

24 minutes ago, RWJ said:

I know he's in our division but why not Gardner Minshew?  He fits our scheme.  Has all the intangibles.  He's not Carr, Wilson, Rodgers or Watson but he'd be less (draft pick wise) than them and much better (look at his career stats) than Jimmy G. or Wentz, IMO.  Has been healthy, reads the Ds well, has great mobility and enough arm.  If RR and Co. have looked at all 32 teams, Minshew should be one to consider, I think. 

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

30 minutes ago, zCommander said:

 

On the radio the other day, sports junkies, EB said he doesn't understand why Ron is telling the whole world he needs a "big fish" QB. In the past he is pretty tight lips. To him it felt like he can then say look we gave it our best shot, and the world will know that he did, but didn't happen so now we have to settle for a less talented QB instead. This way the fans are not crushed when they go the lesser route. Reverse phycology I guess. 

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

43 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

People keep bringing up not tanking in 2020. Do y'all forget just how horrendously bad the NFC East was that year? We basically won it by default. And no coach is gonna try to lose games on purpose, you'd have a mutiny on your hands and would completely lose the locker room. Its such a stupid argument. 

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).

13 minutes ago, Zim489 said:

The past history with anything to do in regards with QB prior to 2011 is irrelevant. Hell maybe even longer than 5 years ago. 
 

the position has just changed so much and has never meant more. Everything is predicated on QB. Nothing else matters until you have an elite guy in place. You’ll never be consistently competing for anything of note. Your team is irrelevant. Your roster is irrelevant. Hell your Coaching staff might be irrelevant. Step one is QB. Do everything humanly possible to take that first step. If you can’t take that first step in a year do everything in your power to make the step easier to make the following year 

History, specially when you have multiple examples for all decades since 1950, has EVERYTHING to do with it.

23 minutes ago, Zim489 said:

The entirety of the 2020s for this franchise is crumbled because Ron won one too many games in the 2020 season making us draft 19th instead of 9th by winning one of the worst football games I have ever seen. 

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.

1 minute ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Wait, what? What season are you talking about?

 

They went 7-9 in 1988, and then 10-6, 10-6, 14-2, 9-7.  Is that the season you're referencing? 

 

Chase Young was born in 1999.  For Damn Sure his parents were alive in 1988.  Otherwise his parents would have been less than 10 when he was born.  Hell, if you were born in 1988, you would be 34 this year.  There probably a few players who were there.  

 

Even if you went back to 1980, They were 6-10 in 1980, Then 8-8 in 1981, 8-1 (strike shortened) in 1982, and then 14-2, 11-5, etc. 

 

Unless Chase Young's parents were 19 when he was born (very possible), they were alive in 1980 also.  I would fathom a guess almost all (Probably not ALL), I'm sure some of the rookies had younger parents) of the parents of our current team were alive in 1980.  

 

I get your point.  But I think you messed up your math a little bit...

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

20 hours ago, Mrshadow008 said:

I disagree w/ this to an extent most inside the league players/coaches/staff understand and pay attention to other stuff in the league way more than we do. Front office staff and coaching staff are mostly pretty well respected around the league. Players/ executives usually know pretty well what each roster offers. Key in point that Russ wouldn’t be opposed to coming here this year when he wasn’t last year. Another key point here is we’ve gotten to a point where numerous national analysts and nfl executives have said this roster is ready to go in a winnable division and that it just needs qb. If execs and analysts have noticed it players around league will have as well. 

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.

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

 

This is no longer true. Embrace it, the team overalls is top half of the league good. Ron and company have turned around the roster well and just need a QB. 

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.

13 minutes ago, RWJ said:

Pull a Watson? You mean pull a Rodgers?

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. 

2 hours ago, RWJ said:

Wilson is my first choice as our QB.  But I agree with you, SIP.  Wilson, Rodgers, Carr will all stay put and the Watson case doesn't get resolved in time for us to trade for him let alone any other teams.  So I think best available FA QB and draft one at #11.

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.

34 minutes ago, London Kev said:

 

 

It's like you're fishing for someone to bite. These slightly provocative one-liners make you come across as a bit of a troll (which I don't think you are).

 

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.