The Consigliere

Next QB up, that's how the system works.

It's next up sets the next price point.

Not if they want QB or RB help, WR is also a weaker draft.

Why? Mariota had one real nice season, and a shortened injured season where the raw #'s look great, but the actual performance of the team was horrific. I was buying Mariota in '16-'18, but at this point, it's nuts to think he's worth much of anything, especially elite DL talent. If they want a DL for Mariota, they can give us a first as a part of the deal.

Piece of evidence 4,384,365,238 why we invest way too much confidence in GM's and F.O.'s, if there is their reason, they are complete fools. Regardless, I'll enjoy watching them eat crow on Fields moving forward. Flat out morons. At least have a sound argument. Wahhh! OSU QB's bust. Wahhhh! We didn't get Josh Allen, he's repeatable in this other guys body. Idiots.

Man you guys are just slamming me with those logic bombs, over and over while I struggle to drag my, "hunch", "Jets ruined him," and, "take lock" ever more slowly forward. I think this is my Thermypolae.

If you want to saddle teams with a coach/gm who can do neither, that will happens as he trades away top 5 WR's for 40th/below ranked, washed RB's and the like. You can tell me any decade, and most years, and I can give out outliers where the F.O. has basically ruined them. Usually their tier 2 guys, but still. Stafford and Detroit, Atlanta and Matt Ryan, Carson Palmer and Cincy, Philip Rivers and San Diego even the Cowboys with Dak. It happens, but generally it's either bad luck, or totally incompetent front offices that manage to waste franchise QB's as Houston has done with Watson. Give them a terrible coach (Nearly all of Rivers coaches were trash), add in a GM screwing things up, and you can fumble away a franchise guy no problem. It's not a panacea, it's not gonna change that we have the worst owner in sports, but it is the only chance we have.

No. '83 was much worse. The Chiefs were in this, repeatedly driving, they just couldn't score, and couldn't block to save their lives. The '83 super bowl was a tour de force of errors: Blocked Punt recovered for a TD, Blocked PAT, Missed FG (you should get a ST's award for that troika), Pick 6 seconds before halftime, million yard, "there's no chance he runs around in circles 5 yards behind the los, then accelerates, turns the corner and makes that, holy ----, no, No, NOOOOO! Marcus Allen TD run, and all of this after we annihilated the Rams 51-7, beat Joe Montana w/some ref help in the playoffs, and beat that same Raider team in the regular season (well, minus Marcus Allen). Let's blame the wind though (which apparently was a major problem and a part of the Lester Hayes/Mike Haynes game plan. '83 was a nightmare where you went from supremely confident, to slowly developing fear, to horror, to inevitably, to emotional collapse. This game was in doubt for some until the fourth quarter when they finally accepted that yeah, the chiefs weren't going to switch to a short passing game fast enough to cope with the pass blocking issues etc (and the exhaustion of the D).

As we're watching one future HOF play another future HOF, and when the Final Four this year was 3 Future HOF's and one guy who turned in a HOF season (Josh Allen)??? I hope it goes w/o saying that the lines matter, hell I've spent the past few years trying to create a new phrase, "being David Carr'd" to explain why you have to give your franchise QB an OL (and I will note, numerous sources gave the Bucs a fighting chance for one reason going in and that was that the chiefs would be starting only one OL from last year's group due to cluster injuries and covid etc and that issue proved out big time against the Bucs front (and shockingly, that secondary too). Regardless though, QB is the end all be all, period. The Bucs were a burning trash can last year, the only major move they made in the offseason was at QB (and getting Wirfs after a bunch of teams idiotically passed on the top 10 talent), and boom, they win a super bowl? Kinda underlines the point.

Wow. That’s super upsetting. Could have had Herbert. Just brutal.

17 out of 32. Clearly I was a cheap date in 1994.

What about Frerotte's debut against the Colts 26 years ago. I still remember that damn game, thinking, "Thank God, Heath's a bust, but we nailed Frerotte," should have known better after my love affairs with Jay Schroeder and Cary Conklin's potential failed horribly (never really a Humphries Truther which is hilarious considering he made a Super Bowl).

But he wasn't, so he hasn't had a year where he was brutalized and then eventually knocked out for the rest of a season with a serious injury. As much as Burrow has the higher grade going into the '20 draft after that '19 season, Herbert isn't carrying forward with a season of shellacking's that can damage a QB's future in the way Burrow was and he also didn't sustain a season ending ACL/MCL injury. Herbert jumps ahead of him both because of the health angle going forward and because Herbert hasn't endured a year of getting smashed in the way Burrow was. Burrow is now damaged by his first professional season. Herbert wasn't in any significant way physically (via injury) or potentially mentally (by getting slaughtered every week). In fariness, Herbert's OL wasn't great or even good, they were barely adequate, but still, Herbert was pressured a touch under 30% less per game than Burrow was, and he was sacked a full 1 sack per game fewer. Herbert comes out with a great season and no lingering issues in terms of injury or getting bashed around non-stop, while Burrow comes out with a serious pair of knee injuries, and did get bashed around non-stop to the point where people were actively talking about "we don't want this guy getting knocked out for the year because the Bengals OL is straight trash for weeks, and then that's exactly what happened" a la Luck. So yeah, I agree that Herbert would've been hit by the same things that would've been out of control, I don't blame Burrow for what happened, he just got drafted by a trash team with a horrible OL (but some legit weapons), and it cost him a serious knee injury and the potential for serious pocket paranoia issues when you see phantom sacks happening left and right due to inept blocking. Herbert managed to avoid that, and that, combined with his performance, elevates him above Burrow, at least for now.

Herbert produced a top 15 season despite playing with a defense that was a mess and an offense that had no playmakers play a full 16 game schedule and all but one only managed a max of 11 starts. Despite that he was excellent for a majority of the season (did have a dip if memory serves around late october to late november), and unlike Burrow, he didn't take a billion hits a game behind horrific blocking (5.1% sack rate to 7.3%). I get nervous when QB's are brutalized by incompetent line play in front of them. Lastly though, seriously? You wouldn't take Herbert now over Young? I'm astonished at that. Young is awesome, no disagreement there, but a locked in franchise QB? There's just zero question what matters more. I guess you're quibbling more with my depiction of Herbert's current status.

Because Herbert hit and a franchise QB is worth vastly more than any other position.

I know this. The poster made reference to him being the best player in the draft. Now, in retrospect, he definitely wouldn't go top 2. Herbert would go 1, and Burrow 2. That's my point. Obviously last year, there were a ton of question marks (though in fairness, going into the season he was the #2 ranked QB in that class, it's just Burrow turned in one of the best, if not the best seasons in the history of college football, while Herbert didn't improve significantly if at all, and so his stock ticked down a touch).

He wasn't the best player, Justin Herbert and Joe Burrow were. No matter what Chase can do (and he can do a lot), Burrow (if he hits and the Bengals don't wreck him) and Herbert right now are infinitely more valuable because one is a franchise QB and one looked like one. I'm a Tua backer, so I believe he'll pan out, but so far he hasn't looked like pre injury Tua so I get the skepticism (whether miami was babying (clearly) or lacked the personel (clearly), or he just isn't the same (possibly), but for all the things Chase does, in the room, with chemistry, and on the field in terms of production, and attention, he still doesn't trump what a franchise QB can do in terms of domino effect, You make a good argument for why I would be scared to include him in a deal for Fields (which is why I wouldn't also give a first). I would include him for Lawrence, because Lawrence is clearly a once a decade, Andrew Luck, Peyton Manning, John Elway top QB talent. I'd trade him for Watson as well due to age. I agree, he's basically a #1 overall pick and a generational type talent, and he hit and he's got four cheap years left on his deal. You only include him for top of the line guys. I would for Fields because I believe in Fields, but I also would've last year for Tua or for Herbert straight up so there's that too. I get why if you trade him, though, he should mitigate a huge portion of the cost for a QB. I also get that it isn't happening anyway.

But the only teams that are year in and year out contenders, that make multiple title game runs, have those QB's. Without them, you're a one and done, Colts, Panthers, Titans, niners type team. It's just way harder to build the team you want. It looks easier, but it isn't, because the stability necessary doesn't come, when you need an answer at QB and don't have it. You'd have to go back to the eighties and early nineties, pre-free agency to find teams that could build rosters and get away with McMahon and Simms lead offenses. That's just not true anymoe, can't keep the roster, and often can't keep the FO/coaches that make it possible either.

I'm one of the one's who would consider trading for him for the raw talent. The #'s are dog pile, the issues he had coming out are still completely present according to tape scouts. But you also have to note the three most accurate depictions of his career to this point: #1: He's been awful since Bowles left. #2: His offense was destroyed by totally incompetent front office management and coaching from if not the worst coach in the league, one of the worst: position group wise since he was drafted: OL: Much worse WR: worse RB: Worse TE: Same but worse because Herndon was suspended and injured, his one healthy year was Darnold's one borderline competent year. #3: Would any QB anywhere have looked good in this situation? Consider Watson, Mahomes, Trubisky, Allen, Rosen, Baker, Kyler, Haskins, Jones, Burrow, Tua, and Herbert from these classes. How many of them had anywhere close to as bad a situation? Rosen and that's it. Not a coincidence that the two guys that air dropped into total dumpster fires are two of the least successful guys. Imagine Mahomes, Watson, Kyler, or Herbert with the Jets? How much is different with Gase taking over and Gase and the GM dumping the OL, and WR positions groups, treading water at best at RB and TE, and letting the D fall apart. I imagine all four would've handled it better but do you think any of them would be considered good or great if they'd been with the Jets for their career instead of the Chiefs, the Texans offense (before O'Brien destroyed it in '19 and '20), the Cardinals in the spread, or Herbert with the Chargers playmaker rich and OL solid squad? I highly doubt it. It's fair to say that Darnold's failed and sucked in a situation where it was virtually impossible to not play suck and fail football. Is he any good? I don't know. I don't know if he sucks, he's been David Carr'd, or if there's hope, but I think he came into the league w/a lot of potential and talent, and if he hasn't had his pocket awareness and confidence shredded by the past two seasons, there's a reasonable chance he can become at least league average. Which then means, how much would he cost? 2 cheap years left on the deal. I'm not paying a first, period. So maybe I don't get him, and I'm fine with that, I'd trade lesser picks, like the dolphins did for rosen, I'm not paying a first.

I don't really disagree w/that take, though those guys are all quite dissimilar except for results. Cousins: Classic empty stat QB mixed in w/an odd aversion to big game moments. For whatever reason, his teams and him never win in prime time or in big moments (which is odd since my first memory of him was a hail mary TD pass for a victory for MSU beating Wisconsin in a big saturday night game back in the fall of '11). Carr: I don't know what you can say, his quarterbacking has been incredibly uneven, he's been a top 12 or so QB twice, he's been a bottom 1/3 of the league caliber starter like twice, and he's been a bottom of the middle of the road guy like twice. I just don't think he's that good, I think he's league average, but with more volatility than most league average guys, plus his teams have mostly been trash (he had weapons at first, and now circa '19-'20, but in those middle years ('15-'18 most of the guys around him on offense stunk as did the defense which made for difficult situations). Goff just flat out isn't good. He had lots of weapons and an OL and running game, but as a Cal Alumn, I've never seen him as anything more than league average on his best day. Flacco's harder to evaluate. His teams were built with defense first, and great running game, good TE play, and the deep ball/INT approach. He was never elite to begin with, and seemed to sit quite consistently in that 14th-19th zone until he aged out. He was high enough end as a manager that he wouldn't sabotage a well built team which his why his ravens teams were superb the first half of the aught-teens, but once the defense began to fell off, and rice obliterated his career, his middling QB quality made the Ravens a mediocre at best team. Of those four guys, the only one who had potentially elite talent was Cousins, but he seemed to have a mental makeup/temperament that didn't fill his teammates with confidence, he constantly threw game killing int's and he was notoriously bad in big moments. I think Carr is the one that's nebulous. Does he have the capacity to be a 10th-12th QB in the league consistently, if he has some weapons and an OL? Maybe. How would he be in big moments? Well the comeback record suggests that he handles certain types of pressure better than most, just not sure about big games since the raiders never win them, but how much of that was on him since they've largely been trash and expected to lose anyway? Not sure. Regardless, I don't think he's the answer at that price, if they really want a first or a first plus, I have less than zero interest.

Yep, as noted in my run down of the QB's playing in conference title games in the aught-teens (2011-2020). 60% of the QB's were the same guys over and over and over (Brady, Wilson, Manning, Rodgers, Ben Roth etc), and of the remaining 40%, nearly all of them were high first rounders. I think it was basically just a touch of 10% of conference championship QB's were game managers. The game manager with a team built around him is a set up that nearly never works, and secondly, the rare instances it does work tend to be both a byproduct of a highly stable and sound organization (Baltimore, SF with the Debartalo/York family), and with a team with a hyper talented defense and loaded with playmakers on offense and an OL. They tend to be perfectly built teams everywhere else, and that's nearly impossible to do with our ownership. It's just not an option. We need the cheat code of a QB because we have the worst owner in the league (being kind, at best he's a bottom 3 to 5 owner, for me he's clearly the worst), and constant F.O. instability (and for those that say, "nuh, uh, we got Rivera now, I just point to Schotty, Gibbs II and Shanny years never lasting more than what, 1-5 seasons, that would put us at 4 years left max, most quality guys can't hang in here that long). The game manager approach is a non-starter, period. It will not work here. Pretending it will is a fool's errand.

I didn't realize other people were saying it. I emphatically am saying it, if it can get us Watson, Lawrence or Fields so long as it mitigates the pick cost. I did not want Chase over a QB last year, and I don't want Chase, if he's the one thing blocking a deal for a Watson, or a Lawrence or Fields this year either. Chase is immaterial w/o a franchise QB also on the roster. Chase+no franchise QB equals franchise irrelevance. I'm absolutely fine w/trading him in a package to try to get a franchise QB. I will not back off of it in the sense that I think it's patently obvious it would make sense if it landed us a legit franchise guy, or the chance to draft one w/that potential. However I've always tried to attach the addendums: #1 Only if it dramatically mitigates the cost of a trade in terms of picks. #2 I do think a bit of wariness of trading players versus picks with the snyder pnealty coming up is a concern. #3 I see ZERO chance of a trade including Chase happening. I could see other DL's and players, but I think there's no chance of it happening. None whatsoever, I just think it should be considered if it reduces the cost of a trade. Just bear in mind, those of you who think it won't happen or it shouldn't, I agree with the former take 100%. I don't think there's any chance we trade Chase for anything. I just think we should, if we can use it to get the right QB.

I don't disagree. Chase is a guy I'd have on the table for only 3 guys: Watson, Lawrence, and Fields. For Watson, they don't get multiple firsts period, that's a first and a #2 overall player who is a confirmed hit and has 4 cheap years left. For Fields, I think I'd offer Chase, and a '23 3rd and '22 1st for the Fields pick and a '22 2nd. For Lawrence, I would offer multiple firsts and Chase for Lawrence and a future 2nd, but I don't think there's any chance in any world where we get lawrence, that's just a marker for me. I think adding chase basically cuts the pick cost of a trade by at least 50% which is why I like it. I also fully recognize that there is zero chance they include Chase because teams never think that way about picks that just hit, they only think that way about picks that may be a miss a year after making them. It's just lazy thinking, but I'm 100% sure Chase won't be included, again, I'm basically positive, however I also think that's fundamentally flawed management to not consider how adding chase could help team building by cutting the costs of a move.

The only thing crazier than trading Chase Young is pretending that Chase Young is untouchable when the best two QB's on the roster finished 29th and 38th in PFF's grading. This team is going NOWHERE with Chase Young and without QB's. How to acquire an elite or potentially elite QB without actually sacrificing Young, or even worse options (3 years worth of day 1 and day 2 picks anyone for a team a flukey year removed from finishing 31st in the league) is utterly beyond me. You can try short cuts, but we've done that repeatedly and ended up in a 5-11 to 9-7 perpetual cul de sac w/half measure QB's like Friesz, Matthews, Boonell, McNabb, and even Alex Smith/Kyle Allen/Bust Haskins. Please consider that. Our QB's finished: 2020: PFF: 29th and 31st QBR: 34th and 35th 2019: QBR: 29th and 32nd In other words, our quarterbacking is horrific, and w/o improvement there, we are far more likely to be a 4-6 win team in '21, than to improve to a 9-10 win team. You can't have your QB that bad, and contend long term. Period. Some exceptions for the persnickety amongst you: 2020: 23rd: Drew Brees-He was bad last year so the poor ranking makes sense. 24th: Lamar Jackson-QBR don't like Jackson. How'd they do it? Simple, Brees plays for a team with a top 3 defense and elite talent all over the field for the offense and he used to be elite. Lamar isn't liked by QBR and despite a down year, he improved in the second half and he plays with a team with an elite defense and plenty of weapons. 2019: Your outlier year? 21st: Josh Allen: These days he's a top QB, back then he was a difference making messy QB. 24th: Kirk Cousins: A good defense and a team loaded with weapons everywhere. 26th: Lamar Jackson: QB clearly hates Lamar who had an insane season in '19. 27th: Drew Brees: Injury riddled '19 on the way to retiring. Explanation: Josh was solid in '21, and with the defense playing well and his konami code approach, he was a legit QB. Cousin played in a Saints/ravens styled strong defense with plenty of playmakers on offense, don't know why he couldn't do better. QBR was just wrong about Lamar, and Brees was injured but playing on an elite team. 2018: 20th: Russell Wilson-Not sure what QBR was doing rating Wilson this low. 2017: 21st: Mariota-Probably the worst QB to make the playoffs the past four years in terms of QB and talent. 23rd: Wentz-QBR is trash. Wentz completed 60% threw 33 TD's and 7 picks, and is 23rd?!?!? 2016: 20th: Ben Roth 21st: Alex Smith 23rd: Dak 26th: Tom Brady Okay, major issues with QBR here. Regardless, what's well and truly worth noting, are there any QB's rated as bad as ours were in the past five years who sniffed the playoffs? The answer? An emphatic NO and the teams that did have QB's that finished around our zone were largely old HOF's playing with elite talent on both sides of the ball, something that absoulutely is not true of the redskins. That's why I'm recommending all players and assets be on the table, and while I'd prefer trading someone with fewer rookie contract years available than Young, clearly Young carries the most value of any player on our roster by far. He's on a cheap contract for four more years (assuming the option is used), he's clearly elite, and he even carries great mental make up with no hang ups (I should say seemingly, since we never actually know what goes on behind closed doors, it just seems that locker room wise, he's beloved). So trading him. OF COURSE. If I can get Trevor Lawrence, Justin Fields, or Watson, and it costs me Young, I do it every single time. I just want Young's cheap contract applied to the contours of the trade, if you are getting Chase Young, say for Fiedls? I aint giving up a first as well. I'll give up multiple day 2 picks, but not a first. If you're getting Lawrence, Young and our first this year or next I'd do without a second thought for Lawrence. For Watson, if I'm giving up Young, I'd give up a 1st and a day 2 pick in '22. Young should be available for such trades AND he should cut the cost dramatically of any deal. Btw, no chance I'm trading him as a part of a deal for a Stafford or Carr, that's nonsense, has to be a top 5 QB right now, or one with that potential.

Not exactly, I'd say: Alex Smith is gone as soon as it doesn't kill our cap. Smoke Screeen usage reading: You can't trust anything they said. Non-Smoke Screen usage: They're looking to make a deal that doesn't rob the team of big chunks of '21 and '22 draft capital. This makes it sound more like they'd include a player with picks to get a deal done so they don't have to use an inordinate amount of picks. I tend to agree w/your general sentiment (other than on Alex Smith), I don't think we know anything other then Hein and Kyle will be back for sure (assuming they have '21 deals in place), but I do tend to thin that if they're telling the truth, then we're going to get a lesser QB period, and if they're not, than we could be getting practically anything. My guess is we'll go cheap unless we can trade up into the top 5.