cakmoney61

5 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

How you feel is totally valid too, drafting a rookie is scary bc it nails the current regime to a timeline they didn’t necessarily have before. And if it was a trade up, even more so. And when you have a HC with the power Rivera does who’s already feeling the heat, you worry a desperation decision could be made to try to save himself. So you are trusting Rivera to find the right guy, for the right reasons, for the right price, and then finish the parlay by successfully developing him and winning…without any guarantees along the way. So I was right that it’s not as simple as whether a guy is “can’t miss” or not, but you were right that it’s ****ing scary to take the gamble on a guy who doesn’t have that pedigree, especially after a pricey trade up.

 

What I’m getting at is that you may be right that my logic could be helpful in your “loved one jumping off a bridge” scenario…but also if they’re a Washington Football fan I might just tell them to jump!  

I appreciate your positive approach of it being possible to find that guy in this year's draft.  I just want someone to guarantee me right now that our QB situation will be addressed for the next 10-15 years, whether he be a vet or a rookie no matter the cost.  Thirty years of mostly mediocrity at the position is enough.  

2 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

It’s not this simple. Yeah there’s no Luck or Lawrence or even Burrow but there rarely is, and those guys aren’t always automatically top of the league talents despite their pedigree. Herbert was not can’t miss. Allen was not can’t miss. Mahomes was not can’t miss. The best you can do is draft a guy with the tools and temperament to become a franchise QB and then develop them. Sometimes you hit the jackpot instantly, sometimes the team fit and skillset is just right. And sometimes it’s a bust. But you cannot rule out an entire draft class if there’s a guy you study and love just because there aren’t any can’t miss guys. That will be the determination Rivera needs to make, that cost/benefit analysis, and it will define his tenure here either way. 

I can't argue with your logic at all.  I am simply expressing how I feel right now.  ConnSKINS26, I know if I had a loved one who was about to jump off a bridge, I would want you to be the person to talk him or her down.  I truly have no rebuttal, because you are making too much darn sense, my friend.

1 hour ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

With talent + needs ... I could see the first 3 picks being Thibideaux, Hutchinson and Neal. #4 pick is where things might get interesting as far as trading in ... and I would think to go from #11 to #4 we'd need to cough our 2023 1st ... or maybe work in a player like Payne.

I am so not feeling giving up high picks and a young talented player to move up to #4 to draft a JAG QB.  Nuh uh!  I am not feeling that at all.  There are no can't-miss prospects.  And the only one apparently with the physical attributes to be a possible game-changer is Malik Willis.  Washington should stay right where they are and draft a QB (maybe Malik Willis) or draft another position.

21 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

I'm still not convince Chase has the physical tools to be dominant pass rusher. I'll keep saying it because nobody seems to want to respond to this point but Chase Young does not have the explosive first step to get the edge, the go-to move for all great pass rushers. He had it in college, a lot of that was being first off the snap and of course he was not playing NFL OTs.  Until he gets the edge he will just be a good player and not much more IMO.    

I hope you are wrong about Chase being nothing more than a good player, but last year, IMO, he wasn't even that.  If last year is a prelude of the rest of his career, he will be considered a total bust.  To be perfectly honest, I am very concerned about his skill, his will, and his IQ.

Based on the above QBR, Washington played against five of the top six, six of the top nine, and seven of the top twelve QBs last year.  You better believe the schedule a team has matters!

9 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said:

If I made the 2022 schedule for the debut of the Washington Commanders 🤢:

 

Most fans will not be pleased with the new name; so you don't start at home right away.

 

 

 

Washington Commanders is a horrible name.  Commanders don't fight; they manage personnel.  Washington Commandos has more of a football sound because commandos are highly trained military assault units used to strike quickly.  Commanders is trash.  Especially since the team hasn't commanded anything but ridicule and laughter over most of the last 30 years.

The New England Commanders or the Pittsburgh Commanders or the Kansas City Commanders has a better sound because those three organizations have garnered respect.  The Washington Commanders?  Not so much.  Under Dan Snyder's leadership over the last 23 years, the Washington Court Jesters would have been a more accurate name.

Sorry, everybody.  But I do feel better now that I got that off my chest.🙂

10 hours ago, mhd24 said:

Our non-division games, we play the following QBs:

1). Ten (Tannehill)

2). Jax (Lawrence)

3). Hou (Mills)

4). Ind (Wentz)

5).  Cle (Mayfield)

6). GB (Rodgers)

7). Min (Kirk)

8). Det (Goff)

9). Chi (Fields)

10). Atl (Ryan)

11). SF (Lance)

 

Its basically Rodgers and then middle-of-the-pack QBs for the most part.

Other than Rodgers, no other QB has a reputation for carrying his team.  The chance for winning more than seven games has gone up exponentially based off the schedule alone.  But if Washington wants a shot at winning ten games, they need a real QB and they need to avoid multiple key injuries.

19 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

Its silly to play the schedule game. Some of those bad teams will be much improved. 

Who you play makes a huge difference.  Washington played a whose who of QBs this past season.  Eight of their games were against great and potentially future great QBs and I didn't include the Raiders' Carr.  It's why I thought they would go between 6-11 and 8-9 even without all the injuries, because the gap between those QBs and Washington's QB was massive. 

They play three games against those types of QBs next year.  The two against Dallas (IMO, Dak is a great QB) and the game against the Packers.  

12 minutes ago, KillBill26 said:

A lot of years in recent memory, I felt like we were on the right path but then injuries dashed any hope of a successful season.  I don't really feel that about this year. 

 

Our defense actually improved after chase went down. 

 

I think Curtis Samuel hurt big time as our offense was so one dimensional.  Logan for the same reason.  Our oline was being held together by duct tape at times and it showed.  But would fitzmagic been much better than TH?  I'd like to think so, but far from a given, and he looked pretty meh in the small sample we saw.

 

All NFL seasons will have injuries, I just don't think we can blame injuries for our performance this year.  We just have too many holes and we get exposed when the inevitable injuries start to set in.  

Fitzpatrick looked like a deer in headlights and looked very fragile even before he got injured.  So I agree with you about him possibly being no better than Heinicke.  But I  disagree about how many holes the team has.  They had injuries throughout the lineup all year.  It got to a point where they were dropping like flies before the first game against Dallas and COVID finished them off.

9 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

Too bad the Seahawks are playing Arizona and the Rams the 49ers...

Wow!  Getting old is not fun.  

18 minutes ago, KillBill26 said:

A lot of ppl expected a 7 win type season due to our brutal schedule.  And that was said while still being optimistic about our long term health.  Just goes to show 1. How demoralizing it is to actually go thru a 7-win season, although 2. We are probably lucky our record wasn't worse.  Our offense was weak most of the year and our defense was asleep the first half of the season.  A 7-win team should feel a few tweaks will lead to a winning record the next season, but I think we all agree we aren't just a few tweaks away.

I think the team has more talent than most people realize.  They can win 10 games next year if three things happen.  One, get a real QB.  Two, play an easier schedule.  And three, avoid season-killing injuries to key players.

I kept hearing folks in the media say no one wanted to play the Colts.  Apparently no one will have to.  

4 minutes ago, markmills67 said:

Think we're picking 10 or 11 in draft. 

 

HTTRedwolves 

If Atlanta loses to New Orleans, Washington will fall to #11.  There may be a chance they could move back up to #9 if Atlanta beats the Saints and if Seattle beats the Rams.  Seattle's SOS is .522 and Washington's is .529.  The Ram's have a .750 winning percentage.  Of course, it would drop some with a loss.

13 minutes ago, Drfustercluck said:

Why did Apke dive for that? It was at a dead stop on the 1. 

He was showing off the team's high football IQ that we've had the privilege of watching for the last 30 years.😩

4 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

Do we want a Viking or Bear win?

Vikings.  If the Vikings lose, they jump in front of us and the Bears may remain in front of us even if they win depending on SOS.

2 minutes ago, tomwvr said:

Not with the 12th pick. They need to fill

too Many spots and reaching for a qb that will most Likely not be the answer is not the right move. Don’t draft a qb out of panic .

It's all a crap shoot.  Look at how bad Chase Young played this year.  Who saw that coming?

One thing has become frighteningly obvious watching both of these QBs today.  Until Washington gets a real one, no one will take this team seriously.  Poor QB play is the death of a football team. 

Sorry but Washington has to draft a QB with their first pick and hope for the best.

Ball game...as I kick my imaginary dog.  Just kidding.😁

It just dawned on me why this game feels like a scrimmage.  There is virtually no crowd noise.  This game would feel totally different if both teams were 10-6 and fighting for the last playoff spot.

It has the stench of a scrimmage game with neither team caring what the outcome is.

I really don't know what I'm watching right now.  Does either team want to win this game?

Judge has decided the best way to hurt Washington is by losing the game.

In the head-to-head with the Cowboys and Giants, both have run away and hid over the last 30 years.  In fact, most teams in the NFL either made up ground or pulled farther away.  

4 minutes ago, skinsmarydu said:

Defense is keeping us in it. 

Or maybe the Giants offense is keeping us in it.

The strength of schedule matters and who is available to play matters.  Washington had one of the toughest schedules in the NFL.  And they lost their starting QB in the first half of the first game.  I get that the QB position was mediocre at best which is another main reason why their record is what it is.  Unfortunately, the injuries to key players never stopped coming.  The team was a MASH unit all year.

It makes assessing the needs of this team difficult when so many players were lost to injury.  What was not hard to figure out is the continuing need for a good QB.  Most teams that win the Super Bowl have a good QB, one of the better strength of schedules, and are fairly lucky at avoiding too many catastrophic injuries to key players.  All three went wrong for Washington.  IMO, they are better than their record.