KillBill26

It is nice that our studs are staggered, and I don't see ion or settle extending with us. But if we do extend allen, payne, sweat, young, t mac and curl, then by 2025, we will have a large percentage of the cap filled by a handful of players. Or worse, they walk and we lose a top talent. I'm not saying we can't win past 2025, or that cap gurus can't navigate the situation, just that the window we have over the next 5 years gives us a HUGE advantage due to a lot of top talent all on cheap contracts.

I can't argue with that. If they allocate significant resources to a qb, they better nail it.

Having studs on their rookie contracts is a huge advantage. Look at the Seahawks with russell wilson. He was cheap on his rookie deal, and the Seahawks were able to surround him with premium talent, and they were elite. Then they had to pay Russ to retain him, and there is obvious drop in talent surrounding him, and the Seahawks aren't quite the force they were a few years back. Having their star qb on the rookie contract was a huge advantage. And I don't believe I'm cracking the code or telling you anything you don't know, but we are currently at a huge advantage where young, sweat, payne, allen, curl, gibson, t mac etc are all on their rookie contracts. Those are our stars. So there is a special window before those rookie contracts expire where we can use remaining cap space to supplement them. Once they are extended, or even worse forced to walk, there will be less cap space to supplement their talent, and it's hard to expect to be as well rounded as we could potentially be over the next few years. Now, as @KDawg mentioned, you can absolutely stay competitive with solid drafting and FA decisions, but just as the Seahawks have shown, they are still good, but not as great as they were during their "window".

Man, if Curl can play FS, he could make a case as one of the better defenders in the league, considering how well he does closer to the LOS. I don't disagree with any of the points you make regarding how important LBs are. But if LBs are our weakest unit, which I agree they are, I don't think that is a huge obstacle. The 2017 eagles won a super bowl, and their lb core was our very own mychal kendricks (solid lb), and Joe walker, Nigel bradham, najee goode, and kamu grugier-hill. The pats last super bowl, they had hightower (solid) and elandon roberts and Kyle can noy off the scrap heap from the lions. I have confidence with the way the skins have been drafting, that they can add a couple young lbs in the next couple drafts to add in with KPL, Holcomb, hudson, SDH, and have a group that's not pro bowlers, but whoever emerges from that group and wins the jobs will be serviceable to give us an elite defense considering our elite d line and solid secondary. Which brings me back to my original point regarding our back 7, we aren't necessarily where we want to be this moment, but with darby, curl, LC, everett, KPL, holcomb, hudson, SDH, etc, we have enough solid pieces that if we add in a few more to that group, we will have positional battles that whomever emerges will be able to get the job done. And with the eagles and pats examples, they didn't need high draft picks or high priced free agents to fill those spots. If the holes were pass rusher, cb, OT, QB, then that would take premium assets to acquire ( and we have needs there too), but I feel confident the way that we have been drafting that the core we already have in place can be added to with less than premium capital to be successful units. That's the luxury of having an elite d line, which we do.

I agree with needing to re sign darby. If 5 yrs 45 mil gets it done ( me speculating), it would be a smart move imo. Considering he is coming off a 1 yr 4 mil deal, can stay out on an emerging defense, in an off-season where many teams will be strapped with cap space, I feel confident we can bring him back. But if he leaves, we have a big hole at one of the most important positions. Curl has been fantastic, and I'd like to see him play alongside LC. I know LC has his weaknesses and isn't worth his contract, and plays the same position as KC, but considering we are often in nickel, there has got to be a way to get them both on the field. FS could use an upgrade, but I wouldn't consider it dire. Our pass defense has been elite with what we have now anyway. LBs are a big problem. I hope KPL comes back and holcomb has a better year next year. You would think LBs will be a focal point for the next couple offseasons. Also, recent champs, eagles come to mind and pats seem to have a turnstile at lb, have won with less than heralded linebackers. We get a couple LBs in first few rounds of next couple drafts, and the unit might not be the strength of the team, but at least won't be an achilles heel. Every team is going to have weaknesses, and an elite d line and solid secondary can make an average lb core serviceable.

I am firmly in camp A. Teams with elite fronts can beat anybody on any given day, and we have some good pieces to build around in our back 7. Which is why I prefer a vet over a rookie. I feel a rookie would be best if we were starting over, such as where the jets and jags currently are. If they draft a bust, they can start over at qb while their window is approaching, assuming they have added sufficient talent elsewhere. I am hoping for a proven vet if available to plug in and own the NFC East for the next 5 years. We could expect to host a playoff game every year if we are able to acquire a solid vet at qb. PS - cam newton is dead last on my wish list. Cross him off my board, hope for whatever is behind door #2. Take away his mvp season, he has often underachieved, and he pouts when he isn't successful. We don't need an elite qb to win with this defense, but I at least want a leader who brings more of a positive attitude, not a mope with eroding skills.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/30612281/ryan-fitzpatrick-tua-tagovailoa-art-mentoring-competition Fitzpatrick would be an interesting choice for qb in 2021. I'm sure he wouldn't be viewed as the first choice. But he is a veteran, has had success in the league, and very smart. He has also handled the role of mentor admirably. He would be a lot cheaper than rivers, stafford, ryan, dak etc. However, he is aggressive and can be turnover prone, which is probably not the best fit for the defensive heavy, field position and ball control style of football we are creating. For those who would prefer to wait another year or two for qb, if we still just have KA / TH after draft and FA, we could do worse for a stopgap.

Valid points. While I hope a good qb option presents itself sooner rather than later, there is definitely a number of paths (ie darrisaw at 19, premier FA at WR, methodically plug holes in a cost efficient way like we did last off-season) where we would improve. Be interesting to see how it all shakes out.

Agreed on how reaching for a qb can be devastating, but if it's decided to go after qb in 2022 as you mentioned earlier, and we just had a 2021 with similar qb shortcomings, then we enter the 2022 draft feeling we absolutely have to take a qb early. If our pick is up, and there is no qb worthy of the pick, you have to choose between reaching or not addressing qb for another year, and the window continues to close.

In the past few years, here are the qbs taken at 19 or later in the first few rounds of the draft 2020 - jordan love, jalen hurts 2019 - drew lock, will grier 2018 - lamar jackson, mason Rudolph 2017 - deshone kizer, davis webb, cj beathard 2016 - paxton lynch, christian hackenburg, jacoby brissett, cody kessler Lamar jackson is awesome, no doubt, but obviously an outlier. Look at the rest of the names, these are the caliber guys we are going to put our title hopes on during our short 5 year window? I agree with you on the cons of acquiring stafford. I just disagree with you on 1. putting off the qb decision and 2. relying on the draft for our qb, knowing we aren't drafting high due to our defense carrying us to at least a respectable record. The odds are high that we are going to end up with a Jo Schmo. I'd rather pin my hopes on Stafford.

Agreed, and if you know you have a 5 year window, it's tough to say "let's not address qb this year, let's wait til next year to figure it out". You are basically choosing to flush a year down the toilet, delaying the qb getting acclimated, and banking on there being qb options that are just as good or better the following off-season.

I hear ya, that was my mentality for the last couple months as this topic has been discussed. You summed up my concerns perfectly. But if the FO / medical team does their research and feel good about the medical side of things, I think MS might be our best option. As this year has proven, our defense alone will carry us to enough wins that we can expect a top pick anymore. So if we are picking middle of the 1st, any qb we take will be a significant question mark. And as I mentioned, by the time it's proven to not have worked out, our window will be closing. Do you really want to put all our chips in on a second tier qb prospect? And if you want to top tier qb prospect, you have to give up significant draft capital, which also goes against your desire to heavily consider cost. No situation is fool proof or without cost. I just feel if we could get stafford for 19 overall, I think that might be the skins best option at qb moving forward, all things considered. (Obviously i would start negotiations with later picks or 2022 1st rounder, but I'm using 2021 19 overall as my final offer, I wouldnt give more than that unless it took a late day 3 pick to make it happen).

I've started to shift my thinking from being anti-acquiring Stafford due to cost, to thinking it is our best option. Ive always been very impressed with Matt Stafford. Even though his teams haven't been great, he is a very good qb. I remember being very impressed with him when he led that comeback over the skins in detroit a few years back (I believe that was the game Matt jones fumbled at the goal line and we kept shooting ourselves in the foot). But stafford took advantage of our mistakes and carried his team to victory. Very impressive. He is a legit, above average qb, who may be considered elite in a different environment. The reason I have been anti stafford recently are two-fold: with AS coming back and leading the team on a recent win streak, I was thinking I'd rather stick with AS. AS knows the system and the personnel, and we can't have both AS and MS, so no reason to give up draft capital and a big cap number for stafford. However, with AS struggling to get back on the field with an injury they are saying is related to his leg injury, it's hard to feel AS is reliable moving forward. Second, with stafford's variety of injuries, including fractures in his back last year, I felt he was an old 32, and I didn't want to give up assets for an injury prone, aging qb. However, digging a little deeper, it seems if anything, MS has proven to be a tough qb who can play through his injuries. He hasn't missed as many games as I thought. The site Sportsinjurypredictor gives him a 5 for durability, the highest score you can receive. This year he has proven the back issues aren't holding him back. https://sportsinjurypredictor.com/player/matthew-stafford/2 Also, stafford has been stuck with some pretty bad defenses as of late. Over the last 6 years, the lions have been bottom half of the league 5 times, with the last 2 seasons being 31st (in yards). https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/det/index.htm Imagine stafford going from having to carry his team due to a bad defense, to just having to protect the football and keep the chains moving. He could be just what we need. It boils down to this for me: if the FO does their research, and determines that MS can play at a similar level for 5 more years (also needs to consider that his wife had brain surgery a year or two ago, if it takes a turn for the worse football will not be a priority for him, as it should be. Just something we need to be aware of), that coincides perfectly with our young core being on cheap contracts. Our window of opportunity may be closed past that. Do we really want to gamble on a high draft pick during that window? Once you've determined that young qb isn't the answer, your window is almost closed. I've started to change my thinking towards adding MS and parting ways with AS. If MS can give us 5 years at his present level of play, he would absolutely be worth #19 overall. Inserting an above average qb into this lineup, as well as addressing the rest of the holes with our cap space and remaining draft picks, we would be in a good position to make a title run. It would be an exciting 5 years.

I'm excited for TH. I don't expect much, but we don't need much from that position. We've proven that. Just don't make boneheaded turnovers. With the running game and spreading the ball around, get first downs and chew clock, and let the defense win the game. Then in the off-season, upgrade the position as best you can. I'm just glad what's his name is gone.

I'm really hoping for Pittman4Two. I miss that guy.

Bc I think they are still trying to figure out what exactly are haskins strengths. Sorry dude, I basically stole your line, didn't see it til just now. Guess we are on the same page with this one.

Haskins will give us the same thing, except he will throw for 130 yards before the boneheaded interception. And he will already have 1 or 2 boneheaded plays under his belt. Haskins makes Cousins look like an all pro. FYI I realize you were debating cousins vs smith. I just have absolutely no faith in haskins.

I'd be ok with that. #1 - AS. #2 - Allen to step in if AS gets hurt #3 - haskins - inactive on game days, one more season to show growth and earn another shot here. If not, bye bye. I like that we can enter the draft without feeling forced to draft a QB, which will most likely result in overpaying for a bust at the expense of filling other holes with that draft capitol. If a prospect we like is there for us to take on draft day, great, take him. I'd have no problem cutting ties with DH to groom future franchise qb, and the rookie QB can be the 3rd string / inactive / redshirt.

I agree, he hasn't played all that well. I think a big part of it is protecting the football and not making boneheaded plays. Winning the field position battle. And I don't think there is any doubt that players in the huddle would be more confident with Alex smith than dwayne haskins. Probably a variety of little things that together make a huge difference, as the numbers prove.

I do wonder what stafford's trade value is. He is an above average qb, no doubt, but he has an injury history, including back problems which are a big red flag. He also doesn't have a great record as a starting qb, which I know isn't all his fault, but it's not exactly a selling point either. And like we had with our own situations regarding dunbar and trent, if you are motivated to trade a player, you might have to accept a package lower than you anticipated, just to be able to move on, which detroit may choose to do with a new coach /gm. If detroit wanted a 1st for stafford, I'd tell them to go pound sand. Considering the factors I mentioned above, and his hefty cap number, detroit may have no other choice but to accept a couple day 2 picks as the best offer. I could live with that.

Agreed. In 2018, redskins were 6-4 with smith as starting qb (including houston game which he didn't finish). Redskins went 1-5 the rest of the way without him. In 2019 without smith, Redskins went 3-13. In 2020, in games smith doesn't start, they are 2-6. With smith starting, they are 4-1, including at dallas and at pittsburgh. Totals: with smith: 10-5 (I'm counting houston game) Without smith: 6-24 I understand how comparing qbs by their win loss record can be misleading, but those numbers are staggering. Especially when looking at situations in 2018 and 2020, when the supporting cast / coaching staff was the same, and there was that big of a difference in winning pct, it's impossible not to give AS a lot of credit for it. We should be confident in our ability to win with him. He has proven to single handedly to be a huge difference maker, considering that's not exactly a small sample size! Imagine keeping AS and using resources to help make his supporting cast even better. Hope AS decides to come back.

C'mon man, you know peterson's role with the lions has been a lot bigger than barbers role here, which would've been peterson's role had he stayed. Peterson has double the number of carries, and barber has 6 games with 3 carries or less. Your argument that peterson not complaining with his twice as large a workload in detroit means he wouldn't have complained with half the carries here makes no sense.

AP would've never been content with a small role like that. He forced his way out of NO when he had that role. He wants carries and yards so he can move up the all time list. I'm a big AP fan, but I understood the move then and still feel it's the right move.

If Kerrigan is requesting a trade, I hope they'd try to make it happen for his sake. Give him a shot at a ring while he can be a contributor. He has been a model Redskin, it's the least we can do for him. At least explore it.

Sweat should be a contender for 1st team all pro. He has had a huge impact. If our record was better, and he was more of a household name, he might have a shot. But I have a hard time believing anyone is playing the position better right now. Consistently disruptive.