skinny21

I can’t help but feeling a pretty big part of this has to be the oline and an inability to hold the ball for longer routes. Of course, those routes are more suited to Terry and Jahan than the shorter routes you have to (generally) win quickly on. Turner faced some similar issues, starting pass heavy and then having to switch to heavy running due (at least in large part) to protection issues. EB ain’t making that change really though. Not absolving EB, just think this oline was gonna make life hard on him regardless.

True enough, and this kind of gets at a point I made earlier - I don’t think I’ve seen anything from Howell that makes me think he cannot be a high end/franchise qb. That’s not even remotely a guarantee he gets to that point of course. This touches on something else I was thinking about. If a GM/HC come in and think Howell can give them a baseline of play to produce wins, while improving the roster, that’s pretty attractive… even if they’re not sure Sam’s a guy that can get them deep into the playoffs. In effect, Sam can buy them some time. They can build a better supporting cast for the next qb, stockpile picks to better enable them to find that guy in the next couple years, and who knows… maybe Howell pans out/exceeds their expectations. The alternative - drafting a guy early this year - brings pretty significant risk. They’d need that guy to show he’s the real deal in the next 2 years. And if he doesn’t, they’re likely going into year 3 needing to 1) still find their answer at qb, and 2) they might not be afforded 2 years with that new guy if the wins aren’t coming. And they’ve just (presumably/likely) used two 1st round picks (or more) on qb in 3 years, limiting their opportunities to land high end players at other positions. Now, to SIP’s point, I don’t really want the new FO to just play it safe. If they don’t believe in Howell, but do believe in Daniels (or whoever), then go for it. I certainly wouldn’t want them to avoid Daniels (or whoever) simply because they’re afraid it might bite them in the long run if they’re wrong. But if they think it’s more important to improve the roster - to see how Howell performs with a better supporting cast, and/or to prepare for when they do get their guy, I can understand it for sure. And frankly, I’d like the new FO to be afforded some time, and since the book’s still out on Howell, I don’t see rolling with him as punting a season… Of course, if Howell fails and a guy that could have drafted succeeds in a big way, that’s a fairly significant black mark. Tricky spot for sure.

AKA waiting for our Herbert… (and then a staff that can help him succeed…) 😁 Just to be clear, that was just a general (non-comprehensive) list of factors for good qbing…

It’s easy to suggest that we simply don’t have high end talent, that none of them are as good as we might have thought. IMO, the fact that all of these guys have played at a high level/been productive (I guess you could argue about Dotson though) suggests the problem lies elsewhere… namely coaching and the FO.

Lots of good points brought up here, leading to a lot of thoughts bouncing around my brain. One that stand out - what’s one (or more) negative trait that stands out with Howell? A negative that makes it hard to see him being the guy going forward, or one that can help lead/carry a team to the playoffs and beyond. One that makes a new staff come in and think we can (and maybe have to) do better? Just off the cuff, some generic/general examples would be - Locks onto targets Poor internal clock Struggles reading defenses Accuracy issues Poor pocket awareness Makes boneheaded mistakes (every qb has them, but not regularly) Lacks arm talent Attitude/work ethic issues Thoughts?

And some really good defenses on tap. Howell’s been absolutely set up to fail this year, and that makes evaluation that much tougher. I mean, I can’t think of a worse setup for a qb, let alone a young one. Learning a new offense, with a 1st time play caller, behind a pretty terrible oline, no real TE to speak of, and receivers that appear to be struggling to get open. And to cap it all, he’s tasked with trying to keep up with teams putting up a ton of points vs our sieve of a defense. Just the psychological side of things - the hits, not being able to wait on intermediate/deep routes, defenses sitting on the short stuff, teams able to pressure with 4, etc. I’m legitimately not sure that David Carr had a worse situation… While I’d like to see Howell given a chance with better (or actual) supporting cast around him, I also wouldn’t be surprised if the damage is done and he can’t truly come back from this (though I do think he’s shown remarkable resiliency). Which of course makes one wonder if drafting a guy in the 1st is the smarter/safer bet. Love Howell’s tools, mentality and drive, but the new staff is going to be dealing with a pretty massive unknown quantity… Sigh.

IMO, if we keep Leno and have a competition, it’ll depend on which tackles we draft. Do we have the 1st rounder compete with Leno on the left, or do they take the RT spot and we have the later pick (whenever that is) compete with Leno. I think it’s probably a mistake to move on from him as we did with Moses. Of course he’ll also cost more, so tricky decision. As with Moses, I don’t mind paying the extra amount because it means more/better competition, 2) high end insurance in case one gets hurt, and 3) it’s likely just a one year thing (and we could always trade him). With all that said, returning Lucas instead is a viable option. Can he be an upgrade at LG? Probably, our play there has been quite bad. Would I count on him to do well there? I wouldn’t. Not least because I want serious quality there… not just hope.

You could well be right. Personally, I’m not eschewing linebacker (I do get your point though)… as I’d be prioritizing putting big money on a guard or center, an ILB, and a DE. Obviously that winds up being a significant chunk of our cap, but I think we’d still have a decent amount of cap space. Perhaps I’m being naive on costs though (I’m earmarking roughly 15, 15 and 25 respectively, plus or minus a few mil each). The rest then goes toward normal offseason stuff - signing rooks, an in-season buffer, and decent players at a variety of positions - a Toohill/JSW type DE, a Darby type corner, a Pringle/Crowder, etc… guys that provide depth and competition for the youngsters (our rooks, Henry/Jones, etc.). Then the draft brings an OT, some other offensive pieces, and a couple/few defenders (skewing offense). End result - 2, maybe 3 new added starters on the OL, our DE and LB units get a big lift, and we add some offensive weapons in the draft. Question marks still at S and corner - you’re hoping new guys (rooks and cheaper FAs) or our current youngsters rise to challenge - and Leno is still starting at LT. Leno’s probably our best or 2nd best lineman right now, the hope would be that he’s closer to the weak link when all is said and done. Definitely doable, though I doubt it plays out that way. My bet is we wind up with between 1-3 new additions starting, depending on competition at LG/C (perhaps Wylie/Stromberg nail down one or 2 spots and the only new addition to start is a rookie RT). Gonna be interesting to see it play out.

Wylie at LG is probably a worst case scenario for me… or worst realistic scenario anyway (him starting at right tackle again would certainly be worse, lol). Not because I think he’d be an awful guard, but we need better than “not bad” or “decent”. I think the baseline goal for the offseason, in terms of the oline, should involve… 1) Landing a good/promising RT (probably with our 1st pick, maaaybe in the 2nd or trading back into the 1st). We need to upgrade from Wylie pronto, and even if we can’t swing it immediately, need an upgrade to Leno at some point soon. Yes, we could find an upgrade to Wylie via FA, but options are limited, it’s a low bar, and we’re probably not getting a long term solution going that route, let alone someone that could potentially move to the left next year. 2) Add 2 high end interior lineman - a LG and center (probably 1 in FA and one in rd 2 or 3). Yes, we want to upgrade from Leno, but shoring up the interior comes first IMO, and not with simply decent or competent players, we need good players there. We need to give Howell a much cleaner pocket much more consistently, and interior pressure means a rushed throw, problems with stepping into a throw, and often makes scrambling that much harder. We could just go for one upgrade on the interior as it’s possible Stromberg could excel at center (or LG), but then our depth is basically nonexistent… Paul and maybe a cheap FA or a mid to late round draftee. Not ideal.

I could see that. Personally, I haven’t really bought into the thinking that our talent just plain sucks - especially when the argument gets into things like Allen, Payne, Terry, et al aren’t all that good anymore. Of course, losing our DEs, and potentially losing Curl and Fuller (along with our perennial dearth at ILB) sets back our defensive talent quite a bit. I like St Juste and I think he and some of these other guys can step up with better coaching, both positionally (ie teaching) and in terms of cohesiveness. Definitely need to add some legit talent to the D though (as well as the offense). Fortunately, we definitely have the resources to do so.

I think the issue is more in terms of a negative effect on our draft placement. But I’ll push back a tiny bit too, Ron can “win” by showing out as a DC. As a HC though, I think you’re 100% right.

Absolutely, and I expect fairly significant improvement (due to coaching) almost no matter what the offseason brings personnel-wise. I should have been more clear though, I meant it’s going to be a tall task to turn this into a “good’ defense. It’s certainly doable though - personally, I don’t see a need to put much of our FA money towards the offense (I definitely hope to sign a high end IOL though), so we could target a good ILB and DE, and a Darby level corner in FA. Draft should be mostly offense (IMO), but I think an early round pick at DE and maybe a pick or 2 toward the back 7 makes sense. I think something along those lines ups the defensive talent baseline pretty significantly (and leave much of the draft to devote to the O).

Yeah, Butler’s issues are big time concerns me, specifically poor angles and letting guys get over the top of him, probably the two most important facets to playing safety. To be fair though, he, Martin and Forbes have all looked lost far too often this year. And of course, you have to wonder how much of a psychological impact the overall poor defensive play has on everyone, and just how poor the coaching has been. Definitely not a guy I’m counting on going forward though, except as a STer (If that). Here’s hoping the next staff brings more out of these guys. With Fuller and Curl potentially leaving, no DEs to speak of, a glaring hole at ILB, a questionable group of corners, and the need to spend a lot of resources on offense… it’s going to be a tall task IMO.

I like your thinking here. While I’m hopeful that Stromberg could nail down our center spot, 1) I’m tired of relying on hope, 2) I wanna put together a really stout interior, and 3) worst case, Stromberg provides nice depth at all 3 spots. So with that in mind, I’d love to come away from FA with at least one stud at either LG or C, and then draft a guy (or 2). I’ll add that I’d rather spend more for quality than spread out our cap on a larger number of decent players.

Interestingly, I’ve found that I have the same preferred strategy for dealing with ILB, G and DE. Sign a high end one and then draft one (between the late 1st-4th). Might be ideal if the drafted guard is instead a C/G prospect so we have competition/insurance for Stromberg. Might seem like overkill, especially with other needs, but… 1. You shore up the middle of the D and O 2. Insurance for Cosmi and Davis possibly hitting FA next year (that’s more of a byproduct than the goal/focus though). 3. Add much needed players at DE Of course, that still leaves OT and TE as big needs (though we at least have our 1st round pick and a couple of mid round picks), and to a lesser extent (IMO) receiver, corner, Rb and safety to address.

Except for the potential comp pick return as Method Man said. Pretty savvy move from them. Re-sign him if it makes sense, tag and trade if he lights it up, recoup the lost comp pick with an equivalent pick a year later. Obviously he could wind up a lost cause and it could wind up as a mistake, but the calculus is/was in their favor, especially given the small amount of risk. Edit - mostly just adding to your point here…

I certainly wouldn’t say no to a FS, lol. I do like Forrest okay there, especially if we get a better system and some upside players in place. I guess I’m just saying I would put it priority-wise after OT, OG, DE, TE, ILB, and maybe rb, wr and corner.

Yep, and as of now (projecting to the offseason), no quality either. I think we sign a pretty good DE, an ok guy (Toohill/JSW level), and then likely draft one. Can’t go into the season w/ Jones, Henry and a handful of JAGs out from FA. Butler was killing me earlier in the year - you have one job as a safety (not true of course, but seriously - don’t let guys behind you). He at least had a couple of plus plays last game, but yeah, he’s not a guy I’m really counting on. As the #4 or 5 though? That’s fine I think. Martin - I’m not ready to call him a reach, bad pick, or whatever, but it’s been pretty ugly so far. Seems to be trending up a bit, but who knows. Of course, for both of those guys (and all the safeties), it’s so hard to know how much they’re impacted by poor all around defensive play. Not saying you can’t isolate poor plays from them, just hard to really judge them in totality. This D is a complete crap show.

DE is a massive need as well. Seems to me we should be able to add a DE and corner on moderate contracts, or maybe a heftier deal for an end. Linebacker is the big one for me in FA though. Then those 5 picks in the first 3 rounds should be able to get you an OT, TE and G. Throw the rest wherever you want - receiver, back, DE, corner, oline, linebacker… As for safety, I’m still ok with this group… if we re-sign Curl. Curl and Forrest is a pretty good duo (they need help around them though), and Martin and Butler give some depth and potential. Can’t recall if Reaves is on a 1 year deal.

Count me as one against going the BB route, even more so if we’re trading for him. I want a young, offensive minded guy. With that said, BB does bring gravitas and pedigree (which can only help FA and player buy in), has experience working with young qbs, and for a new GM, he represents less risk than the unproven, young hotshot. Between BB and Howell, maybe we’d essentially have a lot of options for an up-and-coming play caller. Even so, hope we don’t go that route….

A stud linebacker is in the top tier of my wishlist this offseason, along with OT and OG (though I think at least OT probably has to come from the draft and OG should be the easiest to address to some extent. Second tier for me is TE, DE (x2) and corner - the latter two because we will be so thin at the positions (scary how little we’ll have at DE). While I really hope to add a talented receiver and dynamic back, I don’t see them quite as pressing as the above positions.

On one hand, I feel for Del Rio. Last year he wanted to play more man and it burned him until he benched WJIII and moved to more zone. This year, it’s the zone match issue. On the other hand, Jack keeps trying to make these changes and I think it’s somewhat wasting the fact that most of the guys have been in the same system for a spell. Add wrinkles, sure, but don’t make radical changes unless forced into it (or because you’re adapting to your personnel). I do think we, as fans, tend to get a little impatient with growing pains, and Jack deserves some credit for giving guys (and his scheme) a chance to work, but then adjusting when it doesn’t. I don’t think he’s the out of touch dinosaur he’s been labeled as*. With all of that said, I’m very much looking forward to moving on from him - I don’t think he puts nearly enough focus on putting his guys in a position to succeed, but instead getting too cute in trying to force guys into his scheme de jour. As a sidenote, I imagine that also makes life harder on personnel guys (do you want zone corners or man corners? Do you want more of a coverage linebacker or a run stopping LB? Are you looking for guys adept at blitzing? Do you want ends that are good at contain or ones that can get after the qb? And so on.) *expanding on this point, he added the Buffalo nickel role, alternates between 3 safeties and 3 corners, utilizes 5 down linemen, has switched coverage types (man/zone/zone match) and has blitzed at a greater rate than he’s been given credit for. He has also experimented a lot with personnel - WJIII, tried Wildgoose in the slot last year, put DJ into the lineup, moved Collins (and Curl) to the BN role, alternated St Juste from outside to slot corner, etc. It’s also pretty apparent that he’s had a dearth of talent in the back 7 beyond Curl and Fuller (and Forrest). Now some of that may be on him, and I’m not trying to argue he’s done a good job, just pointing out that he’s tried different things versus sticking to one way of doing things (which would be more in line with the “dinosaur” argument).

It’ll be an interesting first indicator to see how the new GM addresses this issue. Being sold on Howell and wanting to get on the front foot suggests a smart GM/HC would at least look to the same offensive tree (if not give EB another year), taking advantage of Howell’s rookie contract. Going the other route - a very different offense - could be a sign of longer term thinking. Or it could mean nothing (other than the GM just picking what he perceives to be the best HC), lol. Personally, I’m not worried about Howell’s ability to pick up another system, but I do worry we squander the rookie contract window. And of course we’re pushing off his chance to truly master an offense, which limits his ceiling in the short term and therefore might increase the chance that he’s not seen as “good enough” long term. In other words, not hard to envision a scenario where we switch systems on him, and the learning curve makes the decision to extend him harder. Then, if we don’t extend him after next year (the end of his 3rd year), you’re running into trying to re-sign him before the start of FA, after his contract is up (a-la Cousins), after not showing faith in him (ie. No early extension). I think there’s probably a greater chance that improving the team around him, along with him now having experience in the league will make it apparent that he needs to be extended, and it’s also possible Howell wouldn’t have any hard feelings about not getting extended initially… but it’s still a potential hindrance/pitfall IMO. If I’m taking the long view, I just want the best possible GM/HC combo. With that said, the idea of going back to the well for a qb after our history of qb problems is pretty scary though.

Sanchez hit on an important piece, and it’s one of the reasons I was initially hopeful for offensive continuity. IMV, quarterbacking is made up of 3 elements - the physical stuff, mastery of the offense, and reading defenses. There might be some smaller concerns with Howell on the physical front, but he’s shown he can play at a high level. The other two facets, he appears to be doing a pretty good job with, but they take time. The good news is that even if a change in offensive scheme sets him back, he’s getting some serious exposure to NFL defenses. So while I’m concerned/bummed about the time lost in changing schemes, at least he should be going into it with a bit of a head start over where he started this year… especially if (as we all expect/hope) his surrounding personnel is improved.

I’m mostly with you here, though I think the 2 biggest issues - coaching and lack of quality linebackers - are hurting the other position groups. Of course, we still need to address Fuller and Curl hitting FA, could use a stud corner, and we’ll have virtually nothing at DE going into the offseason. Personally, I’d look to FA for defense - a high end linebacker and corner, along with a pretty good DE. Use the draft mostly on offense - Oline, TE, receiver and RB (though FA is pretty cost effective for RB, and maybe not a bad idea to look for a LG in FA either). Not likely we can land a good OT or TE via FA, and good receivers are pricey. Corner, linebacker and DE are sensible ancillary options in the draft as well (in addition to addressing them in FA).