Just maybe. If only Beck doesn't suck :)

[jivelikenice]

I absolutely love the direction, but I wish we had someone better then Beck to warm the seat for our '12 QB. I want him to have a shot, but I'm worried about his propensity to check down and the lack of zip on the deep pass. Realistically I think both guys will play and by the end of the season we may see Clemens gets a shot. I'm just hoping that he play is good enough that we can get a good evaluation of our other pieces on offense.

---------- Post added July-30th-2011 at 06:45 PM ----------

I still think Rex starts week 1.

Based on what I saw today at camp I'd agree. Beck was only checking down and missed everything downfield.

[Hooper]

I'm still waiting for Beck to show off this supposed strong arm he has. It's early, but the reporters at practice today said he didn't complete a deep ball and they all fluttered. I want to buy into this guy, but from everything I've read, he hasn't shown a big time arm since the combine, which is bizarre. For this offense to have any chance at working, we need to keep defenses honest with the deep ball.

[KDawg]

I probably would have drafted a QB this year and taken a one or two year flyer on someone like Vince Young or Matt Leinart. And kept Beck..

What has Leinart or Young done to warrant an opportunity more than Beck? Quite honestly' date=' neither has done anything. Vince Young gets a ton of hype because of his W/L record, but let's remember, W/L is a team stat, not a player stat. Beyond that, what has he done? Now, the argument for him is he has [b']much[/b] more experience. The argument against him and for Beck is that Beck isn't a mentally unstable crybaby and he has a year in this system. Matt Leinart has done nothing but win with a team that was purchased at USC. His NFL career has been a black hole of medicority. So why either one of them over John Beck? Any of those guys is a sad first option.

When McNabb was benched last year, as you point out, we put ourselves in a hole at the quarterback position. And now we have to fix it. The right way.

[Skinzfever2010]

^Vince Young^

2 time probowler

Comeback player of the year

Rookie of the year

[Oldfan]

Mike Shanahan got the best QB in the 2006 draft because he graded Jay Cutler, not Jay Cutler plus the lousy Vanderbilt team he played for.

Mike got a bargain in Jake Plummer because he graded Jake Plummer, not Plummer plus the lousy Cardinals team he played for.

Mike likes Beck because he's grading Beck, not Beck plus the lousy Miami team he played for.

[KDawg]

Rookie of the year statistics:

51.5%, 2,199 yards, 6.15 YPA, 12 TD, 13 INT

That was one of his Pro Bowl years, which is a joke.

Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Carson Palmer, Chad Pennington, Phillip Rivers, Steve McNair, JP Losman were all AFC quarterbacks who were statistically better. Vince had the hype machine on his side.

His 2009 Pro Bowl stats:

58.7%, 1,879 yards, 7.3 YPA, 10 TD, 7 INT

Matt Schaub, Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Ben Roetlisberger, Phillip Rivers, Kyle Orton, Joe Flacco, David Garrard, Carson Palmer were AFC quarterbacks who were better.

[darrelgreenie]

But they are both certainly more inspiring than going through another season with McNabb at the helm.

I'm one of the few that doesn't dismiss the notion that Beck can play but I would certainly be more excited for a second season with McNabb then with Beck and Grossman.

What other options did we really have this year?......Our options were, quite simply, minimal.

Just because you dismiss the options doesn't mean they're weren't any.

There was the draft and there was FA.

Mike/Kyle are choosing to go with Beck and Grossman and whatever QB they bring in.

[KDawg]

Just because you dismiss the options doesn't mean they're weren't any.

There was the draft and there was FA.

Just because you believe there were options doesn't mean there were.

[darrelgreenie]

Just because you believe there were options doesn't mean there were.

Not exactly right.

We both know there were options you dismiss the options for reasons of your own choosing.

One position is factually correct, the other position, yours , is pure opinion.

[KDawg]

Not exactly right.

We both know there were options you dismiss the options for reasons of your own choosing.

One position is factually correct, the other position, yours , is pure opinion.

Yet, your opinion is somehow speckled into the "factually" correct piece. Just because there were physical options doesn't make them good options. Unless, of course, you deem any option a positive one.

[darrelgreenie]

Yet, your opinion is somehow speckled into the "factually" correct piece. Just because there were physical options doesn't make them good options. Unless, of course, you deem any option a positive one.

Your opinion of the options is merely your opinion.

When you state there were no options your only stating that there were no options that you think were viable.

The flipside and imo more logical side is that Mike/Kyle prefered John Beck and Rex Grossman to the available options.

Which would reinforces the position that Mike/Kyle are choosing Beck/Grossman as opposed to being forced to go with Beck/Grossman.

[Art]

Kdawg, while I actually agree with the bulk of your statement, it IS a fact the team had OPTIONS beyond JUST going with Beck and Grossman. You may build a fair case those options would be unappealing to you and that is perfectly fine and valid. But, again, Hasselbeck and Gabbert was a viable option for us. Young or Leinhart was a viable option. Trading the bank for Cutler probably was a viable option. We elected, with all of the options available, to go with what we have. We have done so for ONE reason only. The head coach thinks he found something and has put his reputation on that something. If he's right, we'll all be thrilled by week 4. If he's wrong, his rep will take a hit .

[KDawg]

Your opinion of the options is merely your opinion.

When you state there were no options your only stating that there were no options that you think were viable.

I think that much is obvious. There were options. Not good ones. But options. If you believe they were good you are doing exactly what you accuse me of doing. You don't agree with my assessment, and I don't agree with yours.

The flipside and imo more logical side is that Mike/Kyle prefered John Beck and Rex Grossman to the available options.

So in essence, they agree with me.

Which would reinforces the position that Mike/Kyle are choosing Beck/Grossman as opposed to being forced to go with Beck/Grossman.

Could be one in the same. They may have wanted to look elsewhere, but found no good options. Thus, they choose to stick with their best current option. Thus making my statement that there were no good options in play accurate.

Kdawg, while I actually agree with the bulk of your statement, it IS a fact the team had OPTIONS beyond JUST going with Beck and Grossman. You may build a fair case those options would be unappealing to you and that is perfectly fine and valid. But, again, Hasselbeck and Gabbert was a viable option for us. Young or Leinhart was a viable option. Trading the bank for Cutler probably was a viable option. We elected, with all of the options available, to go with what we have. We have done so for ONE reason only. The head coach thinks he found something and has put his reputation on that something. If he's right, we'll all be thrilled by week 4. If he's wrong, his rep will take a hit .

Obviously there were QBs on the market. If you choose to argue semantics, that's you and dg's perogative.

There were no good options for a rebuilding team, in my opinion. Again, just because there are physical options doesn't make them good options. Or, just because you can trade the farm for someone, doesn't make it the right move.

[Art]

Dawg,

By definition drafting a young, franchise type QB IS a good option for rebuilding. We may do that next year now. Or we may not have to. We elected NOT to for reasons we had. I can't say they were bad reasons, as we haven't seen the games played. We may find it to be a beautiful decision, or, we may shake our fists.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Kdawg,

Just a gut reaction: Who do you think has a better shot at starting a playoff game in the next three years: McNabb, Young, or Beck?

(Actually, that's a good question for everyone).

I'm not going to sit here and claim that Vince Young is going to be an All Pro someday. But people seem to have a million arguments as to why John Beck is thirty years old and has been let go by two teams. Yet, no one is willing to make any excuses for Young or Leinart.

Of course, if the Skins had signed either of them, the excuses would be pouring in. This is really just a reactive "He's our guy now" argument. It's not like there are still people here claiming that Ramsey or Campbell deserve more shots to be stars.

[KDawg]

Dawg,

By definition drafting a young, franchise type QB IS a good option for rebuilding. We may do that next year now. Or we may not have to. We elected NOT to for reasons we had. I can't say they were bad reasons, as we haven't seen the games played. We may find it to be a beautiful decision, or, we may shake our fists.

Art,

I don't disagree. So why the argument on semantics?

It's my position that if there are no good options (fit, age, money, coachability, attitude, leadership) then there are no actual options. Just people that look like options.

---------- Post added July-30th-2011 at 04:18 PM ----------

Kdawg' date='

Just a gut reaction: Who do you think has a better shot at starting a playoff game in the next three years: McNabb, Young, or Beck?

(Actually, that's a good question for everyone).[/quote']

None.

But given the three and a need for an answer, the one with the best support cast.

I don't believe Beck will be our starter for three years. So not him.

Young is stuck behind Vick. But Young could start a playoff game is Vick gets injured I suppose.

The actual answer is probably Minnesota and McNabb. But, I don't think any of them are good options in the long haul for just any team.

[whatmeworry]

I have to remind myself that some birds aren't meant to be caged. Their feathers are just too bright. And when they fly away' date=' the part of you that knows it was a sin to lock them up does rejoice. But still, the place you live in is that much more drab and empty that they're gone. I guess I just miss my friend.[/quote']

Thank you Morgan.

[KDawg]

I'm not going to sit here and claim that Vince Young is going to be an All Pro someday. But people seem to have a million arguments as to why John Beck is thirty years old and has been let go by two teams. Yet' date=' no one is willing to make any excuses for Young or Leinart.

Of course, if the Skins had signed either of them, the excuses would be pouring in. This is really just a reactive "He's our guy now" argument. It's not like there are still people here claiming that Ramsey or Campbell deserve more shots to be stars.[/quote']

I don't think Beck is anything special, personally. He gets no excuses. But him being our current best option is more than being the best quarterback of the bunch (because he's not). I wouldn't want any of them as my quarterback.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Art,

I don't disagree. So why the argument on semantics?

It's my position that if there are no good options (fit, age, money, coachability, attitude, leadership) then there are no actual options. Just people that look like options.

That's depressing.

In other words, from February forward, you believe that there was NOTHING that the Skins could do to improve their situation at the QB spot.

Is there anything that can do next year to fix the QB spot? Or can it never be fixed? Are we destined for a lifetime of mediocrity and Dolphins' castoffs.

[darrelgreenie]

I think that much is obvious. There were options. Not good ones. But options. If you believe they were good you are doing exactly what you accuse me of doing. You don't agree with my assessment, and I don't agree with yours.

lol, there were options but not good options.

Okay, dude.

Unless you find away to predict outcomes you cannot dismiss all the options and claim they weren't good.

[KDawg]

That's depressing.

In other words' date=' from February forward, you believe that there was NOTHING that the Skins could do to improve their situation at the QB spot.[/quote']

No. I believe there was nothing we could do that wouldn't hurt our future in some way or another. We could have traded for Kolb. We could have traded for Orton. But I don't think those guys would be worth the pricetag. Thus no good options. And it's my take that if there is no good options, there is no option. Despite physical availability.

---------- Post added July-30th-2011 at 04:25 PM ----------

lol, there were options but not good options.

Okay, dude.

Is it that hard of a concept to grasp, dg?

Unless you find away to predict outcomes you cannot dismiss all the options and claim they weren't good.

I can when it's opinion, as I've stated. Just like you believe that those physical options were actual good ones. Unless you find a way to predict outcomes.

---------- Post added July-30th-2011 at 04:28 PM ----------

That's depressing.

In other words' date=' from February forward, you believe that there was NOTHING that the Skins could do to improve their situation at the QB spot.

Is there anything that can do next year to fix the QB spot? Or can it never be fixed? Are we destined for a lifetime of mediocrity and Dolphins' castoffs.[/quote']

The draft is pretty loaded with quarterback talent. I think we'll be selecting one of the main three, or who knows, perhaps a sleeper candidate jumps up the charts. I also don't know what QB FA looks like, but I suspect the Shanahan's do.

[SpacePenguin]

lol, there were options but not good options.

Okay, dude.

Unless you find away to predict outcomes you cannot dismiss all the options and claim they weren't good.

Film study is a pretty good way to predict outcomes, but it's as subjective as opinion, so....there is just as little unbiased fact that John Beck is less of a viable option than any of the rest.

I know you're not anti-Beck, just saying if opinion is thrown out the window, there's really nothing to talk about here, hehehe.

Sorry to disrupt your semantics arguement. Carry on.....

[TheLongshot]

What other options did we really have this year? Trade more draft picks for a guy who may not fit the system? Sign a head case quarterback who throws his pads into the stands when he doesn't get his way? Give away more picks to Andy Reid for Kevin Kolb? Our options were, quite simply, minimal.

As far as who was in the NFL, I tend to agree that there were few options, but we had plenty of options in the draft, from Gabbert on down and chose none of them. Certainly how Beck does in comparison to those rookies will reflect a long time on Shanahan's tenure here.

[KDawg]

Film study is a pretty good way to predict outcomes, but it's as subjective as opinion, so....there is just as little unbiased fact that John Beck is less of a viable option than any of the rest.

I know you're not anti-Beck, just saying if opinion is thrown out the window, there's really nothing to talk about here, hehehe.

Sorry to disrupt your semantics arguement. Carry on.....

:applause:

Well said. Agree with this completely. This forum is based on opinion. Football decisions, by football experts are made from opinion. I fail to see why opinion is a bad thing, unless you just don't agree with the opinion.

---------- Post added July-30th-2011 at 04:35 PM ----------

As far as who was in the NFL, I tend to agree that there were few options, but we had plenty of options in the draft, from Gabbert on down and chose none of them. Certainly how Beck does in comparison to those rookies will reflect a long time on Shanahan's tenure here.

Not if those guys weren't a fit. I think Locker was a fit and Shanahan targetted him. Then he got drafted to Tennessee. He then moved to the next best player on his board, Ryan Kerrigan.

[darrelgreenie]

Film study is a pretty good way to predict outcomes, but it's as subjective as opinion, so....there is just as little unbiased fact that John Beck is less of a viable option than any of the rest.

I know you're not anti-Beck, just saying if opinion is thrown out the window, there's really nothing to talk about here, hehehe.

Sorry to disrupt your semantics arguement. Carry on.....

I'm not sure why your first sentence addressed to me?

If you assume that I use film study to predict outcomes your making a very false assumption.

Never said Beck wasn't a viable option, but logic follows that if Beck is a viable option then there were other viable options as well.

KDwag refuses to accept the above and he does so by dismissing that any other option both through draft and FA was viable that is not logical no matter how you dress it up.

Its one thing to state your opinion its another to ask others to accept your opinion as contingent upon follow your argument.

If this discussion has delved into semmantics its not my intention, it never is I come here to talk straight football.