Starting QB 2019???

[LMFAO Alex Smith]

1 minute ago, Area51 said:

Tank.  Lose every single game, secure the #1 overall pick, and hope this guy declares.

 

http://www.espn.com/college-football/player/_/id/4241479/tua-tagovailoa

 

#tankfortua

 

We'd be set for 15 years at QB.  Well worth a lost season.  Heck, I'd start tanking now...not as if we're gonna win a Super Bowl anytime soon.

 

 

I am all for that. My belief is that if your team is not superbowl ready, why bother trying to win? Just tank every season and get stock up on draft picks and then boom in 4 years you have a superbowl caliber team (Rams!).

 

I really do not see a point in playing to win in a season where it is clear your team is not going to win anything in the playoffs. 

[oraphus]

11 minutes ago, LMFAO Alex Smith said:

 

 

I am all for that. My belief is that if your team is not superbowl ready, why bother trying to win? Just tank every season and get stock up on draft picks and then boom in 4 years you have a superbowl caliber team (Rams!).

 

I really do not see a point in playing to win in a season where it is clear your team is not going to win anything in the playoffs. 

yeah!  look how well it worked out for the browns! oh wait ... 

🙄

[LMFAO Alex Smith]

18 minutes ago, oraphus said:

yeah!  look how well it worked out for the browns! oh wait ... 

🙄

 

Looks like it has worked out great! They will be a perennial playoff team for the next 5 years at a minimum once they get a coach and with their legit GM. Oh, and they have more fans than the redskins do, so yeah it checks out. Thank you for clarifying and strengthening my point!

 

Again, if a team is clearly not a superbowl caliber team, there should be absolutely no reason the coach should be trying to win. It should be a full tank mode and prepare for next year.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

4 hours ago, 757SeanTaylor21 said:

 

Did he not look like his former self? You name a qb thats under 26 and started and looked as good as he looked that would be possibly available?

 

Should have done that last year but now it’s too late. Maybe if you can get home for a third, but you still got to pay him and we have no money for him

[HardcoreZorn]

18 minutes ago, LMFAO Alex Smith said:

 

Looks like it has worked out great! They will be a perennial playoff team for the next 5 years at a minimum once they get a coach and with their legit GM. Oh, and they have more fans than the redskins do, so yeah it checks out. Thank you for clarifying and strengthening my point!

 

Again, if a team is clearly not a superbowl caliber team, there should be absolutely no reason the coach should be trying to win. It should be a full tank mode and prepare for next year.

This is the worst thing I've ever read on here.

 

You play to win the game. You build a strong winning culture by winning games, not by tanking seasons. All-Pro players are found all throughout the draft.

 

Only thing I will say is if you are 3-12 and the difference between winning and losing is a few picks, you are probably better off losing. But just because we aren't super bowl contenders this year doesn't mean Gruden and the boys pack up shop and mail it in for a higher draft pick. Come on.

[Tsailand]

1 hour ago, Area51 said:

http://www.espn.com/college-football/player/_/id/4241479/tua-tagovailoa

 

I want a QB who had negative rushing yards in college.

[PlayAction]

I wouldn't want any player that is willing to lose on my team - so tanking the season is out.  IMO Alex Smith needed more time to digest the new system and get comfortable with his players and reads.  If his recovery time is 8 months that doesn't leave much time for the physical reps.  Still, with a guaranteed contract he would have to be the back-up QB at the very worst.  I'd rather continue to draft to fill the many needs on the team and lining up future replacements for the older guys.  Only get a rookie QB to start when he's going to sit behind a solid line with a good RB and good WR/TE options.  

[LMFAO Alex Smith]

11 minutes ago, PlayAction said:

I wouldn't want any player that is willing to lose on my team - so tanking the season is out.  IMO Alex Smith needed more time to digest the new system and get comfortable with his players and reads.  If his recovery time is 8 months that doesn't leave much time for the physical reps.  Still, with a guaranteed contract he would have to be the back-up QB at the very worst.  I'd rather continue to draft to fill the many needs on the team and lining up future replacements for the older guys.  Only get a rookie QB to start when he's going to sit behind a solid line with a good RB and good WR/TE options.  

 

Alex smith had nearly 9 months to "digest" this offensive system and he still looked absolutely lost and scared in it WEEK 11, for goodness sakes! It is not like Gruden is some offensive genius and had such a huge complex play book like Belicheck. Gruden's plays are so rudimentary and vanilla, it says a LOT about alex smith's 14 years experience that he could not pick up a basic play book like Grudens and be comfortable with it by week 11.

 

Redskins need to be done and over with this guy. He has shown nothing but sub par mediocrity. Ask him to retire and spread out his cap hit with an injury settlement, and part ways. Get on it snyder.

[MartinC]

19 minutes ago, LMFAO Alex Smith said:

Gruden's plays are so rudimentary and vanilla, it says a LOT about alex smith's 14 years experience that he could not pick up a basic play book like Grudens and be comfortable with it by week 11.

 

I could show you cut ups of play concepts we run and the Rams run. Exactly the same stuff. Same with most teams in the league. Everyone is pretty much running the same stuff. Well maybe apart from the Bills this year - I have no idea what they are trying to do on offense. Maybe the Seahawks as well who have gone back to the T-formation (literally).

 

But essentially our play book is no more of less complex than anyone else’s.

 

So what’s different?

 

Gameplanning maybe. Identifying and creating favourable matchups. Play calling is always a favourite to gripe about - it’s often not about what you call but when you call it. 

 

But the the big difference is frankly the talent level of our skill position players. There is a glaring lack of speed in this offense. Receivers are not getting off press coverage well and not getting separation when they do get off the line. We are getting some guys open on crossing routes against zone and we have decent production from TE position - but hardly anyone is getting open deep (and when they are the QB has missed them!). We have 3 pass plays over 40 yards on the season. Three. One of those was to a TE.

 

Its Jimmys and Joes not X’s and O’s.

[TheGreek1973]

12 minutes ago, MartinC said:

 

I could show you cut ups of play concepts we run and the Rams run. Exactly the same stuff. Same with most teams in the league. Everyone is pretty much running the same stuff. Well maybe apart from the Bills this year - I have no idea what they are trying to do on offense. Maybe the Seahawks as well who have gone back to the T-formation (literally).

 

But essentially our play book is no more of less complex than anyone else’s.

 

So what’s different?

 

Gameplanning maybe. Identifying and creating favourable matchups. Play calling is always a favourite to gripe about - it’s often not about what you call but when you call it. 

 

But the the big difference is frankly the talent level of our skill position players. There is a glaring lack of speed in this offense. Receivers are not getting off press coverage well and not getting separation when they do get off the line. We are getting some guys open on crossing routes against zone and we have decent production from TE position - but hardly anyone is getting open deep (and when they are the QB has missed them!). We have 3 pass plays over 40 yards on the season. Three. One of those was to a TE.

 

Its Jimmys and Joes not X’s and O’s.

Well we will see now with Colt.  The reason I was calling for him to come in 4 games ago now is because I believe Smith was way too hesitant to put the ball out there.  Too much "happy feet" too much patting the ball and locking into the receiver.  

[LMFAO Alex Smith]

18 minutes ago, MartinC said:

 

I could show you cut ups of play concepts we run and the Rams run. Exactly the same stuff. Same with most teams in the league. Everyone is pretty much running the same stuff. Well maybe apart from the Bills this year - I have no idea what they are trying to do on offense. Maybe the Seahawks as well who have gone back to the T-formation (literally).

 

But essentially our play book is no more of less complex than anyone else’s.

 

So what’s different?

 

Gameplanning maybe. Identifying and creating favourable matchups. Play calling is always a favourite to gripe about - it’s often not about what you call but when you call it. 

 

But the the big difference is frankly the talent level of our skill position players. There is a glaring lack of speed in this offense. Receivers are not getting off press coverage well and not getting separation when they do get off the line. We are getting some guys open on crossing routes against zone and we have decent production from TE position - but hardly anyone is getting open deep (and when they are the QB has missed them!). We have 3 pass plays over 40 yards on the season. Three. One of those was to a TE.

 

Its Jimmys and Joes not X’s and O’s.

I would like to see the cut ups because I disagree. The plays itself may be similar but the formations are fairly different. Jay gruden has very little variation. Watching the rams and chiefs plays, I saw multiple different formations that resulted in the same routes within the same drive. 

 

That is is a big part on the playbook, and it has been evident for 5 years that gruden doesn’t change. Look at belichecks play book 5 years ago vs now, I bet you wil find very little similarities. Gruden on the other hand hasn’t changed at all.

[Rufus T Firefly]

5 hours ago, redskinss said:

Why didn't we trade for Alex Smith and leave his current contract intact?

First scenario is he comes in and performs a little above average and we extend him after the season for what he got anyway because that's about what a slightly above average quarterback is worth now a days.

 

Scenario two he snaps his leg in half and we can walk away with a huge sigh of relief. 

 

Scenario 3 he lights up the league and were in a Kirk cousins like situation where we have to franchise tag him or give him a huge extension but wouldn't that at that point be a good problem to have with a 35 year old quarterback?

 

The more I think about the way the front office handled the Alex Smith trade the more it infuriates me.

 

I suppose scenario 4 would be he lights it up and we have him locked up but I think that's a huge gamble that as we see now really screwed us.

Because everything about the way we handled the QB situation the last three years has been for PR for the Front Office. The narrative they wanted with Smith was "look we got a QB at least as good as Kirk and for less money". That doesn't work if he's playing out the last year of his deal and the Franchise Tag is a looming possibility. So, consequences be damned. 

[Rattlesnake88]

7 hours ago, bird_1972 said:

No. Let's not continue doing stupid things. 

 

We need all of our draft picks. 

 

We roll with Colt and take a developmental guy in mid rounds. 

🤷🏻‍♂️I like the kid personally.

 

lots of confidence. Good arm. Looks like a good fit for Gruden’s offense. 

 

Also dont really like this years draft for qb’s but we’ve all been wrong before.

 

Could certainly spell disaster if it didn’t work out though and would be touted as another “redskin” move.

[MartinC]

13 minutes ago, LMFAO Alex Smith said:

I would like to see the cut ups because I disagree. The plays itself may be similar but the formations are fairly different. Jay gruden has very little variation. Watching the rams and chiefs plays, I saw multiple different formations that resulted in the same routes within the same drive. 

 

That is is a big part on the playbook, and it has been evident for 5 years that gruden doesn’t change. Look at belichecks play book 5 years ago vs now, I bet you wil find very little similarities. Gruden on the other hand hasn’t changed at all.

 

I may have some time over the Holidays on Friday maybe. I’ve not done an X’s and O’s thread for a long time. Might put one together.

 

You make a good point about formations - but I’ve not seen that be an issue with Gruden. Watch the Rams, lots of bunch to one side and ISO to the other - just like us. They don’t use as much 2 TE as we do, but that’s personnel driven (back to the Jimmy's and Joe’s). Gruden is a good offensive coach IMO - not sure he has ever played with a full deck here from a personnel standpoint.

[oraphus]

1 hour ago, LMFAO Alex Smith said:

 

Looks like it has worked out great! They will be a perennial playoff team for the next 5 years at a minimum once they get a coach and with their legit GM. Oh, and they have more fans than the redskins do, so yeah it checks out. Thank you for clarifying and strengthening my point!

 

Again, if a team is clearly not a superbowl caliber team, there should be absolutely no reason the coach should be trying to win. It should be a full tank mode and prepare for next year.

i don't even think you understand the point you are trying to make...

 

-Browns haven't hit .500 since 2007

-They have consistently picked high(and missed on) players in the draft - so they stayed bad

-No FA player wanted to play for the browns over the last 10years, aside from just getting paid

-Culture of loosing - breeds losers. No hope = no motivation from players to win

-To see what you have in younger players.. everyone must play up to their ability.. since players will make each other look bad/ (horrible o line will make a good rb look bad)

-In the NFL, with the right coaching and motivation any team can get hot at the right time and go deep in to the playoffs.. even win a superbowl. 

-While things might be looking up, they still have a ways to go before they are a "perennial playoff team"

.. i can make a hundred more points, but i am not sure it will get through to you so ill just leave it here.

 

 

 

 

[redskinss]

2 hours ago, bowhunter said:

Wait...I thought our fanbase was pizzed at how they didn't extend a (certain) QBs contract??  The FO handled it pretty well IMO. A 2+ year contract on a capable QB who has proven to be healthy throughout most of his career. Given their situation, Why wouldn't a good FO handle it that way??

The good front office got rid of that same quarterback and the chiefs were far far closer to winning it all than we were.

 

Why did that not set off any red flags in anybody's minds?

 

If the chiefs had Aaron Rodgers do you think they pull that trade up to get mahomes?

They already knew what we should have known by their actions, that although Smith can play the position relatively efficiently he's just not a top tier quarterback and not someone you bank your future on.

 

Now we can go around all day about "what were the skins alternatives" and to an extent I agree we tried to make the best of a bad situation but the contract extension was a very very bad idea.

 

[Burger35]

2 hours ago, redskinss said:

The good front office got rid of that same quarterback and the chiefs were far far closer to winning it all than we were.

 

Why did that not set off any red flags in anybody's minds?

 

If the chiefs had Aaron Rodgers do you think they pull that trade up to get mahomes?

They already knew what we should have known by their actions, that although Smith can play the position relatively efficiently he's just not a top tier quarterback and not someone you bank your future on.

 

Now we can go around all day about "what were the skins alternatives" and to an extent I agree we tried to make the best of a bad situation but the contract extension was a very very bad idea.

 

Stupid...  chiefs also tossed Dorsey bc he didn’t manage the cap to re sign guys like Johnson, Tampa Hali and Charles most those guys are eating chips since that cut

[Redd]

I think we're screwed for 2019.  If we draft a qb he won't be ready imo and I don't see Alex Smith being ready to go at the beginning of the season.  If he somehow is ready I doubt his legs will be good enough for a whole season.  We're screwed.

[SoulSkin]

It seems like the absolute worst thing would be if Alex can't come back from this injury at all, and at least be a backup until that contract is more manageable. I just don't see him being ready by training camp, the more I hear about that injury (Of course, I could be wrong. I often am.). Glass hopefully half full scenario...Colt is the opening day starter, and whoever it is will be the backup. Alex heals, and is able to play at some point next year (not saying he actually will, but he'll be able to). As long as Colt can play at the level that Alex has been, and hopefully better, the team is really no worse off than it was prior to the injury in the short term. They go forward with Colt, quarterback X, and Alex (maybe on IR), and keep building the team. The "plan" with the team doesn't really theoretically change that much,  just the depth chart. I'm pretty sure we're all hoping Colt does really well, although the talk of him being able to opt out of his contract is kind of scary. We'd really be screwed without him. Am I right that, cap-wise, this is our most likely best course of action? I'm just assuming we're not getting off the hook, in any way, on Alex's contract. 

 

 

He's not passing a physical in 4 months, and I highly doubt he's going to give up on his career (or that money) before he sees how he heals, as he tries to get back to where he was physically.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

To those saying the contract extension was a bad idea, you’re not wrong, but it was the only way Smith was coming here.  His only real leverage was to make it clear that he’s either going to be extended on his terms or he’ll play the year out and test FA.  I don’t blame him a bit for that either.

 

It feels just like yesterday I read the phrase “wants to be here” every other post.  I think we can close the case on exactly why he “wanted to be here” at this point.

 

The 2019 QB hinges entirely on Colts performance from here on out.  He plays well and we make the playoffs = at minimum he enters 2019 as the starter in camp.  We also select later in the draft the better he plays.  At this time, I’m not real impressed with any QBs in the draft.  The only thing I feel certain on is the 2019 QB won’t be Smith, unless he gets healthy and whoever we have starting gets hurt or plays awful.

[Nerm]

You guys need to start thinking outside the box.  There is an easy way to solve this problem.

1.  Identify the best QB in the draft.

2. Place some cocaine and an unregistered AK-47 in his car, then place an anonymous call to police.

3. Wait until said QB falls to you in the draft... and take him.

 

But seriously, the options will be a lot more clear once we know what timetable there is for Alex to possibly play again.  Also, there will be some offseason QB changes that will open up some players.  Guys like Eli, Carr, Bortles, or Flacco could move on to new teams, which will result in other QBs being released.

 

it really too early to tell what decision the Redskins will have to make in this coming offseason. 

[50yrSKINSfan]

On 11/19/2018 at 10:16 AM, MartinC said:

 

His base salary for the next two years is guaranteed for injury unless he retires. Thats $31M he is due. 

 

So yes, its 100% worth it to him to continue his career ...even if he never sees the field again.

 

Absent him retiring we are on the hook for his salary and cap number the next two years come what may. After the 2020 season there is no more guaranteed money and we can part ways with a reasonable (ish) cap charge of about $13M for the last two years of his pro-rated signing bonus

So we are stuck with paying him even if he holds a clipboard on the sidelines for 2 more years unless he retires? Can't we say he cannot pass a physical?

[WelshSkinsFan]

23 hours ago, 757SeanTaylor21 said:

 

Did he not look like his former self? You name a qb thats under 26 and started and looked as good as he looked that would be possibly available?

 

He looked good in preseason.  the list of QBs who have done that and turned out to be garbage in games that count is way to long to list here.  If he did look like his former self lets remember that his former self was a below average NFL starter who may well have not made it to a second contract in Minnesota even without the injury.  Fact is the Vikings could have kept him pretty cheaply this season but were happy to let him walk and back up the Brinks truck for Kirk, I would not entertain Teddy as anything more than a backup.

[clskinsfan]

17 hours ago, TheGreek1973 said:

Well we will see now with Colt.  The reason I was calling for him to come in 4 games ago now is because I believe Smith was way too hesitant to put the ball out there.  Too much "happy feet" too much patting the ball and locking into the receiver.  

 

I only attended one game this year. The Atlanta game. And there were wide open receivers running all over the field. Now Colt is a double edged sword. He WILL force balls into coverage and has a weak arm. That is a bad combination. But I also think he knows the offense so well that he will hit a lot of those medium depth routes that Alex simply was not throwing. Alex actually started to to do that in his last game. Then promptly threw a couple of ugly picks. 

21 minutes ago, 50yrSKINSfan said:

So we are stuck with paying him even if he holds a clipboard on the sidelines for 2 more years unless he retires? Can't we say he cannot pass a physical?

No. That is why a player signs a contract with an injury guarantee. 

[Stadium-Armory]

Alex Smith.