FAREWELL to the NFL Dwayne Haskins QB Ohio State

[Vanguard]

I won’t make any excuses for a coach that has been below .500 for pretty much his whole career.  Certain coaches, who have proven they aren’t winners, get more chances than they deserve.  If Jay can’t get it right this year, he can go.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

38 minutes ago, Vanguard said:

I won’t make any excuses for a coach that has been below .500 for pretty much his whole career.  Certain coaches, who have proven they aren’t winners, get more chances than they deserve.  If Jay can’t get it right this year, he can go.

I get what you are saying, but just imagine judging owners and FO accordingly.  Oof.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[Hogs 1991]

One thing that is a possibility that I think might be overlooked here. Hypothetical question here. Say we sit Dewayne Haskins for a year. Then when next year comes around, Alex Smith is fully recovered and ready to go. What do you do or who do you start then ?

[Wildbunny]

5 minutes ago, Hogs 1991 said:

One thing that is a possibility that I think might be overlooked here. Hypothetical question here. Say we sit Dewayne Haskins for a year. Then when next year comes around, Alex Smith is fully recovered and ready to go. What do you do or who do you start then ?

I've already asked the question in this thread, early pages.

 

Add to this that by then you'll probably have a new HC.

 

But answers I got were that well... Redskins will have the most expensive backup in the whole NFL history...

[RandyHolt]

Of course sitting all year, he won't gain any live fire game experience, and predict he will have little chance to beat out Smith in an open 2020 competition. Sorry, but the kids just have to be played even though a vet looks better than him in practice. If the guy is so bad that he cannot start by year 2, he shouldn't have been drafted with a 1st. 

 

Ironically, folks that want him to sit all year, want him to sit because he lacks experience.  If sitting in college 3 years didn't prepare him enough, sitting here won't do much more. Sitting him exacerbates his biggest weakness.  Sure he gains reps in practice but he knows damn well in practice no one is going to clean his clock. Nothing replaces live fire deer in the headlight reps. 

[JoggingGod]

2 hours ago, Hogs 1991 said:

One thing that is a possibility that I think might be overlooked here. Hypothetical question here. Say we sit Dewayne Haskins for a year. Then when next year comes around, Alex Smith is fully recovered and ready to go. What do you do or who do you start then ?

Is this a joke?

Haskins, because not only did they just spend a 1st on him but Alex was terrible when he played in 2018.

[Skinsinparadise]

Alex to me is a really cool dude but IMO overrated as to the quick start last season.  I think he was along for the ride as opposed to the key factor.  I was at the Tampa game for example.  The offense was very painful to watch and that was against one of the worst defenses in the league.  But the defense got 4 turnovers in the red zone and set a record for a win where the yardage was that lopsided in favor of the other team.  His last game versus the Texans was one of his worst performances and they were headed for a loss.    Maybe he would have improved with another year in the system.  But personally I think the dude was so so at best as a QB.  Having said that, I'd take a so so QB who doesn't turn the ball over versus a so so QB who does turn the ball over like Colt or Keenum.  So I do think they are weaker at QB.  But I am not clamoring for a then to be 36 year old Alex to return as for this team -- as for Alex as a person I hope he comes back.  

 

So yeah for me I am all in on Haskins being the guy.  I don't know if he ends up being the goods.  But IMO for this team to go anywhere I think he's the one and only hope at QB right now. 

On 7/7/2019 at 7:23 PM, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I get what you are saying, but just imagine judging owners and FO accordingly.  Oof.

 

I think Finlay and Russell summed it well for me as for Jay in a recent show.  Jay is likely the best that this team can get right now.  They said as a complement to Jay as opposed to a shot at him.   They doubt a better coach would come here.  And both said Jay can manage the zoo of the FO and have doubts a new bee could.  

 

I am cool with Jay.  Are there better coaches out there?  Sure.  But i think Jay is a bonafide professional coach.  I got my doubts that Dan-Bruce lands anyone better.  All the fantasies about this or that hot shot up and comer are interesting but I doubt they'd come here if they have choices. 

[Malapropismic Depository]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I think Finlay and Russell summed it well for me as for Jay in a recent show.  Jay is likely the best that this team can get right now.  They said as a complement to Jay as opposed to a shot at him.   They doubt a better coach would come here.  And both said Jay can manage the zoo of the FO and have doubts a new bee could.  

 

I am cool with Jay.  Are there better coaches out there?  Sure.  But i think Jay is a bonafide professional coach.  I got my doubts that Dan-Bruce lands anyone better.  All the fantasies about this or that hot shot up and comer are interesting but I doubt they'd come here if they have choices. 

 

So much truth here.

For those who want Jay gone, it's a case of 'be careful what you wish for'.

There is a reasonable chance his replacement is worse. And possibly whatever great coaching prospect that's out there that the fans are wild about, either doesn't want to come here, or doesn't live up to the hype of his HC potential.

[wit33]

5 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I think Finlay and Russell summed it well for me as for Jay in a recent show.  Jay is likely the best that this team can get right now.  They said as a complement to Jay as opposed to a shot at him.   They doubt a better coach would come here.  And both said Jay can manage the zoo of the FO and have doubts a new bee could.  

 

I wonder if the FO and Jay are right track with surrounding Jay with experienced coaches allowing Jay to focus on his perceived strengths, play design and being a players coach. Admittedly, I soured on him a bit last year, but still lean on side of being more pro Jay.

 

5 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I am cool with Jay.  Are there better coaches out there?  Sure.  But i think Jay is a bonafide professional coach.  I got my doubts that Dan-Bruce lands anyone better.  All the fantasies about this or that hot shot up and comer are interesting but I doubt they'd come here if they have choices. 

 

This in my mind has proven to be false with history of names that have come in. 

 

Big name former NFL coaches or a hot college coach are looking for control in an organization, the Skins have proven willing to give a head coach power. 

 

The Raiders didn’t secure the most sought after name due to being well run (it was the direct opposite) they paid him baaank, historic length, and POWER. The Skins would be no different. 

[Wildbunny]

3 hours ago, wit33 said:

Big name former NFL coaches or a hot college coach are looking for control in an organization, the Skins have proven willing to give a head coach power. 

Considering the debacles of late LaFemina, Scott or Shanny experiments with power outside of Bruce/Dan, I wouldn't be so sure about it.

Even Gibbs asked for Cerrato to be back at the helm for GM duty.

[RandyHolt]

I have no concerns about life after Jay, other than throwing new playbooks every year at our new QB. I don't think we can get much worse than 7-9 and a playoff loss every 5 or 10 years. Jay's a good coach and great guy but has had a fair chance, especially with our decent offense a few years back.

 

The perk of a crash and burn replacement head coach is it should lead to better draft slots.  The teaser of Bruce's next book, "Chasing Sean McVay", will show he is already leaning towards OCKOC as our next coach.  No one with a proper resume will come here, and I am leaning towards being ok with that. The day of the old school stiff coach has passed, folks.   I would swear half of coaching is relating to the players, which all things equal a younger guy is more apt to do. Perhaps that is one reason Jay is as successful as he is. X's and O's, systems concepts etc, are all an open book - anyone can copy them.  Heck Twitter's Bullock probably knows most all of Jay's favorite plays, and all his tendencies.

 

 

[goskins10]

44 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

I have no concerns about life after Jay, other than throwing new playbooks every year at our new QB. I don't think we can get much worse than 7-9 and a playoff loss every 5 or 10 years. Jay's a good coach and great guy but has had a fair chance, especially with our decent offense a few years back.

 

The perk of a crash and burn replacement head coach is it should lead to better draft slots.  The teaser of Bruce's next book, "Chasing Sean McVay", will show he is already leaning towards OCKOC as our next coach.  No one with a proper resume will come here, and I am leaning towards being ok with that. The day of the old school stiff coach has passed, folks.   I would swear half of coaching is relating to the players, which all things equal a younger guy is more apt to do. Perhaps that is one reason Jay is as successful as he is. X's and O's, systems concepts etc, are all an open book - anyone can copy them.  Heck Twitter's Bullock probably knows most all of Jay's favorite plays, and all his tendencies.

 

 

 

Could not disagree with this more. When has he had decent players on both sides of the ball? Yes, we had good offensive weapons a few years ago and guess what, the team was in the top 10 in most offensive categories. Then Bruce let both the top WRs go and has not been able to replace them. He has mostly sat on the Oline that cannot stay healthy, not replaced Reed who cannot stay healthy, and until last year did very little to provide Jay with a quality running game. Not to mention he hosed up the QB position. 

 

So what were the defenses during that time? Virtually last in most every meaningful category. Who were the studs or even average players? Kerrigan and that's about it. They did sign Norman and he has played well but they already started dismantling the offense by then. 

 

Jay has never had a balanced roster. And yes, I am sure he gets some blame for that. But in the end we know he does not make most of the personnel decisions. We know there were players he wanted he did not get and players he wanted to keep that were let go. 

 

So again I completely disagree he has been given a fair chance. Because of that, I am not sure how good Jay can actually be. He may be at his ceiling. I don't think so but it's a fair statement. But he could also have a much higher ceiling if given a more solid roster. I believe he will get a chance somewhere else if it does no happen here. And I do not think it will happen here unless they start Haskins and he is the wunderkind some think he is (and he may be. I am not saying he is not). Otherwise Jay is likely gone after this year. So we will find out if he gets another chance somewhere else. I hope it works out here but if not I hope he gets another chance. He deserves that. 

 

As for no one of quality coming here, that is fairly constant mantra. But it ignores that there are only 32 of these jobs in the world. Would it be many peoples first choice? Probably not. But if offered, I believe most would take it. It's pretty low risk actually. If they fail - well get in line. The narrative will most likely be no one can work in that organization but at least you tried. If they are successful they will write their own ticket. 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

55 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

Could not disagree with this more. When has he had decent players on both sides of the ball? Yes, we had good offensive weapons a few years ago and guess what, the team was in the top 10 in most offensive categories. Then Bruce let both the top WRs go and has not been able to replace them. He has mostly sat on the Oline that cannot stay healthy, not replaced Reed who cannot stay healthy, and until last year did very little to provide Jay with a quality running game. Not to mention he hosed up the QB position. 

 

 

Agree with all of this.  And let's factor what Jay has wanted versus what's happened.  Multiple reporters have said they heard Jay wanted to keep Desean.  Jay has talked about how Desean opens things up for his underneath stuff regardless if he gets the ball among other things.  Desean himself said that Jay was texting him during FA.  But they let him go.   We once had one of the best groups of receivers in the league with Garcon, Crowder, Desean.  Now we arguably have one of the worst.  Maybe that will finally change this year, will see.   Garcon of those three receivers was supposedly the one that Jay wasn't clamoring to keep and he also happened to be the one who wasn't successful elsewhere. We will see about Crowder.

 

Jay suggested this off season about how he hopes to do something at TE because their current personnel on that spot telegraphs run and pass.  Nothing was done.  

 

Look Jay isn't perfect.  He has flaws like just about every coach.  But according to some he's one of the better coaches in the league when it comes to understanding talent in personnel.  I got little doubt that the FO weighs in Jay's opinion on personnel but also its clear as a bell that they don't always do what he wants.   And when some beat guys say that Jay is frustrated with the FO, I think there is a chance there is something cooking there.  It doesn't matter if they get every detail right or wrong on that front.  It's clear that Jay and the FO aren't always in synch just by Jay's rhetoric alone if you just piece together what he said and match it to what's done.

 

I was rewatching yesterday the Tampa game with coaches film.  It illustrated the Desean Jackson and TE points I've made before.  The first clip is of Desean.  That was on third and three.  Look at all the cushion they gave him.  That's on third and three!  I was at the game and I noticed that dynamic multiple times.  They were scared to death of him beating them deep and were even willing to give them a first down as long as they weren't beaten deep.  On that play they did end up throwing a screen on that play to Desean and he got an easy first down. 

 

The other two clips is a first and 10 play.  And yes I do think Jay runs too much on first and 10 but it's not the only issue. The personnel at TE makes it so much easier to diagnose the play.  You got Jeremy Sprinkle on the right side of the play lined up tight and Alex is taking the ball from center.  It's 11 personnel but so what, that's not fooling anyone.  If you got both Alex taking the ball from center and Sprinkle is in the game and he's lined up tight -- its got to be a run, right?  Yep.  And you can see on the next crop Tampa was ready for it and stuffed it.  

 

The TE situation IMO is a problem.  Jay talked about it and he's right.   Cooley turned it into a joke more or less when he charted those plays.  The fact that every TE on the roster is one dimensional makes it so easy to diagnose.   And the irony is Sprinkle (at least by PFF metrics and reputation) isn't even a good blocker.  He's so so and is no threat in the passing game.  Jordan Reed (PFF metrics wise) is the worst pass blocking TE in the league.  Vernon isn't hot either.  

 

Every coach has their strengths and weaknesses.  Jay's strength seems to be play design.  You give the dude weapons who open the field up then good things happen.  Heck I recall on the QB thread years back people slamming said QB by saying its about Jay's magical system not the players.  I like Jay but I disagreed with that.  There is no such thing IMO of a magical offensive system that transcends the players.  Now we got ironically a discussion brewing about maybe Jay doesn't know what he is doing on offense and is bad at running one.     I think Jay is far from perfect but I do think he has a good offensive mind but if you give any dude arguably some of the weaker offensive supporting casts in the league it will have an impact -- and you got Bruce talking about that off season at the time saying hey we lost production in Desean and Garcon but got most of it back in Quick and Pryor (he cited their numbers) -- there are consequences to getting that wrong. 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

7 hours ago, wit33 said:

 

I wonder if the FO and Jay are right track with surrounding Jay with experienced coaches allowing Jay to focus on his perceived strengths, play design and being a players coach. Admittedly, I soured on him a bit last year, but still lean on side of being more pro Jay.

 

 

I am pretty much in the same place.  He's not perfect.  I have some gripes about him.  I've laid some of them out here.  I do think he's a good coach though especially in the context of what he's had to deal with.    I hope O'Connell is a good complement to Jay.  I think Jay brings good things to the table but he needs some help.  Heck McVay hired offensive gurus to help him and has a clock management specialist on staff.  You need a synergy IMO. 

 

7 hours ago, wit33 said:

 

This in my mind has proven to be false with history of names that have come in. 

 

Big name former NFL coaches or a hot college coach are looking for control in an organization, the Skins have proven willing to give a head coach power. 

 

The Raiders didn’t secure the most sought after name due to being well run (it was the direct opposite) they paid him baaank, historic length, and POWER. The Skins would be no different. 

 

The difference IMO is Bruce being here.  If Bruce is gone I think it could change things.  I don't think Bruce would want a strong head coach and neither would a strong personality head coach I'd guess would want to coach under him.  This granted is conjecture on my end with a dose of Laconfora making this point about how Bruce is perceived around the league.  If Laconfora's take is true, I don't think they'd have an easy time getting a big name.    The other factor is there is a lot more water under the bridge for Dan now then there was when they hired Shanny.

 

But your Raiders example is a good one -- I think it might have to be something like that to pull it off with the current structure -- a record breaking 10 year contract for insane money might do it.    but again I'd think Bruce would need to be gone.

 

1 hour ago, RandyHolt said:

I have no concerns about life after Jay, other than throwing new playbooks every year at our new QB. I don't think we can get much worse than 7-9 and a playoff loss every 5 or 10 years. Jay's a good coach and great guy but has had a fair chance, especially with our decent offense a few years back.

 

 

The irony to that point is these recent Jay years is the team's peak under Dan and not a low point so I think it can easily get worse.  But I am with you as to the spirit of the point (removing Jay from this), which is mediocrity doesn't sell me long term.

 

1 hour ago, goskins10 said:

 

As for no one of quality coming here, that is fairly constant mantra. But it ignores that there are only 32 of these jobs in the world. Would it be many peoples first choice? Probably not. But if offered, I believe most would take it. It's pretty low risk actually. If they fail - well get in line. The narrative will most likely be no one can work in that organization but at least you tried. If they are successful they will write their own ticket. 

 

 

 

No doubt people would take a job here.    The thing for me is I don't think the best prospects would want to come here.  Unless they do what Cleveland did which is put a top flight GM in charge and let them make the hire.  Make a move that shows the clown show will change.  At the very least remove Bruce.    Otherwise, I don't think guys like Lincoln Riley would give up a plum job to take his chances here.  But I am sure you get a dude who isn't that high in demand who wouldn't get a HC job elsewhere at that given time.  Or adopt the Raiders model (hard for me to see Bruce allowing it though) and give an insane contract.

 

1 hour ago, RandyHolt said:

The teaser of Bruce's next book, "Chasing Sean McVay", will show he is already leaning towards OCKOC as our next coach.  No one with a proper resume will come here, and I am leaning towards being ok with that. The day of the old school stiff coach has passed, folks.   I would swear half of coaching is relating to the players, which all things equal a younger guy is more apt to do. Perhaps that is one reason Jay is as successful as he is. X's and O's, systems concepts etc, are all an open book - anyone can copy them.  Heck Twitter's Bullock probably knows most all of Jay's favorite plays, and all his tendencies.

 

 

Yeah it almost seems a given that O'Connell is the next head coach.  I am intrigued by him.   But I'd love for him to get more experience.  It's much easier to tinker with someone else's playbook than create your own.   But he seems to fit the profile of what you describe.

 

You got the McVay dynamic which you mentioned.  If Bruce aims to stay then O'Connell doesn't threaten that.  They also wouldn't have to do the dance where they are potentially rejected by big name HC candidates like they were supposedly for the defensive coordinator spot earlier this year.  

 

 

 

[RandyHolt]

3 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

Could not disagree with this more. When has he had decent players on both sides of the ball? Yes, we had good offensive weapons a few years ago and guess what, the team was in the top 10 in most offensive categories. Then Bruce let both the top WRs go and has not been able to replace them. He has mostly sat on the Oline that cannot stay healthy, not replaced Reed who cannot stay healthy, and until last year did very little to provide Jay with a quality running game. Not to mention he hosed up the QB position. 

 

So what were the defenses during that time? Virtually last in most every meaningful category....

 

Fair points.... but one thing I will push back on... his play calling. Others have touched on it here as well.

 

He has the plays in his playbook, and he has had the offense.  And has shown he can be competitive with a limited offense, and even with "no" defense. We can nitpik defense but somehow teams with shoddy defenses make it to the big dance, how - by riding their offense. Get into an aerial show last team with the ball wins type of games. He never does that, he slows the game down as a priority.

 

Even with a lame defense, we still made it to the playoffs. But Jay went conservative on offense vs Green Bay when we had our foot on their neck.  It started after DJax didnt score, he ran up the gut into the teeth of the GBD, and we got stuffed. The rest is history.  Even though in our run to make the playoffs we saw him the least conservative I had ever seen him, yet the most dominant. He flip flopped. Maybe the winds that day scared him.

 

Do you think he has earned a 5 year extension? His play calling is it what it is, at this point. Only by change, can we expect different. Enter OCKOC.  Now, if he hands off play calling, I am fine to give him a 3 year extension, for I want a consistent playbook and environment for Haskins to start his career.

 

Running on first down has grown old.  You don't agree at all, and that is cool.

[goskins10]

1 hour ago, RandyHolt said:

 

Fair points.... but one thing I will push back on... his play calling. Others have touched on it here as well.

 

He has the plays in his playbook, and he has had the offense.  And has shown he can be competitive with a limited offense, and even with "no" defense. We can nitpik defense but somehow teams with shoddy defenses make it to the big dance, how - by riding their offense. Get into an aerial show last team with the ball wins type of games. He never does that, he slows the game down as a priority.

 

Even with a lame defense, we still made it to the playoffs. But Jay went conservative on offense vs Green Bay when we had our foot on their neck.  It started after DJax didnt score, he ran up the gut into the teeth of the GBD, and we got stuffed. The rest is history.  Even though in our run to make the playoffs we saw him the least conservative I had ever seen him, yet the most dominant. He flip flopped. Maybe the winds that day scared him.

 

Do you think he has earned a 5 year extension? His play calling is it what it is, at this point. Only by change, can we expect different. Enter OCKOC.  Now, if he hands off play calling, I am fine to give him a 3 year extension, for I want a consistent playbook and environment for Haskins to start his career.

 

Running on first down has grown old.  You don't agree at all, and that is cool.

 

i get what you are saying and I have had my problems with his play calling just like everyone else - although I do not think it's been as bad as some. Many times it was a great play call just poor execution. But still, he does seem to be run heavy on 1st down and shut it down a little early. Not sure he ever had the horses on Off though to win a shootout. But fair enough, it would have been interesting to see them try. As for defense, they have been historically bad. So not sure any offense wins that battle. Had the Ds been even average, the team likely has several 10+ win seasons and some playoff success. But that is clearly just speculation on my part. 

 

I like him handing over play calling to O'Connell (I believe I heard that's the plan but could be wrong.). But to be honest that's more about football process than just about Jay. I do not think head coaches should call plays outside a few crucial situations. They have enough to worry about during a game. Help create the game plan then let your guys do their jobs.  

 

As for an extension - I believe I am in a no win situation here. I would like to see him get 3 yrs with a real GM. That means firing Bruce but keeping Jay. While that is not impossible I see it as highly unlikely. So as much as I would like to see Jay stay, if his leaving or staying is tied to Bruce then I can live with Jay being collateral damage if it means Bruce is gone. It also means that if he stays Bruce will still be here. That will be slightly more palatable since it should mean the team is doing well finally. 

 

What will suck is if somehow they fire Jay but keep Bruce. This is my worst nightmare come true for this team. That gives Bruce a new lease on his football life here to keep us at best average for another 3 to 5 yrs. No thanks! 

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

I think we're using too much hindsight in judging these roster decisions.  The WR decision in 2017 is being unfairly criticized.  But I agree the TE decisions should be criticized.

 

I still agree with the FO's decision not to keep DeSean and Garcon.  Wrong side of 30, and the contracts they got we could not afford.  We would up being right on Garcon (injuries and age caught up with him) and maybe right on DeSean.  Richardson is also injury prone, but he costs less and is 6 years younger.  Also, keep in mind, at the time we knew keeping Garcon and Jackson would be tough, that's why we went out and spent a 1st rounder on Doctson.  Doctson's rookie year was robbed, he couldn't practice, and the coaches didn't really know what we had in him.  We also gambled $6m on the 6'5 Terrelle Pryor's 1,000 yard season being a sign of things to come.  That didn't pan out.

 

It's easy to critique with hindsight, I think the team's decision made sense:

 - 49ers and Bucs spent over 11 million per year on Jackson and Garcon (Garcon's would've been less, but dead cap hit from release).  FO decided not to risk spending that on WR's who were 30+.

- Team decided to instead gamble on 1st round pick Doctson, and a $6m gamble on Pryor.

 

However, the TE fiasco is something we've seen coming a mile away.  The team did not adequately prepare for the inevitable.  They at least prepared for DeSean/Garcon leaving.  They did not prepare for Vernon aging despite being old, and Reed being injured...despite always being injured.  Drafting Sprinkle was nice in 2017, but he wasn't developing through the season.  2018 was more of the same.  2019 we're now...standing pat again?

 

2019 TE situation (which is worse, imo, than the WR situation), and what we're banking on to improve the team:

- Who knows, maybe Matt Flanagan can develop.

- Haskins/Keenum use TE's better than Alex Smith.

 

Our run game hasn't been as effective as it should on paper, in large part due to TE's missing blocks, or telegraphing the playcall.

[wit33]

An issue Ive had with Jay was the inability to lift the offense to an elite (top 3) or great (top 6) level to carry the much weaker defensive unit. Fully acknowledge my elite and great are subjective, but we can all agree the offense wasn’t a juggernaut during the Jackson, Garçon, and Cousins days. Im absolving Cousins from this discussion, but in my view Cousins was a major contributor to being a good offense and not being an elite offense. 

 

Not resigning Jackson was a huge blunder. Dude is still running by defenders and he would’ve already completed his extension. Many were wondering would he still have speed entering his early 30s, the answer is yes. He has that Darrel Green/Galloway type speed.  

[JoggingGod]

48 minutes ago, wit33 said:

Not resigning Jackson was a huge blunder. Dude is still running by defenders and he would’ve already completed his extension. Many were wondering would he still have speed entering his early 30s, the answer is yes. He has that Darrel Green/Galloway type speed.  

 

Lucky for you we just drafted DeSean jackson Jr.

[wit33]

8 minutes ago, JoggingGod said:

 

Lucky for you we just drafted DeSean jackson Jr.

 

One can hope  

 

[randyjohnson]

Isn’t this a Haskins thread?

[volsmet]

Jay has been given too much credit, he’s done jack without McVay.

 

Justin Wilcox is the coach we want.

 

1 hour ago, JoggingGod said:

 

Lucky for you we just drafted DeSean jackson Jr.

 

We aren’t Baltimore. 

[DJHJR86]

On 7/14/2019 at 5:25 PM, Hogs 1991 said:

One thing that is a possibility that I think might be overlooked here. Hypothetical question here. Say we sit Dewayne Haskins for a year. Then when next year comes around, Alex Smith is fully recovered and ready to go. What do you do or who do you start then ?

 

You cut Alex Smith next year and start Haskins.

[Skinsinparadise]

18 hours ago, volsmet said:

Jay has been given too much credit, he’s done jack without McVay.

 

 

I like McVay and even liked him before it was cool to do so.   But what happened to McVay in 2014 where they just happened to be 26th in points scored that year?   The next year they draft Scherff, Moses finds himself at RT, they add Crowder in the slot -- they get better QB play (get a fairly easy schedule) and then the offense explodes and McVay starts looking a lot smarter.   Talent IMO >>> coaching. 

 

As I've said many times, Jay stays or doesn't stay I don't lose sleep over.   I think Jay is better at what he does than many here think.  But I don't think he's the weak link by a long shot of this team.  IMO the weak line is the FO and more specifically Bruce Allen.   And I'd add to that Jay seems to be the next best evaluator of college talent right after Kyle -- at least reputation wise.  Cooley has strongly hinted that Jay has Kyle's back in that FO (and not everyone else does) and that has helped Kyle get what he wants.  If Allen stays then my point is hopefully the next guy in line is O'Connell because otherwise I'd presume it will be a Bruce Allen lackey from his Tampa days.    Raheem Morris?

 

Switching this back to Haskins, if Jay goes it almost has to be O'Connell.  You want some continuity.  And if Bruce remains I doubt a Lincoln Riley type will be coaching here.