FAREWELL to the NFL Dwayne Haskins QB Ohio State

[madden lot]

7 hours ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

e

 

[Rex Tomb]

I will definitely take a 12th round flyer on McLauren in fantasy this year.  He could be an absolute steal 

[bakedtater1]

8 hours ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

Well the Haskins thread is turning into a McLaurin McLovin thread.

But I guess it makes sense since the 2 have been inseparable and hopefully will continue to be that way.

It's nice to see a guy who has both a huge amount of talent, as well as a very high work ethic.

It's rare that you see both of those qualities in the same player, and to such an extreme. Usually it's mainly one or the other.

Almost as if the highly talented don't feel they have to work as hard usually, or the less talented have to work much harder

to compensate for their less than elite talent.

If this guy has both in high degrees, watch out.

I have a patten on the mclovin name...jus sayin... I started it btw..i mean not the name mclovin but mclovin mclaurin is me baby!!

8 minutes ago, Rex Tomb said:

I will definitely take a 12th round flyer on McLauren in fantasy this year.  He could be an absolute steal 

This sounds about right for one of our rookie wr's...fantasy!

[Skinsinparadise]

“You gotta know what Dwayne is,” Cooley, the former Redskins tight end, said Wednesday on Kevin Sheehan’s podcast. “You gotta know what Dwayne is this season, you gotta know what Dwayne is as soon as you possibly can. You can play Case a little bit with the starters, but I think you play Dwayne with the starters. If I’m Jay, I’m making a decision whether it’s Colt or Case right now as your starter [for Week 1] if Dwayne’s not ready, and if it’s not Case, Case isn’t going to take the reps with the ones. Dwayne would start for me in this preseason game. I want to know what he is. You took him [with the 15th pick in this year’s NFL draft]. If quarterbacks are going to be good quarterbacks, they’re ready to play, soon.”

 

...“No question,” Cooley said. “Unless Colt McCoy is Steve Young, I want to see Dwayne Haskins. [Unless] Colt McCoy is playing in the top 10 in the league in terms of quarterbacks, and your offense is top 10, 15 — which is tough, because I don’t know if you have the weapons at this point to be that — it’s time for Dwayne to play. You just gotta know. It’s too hard now in the league to wait for a long time with these guys. The other thing is, you gotta know in this year with Jay if it’s a mesh with Jay, and if it’s a mesh with [offensive coordinator Kevin] O’Connell. He’s your future. You win with quarterbacks in this league. Let’s figure out what this relationship is and what we can do with it as soon as we can.”

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2019/08/08/dwayne-haskins-should-play-with-redskins-starters-during-preseason-chris-cooley-says/

[Rex Tomb]

@Skinsinparadise I'm with Cooley here.  Especially in terms of finding out if Haskins is a mesh with KO.  You have to guess that if this season is a train wreck that Gruden will be gone and we've all heard how KO is your next McVay waiting in the wings. 

[Skinsinparadise]

16 minutes ago, Rex Tomb said:

@Skinsinparadise I'm with Cooley here.  Especially in terms of finding out if Haskins is a mesh with KO.  You have to guess that if this season is a train wreck that Gruden will be gone and we've all heard how KO is your next McVay waiting in the wings. 

 

Haskins didn't have a lot of college starts.  So he arguably needs more time than the standard college QB to transition to the NFL.  So i am in favor of giving him more leeway and time. 

 

There are two studies that indicate that ultimately you want to see him play.  One is the study below.  The other is an article from PFF which indicated that even early QB play has a strong correlation to future success.

 

And yes there are exceptions to everything.  But PFF ran data and did find a correlation to early performance and later performance.

 

I am consistent on not wanting Haskins to start right away but I've vacillated about whether I want him to play at some point during the season.  I think at the moment I do want to see him play even if its late in the season lets say for the last 4 games or whatever. 
 

https://www.actionnetwork.com/nfl/patrick-mahomes-kansas-city-chiefs-rookie-quarterback-analysis-2019

 

Do QBs benefit from sitting in Year 1?

I ran the numbers for all quarterbacks taken on Day 1 or 2 since 2005 — the year Aaron Rodgers was drafted — and found that the more starts a quarterback makes in Year 1, the more likely he is to have a successful career.

There is a moderate-to-strong correlation between a passer’s Year 1 starts and career total (passing plus rushing) yards (r = 0.53) and TDs (r = 0.61), as well as wins (r = 0.54). The same is true when looking at Year 1 starts vs. Year 2 performance.

Correlation is not causation — quarterback who start in Year 1 don’t necessarily turn out better because of it so much as better quarterbacks earn their chance sooner — but the numbers show no evidence of any edge to be gained from a guy spending his rookie year as a clipboard holder.

But what if we narrow it down to the true essence of the so-called Kansas City and Green Bay models and look at only passers who made 0-1 starts and sat behind a starter at least 30 years of age?

The winning percentage jumps to .484 and the adjusted net yards per attempt climbs to 5.53 while the guys who sat behind twenty-somethings have dismal .403 and 3.01 marks, respectively. So is Gettleman onto something?

He is, if we’re looking to sell franchise-shaping decisions based on misinterpreted results of small-sample data skewed by obvious outliers. While that group is comprised of Mahomes and Rodgers — and, screw it, let’s stay #onbrand and also give him Jimmy Garoppolo — here’s a list of the rest of the group:

 

• Brodie Croyle
• Brock Osweiler
• Chad Henne
• Garrett Grayson
• Jake Locker
• Kevin Kolb
• Kellen Clemens

 

Essentially, a quarterback sits in Year 1 for one of two reasons:

1. He’s behind a player on the level of Tom Brady or Brett Favre.
2. He’s not very good.

Except Alex Smith is no Brady and Mahomes is, in fact, very good, which makes a season commonly billed as a nothing more than a smooth transition start to look like a waste of the beginning of the team’s Super Bowl window.

I realize this may sound crazy, so let’s do some myth-busting.

 

 

[bakedtater1]

Start Dwyane tonight with the 1's

[goskins10]

 

No reason to not start or at least play Haskins with the #1s. You may make a different decision as the regular season starter. But preseason? Zero reason not to start him. 

[COWBOY-KILLA-]

I’ve said it since we drafted him, a qb either has it or doesn’t. I lean towards playing the kid. If you want to give him a few weeks to get his bearings than ok, but we shouldn’t sit him too long. Get him out there and let him take his lumps. There is No greater teacher than getting out there and doing it. Not having immediate success will not “ruin” him. If it does he wasn’t the one.

[JaxJoe]

33 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

No reason to not start or at lest play Haskins with the #1s. You may make a different decision as the regular season starter. But preseason? Zero reason not to start him. 

Well, with McCoy out, maybe we can at least see Haskins with the 1’s for a quarter after Keenum gets his reps in the 1st quarter. 

[Chachie]

52 minutes ago, COWBOY-KILLA- said:

I’ve said it since we drafted him, a qb either has it or doesn’t. I lean towards playing the kid. If you want to give him a few weeks to get his bearings than ok, but we shouldn’t sit him too long. Get him out there and let him take his lumps. There is No greater teacher than getting out there and doing it. Not having immediate success will not “ruin” him. If it does he wasn’t the one.

 

 

TOTALLY agree about "has it or doesn't." I use this analogy for all sports players and I'm sure I've used here on ES.

 

Semi-agree about throwing him out there ASAP. My heart wants to see him week 1 but my head says let this guy learn from the sidelines. I've seen too many QBs become fantastic players by waiting with a clipboard for a season. 

 

I don't think Jay Gruden and his staff will be with us next year whether we see Dwayne this season or not so I'd rather see him learning the scheme of the new regime in 2020. 

[Vanguard]

20 minutes ago, Chachie said:

 

 

I don't think Jay Gruden and his staff will be with us next year whether we see Dwayne this season or not so I'd rather see him learning the scheme of the new regime in 2020. 

 

If Jay gets to the playoffs he’ll be back.

[Malapropismic Depository]

^

In video above, great to see Haskins and O'Connell have a great and healthy relationship.

Haskins looks eager to learn, and O'Connell looks very supportive, humble, patient, and overall good-natured.

[JoeJacobyHOForRIOT]

Really excited to see Haskins tonight. I rather see him with the 2's or 3's and let him build a little confidence 

[JaxJoe]

My primary reason fear to not start Haskins tonight is I want to see how the brand new left side of the line is doing. Maybe play Keenum for a few series, determine if it’s safe, then let Haskins run with the 1’s for the remainder of the half - gradually bringing in some 2’s after that so as not to have a 100% personnel change that might not mesh well. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

But what if we narrow it down to the true essence of the so-called Kansas City and Green Bay models and look at only passers who made 0-1 starts and sat behind a starter at least 30 years of age?

The winning percentage jumps to .484 and the adjusted net yards per attempt climbs to 5.53 while the guys who sat behind twenty-somethings have dismal .403 and 3.01 marks, respectively. So is Gettleman onto something?

He is, if we’re looking to sell franchise-shaping decisions based on misinterpreted results of small-sample data skewed by obvious outliers. While that group is comprised of Mahomes and Rodgers — and, screw it, let’s stay #onbrand and also give him Jimmy Garoppolo — here’s a list of the rest of the group:

 

• Brodie Croyle
• Brock Osweiler
• Chad Henne
• Garrett Grayson
• Jake Locker
• Kevin Kolb
• Kellen Clemens

1

 

 

Shouldn't that guy have included Jason Campbell on that list?...Or am I misinterpreting what he was saying?

[mistertim]

2 hours ago, COWBOY-KILLA- said:

I’ve said it since we drafted him, a qb either has it or doesn’t. I lean towards playing the kid. If you want to give him a few weeks to get his bearings than ok, but we shouldn’t sit him too long. Get him out there and let him take his lumps. There is No greater teacher than getting out there and doing it. Not having immediate success will not “ruin” him. If it does he wasn’t the one.

 

Somewhat disagree.

 

I think to an extent you're correct, but I think that a guy either has the "potential" to be a top NFL QB or he doesn't...not "he is or he isn't". I think Haskins has the talent, smarts, and the character to be a top NFL QB, but I still don't think it's a good idea to throw him to the wolves unless they truly think he's ready and from what I've seen and read, he isn't. 

 

One thing to keep in mind is that for the most part the other guys sampled in the article that @Skinsinparadiseprovided (thanks!) had WAY more starting experience in college. Haskins had really barely mastered his college offense and next thing you know he's off to the NFL, where the speed and complexity is on a whole new level. If he'd been at least a 2 year starter (preferably 3+) then I'd say absolutely...see what he can do, he has enough experience. But I really don't think his footwork and mechanics had even caught up enough at the college level, let alone the NFL level.

 

IMO the issues I saw with him at the college level (inconsistent and sometimes slow/shoddy footwork, lower body not in sync with upper body, etc) he's now bringing to the NFL level and it's causing him problems...likely more problems than a guy with multiple years starting in college would have. So on top of having to learn a new and complex offense, adjust to the speed of the NFL, and adjust to complex NFL defenses, he's having to rapidly develop his footwork and mechanics. Yes, every rookie has to do that, but I think his refinements are more drastic than guys who have more experience. 

 

I'm not saying I wouldn't play him at all this year, but given what we've read, I'd be extremely hesitant about putting him out there unless he's truly ready. I wouldn't be all that surprised if he doesn't play at all this season, especially if we end up fielding a semi-competitive team. 

[Skinsinparadise]

15 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

 

Shouldn't that guy have included Jason Campbell on that list?...Or am I misinterpreting what he was saying?

 

Don't know how far back he went but yeah Campbell applies too.  Though I think it might help his point versus defeat it.  Love Campbell as a person but he was at best a pedestrian QB to less than that IMO.  

 

As for all the Haskins discussion, I agree with the points (I've made similar points too) that Haskins might need to sit more than the typical QB.  but i also get the point that at some point it would be good to see what we got even if its just to see flashes.  So I'd like to see him hopefully towards the end of the season where we have some sample size of what he can do.  And naturally it would be to look for flashes as opposed to think each performance is the be all and end all.  

 

Mahomes is touted as the contrary model but even he did start one game in his rookie year.   And he showed flashes in that game. 

[Commander Wolffe]

If Haskins doesn't give us the best chance to win then start Colt or Case. I believe you owe the other guys in the locker room that much. As soon as we are mathematically eliminated for playoff contention put Haskins in. If the first two both get injured put Haskins in. If the first two struggle badly then put Haskins in.

 

Hopefully we are able to ground and pound our way to 10-6 and slide into the playoffs. This would give him a year on the sideline to improve his NFL acumen and refine his mechanics. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

6 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Don't know how far back he went but yeah Campbell applies too.  Though I think it might help his point versus defeat it.  Love Campbell as a person but he was at best a pedestrian QB to less than that IMO.  

 

As for all the Haskins discussion, I agree with the points (I've made similar points too) that Haskins might need to sit more than the typical QB.  but i also get the point that at some point it would be good to see what we got even if its just to see flashes.  So I'd like to see him hopefully towards the end of the season where we have some sample size of what he can do.  And naturally it would be to look for flashes as opposed to think each performance is the be all and end all.  

 

Mahomes is touted as the contrary model but even he did start one game in his rookie year.   And he showed flashes in that game. 

 

 

Since he included Rodgers I assumed he went back to 2005. And yeah, including/excluding Campbell doesn't really have much of an effect on things lol...but I kept rereading that part because I was trying to figure out why he didn't include JC, so I thought maybe I was misunderstanding what he was saying.

 

I agree about Haskins, which was one of the reasons I initially didn't want us drafting him...I knew he would require a bit of time and a lot of development. And I'm not footsballs-savvy enough to determine which of the more "raw" college QBs are worth investing 1st round draft capital in...

[Skinsinparadise]

16 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

 

Since he included Rodgers I assumed he went back to 2005. And yeah, including/excluding Campbell doesn't really have much of an effect on things lol...but I kept rereading that part because I was trying to figure out why he didn't include JC, so I thought maybe I was misunderstanding what he was saying.

 

I agree about Haskins, which was one of the reasons I initially didn't want us drafting him...I knew he would require a bit of time and a lot of development. And I'm not footsballs-savvy enough to determine which of the more "raw" college QBs are worth investing 1st round draft capital in...

 

Yeah i recall that.  I wasn't a draft Haskins guy either.  But since we are on this train then I'll ride it and hope for the best.  Scouts say the QB position is the hardest to get right.  And I am not pretending I have the definitive word about any player let alone a college QB. 

 

I've listened to Cooley enough to know part of the reason why he wants to see Haskins some this year is he has some skepticism about whether he's the goods so he wants to see the dude against some live action this year to see what we got where he hopes to change his mind for the better.  Similar to @volsmet  -- Cooley and his buddy Sheehan's take is if Haskins isn't the guy lets not mess around if they end up with a high draft position next year or the year after if they like another QB in the draft.     But hopefully he is the guy.

 

My opinion is pretty similar.  I got some doubts about Haskins.  But i am hoping for the best.    And I'd love to see glimpses of Haskins being the dude.   Let's take Sam Darnold.  His numbers weren't hot last year.  On the aggregate he wasn't good.  But he showed flashes.  Jets fans are excited about him and supposedly he's having a big camp. 

 

Watching Haskins in camp, he looked like the player I thought he was before the draft -- strengths, weaknesses, etc.  But I liked what I saw and what I've been reading as to his personality-mental make up.  So if I am hanging on to something for optimism -- its that.  The dude wants to be great and comes off like a really good guy.  And i do think he deserves extra time to sit and learn.  But if the season looks shot and lets say we got 4 games to go or whatever -- I would be fine to throw him to the wolves so to speak and see if we see some flashes. 

 

Shanny was on a Sheehan show once (I think Cooley was on too but maybe am misremembering) and he said you can tell early on about young QBs -- even if they are raw and growing, you could tell if they got "it" or not.  So maybe that's partly what's coloring Cooley's take.

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

18 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Shanny was on a Sheehan show once (I think Cooley was on too but maybe am misremembering) and he said you can tell early on about young QBs -- even if they are raw and growing, you could tell if they got "it" or not.  So maybe that's partly what's coloring Cooley's take.

 

 

I was thinking Gruden validated that take as well when asked about it. Either that, or he said he wanted to see a clear starter early on so that he didn't have to split the reps, which is what he's doing now.

 

Regardless of whether or not they play Haskins during the season or have him holding a clipboard all year, whenever they play him--preseason or regular--I want to see signs and evidence of why they drafted him at #15. And unless he flat-out vomits all over himself during games and throws 5 INTs on 4 attempts (don't ask how that's possible lol), my mindset will be that it's impossible to determine whether he's a bust or not this year. I can't see Allen being on board for drafting another QB high next year or the year after.

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

34 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

I was thinking Gruden validated that take as well when asked about it. Either that, or he said he wanted to see a clear starter early on so that he didn't have to split the reps, which is what he's doing now.

 

Regardless of whether or not they play Haskins during the season or have him holding a clipboard all year, whenever they play him--preseason or regular--I want to see signs and evidence of why they drafted him at #15. And unless he flat-out vomits all over himself during games and throws 5 INTs on 4 attempts (don't ask how that's possible lol), my mindset will be that it's impossible to determine whether he's a bust or not this year. I can't see Allen being on board for drafting another QB high next year or the year after.

 

 

 

I agree that we unlikely could see bust or not.  But if Shanny is right, Jay and others in the building should be able to make a good guess in year 1 as for how it's likely going to go.  According to him, if you've been around enough QBs, you can to do an apples to apples comparison -- practice habits, ability to digest an offense, read a defense on and on.   Maybe he's wrong.  But it sounds intuitive to me that you can see flashes or not.  Even Alex Smith said in an interview that Mahomes would flash at times in practice with wow plays where you could see he would be great. From what i read, Mahomes had ups and downs but the ups were exciting.   We read similar things about Baker, too.  

 

As for Haskins while I agree he needs more time.  There is a harsher view of the inexperience point.  Parcells was famous for his QB model that he outlined years back and among his points were you don't take a QB with just one year of college experience or if you do don't think the odds are with you that he will be a franchise QB.  His model eschews QB's with just one year of experience not for the reason of give them more time and they will excel -- but from the perspective is they are bigger wild cards that make NFL success even less certain than more experienced college QBs. 

 

For me, I am sort of playing medium on the experience point.  I agree with give the dude a longer leash and a bigger break. I think his lack of experience affords him more time.  But at the same time I don't think its a bad idea to unleash Haskins at some point during the season.  My opinion on this has changed from months ago.  

 

As for them not touching a QB in the draft next year (I agree), and also the year after that (I disagree if Haskins doesn't look like the goods) -- not sure i agree that he will get 3 years no matter what.  I think it depends on how it goes, who the coach is -- still Jay, someone else, etc.  That seems part of Cooley-Sheehan's take which is you don't want to give him or any young QB 3 years no matter what especially if you luck out and have a QB you love fall in your lap in the draft.  They think you can scope things out quicker than that.   If you got a Qb that struggles for 3 years, that's likely going to be a rough ride.

 

None of this means that I am pessimistic where I think Haskins flops.  This is the time for optimism and like I said i like what I've seen as to Haskins' personality and make up.  He seems like a good dude who wants to be great.  Hopefully it translates.  But I do agree that i think the coaches will be able to sense if Haskins ultimately has the goods or not -- no doubt they can't tell immediately but i think Shanny might be on to something about you can tell if your guy is a flop or not just by having him in the building for a year.  

 

 

[Chachie]

4 hours ago, Vanguard said:

 

If Jay gets to the playoffs he’ll be back.

 

 

I repeat: I don't think he'll be back.  😋

[JoggingGod]

They’re not firing Jay if they make the playoffs. That’s literally what the “hot seat” means.