FAREWELL to the NFL Dwayne Haskins QB Ohio State

[Malapropismic Depository]

I can understand the sentiment of "play the future".

At the same time, I feel we need to find out exactly what we have in Keenum, as well as take advantage of what he has to offer, during this very short time that we have the privilege of his skills and experience.

One of things he has to offer, is the experience of winning playoff games. That's gotta count for something. Let's see if that experience can translate into

wins for us first, before we ditch him.

I think to automatically throw Haskins out there to begin with, is basically throwing in the towel for this year.

What if...and I do realize it's a huge 'what if', but it's still possible...what if every other part of our team happens to click and get into a groove, and the only thing missing in that groove, is a veteran QB that doesn't make rookie mistakes ?

So I am of the firm stance of starting out with Keenum. Haskins' arm strength alone, isn't going to carry us to the playoffs. However, Keenum's experience just might. We can't be enamored with just one quality of a QB, and ignore the downside. It's the total picture of the QB which determines whether or not we win with him.

 

[wit33]

31 minutes ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

I can understand the sentiment of "play the future".

At the same time, there's a part of me that wants to both "get our money's worth" out of Keenum, as well as take advantage of what he has to offer, during this very short time that we have the privilege of his skills and experience.

One of things he has to offer, is the experience of winning playoff games. That's gotta count for something. Let's see if that experience can translate into

wins for us first, before we ditch him.

I think to automatically throw Haskins out there to begin with, is basically throwing in the towel for this year.

What if...and I do realize it's a huge 'what if', but it's still possible...what if every other part of our team happens to click and get into a groove, and the only thing missing in that groove, is a veteran QB that doesn't make rookie mistakes ?

So I am of the firm stance of starting out with Keenum. Haskins' arm strength alone, isn't going to carry us to the playoffs. However, Keenum's experience just might. We can't be enamored with just one quality of a QB, and ignore the downside. It's the total picture of the QB which determines whether or not we win with him.

 

 

No doubt, if Alex Smith was fresh off a playoff season last year and headed to this year, the prospects of the team and its overall roster would be legit. The expectations would be to challenge for a division title, but with Keenum, it’s more wishful thinking— I’ll be wishing and hoping until eliminated from playoffs.

 

I much preferred McCoy, but doesn’t seem likely with his injury, so Keenum will have to do. 

 

 

 

 

[RandyHolt]

Nice post MD. The point you made that I like best is: what IF we are only a vet QB away from a solid playoff run. Out of respect for Jay playing out his contract he deserves to play his best chance to win QB. 

I am fine with not starting Haskins week 1 but think its imperative to his development to get him work, when that door opens. My prediction is week 4 after 2 Case first half INT's, that we trot out Dwayne for the 2nd half.

 

Doom and Gloom alert Jay named Colt his starter IIRC and then we find out he is injured again. Rappaport said it was an ankle? WTF.  So a problem is -  Keenum wasn't good enough to beat out Colt so we are already on our backup QB.  The sky IS falling / things are already headed south - starting early this year

 

Long term best move for the team to me is play Haskins a lot and let him use this year to learn. Either he will impress and will be 7-9 or 8-8 and a win away from a playoff game, or we will tank into a top pick and Haskins will have a year of tape mpeg's mov's and avi's to study.  It's just kinda short sighted to burn a 15OA on a QB needing experience and not give him any snaps, right?  I stick to my guns a new coach will not be enamored with a QB with just 1 year of college.

 

If the plan is to shelve Haskins all year, I would like Haskins to be very involved.  I want to see him standing next to Jay or OCKOC, or even getting odd snaps lined up wide to throw off defenses. Hell throw him a lateral with a few blockers and let him chuck one deep (ha like Jay would ever do that).  Keep him involved all ways possible.

[Skinsinparadise]

16 hours ago, mistertim said:

 

Yeah he did look pretty decent. But to be honest I'm not all that surprised that he's looked a bit better/more consistent than both Haskins and Murray at the beginning. Jones came from a team that ran a relatively pro-style offense with a QB guru coach who could help him prepare for the NFL. He also consistently faced pressure so is more or less used to it.

 

Murray and Haskins are the opposite. They both had relatively simple offenses, great talent around them to throw to, and rarely faced much pressure. It doesn't surprise me at all that their learning curves are bigger.

 

That being said, I still think that when the dust settles, Jones will end up being exactly what he was in college...a completely pedestrian and unremarkable QB who was ok at a handful of things but great at nothing. 

 

 

Jones I thought was pro ready but a meh version of it.  I didn't per se think he was a bust but saw him as a low ceiling player -- another Case Keenum type.  Many of the players I liked in the draft judging by camp and preseason are doing good.  I guess Jones being "meh" is one of my predictions that hasn't turned out thus far. 

 

But having said that I've watched every throw of his in preseason and I think his performance is way overrated.  He's played mostly with the 1's, in some cases against the 2's and he's mostly made safe short throws in the flat, short out throws, slants.  I said (among others) before the draft yeah if your offense is dink and dunk then he's the guy. The 2 fumbles are par for the course. The dude in college made a lot of turnovers including being the #1 fumbler among the eligible QBs in that draft.

 

The weird thing about it is the expectations for Jones were so low that his dink and dunk success seems to have turned him from zero to hero with the media and a chuck of the Giants fans.  As it relates to Haskins, as I've mentioned the NY media seems to get off about the reports that he's struggled in camp and now claim they got the right QB and thankfully they didn't end up with Haskins.  Ditto some NY fans on twitter.

 

For a passionate Giants fan like Dwayne, I am hoping he's read that stuff and it's fueling his competitive fire.   Heck even his dude Nate Burleson seems oddly off his bandwagon for the moment. 

 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

Shawn Springs on air trying to push the narrative that Haskins shouldn't play.  I'll give him credit on this front he is one of Haskins mentors so obviously he knows him.  He's been fired up about Haskins not playing from the get go going back to when he was drafted.

 

But I don't agree with all his logic as to the reasons for it.  His point is primarily about the Redskins receivers stink.  Sheehan goes well what about all the other first rounder QBs who played and he said they all had better supporting casts.  I think that's silly.  The Jets had great receivers for Darnold?  Josh Rosen didn't have much around him.   If he said yeah others did it too and that was a mistake, I'd get his logic. Or the others had more college playing experience, etc.    Our offense isn't good but this wouldn't be the first rodeo for a young QB playing with a bad supporting cast.

 

Another of his points is RG3 failed and he started from the jump.  IMO RG3 didn't fail because he started right away but for other reasons.  Heck we patiently sat Jason Campbell -- by the same token should we then not associate that as a failure of the concept of sitting?

 

My point is I do trust Springs thinking his dude isn't ready.   I am cool with Haskins sitting from the outset.  But I'd look to start him eventually this season with the disclaimer of I wouldn't do it if the O line is a joke like lets say the Giants teams of 2016-2017.

[volsmet]

We aren’t going to know what the left side of our line actually looks like until we see them v Philly. I’d not have Haskins back there to find out what those guys are ready for... in philly. That would just be stupid.

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

3 minutes ago, volsmet said:

We aren’t going to know what the left side of our line actually looks like until we see them v Philly. I’d not have Haskins back there to find out what those guys are ready for... in philly. That would just be stupid.

 

 

 

Agree.  Eagles D line is stacked.  Dallas right after is pretty good on that front, too.  Definitely the Bears, too.  The first three games in particular might be ugly for this O line.  The whole season might be ugly on that front.    Outside of Scherff our most touted O lineman is Moses and that dude gave up 5 sacks last year and led the league in false starts.  I think even with Trent the O line was the most overrated unit. 

[volsmet]

5 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Agree.  Eagles D line is stacked.  Dallas right after is pretty good on that front, too.  Definitely the Bears, too.  The first three games in particular might be ugly for this O line.  The whole season might be ugly on that front.    Outside of Scherff our most touted O lineman is Moses and that dude gave up 5 sacks last year and led the league in false starts.  I think even with Trent the O line was the most overrated unit. 

 

In philly, calling protections/audibles/etc is just so much different than doing the same at home - we don’t know how either of the guys on the left side will handle that, that’s nearly all of the value in having a vet like Keenum on a team that’s not going to compete for a SB ... but is developing a first round qb. I don’t think there should be any consideration to having DH in that game.... one blown read from GC in his first nfl start, or flowers in his first start at guard, and things could turn bad quickly ... we just watched our QBs get mauled in 2018, we need to see GC & EF play before we can trust them to protect an asset as valuable as a first round rookie in his 15th start since high school. Keenum’s value is in helping the inexperienced line get their protections & having enough experience to feel when something is breaking down too quickly....living to see another down ... this is a layup for Jay.

 

 

[RandyHolt]

I remember years past reading that once we get through the first X number of games, the defensive fronts won't be as good.

 

If we see a front that isn't good, guess what the DC just dials up blitzes. Our OL will be more overwhelmed more than when facing a stout 4, bringing less blitzes. Certainly more confused. 

 

Point being, our QBs will be at risk of getting blindsided every single week.   I am cool with Haskins starting on the bench but think its a mistake to decide when to put him in, based on our perception of how dangerous it is for him facing a certain front.

[volsmet]

2 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

 

Point being, our QBs will be at risk of getting blindsided every single week.   I am cool with Haskins starting on the bench but think its a mistake to decide when to put him in, based on our perception of how dangerous it is for him facing a certain front.

 

What about the reality that GC & EF will be tasked with doing things they’ve never proven they’re capable of doing.

[Skinsinparadise]

25 minutes ago, volsmet said:

 

In philly, calling protections/audibles/etc is just so much different than doing the same at home - we don’t know how either of the guys on the left side will handle that, that’s nearly all of the value in having a vet like Keenum on a team that’s not going to compete for a SB ... but is developing a first round qb. I don’t think there should be any consideration to having DH in that game.... one blown read from GC in his first nfl start, or flowers in his first start at guard, and things could turn bad quickly ... we just watched our QBs get mauled in 2018, we need to see GC & EF play before we can trust them to protect an asset as valuable as a first round rookie in his 15th start since high school. Keenum’s value is in helping the inexperienced line get their protections & having enough experience to feel when something is breaking down too quickly....living to see another down ... this is a layup for Jay.

 

 

 

Agree though by the sounds of what the beat guys are hearing, it sounds like there is very little chance Haskins starts right away.  The debate seems more centered on when?  Game 6?  Later than that?

 

 

[skinny21]

24 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

I remember years past reading that once we get through the first X number of games, the defensive fronts won't be as good.

 

If we see a front that isn't good, guess what the DC just dials up blitzes. Our OL will be more overwhelmed more than when facing a stout 4, bringing less blitzes. Certainly more confused. 

 

Point being, our QBs will be at risk of getting blindsided every single week.   I am cool with Haskins starting on the bench but think its a mistake to decide when to put him in, based on our perception of how dangerous it is for him facing a certain front.

This is a good point.  Playing time probably shouldn’t be dependent on matchup (though things like hostile environment and how bright the lights are - ie division rival, prime time games - should maybe factor in).  

19 minutes ago, volsmet said:

 

What about the reality that GC & EF will be tasked with doing things they’ve never proven they’re capable of doing.

Yeah, I think you hit the nail on the head - don’t wait for a weaker D, wait to see what the line looks like/can handle before putting a rook back there.  

Now, there’s also the consideration that Haskins could make the oline look better than Keenum (a la Griffin/Cousins) - whether because of his pocket movement or he could improve the passing production - but it’s a major risk when the left side might just be getting their feet wet.  

[RandyHolt]

49 minutes ago, volsmet said:

 

What about the reality that GC & EF will be tasked with doing things they’ve never proven they’re capable of doing.

 

Reality is that Lauvao and Trent would also allow sacks.  I dont think Geron is ready and will not start.  Penn was in the probowl. Despite all our concerns Haskins will be one hit away from being forced in. No matter who our OL are, Jay needs to properly prepare our QBs for the onslaught mediocre QBs face, weekly.  Can't get no respect.   The blitzing concerns me more - so I wonder, what is more difficult or risky for a rookie in his first game?

 

A.) Trent Martin Chase Brandon Moses vs. An average front 4 PLUS 3 blitzers coming early and often, including our favorite - the A Gap intruders

 

OR

 

B.)  Penn Flowers Chase Brandon Moses vs. a Top 10 Front 4 that doesn't blitz often, and when they do they bring 1 (like we do).

 

I think B, that the D that blitz's heavily will be a greater challenge for a rookie QB, or maybe it's a coin flip.  Which of the teams we will face in the year, play bend dont break?  Maybe that will provide a good spot for Haskins.

 

Perhaps most important is what is Jay asking Haskins to do vs that 7 man front showing blitz. Throw it away? Or, stand tall in the pocket.

[Skinsinparadise]

The mantra about Haskins above all is can he call protections, yet?  Supposedly he got some of them right in the preseason and some of them wrong.  So if you got an already shaky O line and a QB who is learning how to call protections that's double trouble IMO.

 

I am of the camp of playing Haskins during the season.  But i am also hardcore about having him sit some of the season, too.  In Jay's shoes above all I'd want to see him get comfortable calling protections recognizing it won't be perfect in season 1 but you still want him to be at least OK on that front.

 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

 

[JaxJoe]

One thing that seems certain is that Haskin’s will know when he’ll be ready. He’s showing lots of maturity and patience. It appears like neither he nor the coaches are rushing to get him ready week 1. When? I think it’ll play out a lot like Haskin’s sophomore year where he’ll get some reps in a few games towards the end of the 4th quarter to ease him in without the pressure to win. Difference being, of course, is that OSU usually had a sizable lead by then. 

[RandyHolt]

13 minutes ago, JaxJoe said:

One thing that seems certain is that Haskin’s will know when he’ll be ready. He’s showing lots of maturity and patience. It appears like neither he nor the coaches are rushing to get him ready week 1. When? I think it’ll play out a lot like Haskin’s sophomore year where he’ll get some reps in a few games towards the end of the 4th quarter to ease him in without the pressure to win. Difference being, of course, is that OSU usually had a sizable lead by then. 

 

I love the idea of getting him some reps late in blowouts.  Only, it seems very rare that we've see it happen over the decades.  I would get him in late in blowouts. If we are blowing a team out, great. If WE are getting blown out, maybe its best to save it all for another day. Take our ball and go home.

 

 

[mistertim]

Keenum starting is pretty much what I expected. Given how Haskins seems to have progressed so far I wouldn't be surprised if we saw him by mid season or before, especially if Case stinks up the place or is fully mediocre. 

[Veryoldschool]

 

 

 

 

19 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

The relevant question is: Are you going to win 10+ games and make a playoff run with Keenum.  If the answer is no, then what's the difference between winning 4-7 games with Keenum and 2-7 games with Haskins? You know Keenum is a stop-gap.  Haskins is the future.  Play the future.  

 

Keenum won 13 games with the 2017 Vikings, this isn't your project this is a fact, so don't try to tell me there is no chance that the Skins make the playoffs with him.  The Skins might have made the playoffs last year if the OL held together and Smith didn't get hurt.  If the OL surprises me and stays healthy than Keenum may be able enough to eke out 9 or 10 wins.  Obviously, he won't have Diggs and Thielen to throw to but he doesn't have to scrape together 13 wins 10 or maybe even 9 will do it.   Can he do it with the 2019 Redskins?  Maybe, that is my hope this year.  In any case, I think Gruden should start the year with the QB that offers the Skins the best chance this season if that is Keenum that should be the coaches decision.

 

 

 

 

19 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

Being in the middle is the absolute worst place to be.  Either suck and get better assets to get better, or content.  Being in the middle is purgatory.  

 

I couldn't disagree more.  I would much rather have an 8-8 season and have the team battling and improving including the young players than have a 4-12 collapse.  I believe in incremental progress and units and players improving with success.  I think rock bottom,  crash and rebuild plan is stupid.

 

 

 

 

 

19 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

They ABSOLUTELY SHOULD always tailor the offense, or defense, to the skills and abilities of every player on the field.  That's called "good coaching."  If you don't do it, it's bad coaching.  

 

I think it was stupid to hamstring the entire team because of Griffin's obvious limitations in 2013, the team didn't profit it by it at and neither did Griffin.

 

 

 

 

19 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

And with Haskins, there has to be a situation for him to be successful.  You just have to find it.  

 

Yes, we all hope there is a situation for Haskins to be successful.  After getting a couple of short looks at him I am encouraged and want to see the team do what is best for him and the franchise, but being just a fan observing play I don't know what that is since I don't know how much he understands and how fast he is absorbing the offense and processing the field so I defer to the coaches who have that information.   Putting him out prematurely and unprepared to succeed would be foolish for all concerned including his teammates who want to win this year.

 

 

 

1

19 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

It worked out exceptionally well, actually.  The Shanahan's tailored their system to fit the QB they drafted, and he had as good a rookie season as could have been expected because of it. 

 

It turned out Griffin was both fragile physically and mentally, so his body broke and his mind exploded.  In fact, when he went to the Shanahans and said, "I'm not running the 50-series (read-option) stuff, that's when Griffin started to really struggle BECAUSE he couldn't do all the other things.  If Griffin hadn't been an obnoxious know-it-all who knew nothing, and had just stuck with the program, he probably would have had the best success if Mike and Kyle had stuck around.

 

However, Griffin decided he didn't want to do what he was good at, then Jay tried to force him into his offense, and the combination was just complete failure.  

 

I am astounded you and some others consider 2012 a success, just astounded.  For me, 2012 was an absolute disaster as 2013 when the Skins tried to make a silk purse out of a sows year.  The NFL doesn't know how to measure the mental processing speed of college quarterbacks so mega busts.  Poor Robert just isn't wired to run a WCO in the NFL, failure was inevitable.   

 

 

 

 

19 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

I don't think that it's inevitable.  Wilson runs a ton, he hasn't gotten hurt.  

 

Thank you for mentioning Wilson, I think the comparison undermines your argument.  Wilson is listed at 5'11" and 206 but looking at him he appears to be more like 5'10" and 220.  I just watched him play in a preseason game against the Vikings.  Wilson has a running back's body.  He's built for contact with thick, strong, compact legs.  If he wasn't able to play QB I think he could've been a successful running back in college and maybe the NFL.  Comparing Griffin to him is silly.  Robert Griffin is built like a wide receiver with slender, long legs, he wasn't built for contact.  Griffin has a good throwing arm but probably should've been a wide receiver with his great speed and lateral quickness before his 2012 injury he might have excelled.  

 

 

 

 

19 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

I actually like the way Jay is handling this, if true, more, because it forces Haskins to learn.  However, when it comes time to play, then you can simplify some things for him so it can be easier.

 

You like the way Jay is handling this?  Do you mean he is emerging Haskins in the Redskins offense, the real one not a remedial one?  If so I agree.  Prepare Haskins to run the real offense, which gives the entire team a chance to succeed, and sit him on the bench him to he has learned it.   

[RandyHolt]

Didn't Dan profit off of the RG3 led playoff game?

 

$100 X 75K = Laron Profit.

 

If hamstringing the team leads to the playoffs and a 14-0 lead in the 2nd quarter, count me in.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[Veryoldschool]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

 

Wouldn't it be nice if we believed it is Gruden's decision to make.

[madden lot]

15 hours ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

I can understand the sentiment of "play the future".

At the same time, I feel we need to find out exactly what we have in Keenum, as well as take advantage of what he has to offer, during this very short time that we have the privilege of his skills and experience.

One of things he has to offer, is the experience of winning playoff games. That's gotta count for something. Let's see if that experience can translate into

wins for us first, before we ditch him.

I think to automatically throw Haskins out there to begin with, is basically throwing in the towel for this year.

What if...and I do realize it's a huge 'what if', but it's still possible...what if every other part of our team happens to click and get into a groove, and the only thing missing in that groove, is a veteran QB that doesn't make rookie mistakes ?

So I am of the firm stance of starting out with Keenum. Haskins' arm strength alone, isn't going to carry us to the playoffs. However, Keenum's experience just might. We can't be enamored with just one quality of a QB, and ignore the downside. It's the total picture of the QB which determines whether or not we win with him.

 

This post makes so much sense that it changed my thinking. 

[justice98]

I think we really need to come to a decision as football fans whether the preseason matters or not.  We tend to be all over the map with "it's just preseason" but then also "OMG, so and so looked terrible".  I dont get this idea of "proving" anything in preseason, as in Keenum hasnt proven he's better than Haskins.  Particularly when the variables are all over the place.  No LT, the top 4 starting WRs are all not playing, one guy plays against starters, the other guy against backups.  Judging anything is nonsense.

 

Personally I say start the veteran Keenum, if he falters, start the Haskins era.  I dont see a downside to that strategy.  It tends to work. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

2 hours ago, justice98 said:

I think we really need to come to a decision as football fans whether the preseason matters or not.  We tend to be all over the map with "it's just preseason" but then also "OMG, so and so looked terrible".  I dont get this idea of "proving" anything in preseason, as in Keenum hasnt proven he's better than Haskins.  Particularly when the variables are all over the place.  No LT, the top 4 starting WRs are all not playing, one guy plays against starters, the other guy against backups.  Judging anything is nonsense.

 

Personally I say start the veteran Keenum, if he falters, start the Haskins era.  I dont see a downside to that strategy.  It tends to work. 

Preseason matters.  Score doesn’t matter.  

 

Preseason matters more when there is something of significance which is new.  New HC, coordinator, QB.  

 

preseason matters less of you have a good team returning most of its components.

 

Simple.