FAREWELL to the NFL Dwayne Haskins QB Ohio State

[NickyJ]

49 minutes ago, volsmet said:

People bring up the fact that the 4th stringer for Pitt looked better than Haskins, but neglect to mention that the 4th stringer for the Steelers also looked better than Keenum has since week 2. Maybe Keenum wouldn’t have been able to beat out Devlin Hodges at Samford a year ago... or, Washington has issues that are far too substantial to even begin to evaluate what our QBs are showing.

Nobody is bringing up Keenum's performance because it goes without saying. The reason people are begging for Haskins to start is because Keenum has straight up sucked and NO ONE disagrees. The one person still questioning whether Haskins should start is arguing that Haskins is just that much worse than Keenum.

[volsmet]

6 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

Nobody is bringing up Keenum's performance because it goes without saying. The reason people are begging for Haskins to start is because Keenum has straight up sucked and NO ONE disagrees. The one person still questioning whether Haskins should start is arguing that Haskins is just that much worse than Keenum.

ESperts claim Hodges is more advanced than Haskins.
Keenum is better than Hodges. 
Hodges has looked better than Keenum. 

The syllogism falls apart, it’s major premise is based on a faulty assumption. Classic fallacy.

Ipso facto Colombo Oreo, you need to use more of these, “?”, and fewer of these, “.”.

 

 

[mistertim]

4 hours ago, PartyPosse said:

This isn’t even about Haskins anymore. This is now just a bunch of armchair QBs huffing and puffing claiming they know football and scouting more than those in the NFL. Meanwhile on Monday morning you go to your boring job and wait for Friday. At the end of the day all you have is a delusion that you’re more connected to football than anyone else.

 

Congrats! You win... nothing!

 

I dunno. I think we have a good group of posters here who really do know quite a bit about football (some of them being coaches) and who have very good insights. 

[volsmet]

29 minutes ago, Destino said:

It’s too early to say he’s a bust, but what we’ve seen from him to this point decidedly bad. Results have been horrible.

 

but they have to play well enough to allow the coaches to play them and not risk a locker room implosion or their own jobs by doing so.  

 

 

When it’s almost impossible to know if the words, absent context, are describing the vet or the rookie... playing the rookie may not be as absurd as many here suggest. 

*

Did a coach not yet lose his job while starting Case? 

[volsmet]

6 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

I dunno. I think we have a good group of posters here who really do know quite a bit about football (some of them being coaches) and who have very good insights. 

Undoubtedly.

[PartyPosse]

18 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

I dunno. I think we have a good group of posters here who really do know quite a bit about football (some of them being coaches) and who have very good insights. 

There’s one thing about knowing a fair amount about the sport and another to arrogantly proclaim that a player is either already a bust or will never be good and declare that to be a fact. I don’t doubt that many of us here have a good grasp of the game and can base how well a player is playing based on what they’ve seen. But to create a profile based on assumptions and second half info and to be unwilling to waver from that perception, we’ll that’s no different than how our beloved Bruce Allen operates.
 

its clear that those who go on about his inevitable failures are undoubtedly rooting for his downfall even though they’ll claim otherwise (“I hope I’m wrong but I seriously doubt I am”). Much the same way so-called experts did with RG3 and Cousins. The franchise has so few victories for the community to share that some fans need to find other ways to act like victors.

 

 

[PartyPosse]

1 hour ago, volsmet said:

People bring up the fact that the 4th stringer for Pitt looked better than Haskins, but neglect to mention that the 4th stringer for the Steelers also looked better than Keenum has since week 2. Maybe Keenum wouldn’t have been able to beat out Devlin Hodges at Samford a year ago... or, Washington has issues that are far too substantial to even begin to evaluate what our QBs are showing.

In all fairness, Pittsburgh has a much better offense than ours. That have a top ten OL that’s given up the fewest sacks in the league, an upper echelon RB in Connor, a plethora of solid receivers in Juju, James Washington, Samuels, MacDonald etc.

[mistertim]

8 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

There’s one thing about knowing a fair amount about the sport and another to arrogantly proclaim that a player is either already a bust or will never be good and declare that to be a fact. I don’t doubt that many of us here have a good grasp of the game and can base how well a player is playing based on what they’ve seen. But to create a profile based on assumptions and second half info and to be unwilling to waver from that perception, we’ll that’s no different than how our beloved Bruce Allen operates.
 

its clear that those who go on about his inevitable failures are undoubtedly rooting for his downfall even though they’ll claim otherwise (“I hope I’m wrong but I seriously doubt I am”). Much the same way so-called experts did with RG3 and Cousins. The franchise has so few victories for the community to share that some fans need to find other ways to act like victors.

 

 

 

I agree. I wasn't talking about it from one vantage point or the other. Just saying that we do have plenty of people here who know quite a bit. That doesn't necessarily mean they're the ones taking extreme positions (they almost always aren'tI). 

[NickyJ]

41 minutes ago, volsmet said:

ESperts claim Hodges is more advanced than Haskins.
Keenum is better than Hodges. 
Hodges has looked better than Keenum. 

The syllogism falls apart, it’s major premise is based on a faulty assumption. Classic fallacy.

Ipso facto Colombo Oreo, you need to use more of these, “?”, and fewer of these, “.”.

It would be a fallacy if someone saying that Hodges has played better than Haskins also said that Keenum is playing better than Hodges. You are the only person in this thread who has said "Keenum is better than Hodges." You're trying too hard.

[NoCalMike]

Keenum being mediocre and Haskins looking bad are two separate unrelated issues.

 

For me personally, if Haskins is no good and shows no ability to improve and/or put in the necessary work to become an NFL starter, I'd like to know ASAP, in order to know for sure that the front office needs to move on from him.  I don't want another Jason Campbell situation where a decent game here or there continually buys him more time to turn a corner but it never materializes. 

[Thinking Skins]

37 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

Keenum being mediocre and Haskins looking bad are two separate unrelated issues.

 

For me personally, if Haskins is no good and shows no ability to improve and/or put in the necessary work to become an NFL starter, I'd like to know ASAP, in order to know for sure that the front office needs to move on from him.  I don't want another Jason Campbell situation where a decent game here or there continually buys him more time to turn a corner but it never materializes. 

 

Jason Campbell is the Cousins issue before Cousins. We would have been better if we had kept Campbell, let him compete with Grossman and whoever else and built from there. Maybe we draft RG3 or not but Campbell was run out of here like stale bread and for what? A bunch of proven has been and never will bes. At least Campbell could be a middle of the pack not lost you games QB, which we can't seem to find right now, or haven't really found other than Smith and Cousins. 

[NoCalMike]

8 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

Jason Campbell is the Cousins issue before Cousins. We would have been better if we had kept Campbell, let him compete with Grossman and whoever else and built from there. Maybe we draft RG3 or not but Campbell was run out of here like stale bread and for what? A bunch of proven has been and never will bes. At least Campbell could be a middle of the pack not lost you games QB, which we can't seem to find right now, or haven't really found other than Smith and Cousins. 

 

True, but fast forwarding to the current situation.  The Alex Smith injury is really what the catalyst for all this was.  I am not saying we should/shouldn't have done the trade, just dealing with what the situation  was once Alex Smith was on the team.   Alex Smith wasn't spectacular by any means, but he was good enough at the moment.  He was not here to be the future, he was here to buy the franchise 3-5 seasons (More likely 3) to figure out what the next move was for the QB situation.   His injury which at the time seemed career-ending (still might be) seemed to spook the front office and there they went again quite possibly drafting the wrong QB at the wrong time. (Still to be determined). 

[Riggo-toni]

35 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

Jason Campbell is the Cousins issue before Cousins. We would have been better if we had kept Campbell, let him compete with Grossman and whoever else and built from there. 

Disagree completely. Shanahan ran a WCO, which is based on timing and short routes. Campbell would have been a terrible fit - he had the slowest release I have ever seen, could not throw with enough velocity to "thread the needle" (though neither could Grossman) and was inaccurate beyond 10 yards.

 

Cousins isn't elite, but he is an above average starter. Campbell was nothing more than a career backup - a weak arm version of Byron Leftwich. I wish we could have kept Cousins (though not for what the Vikings paid). I was relieved when we finally got rid of Campbell.

[PartyPosse]

3 minutes ago, Riggo-toni said:

Disagree completely. Shanahan ran a WCO, which is based on timing and short routes. Campbell would have been a terrible fit - he had the slowest release I have ever seen, could not throw with enough velocity to "thread the needle" (though neither could Grossman) and was inaccurate beyond 10 yards.

 

Cousins isn't elite, but he is an above average starter. Campbell was nothing more than a career backup - a weak arm version of Byron Leftwich.

Pfft you can use a timing-based offense with Campbell, just gotta tack on an extra couple seconds (I kid i kid!)

[Thinking Skins]

56 minutes ago, Riggo-toni said:

Disagree completely. Shanahan ran a WCO, which is based on timing and short routes. Campbell would have been a terrible fit - he had the slowest release I have ever seen, could not throw with enough velocity to "thread the needle" (though neither could Grossman) and was inaccurate beyond 10 yards.

 

Cousins isn't elite, but he is an above average starter. Campbell was nothing more than a career backup - a weak arm version of Byron Leftwich. I wish we could have kept Cousins (though not for what the Vikings paid). I was relieved when we finally got rid of Campbell.

 

It's not a question of could Campbell run it. He could do it and if not we could have just had Grossman come in. Just like the McNabb experiment failure, but we save draft picks. 

 

The point is that Campbell was at that time a proven enough starter that he should have at least been given an opportunity to compete for a job. instead he was given up on and shipped to Oakland. 

 

It's one thing if Haskins doesn't turn into a superstar QB who can put the team on his back to win games, but it's another thing if he is simply another John Beck who doesn't belong in this league. And I don't know who's saying what about his potential in this thread any more. But if he becomes a game manager for now, I'm fine with that because even when we've had those guys, we (the team, the fans and the city) seem to make it impossible for them, like we did for Campbell. 

[SoCalSkins]

15 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

It's not a question of could Campbell run it. He could do it and if not we could have just had Grossman come in. Just like the McNabb experiment failure, but we save draft picks. 

 

The point is that Campbell was at that time a proven enough starter that he should have at least been given an opportunity to compete for a job. instead he was given up on and shipped to Oakland. 

 

It's one thing if Haskins doesn't turn into a superstar QB who can put the team on his back to win games, but it's another thing if he is simply another John Beck who doesn't belong in this league. And I don't know who's saying what about his potential in this thread any more. But if he becomes a game manager for now, I'm fine with that because even when we've had those guys, we (the team, the fans and the city) seem to make it impossible for them, like we did for Campbell. 

 

Wow. A Jason Campbell apologist a decade later. Dude was the most worthless qb the Redskins had in years. He resulted in Zorn and set the franchise back years after Gibbs had us in playoffs 2 out of 3 years.  He was no where near comparable to Cousins. His salary and career after Washington prove that. 
 

The correct revisionist take on Campbell is we draft Aaron Rodgers at 9 instead of Carlos Rogers and Gibbs goes out with another Lombardi.

 

Arguing Campbell as a legitimate starter in the NFL destroys any credibility on quarterback play. It is an absurd take. History proved it. Yet your arguing it. It’s beyond laughable. You might want to consider changing your screen name after that take...

[NickyJ]

I vote this thread gets repurposed into a Jason Campbell thread. I wasn't here for the Campbell Campaign Wars, so I'm ready for some reenactments to bring it to life.

 

I also vote Todd Collins was our best QB of the 2000s decade. Colt Brennan 2nd place. Chase Daniel 3rd.

[volsmet]

This guy can play some football.
 

A good coach can make Matt Moore look like a stud, our coaches make Case Keenum look like he’s living out his make-a-wish. Every coach in the league would prefer to have Case. 
 

This guy, can’t wait for the DH movement once he gets settled in. 
 

 

[SoCalSkins]

19 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

I vote this thread gets repurposed into a Jason Campbell thread. I wasn't here for the Campbell Campaign Wars, so I'm ready for some reenactments to bring it to life.

 

I also vote Todd Collins was our best QB of the 2000s decade. Colt Brennan 2nd place. Chase Daniel 3rd.

Rex “the dragon” Grossman was the greatest QB of the century.... 

 

Google Rex the dragon Grossman and click on the kissing Suzy Kimberly article. Funniest 3 minute read you will have if you haven’t seen it before. 
 

it probably hasn’t aged well, but for the mid 2000s that was funny comedy...

[volsmet]

 

 

[Malapropismic Depository]

Matt Moore gave Aaron Rodgers a run for his money, and nearly beat Aaron Rodgers, after just recently being pulled from a gig where he was coaching HS football.

Last year, we ran out of QB's and resorted to Sanchez and J. Johnson, and were told that was the best options available.

This same Matt Moore was available and we overlooked him. KC grabs him and they barely skip a beat.

[volsmet]

2 minutes ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

Matt Moore gave Aaron Rodgers a run for his money, and nearly beat Aaron Rodgers, after just recently being pulled from a gig where he was coaching HS football.

Last year, we ran out of QB's and resorted to Sanchez and J. Johnson, and were told that was the best options available.

This same Matt Moore was available and we overlooked him. KC grabs him and they barely skip a beat.

 

[SoCalSkins]

We should also start posting Madden highlights of him. They have the same value as preseason highlights...

 

Dude has an arm. He just can’t do it against an NFL defense. Preseason isn’t NFL defense. He so far has a 20% interception percentage against NFL defenses who have not even schemed against him specifically. 

[volsmet]

Just now, SoCalSkins said:

We should also start posting Madden highlights of him. They have the same value as preseason highlights...

 

Dude has an arm. He just can’t do it against an NFL defense. Preseason isn’t NFL defense. He so far has a 20% interception percentage against NFL defenses who have not even schemed against him specifically. 

What would you estimate the value of your insights at?
 

 

[SoCalSkins]

1 minute ago, volsmet said:

What would you estimate the value of your insights at?
 

 

Better than most. Far better than your animated gif responses...