FAREWELL to the NFL Dwayne Haskins QB Ohio State

[Gamebreaker]

Haskins starting the rest of the season is essential for multiple reasons, and helps us whether he bombs or improves. It allows us to see what Haskins is. If he shows improvement to the point where we start winning games. Great. We'll know we can pencil him in as starter next season and use a potential top 10 pick on a new LT or another difference maker. If he bombs, then this is great as well. We'll be 1-15, have a top 3 overall pick, and will be in position to pick a much better QB prospect than Haskins. 

 

There is literally zero logical reason to not start him at this point. I think Callahan knows this. I also think he didn't play him right away after Gruden was fired because it was a combination of him being a young kid who doesn't know how to study without guidance, because Jay certainly wasn't giving him any, and Callahan not wanting to look even worse than Gruden immediately after taking over by having Haskins go out and not even be able to get the ball hiked. 

[Skinsinparadise]

To the tweet below, Haskins seemed at least in the first half (I'll rewatch the 2nd half shortly) to take what was there.  And he played with guts -- guts in the pocket, on the move and throwing before the receiver was open. 

 

Lol, while I am not as down as some here are on Alex Smith.    I did become a bit of a critic of his to an extent when I would freeze frames (many times) and see Alex stare at open receivers further down the field and not throw to them.

 

Haskins throws with some anticipation.  Granted its a small sample and it was an ultra conservative plan.  If its the same story every game, I'd have some concerns.  But it was a windy cold day against a top defense.  Lets see if they unleash him against the Jets, etc.

 

 

 

[KDawg]

The stuff that Bullock points out are not what my concerns are with Haskins. It's the mechanical stuff that makes his have some wildly erratic stuff. The moving people with his eyes are great, but that wasn't something I ever really questioned with him. Glad to hear he's doing that stuff, though.

[Thinking Skins]

39 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

To the tweet below, Haskins seemed at least in the first half (I'll rewatch the 2nd half shortly) to take what was there.  And he played with guts -- guts in the pocket, on the move and throwing before the receiver was open. 

 

Lol, while I am not as down as some here are on Alex Smith.    I did become a bit of a critic of his to an extent when I would freeze frames (many times) and see Alex stare at open receivers further down the field and not throw to them.

 

Haskins throws with some anticipation.  Granted its a small sample and it was an ultra conservative plan.  If its the same story every game, I'd have some concerns.  But it was a windy cold day against a top defense.  Lets see if they unleash him against the Jets, etc.

 

 

 

Today is a good day to be on Twitter because a lot of the beat reporters and analysts have now gone through the tape and analyzed the game and can give more informed opinions vs just feelings after the game. 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

Football Outsiders just updated their passing stats.  Interestingly, if I understand the stat right Keenum has the worse numbers in the NFL on the Alex stat.  Named after our own QB.  That is, Keenum has thrown short of the sticks on third down more than any QB.   Daniel Jones ranked towards the bottom as to overall stats. 😀

 

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb/2019

 

• ALEX represents Air Less EXpected on third downs, the average difference between the length of the quarterback's throw and the distance needed for a new set of downs. The number listed here only includes third downs and is not adjusted for passes thrown away or batted down.

 

Because it is early in the season, opponent adjustments are currently at 90% strength.

 

PASSING: Minimum 135 passes, 32 players ranked

Player	Team	DYAR ▴	Rk	YAR	Rk	DVOA	Rk	VOA	QBR	Rk	Pass	Yards	EYds	TD	FK	FL	INT	C%	DPI	ALEX
R.Wilson	SEA	788	1	890	1	28.6%	3	33.8%	78.5	1	307	2,292	2,672	21	2	1	1	68.7%	4/85	1.9
P.Mahomes	KC	779	2	811	2	37.8%	1	39.8%	77.0	3	249	2,109	2,341	15	0	2	1	65.4%	4/55	1.6
M.Stafford	DET	728	3	772	4	26.2%	5	28.4%	68.5	7	308	2,355	2,562	19	2	2	5	64.7%	2/57	2.3
D.Watson	HOU	706	4	685	5	22.1%	7	21.1%	74.8	4	327	2,276	2,672	18	2	1	5	70.4%	1/5	0.1
D.Carr	OAK	697	5	611	8	29.8%	2	24.7%	65.1	9	260	1,921	2,320	13	0	2	4	71.5%	2/48	1.7
D.Prescott	DAL	692	6	806	3	26.3%	4	32.5%	77.7	2	283	2,293	2,422	15	2	0	7	69.9%	5/81	1.5
A.Rodgers	GB	645	7	621	6	18.1%	8	17.0%	57.4	11	338	2,311	2,661	17	0	2	2	65.6%	7/147	2.6
K.Cousins	MIN	600	8	620	7	23.7%	6	24.8%	54.4	15	270	2,085	2,208	16	3	2	3	69.0%	5/65	1.9
P.Rivers	LAC	524	9	522	9	12.1%	10	12.0%	53.3	16	350	2,487	2,528	12	2	2	7	67.6%	7/101	2.1
T.Brady	NE	398	10	518	10	5.4%	15	10.5%	57.8	10	370	2,384	2,473	14	0	1	5	65.5%	6/123	1.3
M.Ryan	ATL	338	11	369	12	6.8%	14	8.5%	57.1	12	304	2,032	1,978	15	2	2	8	70.9%	4/82	2.2
G.Minshew	JAX	323	12	252	17	5.1%	16	1.5%	46.0	24	328	2,171	2,044	13	2	6	4	61.4%	1/26	1.4
J.Brissett	IND	316	13	434	11	8.8%	12	16.3%	50.0	19	248	1,582	1,710	14	1	3	3	65.4%	5/124	-0.8
J.Garoppolo	SF	312	14	356	13	9.2%	11	12.1%	69.1	6	241	1,721	1,660	13	2	2	7	70.8%	5/44	-0.3
L.Jackson	BAL	307	15	348	14	7.8%	13	10.3%	69.9	5	255	1,722	1,724	12	0	0	5	64.6%	0/0	1.0
T.Bridgewater	NO	301	16	307	16	12.5%	9	12.9%	47.9	20	206	1,272	1,439	9	1	0	2	68.0%	1/3	-1.2
C.Wentz	PHI	206	17	328	15	-1.5%	17	4.2%	67.8	8	324	1,949	2,005	15	1	2	4	62.7%	3/29	3.3
J.Winston	TB	168	18	-25	23	-3.2%	20	-12.3%	53.1	17	337	2,202	1,935	16	5	4	12	59.9%	5/114	2.1
J.Goff	LAR	123	19	235	18	-5.3%	21	0.0%	43.3	25	327	2,271	1,870	11	2	3	7	61.1%	3/34	2.1
C.Keenum	WAS	116	20	101	20	-2.2%	18	-3.3%	50.6	18	198	1,235	1,196	9	2	2	4	67.7%	2/23	-2.1
R.Fitzpatrick	MIA	95	21	-6	22	-3.1%	19	-11.7%	56.7	13	188	1,121	1,075	8	2	1	7	61.8%	2/31	6.9
K.Murray	ARI	60	22	104	19	-8.4%	22	-6.4%	55.3	14	343	2,004	1,832	9	2	0	4	65.1%	2/25	-0.2
K.Allen	CAR	-16	23	-84	25	-12.3%	23	-17.3%	46.1	23	211	1,136	1,064	9	2	4	4	60.7%	1/36	4.1
M.Rudolph	PIT	-17	24	53	21	-12.8%	24	-6.3%	37.8	28	171	1,042	846	10	3	0	4	66.1%	3/81	-0.7
M.Trubisky	CHI	-95	25	-141	27	-17.6%	26	-20.6%	34.8	30	232	1,113	1,053	5	0	1	3	63.3%	4/22	-0.1
M.Mariota	TEN	-97	26	-65	24	-20.4%	29	-17.3%	32.4	32	182	1,007	714	7	2	0	2	60.3%	2/25	0.2
A.Dalton	CIN	-117	27	-234	29	-16.2%	25	-21.3%	37.9	27	363	2,056	1,716	9	1	3	8	61.1%	8/93	-0.3
B.Mayfield	CLE	-160	28	-297	30	-20.0%	28	-27.7%	40.1	26	293	1,774	1,231	7	1	1	12	59.1%	4/58	0.4
J.Flacco	DEN	-162	29	-217	28	-19.8%	27	-22.8%	47.9	21	287	1,635	1,282	6	4	3	5	65.8%	5/79	-0.6
J.Allen	BUF	-240	30	-127	26	-25.5%	30	-18.7%	34.6	31	263	1,510	1,019	10	2	2	7	61.9%	1/9	2.6
D.Jones	NYG	-365	31	-350	31	-31.7%	31	-30.8%	47.8	22	283	1,481	940	11	2	6	8	62.6%	3/72	-0.4
S.Darnold	NYJ	-429	32	-420	32	-45.6%	32	-44.8%	35.6	29	192	972	419	6	2	1	9	63.6%	5/75	2.4

[Llevron]

100% positive Jessie Rakusin has 7 accounts here lol

 

I have seen alot of his arguments the last few weeks. 

[Koala]

I was pretty high on Haskins and happy we got hi, watched him at Ohio State.  And Im still there.  I warned he was raw, I remember in one post I specifically wondered if Washington was a good place for him given the impatience of the fan base.  

 

I dont know what people thought that I others meant when we said patience was gonna be required for Haskins.  But patience definitely means more than ONE ****ING START ihis rookie year.  Jeebus people.  This franchise is far from being a winner.  What is the hurry about Haskins?  Do people really think we are one QB away from being a superbowl contender?  Let me burst your bubble;  we are not.  We are at least two full drafts and good off-seasons away from even being competitive.  Right now, this team is composed of J. Allen, D. Payne, L. Collins, Scary Terry. , maybe O. Dunbar, maybe K. Holcomb, maybe B. Scherff (i say maybe cause hes played like crap this year and he might be on his way out) -- and atter that is piles and piles of unwatchable crap.  We need about 15 more NFL caliber starters than we currently have.

 

Russell Wilson had a good team around him.  Ditto Ben Roethlisberger.  Ditto Tom Brady.  Drew Brees did not have a particularly good team around him and guess what -- he didnt look particularly good his rookie year, and guess what -- he was traded away cause the franchise jumped the gun and drafted P. Rivers.  And I feel thats exactly how far away the Chargers have been from winning as SB -- if they had kept Drew Brees and used that 1st rounder on somn else, I think theyd have a ring right now.

 

We have a raw rookie QB, playing on a really bad team, with an interim head coach.  If we cant have patience with Haskins in this situation, we dont deserve a franchise QB.     And if we just focus on getting another QB ASAP, without filling all the other holes we have, we will just have two busts at QB on our roster.    

[KDawg]

2 minutes ago, Koala said:

 

We have a raw rookie QB, playing on a really bad team, with an interim head coach.  If we cant have patience with Haskins in this situation, we dont deserve a franchise QB.       

 

Agreed to an extent. 

 

The issue I see now is that a new head coach has to be tied to Haskins. And that's a mistake to either 1) Force your hire to be a Haskins guy, 2) Hire a Haskins guy to force your guy.

 

You want the best candidate for the position, regardless of how they feel about Dwayne Haskins. 

 

But that's not his fault. And as I've said many times here, I'm pretty meh on Haskins, but to your points above: You absolutely, 100%, cannot give up on the kid at this point in his career. He was raw as hell. Giving up on him makes little sense at this point. He still has 7 games to show what he can do and show improvement in his game. Let him develop.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

Group QB decision? BIll Callahan has complete control of Redskins roster, per source

By JP Finlay November 05, 2019 2:20 PM

 

Whenever Bill Callahan names the Redskins starting quarterback for the Week 11 game against the Jets, know that Callahan is making his own call. 

Sources tell NBC Sports Washington that before Callahan accepted his role as interim head coach last month, he made clear he would only accept the role if he had complete control of the 53-man roster and what players he started. The Redskins agreed to Callahan's terms, partly out of necessity because the team had made clear former head coach Jay Gruden would be fired. 

 

Since Callahan took over as Redskins coach, the team has made a number of changes, including signing a fullback and turning over nearly the entire practice squad. The veteran coach knows what he wants, and has not hesitated to move towards his vision of a 53-man roster. 

 

Nowhere is that more apparent than his decisions at quarterback. 

In Gruden’s final game as head coach, he started Colt McCoy in a Week 5 loss to the Patriots. The next game, a Week 6 win in Miami, Callahan put Case Keenum back in the starting spot and moved McCoy to third string. 

 

Callahan made it very clear that Keenum was installed as the Redskins QB1, and the veteran started the next two games. In a loss to Minnesota in Week 8, Keenum suffered a concussion that forced him to miss the Week 9 contest against the Bills. 

In his absence, rookie QB Dwayne Haskins started, something that many fans and analysts had been demanding for some time. Haskins played reasonably well for his first start, and conventional wisdom expected the rookie to keep the starting job going forward. 

 

Only Callahan would not commit to Haskins as his quarterback, merely saying he would take his time during the team’s Week 10 bye to make his decision at quarterback. 

 

“I just want to gather all the information, I want to look at a lot of things on film, go back into the self-scout and I just want to take my time and decide where we’re going to go, the direction that we’re going to go,” Callahan said Monday. 

Think about it another way: How many interim head coaches would have the gall to eschew overwhelming public demand to play a rookie QB in an otherwise lost season? Only those with the assurance they get to make their own calls without front office interference.

[Voice_of_Reason]

@Skinsinparadise it would be really interesting to know what roster control Callahan got that Gruden didn’t have.  It seems clear that Gruden didn’t have final say on who made the roster, however I’m not sure Callahan really has that either.  

 

Who to play? Jay inactivated AP and played Colt as soon as he could, do I assume he had some roster say-so on game day.

[Llevron]

3 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

@Skinsinparadise it would be really interesting to know what roster control Callahan got that Gruden didn’t have.  It seems clear that Gruden didn’t have final say on who made the roster, however I’m not sure Callahan really has that either.  

 

Who to play? Jay inactivated AP and played Colt as soon as he could, do I assume he had some roster say-so on game day.

 

Yea this is all getting a bit confusing. Could it be as simple as Jay was afraid to say no to the pressure from above and Callahan isnt? 

 

Strange times, as always, in DC 

[MartinC]

2 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

@Skinsinparadise it would be really interesting to know what roster control Callahan got that Gruden didn’t have.  It seems clear that Gruden didn’t have final say on who made the roster, however I’m not sure Callahan really has that either.  

 

Who to play? Jay inactivated AP and played Colt as soon as he could, do I assume he had some roster say-so on game day.

 

The article is saying that Gruden did not have total say on who started and got playing time. But then does not really make a case for that to be true or cite information to that effect. For example it cites an inability to cut Swearinger until finally the front office relented. Well that is about who is on the 53 not who starts.

 

That said its a logical inference that if Callahan requested final say on control within the current roster it was something Gruden did not have. Or it coud just be him making sure he had the same control Gruden already had? 

 

Lets put it this way I find it hard to see anyone in the front office banging the table for Colt McCoy to get that start at QB. 

[Skinsinparadise]

9 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

@Skinsinparadise it would be really interesting to know what roster control Callahan got that Gruden didn’t have.  It seems clear that Gruden didn’t have final say on who made the roster, however I’m not sure Callahan really has that either.  

 

Who to play? Jay inactivated AP and played Colt as soon as he could, do I assume he had some roster say-so on game day.

 

There have been mixed reports about game day so I don't know.  I got the impression it was mostly Jay's decisions but on occasional he was interfered with via the FO.   But plenty of reports on the roster stuff didn't all go his way (Jay even talked about it on 106.7 a few weeks ago) -- including Jay wanting Norman out last off season, didn't want to resign Zach Brown the previous year, some say he wanted Crowder back and a bunch of stuff like that.    I am actually ok when its the GM over the head coach but not here because in my view we have a  politician not a real personnel guy running the team. 

 

Frankly I don't really care at this point about what power Jay versus Callahan has.  It's not what drives me on this point even a little.  My issue here is I hope this doesn't mean Haskins doesn't play.  The way Callahan talks about Keenum reminds me some of how Jay hyped Colt.  He touts the idea that Keenum was voted captain, he earned the job on and on and on. 

[Hooper]

So our interim HC has more power than our actual head coach had?

 

Gotta head to you, Brucey. You keep finding new and impressive ways to embarrass yourself.

[Skinsinparadise]

2 minutes ago, Hooper said:

So our interim HC has more power than our actual head coach had?

 

Gotta head to you, Brucey. You keep finding new and impressive ways to embarrass yourself.

 

Finlay said on the postgame show don't count out Callahan to be the next head coach considering he's very close with Bruce.  Though he did say in another recent interview that he doesn't think he ends up the guy. 

[Est.1974]

29 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Finlay said on the postgame show don't count out Callahan to be the next head coach considering he's very close with Bruce.  Though he did say in another recent interview that he doesn't think he ends up the guy. 

 

Seems like Callahan has been kept sweet in the short term in case we can't attract any kind of credible candidate in the offseason.

[Skinsinparadise]

4 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

 

Seems like Callahan has been kept sweet in the short term in case we can't attract any kind of credible candidate in the offseason.

 

Could be.  If the season ends they way I think it will with more losses (aside from the Jets game and maybe one other) and low attendance -- Dan I think will be desperate for a splash.  And bringing back Callahan won't give him that splash.    But agree he might not be able to generate the splash he'd want -- but heck I think even a dude like Gregg Williams is more splashy than retaining Callahan. 

 

O'Connell is interesting.  Some say Dan doesn't want another narrative like the one about McVay with another young dude leaving and thriving.   At the same time would promoting O'Connell bring a splash -- I doubt it. 

[Hooper]

I think Callahan's best chance to get the job is to win a few games with Haskins under center. I don't know how starting Keenum would do anything for him -- even if he doesn't want the job. 

 

But it's the Skins so why should anything make sense.

[Mr. Sinister]

39 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Finlay said on the postgame show don't count out Callahan to be the next head coach considering he's very close with Bruce.  Though he did say in another recent interview that he doesn't think he ends up the guy. 

 

Bruh, if this happens, I'm done. For real this time. That would kill what little bit of loyal, hardheaded, determined, resilient energy I have left.

[Skinsinparadise]

4 minutes ago, Hooper said:

I think Callahan's best chance to get the job is to win a few games with Haskins under center. I don't know how starting Keenum would do anything for him -- even if he doesn't want the job. 

 

But it's the Skins so why should anything make sense.

 

If you buy into what Sheehan and some others have said, they've heard Bruce is selling ending the season on a win streak to prove they assembled the right roster but they simply weren't responding to Jay anymore.  If so, winning some games at the end serves a purpose for some people in that building.  

 

I'd guess too that since Callahan is tight with Bruce, he'd be more than fine with him being back but in order to sell that to Dan I'd gather they have to win some games.  

 

 

 

[Est.1974]

McCoy was purely Grudens guy so he's history.

 

Keenum likely being a Bruce move. So playing him and picking up 2/3 wins might massage Bruce's ego and slightly vindicate the move to pick him up. You never know, the contracts QBs pick up in FA he may net us a reasonable comp pick. 

 

Callahan also wants the job, and is playing to win. 

 

We really should be starting Haskins though.

[Skinsinparadise]

13 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

McCoy was purely Grudens guy so he's history.

 

Keenum likely being a Bruce move. So playing him and picking up 2/3 wins might massage Bruce's ego and slightly vindicate the move to pick him up. You never know, the contracts QBs pick up in FA he may net us a reasonable comp pick. 

 

Callahan also wants the job, and is playing to win. 

 

We really should be starting Haskins though.

 

All of it speaks to why this organization is a loser IMO.    Just nonsense politics that interferes with winning.  It's a mantra under Dan.

 

A.  Multiple beat reporters (especially Hoffman) have said Colt is the odd man out now because he's seen as "Jay's guy".  Some players in the locker room supposedly (according to Hoffman) think Colt is their best option.  Personally, I've never been a Colt guy but I feel bad for the dude if he's targeted in a bad way just because he's associated with Jay.  I don't want him to start but he doesn't deserve to be persona non grata. 

 

B.  That Bruce is tight with Callahan hence he's in the running

 

C.  Callahan (an interim coach) supposedly getting more power than the previous head coach.  Weird.

 

D.  This quest to win some meaningless games to in effect question the need of a rebuild by making the case that the roster was always fine.

 

E.  The idea that Callahan might want to show his power some by sticking to his guy at QB 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

I missed posting the main plot line in that Finlay article

 

https://www.nbcsports.com/washington/redskins/group-qb-decision-bill-callahan-has-complete-control-redskins-roster-source

In that vein, don't be shocked if Callahan steps to the podium next week and names Keenum his starter. It might not make sense for the organization's plans in 2020 or beyond, but Callahan has been adamant that his goals are wins this season. 

Keenum or Haskins, whoever gets the call, the decision came from Callahan.

[KDawg]

I’m semi curious if Keenum was a Bruce/Callahan guy, McCoy was Gruden’s guy and Haskins was Snyder’s guy and none of these guys were the front office’s guy. 
 

I mean that doesn’t seem likely, but it seems to odd for this to even be part of the conversation that you almost have to wonder if there was some thought put into Callahan being the interim in the off-season.

 

Again, I have nothing to base that on. It’s not remotely logical. But this team makes me think of odd scenarios