Llevron Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 I mean you have to give credit to some of these cats keeping up the “He’s a bust” thing at this point. It takes conviction to be that wrong and keep it up. There is another word I would use to describe it but there are rules here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 Some people suffer from premature evaluation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 11 hours ago, wit33 said: Haskins floor has continued to increase throughout his time as the starter. He’s provided enough to be excited about the upcoming season. The “Kyler Murray” plan is squashed. I wouldn't say that. And no one should in my opinion. Haskins has shown, that with this regime, he should be the starting quarterback in 2020. No doubt. But, a new GM/HC combo absolutely, 100%, needs to be able to pick their own groceries. I am completely fine if a new regime comes in and is all aboard the Haskins bandwagon as long as its their true feelings. I am not okay with guys coming in and being forced to keep Haskins. At all. Ideally for the team, the most qualified guys who take the job (again, I am hoping Bruce is canned even though I'm not sure he's going to be), will be on board with Haskins. If not, they may not use a first or whatever, or they may, but you'll see them get their guys in the building pretty quick. The HC change actually makes a "Kyler Murray" situation more plausible. Though I'd argue it's absolutely not in the best interest of the team in the short term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xameil Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 12 hours ago, skinny21 said: Everyone should agree that there’s a chance he will be a bust and a chance he becomes a competent starter (or better). Everyone should have agreed with that from the get go, even if (historically) odds were better he’d be a bust. Are you new here? 12 hours ago, Cougarrick said: Haskins is glass. Get an o line or he will never pan out. Soooo...all that talk about how tough he was and the respect he had gotten from playing a game injured was just bull**** then....right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuriousD Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 3 hours ago, KDawg said: But, a new GM/HC combo absolutely, 100%, needs to be able to pick their own groceries. I am completely fine if a new regime comes in and is all aboard the Haskins bandwagon as long as its their true feelings. I am not okay with guys coming in and being forced to keep Haskins. At all. Ideally for the team, the most qualified guys who take the job (again, I am hoping Bruce is canned even though I'm not sure he's going to be), will be on board with Haskins. If not, they may not use a first or whatever, or they may, but you'll see them get their guys in the building pretty quick. Talking about the HC specifically, if Haskins truly was Snyder's pick, his name is going to come up early and often in every interview. I even imagine a scenario where a willingness to work with Haskins will be pre-requisite for being invited to interview. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cougarrick Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 Point is, better fix that o line or you will never know what Haskins can do because he will get hurt before he learns how to get away. A better line line would help him grow, when he gives a damn anyway because he sure did a poor job of getting ready to play at the beginning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskins59 Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 IMO, make it clear to whoever is the HC that Dwayne Haskins needs to start next year, period. Imagine if the new HC decides that Haskins is not the guy. So Haskins gets traded, and he drafts his own guy. The new guy is a bust, while Haskins looks elite. What you need to do is let the new HC know that his job is secure for a few years. The first year is about figuring out Haskins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 25 minutes ago, redskins59 said: IMO, make it clear to whoever is the HC that Dwayne Haskins needs to start next year, period. Imagine if the new HC decides that Haskins is not the guy. So Haskins gets traded, and he drafts his own guy. The new guy is a bust, while Haskins looks elite. What you need to do is let the new HC know that his job is secure for a few years. The first year is about figuring out Haskins. This is a major, major, major mistake. You don't cut your coach (and hopefully GM search) short on candidates by forcing a player on someone. Ideally, the candidate hired is the most qualified for the job AND they want Haskins. But the second you force that on the coach you prove that nothing is changing, there will be consistent meddling and the team will not get beyond the mediocre threshold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggarriso Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 15 minutes ago, KDawg said: This is a major, major, major mistake. You don't cut your coach (and hopefully GM search) short on candidates by forcing a player on someone. <~~ This. - A good coach can and would change the entire trajectory of the franchise - it would be exceedingly foolish to anchor them to anyone on the current roster. I would argue the answer would be to hire a real GM who then builds the staff, roster, and selects the coach, all without bias to anyone (staff, player, or coach) currently in the building - but thats too easy for our boy Danny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskins59 Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 7 minutes ago, KDawg said: This is a major, major, major mistake. You don't cut your coach (and hopefully GM search) short on candidates by forcing a player on someone. Ideally, the candidate hired is the most qualified for the job AND they want Haskins. But the second you force that on the coach you prove that nothing is changing, there will be consistent meddling and the team will not get beyond the mediocre threshold. It's in everybody's interest to know if Haskins is good or not. If a coach cannot see that Haskins has improved dramatically in the last few weeks, he should not be hired. Heck, I am an amateur, and I can see it. What they think of Haskins is a question that the front office needs to ask whoever they interview. He was a rookie this year. He needs to work on a lot of things. The way you do that is let him get the majority of snaps in practice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 6 minutes ago, redskins59 said: It's in everybody's interest to know if Haskins is good or not. If a coach cannot see that Haskins has improved dramatically in the last few weeks, he should not be hired. Heck, I am an amateur, and I can see it. What they think of Haskins is a question that the front office needs to ask whoever they interview. He was a rookie this year. He needs to work on a lot of things. The way you do that is let him get the majority of snaps in practice. Again, I can see why a coach WOULD be interested. But I can also see why they wouldn't. It's best for us if they do want him to be the quarterback moving forward. But it should be their choice and not forced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 3 hours ago, KDawg said: Again, I can see why a coach WOULD be interested. But I can also see why they wouldn't. It's best for us if they do want him to be the quarterback moving forward. But it should be their choice and not forced. I agree with you that a QB should not be forced on a HC - if your preferred HC candidate wants to go a different direction that’s what should happen. But I think we are at a point where Haskins will be seen as a positive by prospective candidates not a negative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinny21 Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 Personally, I’ve seen enough from Haskins to believe he needs to be given a shot. We’ve spent the resources, we have him on a rookie contract, and we have plenty of other team needs (to not be using resources to find a replacement). So a GM that wants to trade up for Burrows or use an early pick on Herbert, etc, or sign Tannehill/Prescott to a 25-30mil contract... that’s kind of a no-go for me. With that said, a new GM’s job (as well as the new HC’s job) should not be tied to Haskins’ success. It’s a similar situation to Gruden (and his GM) with Carr. The GM hire should be focused on the long term and should be given the leeway to do so. A good GM hire should be choosing a HC that has a plan for how to work with Haskins, IMO. Doesn’t mean the HC should be forced to start him I’d say. Also doesn’t mean that a vision of how to use Haskins should be the only, or even main prerequisite for a HC hire. None of this is means I think Haskins is the answer at qb. From a resource management and roster building standpoint though, it just makes sense for him to be given the chance to be that guy. If he fails, then we continue building the team and try again - whether that’s next year or at the end of his rookie contract. If the GM doubts he succeeds (and maybe even if he believes Haskins can/will succeed), I think it would be wise to hedge by looking to accrue future draft picks as ammo to trade up for a qb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 1 hour ago, MartinC said: I agree with you that a QB should not be forced on a HC - if your preferred HC candidate wants to go a different direction that’s what should happen. But I think we are at a point where Haskins will be seen as a positive by prospective candidates not a negative. I agree. But I’ve seen stranger **** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XxSpearheadxX Posted December 27, 2019 Share Posted December 27, 2019 15 hours ago, Cougarrick said: nm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexa Posted December 27, 2019 Share Posted December 27, 2019 Haskins has played about a game and a half of good football and has been injured. He should be named the starter going into the off season but that is it. I would hope there's someone brought in here to push him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted December 27, 2019 Share Posted December 27, 2019 The best head coaching candidates will provide competent and detailed plans of attack during their interviews that they would pursue if hired. One of those plans would definitely involve showing the owner and GM what they feel would be the best way to develop and leverage the talent already acquired by the team. If a coaching candidate can't do that, if they can't basically say "I'd prefer Burrows but here's how I would develop Hsskins", then they are not the best qualified. My view has always been that the GM would determine the players selected and also determine the head coach best qualified to maximize that talent. If a coaching candidate wants to move on from recently acquired players--especially at a position such as QB--they better have a damn good explanation as to why, one that thoroughly convinces the GM and owner it's the right move to make. I've said before, the last thing I want is another Spurrier situation, where we are shipping off good players in exchange for giving the new head coach the players he feels he can win with. If you don't think you can win with Stephen Davis but are convinced you can with Trung Candidate because he fits your scheme better, then I'm not hiring you lol... Can you imagine if some widely respected and sought-after HC candidate, one that got this entire board excited, ended up trading McLaurin for draft picks because he feels his system will only work with WRs who are 6'3" or taller?... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going Commando Posted December 27, 2019 Share Posted December 27, 2019 On 12/23/2019 at 12:34 PM, Mr. Sinister said: This is going to be a serious blow to Gruden for anyone looking to hire him to work with their QB. Wasn't he under fire a bit in Cinci for how he handled Dalton? It seems apparent now that instead of trying to get dude ready, put everything he had into getting him going so he could take off Wk 1, he just pouted from the moment we drafted him. Play the hand your dealt, and play it well. That's how you survive as a Head coach in the NFL. He quit on RGIII too. He's not a good quarterback coach. Neither is his brother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llevron Posted December 27, 2019 Share Posted December 27, 2019 If a new coach/GM came in and his first move was to cut Haskins I would not be a fan. Not because I like Haskins. But because the move wouldnt make any sense to me. Again at worse you build your roster around the QB while Haskins takes the hits and then once you dont have over 100billion in salary tied up in the position and you have everything else you put in your guy who maybe you drafter a year or two before. You can have your own guy, fine. But dont be an idiot about it and put him behind this horrible oline with no weapons only to prove a point.l Thats that Mike Shannahan type of bull****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted December 27, 2019 Share Posted December 27, 2019 If anyone came in and CUT Haskins they’re an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted December 27, 2019 Share Posted December 27, 2019 This point below seemed to be a theme this year with Haskins. Just about every beat guy has said they were told by people in the building (coaches hinted at it too especially O'connell) that Haskins wasn't preparing as hard as they would have liked but something switched in him in a good way that got him cooking in the right direction on that front. I forgot who said it but one said it was his first performance against the Giants, that helped really fire up Haskins in a good way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panninho Posted December 27, 2019 Share Posted December 27, 2019 Got no problem with him missing the game this week. This way he can ultimately retire unbeaten against the Cowboys while we still get the #2 overall pick this weekend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted December 27, 2019 Share Posted December 27, 2019 The future roster should be up to the new coach/ gm. Any quality coach/gm should insist on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinny21 Posted December 27, 2019 Share Posted December 27, 2019 11 hours ago, Alexa said: Haskins has played about a game and a half of good football and has been injured. He should be named the starter going into the off season but that is it. I would hope there's someone brought in here to push him. As in a qb competition? Personally, I hope not. Not because I’m afraid to tick off Haskins (though I have my doubts about how he’d handle it), but because I think Haskins has shown enough to warrant getting the bulk of the snaps... and it’s more than just the 6 quarters that people keep bringing up. @stevemcqueen1 has talked a lot about supporting a young quarterback, and giving him competition and reducing offseason snaps isn’t the way to show that much needed support. @Califan007 Spurrier was who I was thinking of in my post above, but in regards to the qb situation with Ramsey and Wuerfel (think I maybe spelled that wrong, but I’m not wasting time to look it up). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinbuck Posted December 28, 2019 Share Posted December 28, 2019 11 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said: This point below seemed to be a theme this year with Haskins. Just about every beat guy has said they were told by people in the building (coaches hinted at it too especially O'connell) that Haskins wasn't preparing as hard as they would have liked but something switched in him in a good way that got him cooking in the right direction on that front. I forgot who said it but one said it was his first performance against the Giants, that helped really fire up Haskins in a good way. Perhaps the switch was hard to flip when he was still distracted by the nasty stab wound in his back, inflicted by an incompetent HC who all but deserted him. This is seemingly the only logical conclusion. Otherwise, behavioral traits such has hard-work or laziness don’t typically change overnight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.