FAREWELL to the NFL Dwayne Haskins QB Ohio State

[MisterPinstripe]

14 minutes ago, Florgon79 said:

 

 

We got to see a lot more from Mayfield year 1 than Haskins.

Mayfield was also in a better situation with a team and coach supporting him and wanting him and not completely dysfunctional off the field.

[HTTRDynasty]

11 minutes ago, Alcoholic Zebra said:

 

More like successfully masquerading as a franchise QB?  Isn't Goff kind of a dummy that doesn't get basic stuff if McVay isn't telling him everything pre-snap through the headset?

 

That's the meme.  The reality though is that while McVay may help him until 15 seconds is left on the play clock, McVay isn't out there making last second pre-snap decisions, post-snap decisions, and throwing passes into NFL windows.  Goff is probably never going to be a top 5 QB, but he has been top 10 in the past, statistically, and he could definitely be that again at some point.  

 

McVay deserves a ton of credit, but Goff is still a franchise QB in my book.  I think Shanny would take Goff over Garoppalo in a heartbeat.

 

 

[NewCliche21]

42 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

But that's lazy analysis isn't it? The really smart kid is capable of getting an A. Whether he does or not is on him. But that's what he can do--it's what he's done in previous grades. He's not the kid who has repeated the 3rd grade twice and can't spell cat if you spot him the c and the t. That's the difference between having a young QB and not having a QB. We have a young QB. What Esiason said was lazy "reporting"

 

But how do you know that he's a really smart kid prior to him demonstrating it?  Einstein was a poor student at times and got negative feedback, to put it gently, and he proved them wrong.  That's what I'm looking for from Haskins, the DL, everyone.  Prove them wrong.

Is it lazy?  It's generalist, so I could see how that would be viewed as lazy.  Again, they're not invested like we are so they're not deep diving into what's going on.

44 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

But what if that kid didn't get an F. What if they got like a B- while the rest of his siblings were getting D's, and F's. Do we give that kid an F, too, just because he's part of that same family?

 

Sorry, I'm not following.  I'm talking about Haskins.  Are you referring to the DL?  If so, then yeah, you can PFF it and give individual players individual grades, that's, as what @Riggo#44 said, the opposite of lazy reporting.

Again, not sure that I follow so I apologize if I didn't get that quite right.

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

25 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

 

I think Shanny would take Goff over Garoppalo in a heartbeat.

 

 

 

Interesting comparisons we can do here.

 

1) Goff has 3 full seasons with good coaching to Garoppolo's 1.  It seems more likely that Garoppolo, rather than Goff, can improve further.

2) Is cap hit:

2020

Goff - 28.8

Jimmy - 26.6

2021

Goff - 34.6

Jimmy - 26.9

2022

Goff - 32.6

Jimmy - 27

Goff then has 2 more years under contract after that, point in his favor.  While both have contracts that can readily be restructured, just about all of Jimmy G's is Base Salary, so virtually all of that can be tinkered with.  That's a plus depending on how much the cap goes down in 2021.

 

3) Jimmy gets sacked at a higher rate than Goff

4) Both of them are slightly below average in avoiding turnovers.

5) Goff and Jimmy have usually had a TD rate that's been pretty good, although Goff's nosedived last season for some reason.

 

I'm not sure which one I'd rather have.  Hot take, I'd rather have Haskins than either. Cap hit's of:

2020 - 3.3

2021 - 3.9

2022 - 4.6

2023 - Whatever the 5th year QB option might be.

 

------------------------------

Volume stats

Player	Yds	TD	Int	Sk
QB A	962	7	3	12
QB B	711	5	1	12
QB C	1324	8	4	3

 

 

Rate stats

Player	Cmp%	TD %	Int %	Sk %
QB A	67.52%	5.43%	2.33%	9.30%
QB B	63.16%	4.67%	0.93%	11.21%
QB C	66.67%	4.60%	2.30%	1.72%

 

 

This is a 4 game sample from weeks 13-16 of last season. Who would people rather have?

[Califan007 The Constipated]

59 minutes ago, NewCliche21 said:

 

Sorry, I'm not following.  I'm talking about Haskins. 

 

 

 

 

[Going Commando]

2 hours ago, dyst said:

Yea, the defensive line last year wasn’t all that it was cracked up to be with FOUR first round draft picks. They were underwhelming. 

 

They were pretty good: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2019/opp.htm#advanced_defense::17

 

Third in the NFL in pressure %, fifth in total pressures, third in hurry % and total hurries.  We were 23rd in total blitzes and 24th in blitz rate, so that pressure was coming from the DL.

 

The DL was good, the problem with the defense as a whole was what was happening behind the defensive line.  Fourth worst completion % allowed in the league and second worst passing TD%.  The secondary fell apart by the end of the season.  Injuries, lack of talent, bad offense, bad coaching.  We added the best edge prospect in a generation to a DL group that was already very good, we have good reason to expect the DL to be great.  The questions are really about whether or not the secondary is still trash and whether or not the offense can keep possession of the ball--the DL is going to do their job.

[HTTRDynasty]

1 hour ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

They were pretty good: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2019/opp.htm#advanced_defense::17

 

Third in the NFL in pressure %, fifth in total pressures, third in hurry % and total hurries.  We were 23rd in total blitzes and 24th in blitz rate, so that pressure was coming from the DL.

 

I used to get excited about the pressure stats as well, but I still can't get our pass rush win-rate stats from last year out of my head, so I'm not really sure what to think about our DL:

 

 

 

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

35 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

 

I used to get excited about the pressure stats as well, but I still can't get our pass rush win-rate stats from last year out of my head, so I'm not really sure what to think about our DL:

 

 

 

Of course, that's the nature of a terrible scheme not utilizing talents to their advantage.  We were a strict 2 gap DL.  So Payne's first job at the snap (for most plays) was get into the chest of the OL, read run/pass, then if it's a pass start trying to shed the blocker.

 

"PRWR = rate pass rusher beats blocker in 2.5 seconds."

 

It's hard to play the run first on the way to the QB and win the block in under 2.5 seconds.

 

Why do you draft DL in the 1st round and then purposefully try to limit their talent?  That's just crazy.  Not to mention the most valuable pressure against the QB is from the A gaps, it's the most likely to get the QB to abandon a read and pull the ball even if the read is about to be open.

 

Edit:  Jay Gruden and Manusky were so frustrating.

[HTTRDynasty]

6 minutes ago, Alcoholic Zebra said:

 

Of course, that's the nature of a terrible scheme not utilizing talents to their advantage.  We were a strict 2 gap DL. 

 

Yeah, this is what I've been hoping the primary reason is for the awful placement.  I've asked Seth in the past if he could limit the graph to 3rd downs, but no luck.

 

EDIT:  Forgot to add... I hope that explains the relatively poor PFF pass rush grades as well.

 

 

[Hooper]

3 hours ago, HTTRDynasty said:

 

That's the meme.  The reality though is that while McVay may help him until 15 seconds is left on the play clock, McVay isn't out there making last second pre-snap decisions, post-snap decisions, and throwing passes into NFL windows.  Goff is probably never going to be a top 5 QB, but he has been top 10 in the past, statistically, and he could definitely be that again at some point.  

 

McVay deserves a ton of credit, but Goff is still a franchise QB in my book.  I think Shanny would take Goff over Garoppalo in a heartbeat.

 

 

 

Goff gets dinged by fans and the media because he looks like a spoiled soCal kid, not a NFL Qb. 

 

But dude can make some sick throws.

 

And is way tougher than people think.

 

I went to the classic Rams Chiefs game two years ago. The one where over 100 points where scored. Goff constantly stood in the pocket with guys coming in his way and then flicked beauties.

 

3 hours ago, Florgon79 said:

 

 

We got to see a lot more from Mayfield year 1 than Haskins.

 

Mayfield's physical skills are so suspect. Seems like it takes everything he has to make a throw. This year is beyond make or break for him. Last year if his first read wasn't open it was disaster time.

[Voice_of_Reason]

1 hour ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

I wouldn’t even go that far necessarily and wouldn’t expect anyone in the media to, but an acknowledgment that we hope to have our QB answer in-house even if he’s had a rough start is what I’m looking for. Saying we straight up don’t have a QB just isn’t true, given our investment, even if it turns out that he sucks. 

I agree with you. But it's how the media works.  Stay with me now, this is going to be  a little long...

 

Haskins is the betting favorite, apparently by a lot, to be the first QB benched this year.  Sheehan was talking about it on his podcast.  Sheehan stated, and I agree, the reason is because Haskins was drafted by this team. 

 

In my opinion, (Sheehan listed some of these also, so credit where credit is due) Haskins' reputation is effected negatively by:

 

1. The fact the owner, who everybody despises worst than Lucifer himself, picked him over the reservations of "the football people" (whoever they are, I guess Kyle Smith and Jay Gruden)

2. The coach, Jay Gruden, didn't want him, at least not at 15.  And there is a lot more respect for Gruden (at least for now) outside the area than inside the area.  

3. The constant leaks about him not being able to call a play in the huddle, which lasted for the entire off-season and into the season. 

4. When he got his first opportunity, he looked completely lost.  

5. His first several starts were just bad.  He didn't know what he was doing, he had bad mechanics which led to bad accuracy.  

6. He showed a tremendous amount of immaturity with the "leauge done messed up," taking selfies while the game was still going on, other social media posts, etc. 

7. The overall opinion Haskins did not do what he needed to do to get ready for the season last year.

 

All of these things have stuck to Haskins.  Most of them are on the organization, whether it be Dan, Bruce, Jay or others, they are factors outside Haskin's control.  SOME are not.  He could have prepared better, been more engaged, and been more mature.

 

However, the only counter-balance to the bad things are 2 drives at the end of the Detroit game which led to field goals, which were somewhat impressive but came at the end of a 13-29 with an INT, no TD performance.  So, unless you REALLY watched, that doesn't look all that impressive.  (I thought he played well when he needed to, which was impressive. Even though he was inconsistent.) And then the final 6 quarters of his season, which ended with him getting injured. 

 

So, when the media "evaluates" the situation, they are looking at it through that lens.  And because most of the national media have to cover the entire league, they migrate to the easy to defend position which takes as little thought as possible.  And has the benefit of being 'click worthy."

 

Saying "Washington has a young QB, he was put in a terrible situation last year, they have a new coach and structure now, and they need to see how he's going to do with a new situation and better preparation" isn't remotely interesting, though it has the benefit of being the truth.  I also puts some demand on the media member to understand what Ron has been doing this off-season with Hasksins, what the offense is going to ask of him, and know a little more than just what happened last year on the field.  This immediately means 80-90% of the national media will not either have taken, or have the time to come up with that answer.  

 

Saying, "The WFT has the worst QB situation in the NFL because Haskins didn't show anything last year, the backup is an undrafted free agent who didn't look good last year, and the 3rd string guy's leg looked like it was gnawed on by a shark.  They have nothing, and they are going to suck."  Now, that will draw some clicks. And can be defended by last year, and has the benefit of not requiring any real research or thought. 

 

Alternatively, if somebody came out and said, "Look, Haskins was extremely well regarded out of college.  He's going to be a top 10 QB this year, here's why: (explanation)." That would be interesting and would get clicks.  BUT this is the hardest of the three answers because it would involve thought which is different than the group think which is easy to regurgitate and spin a little to make it your own.  And you'd have to come up with all of your justifications by yourself and be able to defend them.  This is harder and time consuming.  So even if somebody did think this way, most likely it wouldn't come up because it's hard.

 

In summary, I completely agree with you.  The way the media operates is "path of least resistance" and "click-bate" or "shock-jock."  So, I don't expect anything close to actual reporting from anybody who's outside the bubble.  And the counter is, the people inside the bubble are tainted in the opposite direction.

 

 

56 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

I remember something similar being said about Cousins...that we shipped off Jackson and Garcon because they were getting in the way of Cousins being able to lead or something like that there., like with them gone it would definitely be Cousins' team. Pretty sure that turned out to be the wrong perception lol...

 

I remember Cooley saying it and I thought it was the most ludicrous thing I'd ever heard in my entirely life.  I can't remember if he was saying that's what he heard, or that was his opinion.  I do remember thinking if you get rid of your 2 best weapons because your QB can't be a leader in the locker room, then you need to find a new QB.  I also think Cousins could have been a fine leader in the locker room with Garcon and Jackson there, and the excuse was just stupid Bruce Allen bull**** for being a cheap *******. 

 

 

37 minutes ago, dyst said:

Why are we upset, again, at what the media says about us. We won 3 games. We sucked. 

I take issue with this point of view.  Just because we suck shouldn't mean we should be subject to lack of thought by reporters.  

 

If you take a look at the team and say, "yeah, they still suck because of X, Y and Z" then that's fine.  

 

But if you say, "They sucked last year, they're a terrible organization, so I'm just going to assume they're going to suck this year" is lazy. 

 

It's not the conclusion I have an issue with, it's the lazy way people come to the conclusion which I take issue with.  

[dyst]

6 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

But if you say, "They sucked last year, they're a terrible organization, so I'm just going to assume they're going to suck this year" is lazy. 

I think if it was just last year, the media would play nice but we sucked last year, the year before, the year before that, and even prior from 2016 > 1991 etc.

 

This is absolutely a “show us” game the media is playing and rightfully so. 
 

I know this year is different but we also said that before too.

[Voice_of_Reason]

5 minutes ago, dyst said:

I think if it was just last year, the media would play nice but we sucked last year, the year before, the year before that, and even prior from 2016 > 1991 etc.

 

This is absolutely a “show us” game the media is playing and rightfully so. 
 

I know this year is different but we also said that before too.

I still disagree.  Sure, it's a show-me year.  And we're all waiting.  So instead of just saying they'll suck, maybe just say it's a show-me year?  And then you can say, "Look, they have a ton of talent in the front 7, questions in the back end of the defense, and a lot of questions on the OL and skill positions on offense.  It probably won't be a good year."  

 

The issue is not the statement of them not being good.  It's the reason of, "They've sucked for 25 years (the suck started before Snyder), so they're going to continue to suck."  That's lazy.  At least tell me WHY THIS YEAR you think they're going to suck.  Only because that's kindof the job you're being paid to do.  But whatever.  We're "arguing" about semantics. 

[Dark Acre]

23 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

I mean there aren't a lot of options. If it wasn't gonna be Scherff it would be Moses.

This Moses isn't leading us to the Promised Land.  If he can just keep the onrushing waters parted long enough to get to the red zone, dayenu!

[WilberMarshall]

6 hours ago, dyst said:

Why are we upset, again, at what the media says about us. We won 3 games. We sucked. 

 

We know why we sucked.

 

If folks coached with a coaching license, Gruden and some members of his staff should've lost their coaching license for the type of malpractice they supervised here in Washington.

 

The media should be wondering why Gruden should still be in the league. 

[dyst]

23 minutes ago, WilberMarshall said:

 

We know why we sucked.

 

If folks coached with a coaching license, Gruden and some members of his staff should've lost their coaching license for the type of malpractice they supervised here in Washington.

 

The media should be wondering why Gruden should still be in the league. 

We sucked under Shanhan also. We did make the playoffs twice under Gibbs but those teams sucked in some sense also. Zorn team sucked, so did Norv etc. Coaching has definitely been a problem, so has personnel.

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

32 minutes ago, dyst said:

We sucked under Shanhan also. We did make the playoffs twice under Gibbs but those teams sucked in some sense also. Zorn team sucked, so did Norv etc. Coaching has definitely been a problem, so has personnel.

 

Those 2 playoff appearances by Gibbs have to help his status as one of the best coaches ever.  He had a 50% playoff rate (even won a game!) with Dan Snyder and his craptacular organization?  That is unbelievable.

[dyst]

4 minutes ago, Alcoholic Zebra said:

 

Those 2 playoff appearances by Gibbs have to help his status as one of the best coaches ever.  He had a 50% playoff rate (even won a game!) with Dan Snyder and his craptacular organization?  That is unbelievable.

No doubt pretty amazing looking back at it

[CommanderInTheRye]

29 minutes ago, Alcoholic Zebra said:

 

Those 2 playoff appearances by Gibbs have to help his status as one of the best coaches ever.  He had a 50% playoff rate (even won a game!) with Dan Snyder and his craptacular organization?  That is unbelievable.

 

Gibbs 2.0 holding that team together after the death of Sean was unforgettable.

[skinbuck]

Here’s the thing: every year, experts try to guess who the surprise teams of the year might be and most predictions are way off as they rely on this type of shallow, lazy analysis. 

 

I’d think that for those really dedicated to their craft, it’d be an interesting challenge to leverage their instincts, collate their obervations and come up with insights that meatheads like Boomer are incapable of spotting. As opposed to spouting off boring, fairly obvious but defensible takes.

 

i guess that’s too much to ask for though 🤷‍♂️

[volsmet]

46 minutes ago, skinbuck said:

Here’s the thing: every year, experts try to guess who the surprise teams of the year might be and most predictions are way off as they rely on this type of shallow, lazy analysis. 

 

 

Not experts in a meritocracy, certainly.
 

[FootballZombie]

1 hour ago, skinbuck said:

Here’s the thing: every year, experts try to guess who the surprise teams of the year might be and most predictions are way off as they rely on this type of shallow, lazy analysis. 

 

I’d think that for those really dedicated to their craft, it’d be an interesting challenge to leverage their instincts, collate their obervations and come up with insights that meatheads like Boomer are incapable of spotting. As opposed to spouting off boring, fairly obvious but defensible takes.

 

i guess that’s too much to ask for though 🤷‍♂️

 

 

Were you watching the game? Did you see the graphic showing expected W/L for the top and bottom of the league? I'm still not sure I was not hallucinating, but I didn't see Wash in the bottom 5 alongside the likes of the Giants and Jaguars. Anybody get a second set of eyes on that graphic

[Malapropismic Depository]

Wesseling rated Haskins #32 - "the worst starting QB in the NFL"

 

https://www.nfl.com/news/qb-index-week-1-ranking-all-32-starters-entering-2020-nfl-season

 

 

[volsmet]

21 minutes ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

Wesseling rated Haskins #32 - "the worst starting QB in the NFL"

 

https://www.nfl.com/news/qb-index-week-1-ranking-all-32-starters-entering-2020-nfl-season

 

 

If he’s the worst starting QB in the nfl, it won’t be for lack of effort or talent on his part. 

[Going Commando]

My expert analysis says the surprise teams of 2020 = Colts vs Packers in the Championship game.

 

Indy quietly built the Hogs 2.0 and found a skipper for the offense and drafted one of the most productive backs on CFB history.  They're going to strangle teams with their run game.  And after everyone crapped on their offseason, Green Bay will take their revenge.