FAREWELL to the NFL Dwayne Haskins QB Ohio State

[wit33]

This staff & FO contributed to Kirk Cousins’ development and enabled him to receive the largest contract in NFL history at the time, but somehow the narrative by many is they’ll screw it up. Huh?

 

Yes, the QB position as a whole is a crapshoot, so there’s a chance Haskins won’t pan out, but the Skins have it together in regards to developing a young QB. 

[volsmet]

18 minutes ago, wit33 said:

enabled him to receive the largest contract in NFL history at the time

 

 

 

Kirk’s is development was apparent in the steps Minnesota took after moving on from Case. 

[mistertim]

2 hours ago, wit33 said:

This staff & FO contributed to Kirk Cousins’ development and enabled him to receive the largest contract in NFL history at the time, but somehow the narrative by many is they’ll screw it up. Huh?

 

Yes, the QB position as a whole is a crapshoot, so there’s a chance Haskins won’t pan out, but the Skins have it together in regards to developing a young QB. 

 

KIrk had plenty of learning he did in the NFL before being handed the reigns full time...both under the Shanahans and under Gruden/McVay. He was also a 3 year starter in college before that. I don't think the situations are very comparable. We're talking about a guy who started 3 years in college, then got to learn and grow for 3 seasons in the pros before becoming the true full time starter, vs a guy with 1 year of college experience who may be thrown to the wolves from day 1 in the NFL. THAT I think is something that our coaching staff could easily screw up.

[wit33]

22 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

KIrk had plenty of learning he did in the NFL before being handed the reigns full time...both under the Shanahans and under Gruden/McVay. He was also a 3 year starter in college before that. I don't think the situations are very comparable. We're talking about a guy who started 3 years in college, then got to learn and grow for 3 seasons in the pros before becoming the true full time starter, vs a guy with 1 year of college experience who may be thrown to the wolves from day 1 in the NFL. THAT I think is something that our coaching staff could easily screw up.

 

Or any coaching staff, right? If that’s the argument, then I’m with ya or anyone else. QB spot is a crapshoot. 

 

I choose to give Gruden and FO credit for playing a significant role in Kirk’s ascension. If Haskins has a chance to succeed history tells us Gruden (played a key role with Dalton as well) and company will pull it out of him. 

[mistertim]

22 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

Or any coaching staff, right? If that’s the argument, then I’m with ya or anyone else. QB spot is a crapshoot. 

 

I choose to give Gruden and FO credit for playing a significant role in Kirk’s ascension. If Haskins has a chance to succeed history tells us Gruden (played a key role with Dalton as well) and company will pull it out of him. 

 

I suppose that's true...I have no clue how Kirk would have developed under a different coaching staff or how he would have developed if he'd been a 1st round pick and was thrown to the wolves from the get-go.

 

Be that as it may, as far as it pertains to Haskins I just don't think it's really comparable. Given the vast differences in their situations essentially saying "Well these guys were able to contribute to Kirk's development so I don't see why they would fail with Haskins" is sort of a misleading argument (to note, I don't mean intentionally misleading on your part or anything). 

 

Either way, none of us have much choice other than to root for Dwayne to be great and take a wait and see approach. 

[SkinsFTW]

26 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 QB spot is a crapshoot. 

 

 

 

Not with the Redskins.

 

1st round drafted Qbs are always (since 1937) an airball.

 

Leaks indicate that Doofus Dan was probably involved with the pick... What could go wrong?

 

Or, is there a chance that this doesn't once again blow up in his face?

 

We've already seen this cartoon several times.

 

Is there an alternate ending?

[Anselmheifer]

I think we need to go the Indianapolis route and make the interior OL rock solid and add some more WR speed. If Martin is solid at LG, that will obviously help enormously. 

 

Does anyone else here think that if Haskins starts, the biggest determinant of his success might be the health of Chris Thompson?  Two years ago, Thompson was our offensive MVP when healthy. He's great in pass pro, and can provide a lot of that short pass/YAC action that we saw Haskins succeed with at OSU. 

[COWBOY-KILLA-]

Haskins is saying all the right things and he means it. I like his attitude and demeanor from his interviews, especially post draft. The day of the draft I think he was overwhelmed a little by the draft night spectacle. I do believe Jay knows how to work well with qb’s and get them to maximize their skills, I have no doubt.

 

Bottomline: I believe if a QB has the goods, by goods I mean a top 12 QB. A qb that gives you a chance to win your division every year, consistently make the playoffs and maybe make a super bowl run. He shows you that talent and those flashes from day one even in the worst of situations.  The talent shines through. Whether he starts day 1 or game 1 of his second season.  I don’t believe that giving him time to sit or throwing him into the fire will affect whether he ultimately succeeds in the league as a top 12 QB.   

If he’s got it we’ll know sooner than later. 

 

And that takes us back to the young man that looks ready to play the part. He seems adept in the film room, seems very coachable, wants to be great, and has earned everything he’s achieved till now. He’s got a lot going for him, it’s gonna be a fun ride to see if he’s the one.

 

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

9 hours ago, volsmet said:

 

 

Kirk’s is development was apparent in the steps Minnesota took after moving on from Case. 

 

That sound you heard was the point whizzing right over your head.  The point was the Redskins developed Kirk to the point where he was offered that contract, what he did after signing is irrelevant.  

 

As for Haskins I'm glad to see those clips of the intermediate passes, as well as his stats on the deep out.  I'm just saying in the 3 games I saw the throw was rarely attempted and his stat line against Michigan was deceiving due to YAC.  

 

 

[Llevron]

6 hours ago, SkinsFTW said:

Leaks indicate that Doofus Dan was probably involved

Is there an alternate ending?

 

You know hes involved with alot right?

[volsmet]

2 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

That sound you heard was the point whizzing right over your head.  The point was the Redskins developed Kirk to the point where he was offered that contract, what he did after signing is irrelevant.  

 

The fact that he showed he was not well developed is irrelevant. 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

10 hours ago, wit33 said:

 

Or any coaching staff, right? If that’s the argument, then I’m with ya or anyone else. QB spot is a crapshoot. 

 

I choose to give Gruden and FO credit for playing a significant role in Kirk’s ascension. If Haskins has a chance to succeed history tells us Gruden (played a key role with Dalton as well) and company will pull it out of him. 

 

Yeah I know some kill Jay's play calling.   I don't always love it myself though I think he's killer good at play design.   But I think he's really good at developing QBs.  And I trust his personnel acumen.  From what i can tell from training camp, Jay is very hands on with the Qbs. 

 

I got some concerns about Haskins and i am not prematurely celebrating the pick as a hit.   But if Jay is jazzed to develop him as most are saying who cover the team -- i am jazzed in kind.    It should be fun.  Hopefully it works out.  The fact that Jay is involved makes me trust the process more.  I know to some it's the reverse.    But I like the idea of Jay working with Haskins this off season. 

 

IMO we got zero shot at the big dance without a franchise QB.  So I am very intrigued as to how this plays out.  

[KDawg]

https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/05/13/dwayne-haskins-jay-gruden-washington-redskins-doug-baldwin-kam-chancellor-seahawks?utm_campaign=themmqb&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social

 

Has anyone seen this? This seems to say that Gruden was behind the Haskins pick. 

 

Granted, I assume people are going to come out and say, "well yeah, of course he's saying that now... They drafted him."

 

But the point is: Who the hell knows what happened behind closed doors pre-draft? There's stories pointing in every direction. Consider yourselves subverted

[Llevron]

11 minutes ago, KDawg said:

But the point is: Who the hell knows what happened behind closed doors pre-draft? There's stories pointing in every direction. Consider yourselves subverted

 

For sure. Its almost impossible to know what really happens. Even if someone knows the truth, how can you believe him when we know people are told lies for fun everyday. Just gotta ride the wave at this point. 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[Thinking Skins]

1 hour ago, KDawg said:

https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/05/13/dwayne-haskins-jay-gruden-washington-redskins-doug-baldwin-kam-chancellor-seahawks?utm_campaign=themmqb&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social

 

Has anyone seen this? This seems to say that Gruden was behind the Haskins pick. 

 

Granted, I assume people are going to come out and say, "well yeah, of course he's saying that now... They drafted him."

 

But the point is: Who the hell knows what happened behind closed doors pre-draft? There's stories pointing in every direction. Consider yourselves subverted

 

 

That's a great article. Back right before the draft or right after, I was having this conversation with SIP about how in or how out Jay was. The beat guys were giving the statement that Jay wasn't in on Haskins so if we drafted him (and traded up) it was a Dan and Bruce decision. But I always wondered what that meant. I have a quote somewhere in this thread where I directly ask that question. 

 

First, this is almost a direct opposite statement to what Cooley is saying, that OSU's offense is too simple. 

“Coach [Ryan] Day did a great job there with their offense,” Gruden said. “It’s not just an RPO-type game. They were doing all kinds of dropback and quick game and play-action, things that conceptually are very similar to what we do. So it was easy not just to watch him, but watch him progress.”

 

This article goes further than any other beat reporter has done because we have direct quotes from Gruden, and I really wonder how long he's been working on this piece because he's talking about stuff from back in March. Did Breer know he'd likely write this (possibly, if all went well) back then or was this put together since the draft? I love the direct quotes and the direct opinion from Gruden on Haskins. It really gives me some comfort in the relationship. 

 

“They’re all pretty confident kids, bright-eyed. I was impressed with the entire class,” Gruden said. “But [Haskins] has a demeanor and aura about him, kind of similar to Cam Newton coming out, just an aura of confidence. There’s something about him. When you’re around him, you feel like he’s got it, everything’s going to be O.K.—that he’s going to be successful, because he believes it.

 

I mean, I don't really care about the comparison but I like that last part of the quote. That's what I want to hear from my coach about his QB. Hopefully this continues to develop. 

[Llevron]

2 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

I mean, I don't really care about the comparison but I like that last part of the quote. That's what I want to hear from my coach about his QB. Hopefully this continues to develop. 

 

Agree. Cam almost wills his way to victory in some instances. And thats a mindset you want from any QB. Its exactly what I didnt like about Kirk. Now, cam doesnt have the tools to be special if you ask me. Hes physically hes a man among boys, but at his position you need more than that and unfortunately he hasn't really grown much from what I can see since hes been in the NFL. Haskins has the same "aura" according to Jay here, but his tool-set translates better for his position IMO. 

 

Now keep in mind I dont claim to know wft im talking about at all and Shanny was just as glowing about RG3 until the great (knee) collapse. So any or all of this **** can and will change if it doesnt work out. 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, KDawg said:

https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/05/13/dwayne-haskins-jay-gruden-washington-redskins-doug-baldwin-kam-chancellor-seahawks?utm_campaign=themmqb&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social

 

Has anyone seen this? This seems to say that Gruden was behind the Haskins pick. 

 

Granted, I assume people are going to come out and say, "well yeah, of course he's saying that now... They drafted him."

 

But the point is: Who the hell knows what happened behind closed doors pre-draft? There's stories pointing in every direction. Consider yourselves subverted

 

Yeah not just Jay every coach has to push a narrative that they were 100% on board with a pick.   That doesn't mean it's true or untrue.  Heck last year there was some talk that Jay wanted a different player than Payne in the first round but when Jay went to the podium -- Payne was his guy all along.  Doug later revealed that there wasn't full agreement in the draft room about that pick.  

 

My concern would only be if Jay is not on board now.  And the reporters who said that wasn't who Jay wanted at 15 are also saying Jay is all in to develop him and is jazzed.  So like I've been saying that's all that matters to me.  The only part of that story that concerns me is the Dan man crush element to this.   Breer was on Grant and Danny and I only caught the tail end of it but if I heard him right he did say something to the effect that Dan was big time into it.  So whether Dan pushed the pick or was just a passenger along for the ride -- either story is fine with me as long as it doesn't translate to Dan becomes buddies with Haskins -- aka Portis, RG3, etc.   The owner becoming pals with any player especially the QB doesn't always end well so hopefully Dan's learned a lesson on that front.

[KDawg]

Just now, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Yeah not just Jay every coach has to push a narrative that they were 100% on board with a pick.  Heck last year there was some talk that Jay wanted someone else other Payne in the first round but when Jay went to the podium -- Payne was his guy all along.  Doug later revealed that there wasn't full agreement in the draft room about that pick.  

 

My concern with Jay is only if he's not on board now.  And the reporters who said that wasn't who Jay wanted at 15 are also saying Jay is all in to develop him and is jazzed.  So like I've been saying that's all that matters to me.  The only part of that story that concerns me is the Dan man crush element to this.   Breer was on Grant and Danny and I only caught the tail in of it but if I heard him right he did say something to the effect that Dan was big time into it.  So whether Dan pushed the pick or was just a passenger along for the ride -- either story is fine with me as long as it doesn't translate to Dan becomes buddies with Haskins -- aka Portis, RG3, etc.  

 

I think you're covered in shadows brother. You trust the narrative, spun by the media, that Jay didn't want the guy, but you don't trust the narrative, spun by the media, that he does. 

 

These things are almost always more complex than any author knows or can convey. I think people worrying about whether or not he was Jay's guy are just giving themselves a headache unnecessarily. Whether it was Dan/Bruce/Kyle/Jay/O'Connell or whoever doesn't matter much. It's all conjecture. And there's tons of spin. 

[brettstr]

In My Opinion. Haskins does not appear to be the choice of Gruden. That in itself is a problem.   Gruden says all the nice things, but is Haskins his choice as QB?. it would be hard to imagine Gruden doing all the right things to bring Haskins along, IF thats not his guy. The mistake was either drafting Haskins or keeping Gruden on. News outlets are showing how cardinals coach and new qb are interacting. You can tell that's his guy. The bond and chemistry between Haskins and Gruden does seem to be there. Why give Gruden the chance to ruin this guy. In my opinion, Bruce and company should have moved on from Gruden and let his successor choose. If Haskins was the choice, live and die by it. Feels like a recipe for disaster AGAIN.

 

HTTR

[Skinsinparadise]

21 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

I think you're covered in shadows brother. You trust the narrative, spun by the media, that Jay didn't want the guy, but you don't trust the narrative, spun by the media, that he does. 

 

 

As for what I trust and what I don't trust from a media stand point, I got a simply formula -- what are MOST people saying and is there someone in that mix who i normally trust.  For me that guy is Keim.

 

I've been very consistent in making the point regardless of the narrative, i don't care about how much Jay was on board or not once I learned he's on board now -- regardless of the narrative from the past.    So I am not sure what point you are trying to make at least in the context of me?

 

21 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

These things are almost always more complex than any author knows or can convey. I think people worrying about whether or not he was Jay's guy are just giving themselves a headache unnecessarily. Whether it was Dan/Bruce/Kyle/Jay/O'Connell or whoever doesn't matter much. It's all conjecture. And there's tons of spin. 

 

As for myself, I agree but not because maybe they are right or wrong but because it doesn't matter if they are right or wrong.  The only element of the story that concerns me as I've stated many times now is the Dan really dug Haskins element of the story which I've yet to see disputed. And that's purely from the stand point of him interfering with Haskins development. But hopefully he's learned his lesson.  

 

If you want to make the case that everything and all things could be wrong?  Sure.  I think everybody here is reasonably intelligent and gets that.  Then if that's the rule of thumb then we probably shouldn't talk about any story from any reporter since they all have the potential to be wrong. 

[Burgundy Yoda]

20 minutes ago, brettstr said:

In My Opinion. Haskins does not appear to be the choice of Gruden. That in itself is a problem.   Gruden says all the nice things, but is Haskins his choice as QB?. it would be hard to imagine Gruden doing all the right things to bring Haskins along, IF thats not his guy. The mistake was either drafting Haskins or keeping Gruden on. News outlets are showing how cardinals coach and new qb are interacting. You can tell that's his guy. The bond and chemistry between Haskins and Gruden does seem to be there. Why give Gruden the chance to ruin this guy. In my opinion, Bruce and company should have moved on from Gruden and let his successor choose. If Haskins was the choice, live and die by it. Feels like a recipe for disaster AGAIN.

 

HTTR

Gruden has plenty of other players to evaluate. He would be doing the team a disservice by not doing so, we have QB coaches for a reason and they are here to... wait for it... coach our QBs, which includes Haskins believe it or not. 

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

As for what I trust and what I don't trust from a media stand point, I got a simply formula -- what are MOST people saying and is there someone in that mix who i normally trust.  For me that guy is Keim.

 

I've been very consistent in making the point regardless of the narrative, i don't care about how much Jay was on board or not once I learned he's on board now -- regardless of the narrative.    So I am not sure what point you are trying to make at least in the context of me?

 

 

 

I'm not speaking of your consistency at all - or your character, to be clear.

 

I am speaking to, largely, how you believe the narrative that fits your opinion. It's a human inclination to do so. And not reserved to you. I do it, too. We all do. 

 

And it's all worthy of discussion. But there are a lot of people adamant, one way or the other. One posted just above us.

 

The narrative is the Redskins FO is bad. A narrative that, up until VERY recently I totally concur with. And the story that Gruden was against that pick goes with it. So some people want to force that narrative (I'm not saying you are one of the people that wants to force it, I am saying that you may buy in more due to your biases).

 

I despise the way this franchise has been run. Especially under Allen. But this offseason has been much better than any previous. 

 

If I HAD to pick a "side" it would be that Gruden liked Haskins. I think they are using their bad rep to their advantage in this scenario. That's where my biases kick in.

 

In the end, I'm probably wrong, too.

 

 

[ixcuincle]

On 1067 the Junkies said Haskins had "red flags" because he brought himself, and his mother, a car after he was drafted. 

 

🤣

 

[Skinsinparadise]

28 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

I'm not speaking of your consistency at all - or your character, to be clear.

 

I am speaking to, largely, how you believe the narrative that fits your opinion. It's a human inclination to do so. And not reserved to you. I do it, too. We all do. 

 

 

I agree we all do that.  But I can change my opinions.   And try to keep an open mind.  I met Scot and thought he was a great guy.  I wasn't a Bruce guy to say the least.   But when the story broke out about Scot's firing -- i backed Bruce on it.  Why?  Too many reporters agreeing on the same thing and among them a reporter or two who typically has been right.  It wasn't what i wanted to hear.  But it pointed in that direction so i ran with it. 

 

I've made some big macro changes on my takes over the years on Dan, Bruce, Shanny, Jay, RG3 among other things.  Ego wise i am not vested in being right no matter what.  I used to have epic debates with Oldfan about Shanny and in the end I circled back and told him he was right, I was wrong.  

 

I deal with the media as part of my business.  And I think they can get a bit overly demonized and this is coming from someone who has been upset with reporters multiple times for covering my clients unfairly or in some cases my role for those clients.  As I stated in another thread, they are usually give or take 80% right on stories in cases where I am aware of the real facts from the inside.   Once in a blue moon they'd be 100% wrong.  Once in a blue moon 100% right.

 

It's difficult to get anything 100% right because sources will bring their own perspectives and agendas so even if you are getting the basic facts right there is a decent chance you are getting it with a spin of some sort that can lead you at least slightly astray.   But at the same time, it doesn't mean that everything they got is wrong just because part of the story is wrong.  That's why like I said from experience I'll listen to multiple narratives and see if they have anything in common while usually ignoring the conflicting parts of the stories. 

 

On a situation like Jay and Haskins.   Most say that wasn't Jay guy at 15.  But there are two conflicting narratives as for why.  1.  Jay doesn't love his play.  2.  He might have liked Haskins but preferred at pass rusher, instead.  There is a competing story that Haskins became Jay's guy later in the process especially after having dinner with him -- and heck who was the dude who brought up that competing narrative on this very thread including citing the sources -- me. 😀  So I try to be fair. 

 

But like I've been saying as I digested that Jay is excited about Haskins now -- that's all I care about.  Again that's a story that ALL reporters have said they heard so I find it believable as for Jay being all in -- that's the key for me.  And my one reservation is what I said Dan staying out of it.  Because again sticking to what ALL reporters are saying -- I've yet to see one narrative that doesn't include Dan's excitement about Haskins.  Unless am missing one?  When i can I'll listen to Breer's take on it from his 106.7 segment to see if he had another take.   And while i don't blame Dan for being excited.  I don't want him interfering with Haskins like he seemed to do at times with RG3.