FAREWELL to the NFL Dwayne Haskins QB Ohio State

[PiLfan]

 

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

I've changed my mind, I don't think we should put Haskins out against the historically awful Miami defense.

 

Has to happen:  Haskins plays this season to gauge where we are at QB entering 2020 off-season.

 

Scenario 1: We play Haskins immediately because the Dolphins defense might be the worst defense any QB faces at any point in their careers.

SoS by Y/P Allowed: 32 (MIA), 4 (SFO), 3 (MIN), 2 (BUF), ...BYE..., 13, 18, 6, 17, 11, 30, 7

SoS by DVOA: 32, 2, 4, 3, ...BYE...,10, 12, 8, 9, 6, 23, 19

 

While this is tempting to go against Miami.  The next 3 opponents right after have been playing amazing defense.  That's a murderers row.

 

Scenario 2: We have Haskins avoid that SFO/MIN/BUF Gauntlet.  When is the next best opportunity for him to play?

 

Unfortunately there is no stretch of bad defenses on our schedule.  The only below average (or bad) defense belongs to the New York Giants in Week 16.  Everyone else is above-average to average defensively.  Let's avoid the toughest stretch of defenses and then throw him in.

 

Haskins starts Week 11 against the New York Jets.  We get 7 games to see what's up.  He also has the BYE week to prepare for his first start.

[CowboyKillerz]

Jets are not an easy D by any stretch either... But I agree. Boys gotta learn from mistakes and see his tape... Has to have something to grow upon

[mojo]

Anybody hear Josh Norman on the Rich Eison show today?  Rich asked Josh about the reports that Dwayne might be a year or two away from playing and Josh did nothing to squash those rumors.  Basically said some players can grasp NFL concepts right away and it takes other longer.  Said It’s taking Dwayne longer than most to transition.

[DJHJR86]

2 minutes ago, mojo said:

Anybody hear Josh Norman on the Rich Eison show today?  Rich asked Josh about the reports about Dwayne might be a year or two away from playing and Josh did nothing to squash those rumors.  Basically said some players can grasp NFL concepts right away and it takes other longer.  Said It’s taking Dwayne longer than most to transition.

 

Clearly Josh Norman is only out to sabotage Haskins career because he didn't want him on the team.

[Sonny9TD]

1 hour ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

Clearly Josh Norman is only out to sabotage Haskins career because he didn't want him on the team.

 

Tasty sarcasm and clearly true.

3 hours ago, KDawg said:

 

 

[Llevron]

I can totally see us drafting another QB next year and neither working out cause they will be indoctrinated by the damn good culture here. 

[Boss_Hogg]

A 1st round pick (15) struggling this much in practice is alarming. Guess those reports are true that Dan meddled in the draft and picked his new BFF. 

[Renegade7]

We knew he was a project and mad hes a project.  Typical.

[SemperFi Skins]

14 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

We knew he was a project and mad hes a project.  Typical.

 

I'd argue that though:

 

My belief was we drafted him with the idea that we had a competent QB ahead of him to take the reigns and hopefully win us some games with this "playoff caliber" team on paper, thus, allowing him to sit and learn. I don't like the term project for a first round QB who was arguably the top talent at QB coming out.

 

Now that we know the state of the franchise and all else is out the window, you need to be able to take off the bubble wrap and see what you have in the guy. Learn on the fly so-to-speak. The other two QB's are obviously not getting it done and most likely won't be here unless in a backup role moving forward. 

 

We also have an opportunity ahead of us for a top-5 pick which could be another QB if we don't like what we see or just value someone that much higher, i.e. Tua or Herbert, etc.

 

My 2 cents...

[Sonny9TD]

4 hours ago, KDawg said:

 

Haven't watched Purdy much, so I'll reserve comment... I have some questions about Tua, too, but I also see why he's being touted a big deal. Will know more when I watch more film.

 

Haven't watched a lot of Costello, either.

 

But Lawrence is not an out of nowhere prospect. He's the top prospect in the 2021 draft

 

 

Take a look and tell me what you think of them. I/m good either way.   K.J. Costello Stanford.    Brock Purdy   Iowa State I pasted the address but the video popped up instead. A great mid round pick he would be, I don't want to paste KJ Costello since that might be a video instead of a link too. I like the Brock kid a lot though. The pass at 1:38 is tight and sweet. His arm strength is just enough to make it. Honestly his arm strength is at the minimum that will make it in the NFL but it is strong enough to play. I would consider his arm strength the threshold of strong enough. Id rather have his talent in awareness, body movement and total game  than a cannon that doesn't have the agility or play making ability. Thing is although this kid might be a 3rd rounder maybe later i still think he is better than Haskins. I'd rather have this kid leading my offense than Haskins

 

 

 

 

Quote

 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

12 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

 

Mate, you've done F all to warrant the outright starting gig so frustration shouldn't come into it. 

 

You all start with a clean slate under this Coach so do everything they ask of you right, ALL the time, day in, day out, and impress him enough to EARN the right to lead this team and not have this discussion. 

 

Hail. 

[Skinsinparadise]

7 minutes ago, Gibbs Hog Heaven said:

 

Mate, you've done F all to warrant the outright starting gig so frustration shouldn't come into it. 

 

You all start with a clean slate under this Coach so do everything they ask of you right, ALL the time, day in, day out, and impress him enough to EARN the right to lead this team and not have this discussion. 

 

Hail. 

 

Keenum according to some who cover the team was really upset about his benching in NY.  They've also said he can be a feisty-sarcastic dude sometimes.  So it paints a picture to me that he's not a happy camper right now.  But agree he hasn't proven squat heck ditto even if there wasn't a new HC. 

[Sonny9TD]

Redskins take QB Dwayne Haskins at No. 15 overall

Haskins hasn't looked good in his brief relief playing time. In Week 4 against the Giants, he wasn't ready to play, going for 9-of-17 for 107 yards and three INTs, adding up to a dismal 32.8 passer rating.

The Ohio State product had a great final season in Columbus, but coming in, there was a thought he needed great coaching — to which he is very receptive — to consistently improve. While the arm talent and intelligence are there, the accuracy, decision-making and pocket awareness are far short of viable NFL levels at the moment.

That said, Haskins' shaky debut isn't the biggest concern. It's more the fact the Redskins are mismanaging his drafting early. They attached him to an offensive-minded head coach, Jay Gruden, who has since been fired. They are reluctant to let Haskins learn on the fly with needed in-game reps now, choosing instead to stick with the low upside of either Case Keenum and Colt McCoy in desperate search for a win at 0-5.

Now it will get worse, because interim coach Bill Callahan is calling for a conservative, run-heavy approach, rather than letting Haskins take his lumps and learn from mistakes under first-year offensive coordinator Kevin O'Connell.

Let's not write off Haskins as a bust now, but let's accept the real initial problem is that Washington had no real plan in place for accelerating his development. 

9 minutes ago, Gibbs Hog Heaven said:

 

Mate, you've done F all to warrant the outright starting gig so frustration shouldn't come into it. 

 

You all start with a clean slate under this Coach so do everything they ask of you right, ALL the time, day in, day out, and impress him enough to EARN the right to lead this team and not have this discussion. 

 

Hail. 

 

Totally agree

[Veryoldschool]

2 hours ago, mojo said:

Anybody hear Josh Norman on the Rich Eison show today?  Rich asked Josh about the reports that Dwayne might be a year or two away from playing and Josh did nothing to squash those rumors.  Basically said some players can grasp NFL concepts right away and it takes other longer.  Said It’s taking Dwayne longer than most to transition.

 

This is not encouraging.  He only played 13 games in college did so for a team that had a huge favorable talent differential with all but a couple of opponents, it has to be a huge step up from the simple offense he ran at OSU to Gruden's WCO against NFL defenses, but I don't want to even think about Haskins being a bust.

[MartinC]

I’ve been seeing some talk about us taking a QB high again next year. New coach - new QB seems to be the thinking, plus if we are picking top 5 as seems very likely right now if there is a QB there you rate over Haskins you take your man because you might not be picking that high again the next year.

 

I can see some logic to the second part of the argument. But not the first - if you drafted Haskins because you believe he has the ability to become a very good starting QB (and I agree with that) then part of your hiring process for the new HC is someone committed to working to develop Haskins and a front office committed to using draft capital and free agency to put the pieces around Haskins to help him be successful.

 

if we use a high pick on another QB next year it’s yet another organisational failure.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

11 minutes ago, MartinC said:

if we use a high pick on another QB next year it’s yet another organisational failure.

It’s already an organizational failure to put themselves in a position to make Haskins development a requirement for the gig.  It limits the already shallow talent pool they have to hire from.  

[DJHJR86]

14 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Keenum according to some who cover the team was really upset about his benching in NY.  They've also said he can be a feisty-sarcastic dude sometimes.  So it paints a picture to me that he's not a happy camper right now.  But agree he hasn't proven squat heck ditto even if there wasn't a new HC. 

 

In Keenum's defense, he's been the best QB on this roster and I'd be pissed off too if I got benched for a rookie who is nowhere near ready and for a guy who is now 7-21 as a starter in the NFL.

[MartinC]

14 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

It’s already an organizational failure to put themselves in a position to make Haskins development a requirement for the gig.  It limits the already shallow talent pool they have to hire from.  

I disagree. 
 

Haskins is not some left field pick who has marginal physical ability. He has everything you need to be a very good NFL QB - if he can process information quickly and handle the mental aspect needed. Which is not a given and is what sinks many good QB prospects. That and the organisational failure to put a good supporting cast and good coaching around them.

 

Which brings us to the Redskins.

 

We just invested a first round pick in Haskins. A reasonably high first round pick.

 

We likely have an opportunity here to take either the best non QB on the board (Chase Young) and help a young QB with a stronger defense, or replace Trent with Andrew Thomas or line up Jerry Jeudy opposite Terry McLaurin and have the best young receiving tandem in the league.

 

Finding a quality coach to be part of developing the team within that overall strategy of building around Haskins should be the plan. It might not work - but that’s the logical sensible plan.

 

Or you could draft Tua, throw him into the mix and change tack again. Having no direction and constantly making ‘pivots’ is the sign of a failing organisation. 

[KDawg]

53 minutes ago, MartinC said:

I’ve been seeing some talk about us taking a QB high again next year. New coach - new QB seems to be the thinking, plus if we are picking top 5 as seems very likely right now if there is a QB there you rate over Haskins you take your man because you might not be picking that high again the next year.

 

I can see some logic to the second part of the argument. But not the first - if you drafted Haskins because you believe he has the ability to become a very good starting QB (and I agree with that) then part of your hiring process for the new HC is someone committed to working to develop Haskins and a front office committed to using draft capital and free agency to put the pieces around Haskins to help him be successful.

 

if we use a high pick on another QB next year it’s yet another organisational failure.

 

I disagree. Regardless of why you drafted Haskins, if he doesn't show he has the tools to be the guy, then you move on.

 

I could be on an island here, but isn't it alarming at all that people are suggesting that Haskins isn't playing simply because he's not ready? I mean, how far below par do you have to be to be considered unable to play? Yet everyone keeps saying the same things over and over and over again. It really could be that he's just in way over his head at this point. And there's no telling if that will go away or not (unless we see him out there this year and see the strides). Why would anyone want to pass on a possible generational talent in the draft in favor of developing a guy over the next 2-3 years just to see what he has? Haskins was drafted in the first round, but he needs to be treated as a mid round project, in my opinion. Hedge your bets, not go all in on a middling hand in a big money game. 

 

Maybe that doesn't mean that he can't develop and you throw him out. Maybe you keep him on the off chance he develops and then use him or a newer QB as trade bait later. Maybe you trade him now if a team is willing to give up enough for him. I don't know. It's too early to say regardless... But I think just saying, "we're not going to draft a QB, when we could be at the top of the draft because we drafted Dwayne Haskins" is a mistake. No one, not on person that I've seen, has said he is a transcendent talent at the QB position. I personally like his upside. But I don't see elite, top end talent. 

 

As far as I'm concerned this team is 0-5. There isn't a single position on the field that isn't up for grabs now or in the future.

13 minutes ago, MartinC said:

He has everything you need to be a very good NFL QB - if he can process information quickly and handle the mental aspect needed. Which is not a given and is what sinks many good QB prospects. That and the organisational failure to put a good supporting cast and good coaching around them.

 

 

Everything you need to be a very good NFL QB includes the ability to process information quickly and make good throws on a consistent basis. Two things he has yet to do.

 

We just invested a first round pick in Haskins. A reasonably high first round pick.

 

You don't compound one mistake by saying right off the bat, that you are doubling down on that mistake (if it is one)

 

We likely have an opportunity here to take either the best non QB on the board (Chase Young) and help a young QB with a stronger defense, or replace Trent with Andrew Thomas or line up Jerry Jeudy opposite Terry McLaurin and have the best young receiving tandem in the league.

 

This absolutely needs to be weighed in the conversation. Agreed!

 

Finding a quality coach to be part of developing the team within that overall strategy of building around Haskins should be the plan. It might not work - but that’s the logical sensible plan.

 

I like the first part, but the idea that they have to build around Haskins is a colossal mistake. Build around Haskins if you like him? Sure. Mandate? Bad move.

 

Or you could draft Tua, throw him into the mix and change tack again. Having no direction and constantly making ‘pivots’ is the sign of a failing organisation.

 

It's a failed organization. Starting over isn't an issue.  

 

[MartinC]

Nothing that has happened with Haskins so far should be a surprise, or alarming. It was known he was raw with only a year of starting experience and would need time to develop. And here we are - taking time. Unless something is happening we are not aware of that drastically changes the teams evaluation of Haskins changing QB again just puts you a further year back in the teams development and is yet another signal that there is no plan here. You are just throwing darts blindfold and hoping to hit a treble.

[KDawg]

11 minutes ago, MartinC said:

Nothing that has happened with Haskins so far should be a surprise, or alarming. It was known he was raw with only a year of starting experience and would need time to develop. And here we are - taking time. Unless something is happening we are not aware of that drastically changes the teams evaluation of Haskins changing QB again just puts you a further year back in the teams development and is yet another signal that there is no plan here. You are just throwing darts blindfold and hoping to hit a treble.

 

You can't look at Haskins in a vacuum in this situation.

 

It's not about Haskins. It's about the Washington Redskins. 

 

Haskins could turn into a good QB, and without us actually being in the room for the Haskins convos we can only speculate (and we would have a better base for conversation).

 

But when you drafted Haskins, you basically doubled down on your head coach. Developmental project means your head coach needs to stay on. One of my biggest fears is that the plan was to keep Jay, but his lackadaisical nonchalant attitude accelerated the plan to release him and the team is actually going to ride with Callahan moving forward to keep on the Haskins train.

 

To me it's not even about Haskins. The kid wound up in an absolutely awful spot. Lame duck HC. Lame duck GM. Lame duck everything. 

 

My opinions aren't based on Haskins potential or the fact that he's a project. I don't think Haskins is doomed to be a failure in the NFL. It's too early for that. But this organization is akin to the plague at the moment. Drafting a QB to develop when you don't have a plan in this damn good culture is a very, very large mistake. 

 

I like some things I see from Dwayne. I really, really do. But A) I don't see him as a top end elite franchise QB (so if you get a chance at one, you are still in the market), B ) I'm not sold on his attitude or abilities at this point (he's young and maturing, I refuse to count HIM out for that), C) This franchise is in a place where we may not be able to afford to develop a QB. 

 

I'm on board with whatever plan a new HC and new GM (  ) come up with. Even if it includes Haskins. Despite opinion here, I'm not a Haskins hater. I just don't think this situation is good for Dwayne Haskins or the Redskins. Our GM made sure of that.

 

If we had a new HC and regime in place going into this year, I'd probably have a totally different point of view on Dwayne. You can develop a QB that is paired with a HC that was on board with the decision to draft him.

 

But Haskins is a Bruce Allen project, in my opinion. And Bruce Allen has to go.

 

A new GM can decide if Haskins is worth keeping and developing, and he could be... But I'm more than okay with that decision being in a competent football person's hands.

[MartinC]

9 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

You can't look at Haskins in a vacuum in this situation.

 

It's not about Haskins. It's about the Washington Redskins. 

 

Haskins could turn into a good QB, and without us actually being in the room for the Haskins convos we can only speculate (and we would have a better base for conversation).

 

Agree we don’t know what’s going on in the meeting rooms or in practice (really). If the team decide based on what they see they made a huge mistake then sure cut bait.. Dont throw good money and time after bad. But I think it is awfully awfully early to make that call. If the team still trust the judgement they made in drafting him unless you give him time, opportunity and put a structure and talent around him we will never know if he is a good QB.

 

Quote

 

But when you drafted Haskins, you basically doubled down on your head coach. Developmental project means your head coach needs to stay on. One of my biggest fears is that the plan was to keep Jay, but his lackadaisical nonchalant attitude accelerated the plan to release him and the team is actually going to ride with Callahan moving forward to keep on the Haskins train.

 

To me it's not even about Haskins. The kid wound up in an absolutely awful spot. Lame duck HC. Lame duck GM. Lame duck everything. 

Here I absolutely agree with you. I have said several times before that drafting a rookie QB high with a coach who had to win to keep his job was an organisational failure. If your draft evaluation and plan said we need to take this QB high you then either had to extend Gruden or fire him before the season.
 

There had to be a coaching staff in place given the mandate and time to develop Haskins and a front office plan to develop the roster around him.

 

My position is that should be the plan now. 

[KDawg]

4 minutes ago, MartinC said:

 

My position is that should be the plan now. 

 

We are aligned seemingly in most of this conversation except for here.

 

I don't think you saddle a new HC and new GM (  ) with mandated baggage. 

 

The process for hiring should be (for both positions)

 

1. A solid knowledge of the game

2. A short-term and long-term plan

3. Respect from players and coaches league wide

 

Obviously there are many more intricate details there, but in the interest of short and sweet...

 

Once you make those hires, you have those guys sit down and decide on Haskins vs. a New QB vs. a huge draft haul vs. Other options.

 

The issue with all of this is that Allen is going to still be here. I just don't see him being removed. Therefore Haskins will be a mandate and I think THAT is the sign of a terrible organization that hasn't learned. 

 

Mandate keeping, say, Aaron Rodgers with a coaching change. Yeah. Absolutely.

 

Dwayne Haskins? Eh.