Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Welcome to the NFL Dwayne Haskins QB Ohio State


Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

For me he's been fine.  For a coach in my book its not about how good does the coach speak come off to fans.  If some fans think its a mixed message and they aren't buying it -- that's fine, its up each individual to take it in anyway they'd like.  The key is the locker room.  And at least based on what some beat guys have heard and some based on players comments -- they love Rivera.

 

 

You remain in the same position on Ron the day of the hire to today? 
 

I’m still hanging onto what you appear to be as well and that is his relationship with the players, but realizing this will be a ride with Ron that is filled with by seat of you pants decision making on game days. To be honest, that doesn’t mean it will be bad on game days, and he’s been able to experience some success coaching that way, but everything he does now carries a different weight being the leader of all things Washington Football. 
 

What if his rationale for picking players and team building (which he’s never done on his own) mirrors what we’ve seen on game days and post game pressers?

 

No conclusions made at all, just engaging in discussion while in the process of learning more about how Ron operates.

 

Either way, as always, it will come down to him finding a franchise QB lol

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I am in the camp of I do not take the win the division stuff literally and Rivera was just giving a nice excuse as coaches tend to do for the benching. 

 

How is saying you can't win the division with Haskins at QB considered "nice"? lol..."Nice" would have been saying he still needs some seasoning and making him the #2 QB. I don't think being nice played much of a role in things.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, wit33 said:

 

 

You remain in the same position on Ron the day of the hire to today? 

 

yep.

 

3 hours ago, wit33 said:

 

I’m still hanging onto what you appear to be as well and that is his relationship with the players, but realizing this will be a ride with Ron that is filled with by seat of you pants decision making on game days. To be honest, that doesn’t mean it will be bad on game days, and he’s been able to experience some success coaching that way, but everything he does now carries a different weight being the leader of all things Washington Football. 

 

My only issue with him on game day is clock management.   But ditto, Jay, shanny, Gibbs, Zorn.  Weird none of our head coaches have been good at it.

 

3 hours ago, wit33 said:

 

What if his rationale for picking players and team building (which he’s never done on his own) mirrors what we’ve seen on game days and post game pressers?

 

No conclusions made at all, just engaging in discussion while in the process of learning more about how Ron operates.

 

Either way, as always, it will come down to him finding a franchise QB lol

 

I debated you among others about Bruce on the GM thread.  I thought he did a lousy job.  And I do think a coach centric model where kyle is the defacto personnel guy but Rivera helps provide a shopping list of wants and maintains final say while isn't my preferred method -- It's still to me a mile better than having a politician running personnel coupled with the owner behind the scenes.  This new situtation is an upgrade IMO.

 

Would i prefer Kyle to have the title and all the power?  Sure.  But for some of the Haskins has been wronged crowd..where were you guys on the GM thread for years when we talked a ton about structure?   Kyle according to multiple sources didn't want Haskins at 15 or grade him as a first rounder.  So if he were in charge, the outcome here would likely be the same. 

 

I'd put money if there is anything to the complaints about Haskins intangibles, having a GM type in charge (aside from Louis Reddick) would result in a similar outcome with Haskins. 

 

 

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

How is saying you can't win the division with Haskins at QB considered "nice"? lol..."Nice" would have been saying he still needs some seasoning and making him the #2 QB. I don't think being nice played much of a role in things.

 

If he said what others leaked it would be something like:  I don't think the dude is a franchise QB, I've seen enough already where we'd be wasting our time experimenting further and I think the dude is immature and doesn't work hard enough so I am ready to move on because he's not the guy. 

 

If that's what Rivera truly feels about it as some say then yeah that would be much nastier for him to say what I did above then:  we have an opportunity to win, he didn't have a fair shake in the off season, he has an NFL arm and I haven't given up on him.

 

I am not the only dude who thinks Rivera has been soft peddliling.  Other observers have said the same.  If you disagree, cool. But i am not exactly advancing some wild and crazy opinion. 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

If he said what others leaked it would be something like:  I don't think the dude is a franchise QB, I've seen enough already where we'd be wasting our time experimenting further and I think the dude is immature and doesn't work hard enough so I am ready to move on because he's not the guy. 

 

If that's what Rivera truly feels about it as some say then yeah that would be much nastier for him to say what I did above then:  we have an opportunity to win, he didn't have a fair shake in the off season, he has an NFL arm and I haven't giving up on him.

 

I am not the only dude who thinks Rivera has been soft peddliling.  Other observers have said the same.  If you disagree, cool. But i am not exactly advancing some wild and crazy opinion. 

 

If I disagree?...to mimic you, I am not the only dude who thinks Rivera's explanations are anything but "nice" ways of putting things. Other observers have said the same. It comes down to not being unnecessarily negative is not the same as being "nice". If anything, Rivera has given mixed signals and confusing explanations for a bunch of his decisions all season. That has also been observed by other dudes, especially in the media. You do that enough, and people start doubting all your explanations as being genuine. Either that, or start wondering if you're completely there.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I am not the only dude who thinks Rivera has been soft peddliling.  Other observers have said the same.  If you disagree, cool. But i am not exactly advancing some wild and crazy opinion. 


Jumping in here, but it’s wild, I feel he’s been the direct opposite of “soft peddling” with Haskins. I don’t even fall on side of it being wrong, this is actually a decision he’s been most transparent about.  He essentially put the responsibility of the teams play on Haskins in one presser while propping up his OC who’s been criticized by every football person you can find discussing the topic.
 

Perspective may have something to do with it, due to Turner being his choice and being a direct reflection on Rivera and the opposite is true for Haskins. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, wit33 said:


Jumping in here, but it’s wild, I feel he’s been the direct opposite of “soft peddling” with Haskins. I don’t even fall on side of it being wrong, this is actually a decision he’s been most transparent about.  He essentially put the responsibility of the teams play on Haskins in one presser while propping up his OC who’s been criticized by every football person you can find discussing the topic.
 

Perspective may have something to do with it, due to Turner being his choice and being a direct reflection on Rivera and the opposite is true for Haskins. 

 

I would call some of his comments after benching Haskins to be passive-aggressive, basically in terms of calling out Haskins' agent for his tweet without directly doing so.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

If I disagree?...to mimic you, I am not the only dude who thinks Rivera's explanations are anything but "nice" ways of putting things. 

 

I know.  But you are the dude who came after my position not vice versa.  So the tit for tat stuff isn't really on point.  There is certainly a mixed opinion among fans about Rivera's handling of things.  But I explained why I don't give a crap about it in a different post.

 

11 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

 That has also been observed by other dudes, especially in the media. You do that enough, and people start doubting all your explanations as being genuine. Either that, or start wondering if you're completely there.

 

True with some.  Not true with others.

 

Also some big time Haskins guys like Sheehan and Galdi said absolutely you bench Haskins if the intangible questions are true.  And to Sheehan and Galdi's credit they seem to be warming up to be wrong about Haskins and agree that guys like Keim, don't make up crap so they buy into these questions about his intangibles now.  I am not saying Galdi or Sheehan are right.    But saying there is indeed mixed views with the media, mixed view with fans.  My take on it is so what?  If we had behind the scenes mutiny like what's going on in Dallas with players complaining I'd feel differently.

 

22 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

Perspective may have something to do with it, due to Turner being his choice and being a direct reflection on Rivera and the opposite is true for Haskins. 

 

He's the coach.  His perspective and predispositions about Turner and Haskins are relevant and fair.   And whose to say he is wrong.  I know you were somewhat of a fan at least relatively speaking of the previous adminstration, Bruce and Jay.  i didn't dislike Jay the way same here did.  I didn't though care for Bruce.  But Jay and his regime according to people who cover the team had smilar concerns about Haskins.  Rivera isn't on some wild ride here.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

He's the coach.  His perspective and predispositions about Turner and Haskins are relevant and fair.   And whose to say he is wrong.

 

Fair enough.
 

Would you agree Turners offense has been criticized a great deal from those on both sides of the Haskins debate?

 

I have not reached a conclusion on any of it just engaging discussion during the process. I still can understand the macro plan is going to take a while for Ron. It’s just some choppy waters, due to it being about as bad as one can imagine Ron starting out, but he’s COMPLETELY comfortable in letting us know it will take and while and this a rebuilding year when convenient. 
 

Quote

I know you were somewhat of a fan at least relatively speaking of the previous adminstration, Bruce and Jay.  i didn't dislike Jay the way same here did.  I didn't though care for Bruce.  But Jay and his regime according to people who cover the team had smilar concerns about Haskins.  Rivera isn't on some wild ride here.  

 

 

Let me know when Jay finds a QB he does like lol other than Mccoy. 

 

I was always in between 40-60% in my support of Bruce and company. I valued being in the hunt for playoffs and watching meaningful games in November and December. I absolutely hate and get extremely bored with years like last year and now this season. As a fan, it provides me zero value and there’s no guarantees being horrible this year or as Ron would call it, a rebuilding year is going to net any real value in return. It will be celebrated if Ron gets the team in playoff contention next year (me included), but it won’t lessen or make forget the value of past seasons being in contention. 
 

Bruce and company failed to get beyond being a consistent playoff contender, that’s damn hard to do, hopefully Ron gets the team there. My guess it will take hitting on a franchise QB to sustain any success to become SB contender. If that happens that FO structure will be renowned here as the way to do things. 
 

Admittedly though, I had very little emotion tied to how Bruce treated others or the way he lives his life. Just the same as if he was great dude and kind to people, it impacts zero as a fan or my everyday life. This perspective I realize provided me the necessary armor to overlook many things. 

Edited by wit33
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wit33 said:

 

Fair enough.
 

Would you agree Turners offense has been criticized a great deal from those on both sides of the Haskins debate?

 

I've ultimately rewatched games with coaches tape and made up my own mind about playcallers.   In a few weeks, I'll have time to land on my own opinion versus relying on others.  I respect Cooley's opinion the most among talking heads as for offense.  Relevant to this conversation -- Cooley thinks Turner has been hit and miss.  Some games he really liked his schemes.   Other games he hated it.  He also has suggested there is plenty to see on tape already that Haskins doesn't have it and feels like Rivera is soft peddling the benching with the we want to win now rap. 

 

Back to Turner.  Jay's ability to scheme up guys getting open was an under appreciated IMO talent here.  Jay and Scott on the surface seem to have opposite strengths and weaknesses.  Scott is good on the analytics side of things, when to call runs and passes.  Dudes like Warren Sharp loved the hire.  His weakness seems to be play design.  Jay was the opposite. 

 

Most on this thread are using Scott Turner as part of the excuse for Haskins failures.  That's my only issue with the Turner criticism.  My thing with Haskins is if the dude isn't accurate and his intangibles are in question, it makes all the sense in the world to move on.  You can have two problem at once.

 

As for Rivera, if Turner doesn't improve, i'd presume he's smart enough to move on.  He openly criticized Turner for his play calling in game 1.  

 

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

 

I was always in between 40-60% in my support of Bruce and company. I valued being in the hunt for playoffs and watching meaningful games in November and December. I absolutely hate and get extremely bored with years like last year and now this season. As a fan, it provides me zero value and there’s no guarantees being horrible this year or as Ron would call it, a rebuilding year is going to net any real value in return. It will be celebrated if Ron gets the team in playoff contention next year (me included), but it won’t lessen or make forget the value of past seasons being in contention. 
 

Bruce and company failed to get beyond being a consistent playoff contender, that’s damn hard to do, hopefully Ron gets the team there. My guess it will take hitting on a franchise QB to sustain any success to become SB contender. If that happens that FO structure will be renowned here as the way to do things. 
 

Admittedly though, I had very little emotion tied to how Bruce treated others or the way he lives his life. Just the same as if he was great dude and kind to people, it impacts zero as a fan or my everyday life. This perspective I realize provided me the necessary armor to overlook many things. 

 

They were in the hunt when they had competent QB play and weren't when they didn't have it.    Rivera strikes me a lose the battle to win the war type.  He'd be a fool to tell the world what he was doing and why.    I don't think its crazy for him to think in a season which he's said multiple times is a rebuilding year that indeed that's the objective.  He said even recently this is a rebuilding club.  Our executives typically don't say that. 

 

Some keep harping on his comments about win now in the context of Haskins -- everything else though screams rebuild, rebuild, rebuild.  To me (and its not just some obscure opinion) the win now is BS soft peddle Haskins benching rhetoric.  Some want to believe otherwise and that's cool.   But I am just explaining why for me there is nothing mixed about his rhetoric.  If you follow his actions to me his goals are clear as day -- build a culture and see who should be here in the future and who needs to go.  And if they can get a franchise QB in the draft that would likely turn this team around. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

I would call some of his comments after benching Haskins to be passive-aggressive, basically in terms of calling out Haskins' agent for his tweet without directly doing so.

 

The agent question was brought up to him, he didn't talk about it unsolicited.    I am not a big Haskins guy as for the player but i like the dude so nope I wouldn't enjoy a direct lambasting of Haskins from Rivera ala what Jay did to RG3 in 2014.

Edited by Skinsinparadise
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/18/2020 at 9:43 PM, skinbuck said:

Not what I was implying. 

 

My point was that peoples’ reactions here about 2 very similar performances from 2 individuals seem so heavily impacted by their own unconscious biases. And this is totally setting aside the purported off-field or intangibles issues displayed by one of them 

 

 

Not really, Haskins can't throw a football properly. A Spade is a Spade. There is no bias, that is what it boils down to for me. Haskins has a terrible throwing motion, Allen looks like he can throw the ball properly. Both are young, Haskins got his shot, now its Allen's turn. If both suck, you move on

 

I loved RG3, but didn't take long that he wasn't going to be a pocket passer overnight like he envisioned. Cousins was better at that, which is saying a lot because cousins sucks. I mean we did well with a 4th round pick, but the guy is like Kyle Allen to me.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, KDawg said:


Only thing we’ll get when Tua plays well is people here saying, “Young stinks! Why didn’t we take Tu’a?!?”

 

Then I’ll be like, “well, some of us wondered if we should consider Tua at 2... but we didn’t and still don’t think Young stinks... and those of us that floated that possibility got lambasted by the ES contingency”


:ols:

 

I was strong on the Tua train and got blasted "but we have Haskins!" 

 

Yeah well the Cardinals must be idiots for what they did with Rosen....

 

I like Chase Young, but still would have taken Tua 100%, if we thought his health wasn't really a concern. 

Edited by Skins199021
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Skins199021 said:

I was strong on the Tua train and got blasted "but we have Haskins!" 

 

Yeah well the Cardinals must be idiots for what they did with Rosen....

 

I like Chase Young, but still would have taken Tua 100%, if we thought his health wasn't really a concern. 


His health is what made me favor Young. I thought about Herbert but wasn’t sure he was going to be worth taking over Young. But I knew the Bengals liked him and after watching him a bunch I liked him... but Young or him was a tough sell. Not sure I was wrong... who knows how Herbert would be doing here. Maybe the same, maybe worse...

 

To be clear, I was happy with Young. He’s a great player. But I knew Young wasn’t going to be Superman.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, KDawg said:


His health is what made me favor Young. I thought about Herbert but wasn’t sure he was going to be worth taking over Young. But I knew the Bengals liked him and after watching him a bunch I liked him... but Young or him was a tough sell. Not sure I was wrong... who knows how Herbert would be doing here. Maybe the same, maybe worse...

 

To be clear, I was happy with Young. He’s a great player. But I knew Young wasn’t going to be Superman.

Yeah I remember these discussions now, most thought Young was this infallible specimen and I kept saying I don't see him as a better prospect than Clowney coming out. I got hammered.

 

I really do like Young, but my point would be, yeah Watt, Donald, etc are great, but their teams didn't do **** until they had a QB. 

 

I think Tua is going to be very good, I would have sat him out this whole year Mahomes style.

 

Herbert is so damn good, F the Chargers. Brees - Rivers - Herbert... but damn I swear they always have multiple stars out for the season

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Skins199021 said:

Yeah I remember these discussions now, most thought Young was this infallible specimen and I kept saying I don't see him as a better prospect than Clowney coming out. I got hammered.

 

Just for score keeping purposes...


I still think he is infallible and a specimen and that he will prove to be a much better sack artist than Clowney has ever been. 

 

1 hour ago, Skins199021 said:

 

I really do like Young, but my point would be, yeah Watt, Donald, etc are great, but their teams didn't do **** until they had a QB.


JJ Watt won defensive MVP (20.5 sacks) in his second year and the Texans went 12-4 with Matt Schaub. QB is king, but exceptions to the rule exist. 

 

Here’s to hoping Young has an exceptional year in the future that allows him to be the exception. Or... the team hits on a franchise QB this upcoming draft and the two most important positions are locked in for 10 years. One can hope. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, wit33 said:

 

Just for score keeping purposes...


I still think he is infallible and a specimen and that he will prove to be a much better sack artist than Clowney has ever been. 

 


JJ Watt won defensive MVP (20.5 sacks) in his second year and the Texans went 12-4 with Matt Schaub. QB is king, but exceptions to the rule exist. 

 

Here’s to hoping Young has an exceptional year in the future that allows him to be the exception. Or... the team hits on a franchise QB this upcoming draft and the two most important positions are locked in for 10 years. One can hope. 

 

Yeah i am in the Young superman category still.  He got about a 90 rating from PFF in the last game which is borderline perfect.  Sacks aren't everything for pass rushers, that INT that happened on Sunday was all him.  The groin injury I think is slowing him down some. 

 

I would have gone Tua in the last draft just because Qbs are the top position  if I was confident about his health-- issue wtih Tua is health.  His health to me is the wildcard and I don't just mean healthy now but for his career going forward -- the dude gets banged up a lot, he's not the biggest dude.

Edited by Skinsinparadise
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a huge believer in getting the best QB you can find. But no way would I have wanted them to take Tua over Chase.  Too many health questions with Tua, Young is a prospect you can't pass up and the jury was still out on Dwayne at the time.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Skins199021 said:

Yeah I remember these discussions now, most thought Young was this infallible specimen and I kept saying I don't see him as a better prospect than Clowney coming out. I got hammered.

 

I really do like Young, but my point would be, yeah Watt, Donald, etc are great, but their teams didn't do **** until they had a QB. 

 

I think Tua is going to be very good, I would have sat him out this whole year Mahomes style.

 

Herbert is so damn good, F the Chargers. Brees - Rivers - Herbert... but damn I swear they always have multiple stars out for the season

 

The difference for me was I had high hopes for Haskins.  The anti-Haskins people don't remember it, but he played pretty well down the stretch last year and I thought his first year showed enough promise to remain optimistic.   He regressed a bit in year 2 and Rivera didn't waste time pulling the plug, but I thought given Tua's injury and Herbert's up and down play in college, I didn't necessarily think they were definitely better than Haskins.  Further I thought Chase Young was as sure to a thing as you can get and for the most part that has proven true as he is a solid player above average player in year 1 (but not dominant).  Hopefully he becomes dominant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to get too off topic, but Young has been great. With a groin injury to boot. He's a focus of the opponent and Sweat emerging as a consistent threat will prove helpful for the stats guys. 

 

I don't see Allen as the guy at all, but a replacement-level QB has its uses. With the O-line as it is, here's hoping he can have a solid year despite this team inevitably losing almost every game. 

 

It's tough to grow up. Hopefully Haskins gets there. Disappointing it's not going to be here/now because it remains a huge void to fill. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's quite obvious that these 2 QBs aren't being held to the same standard. Honestly, the offense is not much different regardless of who plays QB. 

Haskins single handily lost the game against Cleveland, we can all agree there. In the same fashion, Kyle Allen single handily lost the game against the New York Giants.

The main difference for me, is that Haskins lost to 3 playoff teams while Allen lost to a winless team. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Drastik said:

I think it's quite obvious that these 2 QBs aren't being held to the same standard. Honestly, the offense is not much different regardless of who plays QB. 

Haskins single handily lost the game against Cleveland, we can all agree there. In the same fashion, Kyle Allen single handily lost the game against the New York Giants.

The main difference for me, is that Haskins lost to 3 playoff teams while Allen lost to a winless team. 

We're led to one of three possibilities: 

 - There is some unknown factor (work ethic, attitude) that led to Haskins benching

 - Allen is the secret QB that they wanted and just had to find an excuse to put him in

 - Allen is actually being held to the same standard as Haskins, and even though he is making the same mistakes, there is hope that he will grow from them or he willl be replaced by Smith or Haskins sometime in the future. 

 

I don't know how much of Ron to believe (again this is part of me not being totally onboard the bandwagon now) but he did say that if they had a preseason Haskins would have started week1 and Allen would have started week2. So if we assume that this second 4 weeks is week 2 then it gives some kind of comparison between the two. Its different because Haskins went against some playoff teams vs the bottom barrell Allen is facing but life is unfair. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Thinking Skins said:

We're led to one of three possibilities: 

 - There is some unknown factor (work ethic, attitude) that led to Haskins benching

 - Allen is the secret QB that they wanted and just had to find an excuse to put him in

 - Allen is actually being held to the same standard as Haskins, and even though he is making the same mistakes, there is hope that he will grow from them or he willl be replaced by Smith or Haskins sometime in the future. 

 

I don't know how much of Ron to believe (again this is part of me not being totally onboard the bandwagon now) but he did say that if they had a preseason Haskins would have started week1 and Allen would have started week2. So if we assume that this second 4 weeks is week 2 then it gives some kind of comparison between the two. Its different because Haskins went against some playoff teams vs the bottom barrell Allen is facing but life is unfair. 

Honestly, and this is coming from someone who loved the Rivera hire and Rivera as a person overall..... at this point I can't put stock in anything Rivera says. He's made it clear that he's not going to give the media anything extra. His statements to the press/media have not always aligned with one another over these past 2 months....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...