PartyPosse Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 1 hour ago, skinsmania123 said: i know what your saying but consider this. So did you catch the San Fran - Packer game during the regular season? What the San Fran D line did to Rodgers O line, and to him because they could not hold up was crazy. They made him look mediocre at best - plus no run game, I was thinking about that when I thought if I am picking at # 1 I may very well go for the game changer, an immediate impact player. I just wouldn't pass him up. That is just me in the hypothetical game. Just not sure I wouldn't do it. That is true but occasionally you have players you should not not pass on IMO. It will be interesting to see what the Bengals do. I agree San Diego needs a new QB, and needs to cut ties with River's. He had decent protection and was INT machine this year. I don't think Okudah is going to be there. I think he is going to the Lion's. Boy do they need him in their secondary. I will have to research on Lamb. It will be fun no matter what happens and Redskins football is becoming at the very least interesting again for me. I don’t see it. Lions have absolutely zero interior pass rush or anything potent on their front 7. They already have Darius Slay as their 1 CB. My guess is they take Derrick Brown. He’s an absolute monster. Just watch what he did against Alabama. The giants are the real wild card imo as they have needs all over the place. OT, WR, CB... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sportjunkie07 Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 I think the giants go tackle to protect their investment. Gettleman took a chance with Daniel Jones and he will want to save face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HigSkin Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 Hmmmm.... Tyler's supports his thought with this - Free Agents: Jamis Winston(26) Marcus Mariota(28) Teddy Bridgewater(26) Cam Newton(30) Nick Foles(Trade) Josh Rosen(Trade) On team: Ryan Finlay, Andy Dalton QB's(maybe) after RD1: Eason Fromm Hurts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 1 hour ago, skinsmania123 said: i know what your saying but consider this. So did you catch the San Fran - Packer game during the regular season? What the San Fran D line did to Rodgers O line, and to him because they could not hold up was crazy. They made him look mediocre at best - plus no run game, I was thinking about that when I thought if I am picking at # 1 I may very well go for the game changer, an immediate impact player. I just wouldn't pass him up. Not only would I consider this as you point out. I've been making the same point for months about Chase Young in a similar way that you do here. But still QB > Edge rusher. The 49ers wouldn't IMO be the same force if Andy Dalton was the QB versus Jimmy G. Not that Jimmy G is the be all and end all but he's at least a good QB. You need a good QB typically to win. And Burrow has the potential to be better than just good. Chandler Jones has been a freak for Arizona yet they haven't really won. Ditto the Bears with Mack, etc. You need both and a franchise QB is the harder get IMO. I've been arguing your point on the draft thread among other places but not in the context of edge versus QB but edge compared to other positions. QB to me still is the Holy Grail spot. 1 hour ago, skinsmania123 said: i That is true but occasionally you have players you should not not pass on IMO. It will be interesting to see what the Bengals do. I consider myself one of the band leaders here for Chase Young. I was one of the ones who touted him on the draft thread before it became cool so to speak where I see it now everywhere. Yet, I'd pass over Chase in a heartbeat without even flinching if I were Cincy. But will see. Like I said I'd bet that we will hear a ton of stuff about how Cincy is heavily considering Young because heck the team with the first pick seems to be making it a rite of passage of late to create some mystery about their intentions. So I got little doubt we will be reading stories about how Cincy loves Young and is heavily considering drafting him but I'd be stunned if they actually do it. But agree anything is possible. 1 hour ago, skinsmania123 said: I don't think Okudah is going to be there. I think he is going to the Lion's. Boy do they need him in their secondary. I will have to research on Lamb. It will be fun no matter what happens and Redskins football is becoming at the very least interesting again for me. Agree that it will be fun. I agree Okudah likely goes at #3. My point is I'd want Simmons or Okudah whomever is there at 5 if I traded down. Actually, I'd hope in that case that Okudah is gone because I like Simmons better. If I am trading down my preference A. Simmons B. Okudah C. Lamb D. Jeudy If Trent is traded I might elevate Thomas to that group albeit I don't think he's as good as those 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 14 minutes ago, HigSkin said: Hmmmm.... Tyler's supports his thought with this - Free Agents: Jamis Winston(26) Marcus Mariota(28) Teddy Bridgewater(26) Cam Newton(30) Nick Foles(Trade) Josh Rosen(Trade) On team: Ryan Finlay, Andy Dalton QB's(maybe) after RD1: Eason Fromm Hurts If this truly happened it would be another early Christmas for the Redskins. There will be several QB needed teams looking to trade up. You will have the added help in the time limit between picks. Tell them give up your absolute best offer. We don't have time for a bunch of back and forth. But I really think the above is just your basic bull**** smoke. Cinn would be dumb as hell to pass up their chance at Burrow. They are unlikely to be in a position to take a QB like him again and they literally have no one to play QB. But if they make this colossal mistake, the Redskins fans will be very happy with the outcome - or at least we should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharleyT Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 13 hours ago, PartyPosse said: You’d get at most a 2nd for him. Rosen was a top ten pick and all they could get was a second. Why? Because they had no leverage. I'd be OK with that, though--to have Burrow plus market value for Haskins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stefanskins Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
757SeanTaylor21 Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 But what if theres no trade back option? Then the question boils down to is burrow better for us than haskins? If its debateable then u rock with haskins and pick who u got as 2nd on your board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostofSparta Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 I brought this up in the draft position thread a few times. My answer is no. What I would do, if Cincy is clear before the draft that they're taking Chase Young at #1, is let everybody know that the #2 spot is up for grabs. I am then taking every single offer that comes and hopping right on the phone with Miami to let them know what they have to beat. I completely understand the argument for taking Burrow at #2. I get betting high on QBs until one pans out because that's what you have to do to succeed. I know that Haskins is not a known quantity and could very well bust and be looking back in 5 years like "Well ****, we had our chance at him and we passed." I'm also very familiar with the Rams fleecing us in the RG3 trade and both teams having nothing to show for it within 4 years. Everything in the draft is a gamble, but the more picks you have, the better your odds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooka Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 Hell yes, assuming no trade down. The Washington Redskins though? No. Don't have confidence this franchise can manage the 2 QBs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RemoveSnyder Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 The answer is that Haskins hasn't proven a damn thing to warrant the status of untouchable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 1 hour ago, 757SeanTaylor21 said: But what if theres no trade back option? Then the question boils down to is burrow better for us than haskins? If its debateable then u rock with haskins and pick who u got as 2nd on your board. Some of us I think already answered this but I will again here - you take Burrow if you have no trade then. Kind of like when San Diego took Eli - other teams wanted to see if they would take him or not. If SD blinks they get him cheaper. So you take Burrow. Let the competition begin between Haskins and Burrow - but you may get that huge offer after you have him. If not and they both look good in camp then someone will want one of them. It will not be a wasted pick if you take Burrow. However, I am 99.9% certain there will be multiple trade partners at #2 if CN does the unthinkable and takes Young at #1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PartyPosse Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 19 minutes ago, goskins10 said: Some of us I think already answered this but I will again here - you take Burrow if you have no trade then. Kind of like when San Diego took Eli - other teams wanted to see if they would take him or not. If SD blinks they get him cheaper. So you take Burrow. Let the competition begin between Haskins and Burrow - but you may get that huge offer after you have him. If not and they both look good in camp then someone will want one of them. It will not be a wasted pick if you take Burrow. However, I am 99.9% certain there will be multiple trade partners at #2 if CN does the unthinkable and takes Young at #1. I'm in a similar camp in that you take Burrow and dangle him almost immediately. Let teams fight for him so at least you can pick and choose who you can deal with in terms of who they draft. It's not ideal but it's the best option IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommanderInTheRye Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 43 minutes ago, GhostofSparta said: I brought this up in the draft position thread a few times. My answer is no. What I would do, if Cincy is clear before the draft that they're taking Chase Young at #1, is let everybody know that the #2 spot is up for grabs. I am then taking every single offer that comes and hopping right on the phone with Miami to let them know what they have to beat. I completely understand the argument for taking Burrow at #2. I get betting high on QBs until one pans out because that's what you have to do to succeed. I know that Haskins is not a known quantity and could very well bust and be looking back in 5 years like "Well ****, we had our chance at him and we passed." I'm also very familiar with the Rams fleecing us in the RG3 trade and both teams having nothing to show for it within 4 years. Everything in the draft is a gamble, but the more picks you have, the better your odds. Although I disagree with your conclusion this was an extremely well reasoned and thoughtful post. I generally agree with you that a slew of good players is preferred over a single great player but only as long as that great player is not a QB. QBs are force multipliers. Great ones are the high tide that raises all boats. If I were the decision maker in this hypothetical I would take Burrow and keep — NOT TRADE— Haskins. Let them fight it out through training camp (both would be on equal footing as a new offense is being installed) winner take all. Competition reveals character and sometimes destiny. If one of them emerges during the preseason as clearly better than the other I solicit offers for the loser and trade him if I get good value. If neither is superior I take the competition to the regular season. See who develops and seizes the moment when real bullets are flying. If both turn out to be busts well we’ll have an early ticket for the 2021 Tyler Lawrence sweepstake. I know this is a radical solution to a vexing situation and I can’t think of any corollaries off the top of my head other than Aikman/Walsh and Bradshaw/Hanratty. Which incidentally resulted in two multiple Superbowl winning first ballot hall of fame qbs. The safe decision is clearly to trade number 2 for a slew of picks. But sometimes it pays to shove in all of your chips, ignore the criticism of those on the sidelines and risk everything in one great heroic and perhaps a bit foolhardy gamble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommanderInTheRye Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 43 minutes ago, GhostofSparta said: I brought this up in the draft position thread a few times. My answer is no. What I would do, if Cincy is clear before the draft that they're taking Chase Young at #1, is let everybody know that the #2 spot is up for grabs. I am then taking every single offer that comes and hopping right on the phone with Miami to let them know what they have to beat. I completely understand the argument for taking Burrow at #2. I get betting high on QBs until one pans out because that's what you have to do to succeed. I know that Haskins is not a known quantity and could very well bust and be looking back in 5 years like "Well ****, we had our chance at him and we passed." I'm also very familiar with the Rams fleecing us in the RG3 trade and both teams having nothing to show for it within 4 years. Everything in the draft is a gamble, but the more picks you have, the better your odds. Although I disagree with your conclusion this was an extremely well reasoned and thoughtful post. I generally agree with you that a slew of good players is preferred over a single great player but only as long as that great player is not a QB. QBs are force multipliers. Great ones are the high tide that raises all boats. If I were the decision maker in this hypothetical I would take Burrow and keep — NOT TRADE— Haskins. Let them fight it out through training camp (both would be on equal footing as a new offense is being installed) winner take all. Competition reveals character and sometimes destiny. If one of them emerges during the preseason as clearly better than the other I solicit offers for the loser and trade him if I get good value. If neither is superior I take the competition to the regular season. See who develops and seizes the moment when real bullets are flying. If both turn out to be busts well we’ll have an early ticket for the 2021 Tyler Lawrence sweepstake. I know this is a radical solution to a vexing situation and I can’t think of any corollaries off the top of my head other than Aikman/Walsh and Bradshaw/Hanratty. Which incidentally resulted in two multiple Superbowl winning first ballot hall of fame qbs. The safe decision is clearly to trade number 2 for a slew of picks. But sometimes it pays to shove in all of your chips, ignore the criticism of those on the sidelines and risk everything in one great heroic and perhaps a bit foolhardy gamble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PartyPosse Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 28 minutes ago, SumTingWong said: If both turn out to be busts well we’ll have an early ticket for the 2021 Tyler Lawrence sweepstake. IF both turn out to be busts then there are two aspects to consider. You've already concluded that your first round QB in 2019 and 2020 aren't able to thrive EVEN though you've basically spent zero resources on upgrading your offensive line not to mention having a new regime come in expecting the offense, with its young players like Terry, being asked to pick up a THIRD offensive scheme in three years. That's simply preposterous and very reminiscent of the impatience of the Front Office that we complain about. Even if we're in position to draft Lawrence, well then that means we've drafted QB in the first round three years in a row which means were setting all kinds of NEW records regarding incompetence. That also means we've basically gone through an RG3-worth of draft picks for the second time in less than 10 years. Simply put if we draft Burrows i'd be pissed off. If we draft Burrows and keep Haskins, that may be the worst decision this franchise has made in Dan's entire tenure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Est.1974 Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 Been saying for a while the Bengals could take Young. Lots of vets out there, plus they pick at #33 and can jump back into the first fairly easily. Long ways to go yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carex Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 55 minutes ago, SumTingWong said: Although I disagree with your conclusion this was an extremely well reasoned and thoughtful post. I generally agree with you that a slew of good players is preferred over a single great player but only as long as that great player is not a QB. QBs are force multipliers. Great ones are the high tide that raises all boats. If I were the decision maker in this hypothetical I would take Burrow and keep — NOT TRADE— Haskins. Let them fight it out through training camp (both would be on equal footing as a new offense is being installed) winner take all. Competition reveals character and sometimes destiny. If one of them emerges during the preseason as clearly better than the other I solicit offers for the loser and trade him if I get good value. If neither is superior I take the competition to the regular season. See who develops and seizes the moment when real bullets are flying. If both turn out to be busts well we’ll have an early ticket for the 2021 Tyler Lawrence sweepstake. I know this is a radical solution to a vexing situation and I can’t think of any corollaries off the top of my head other than Aikman/Walsh and Bradshaw/Hanratty. Which incidentally resulted in two multiple Superbowl winning first ballot hall of fame qbs. The safe decision is clearly to trade number 2 for a slew of picks. But sometimes it pays to shove in all of your chips, ignore the criticism of those on the sidelines and risk everything in one great heroic and perhaps a bit foolhardy gamble. we do not have enough resources to waste them like you're proposing. We aren't overflowing with talent, we don't have a ton of draft picks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 1 hour ago, Monk4thaHALL said: The answer is that Haskins hasn't proven a damn thing to warrant the status of untouchable. There isn’t a love button but there should be. Oh... and new regime. That’s a big one. In fact, that’s what makes this idea go round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommanderInTheRye Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 20 minutes ago, PartyPosse said: IF both turn out to be busts then there are two aspects to consider. You've already concluded that your first round QB in 2019 and 2020 aren't able to thrive EVEN though you've basically spent zero resources on upgrading your offensive line not to mention having a new regime come in expecting the offense, with its young players like Terry, being asked to pick up a THIRD offensive scheme in three years. That's simply preposterous and very reminiscent of the impatience of the Front Office that we complain about. Even if we're in position to draft Lawrence, well then that means we've drafted QB in the first round three years in a row which means were setting all kinds of NEW records regarding incompetence. That also means we've basically gone through an RG3-worth of draft picks for the second time in less than 10 years. Simply put if we draft Burrows i'd be pissed off. If we draft Burrows and keep Haskins, that may be the worst decision this franchise has made in Dan's entire tenure. I understand and anticipated that some would react to my radical proposal with unaffected scorn. Clearly we have a fundamental difference in how we value what I call the essential necessity of doing whatever it takes to acquire a franchise QB. For me, until you have a franchise quarterback you don’t have a chance to be a consistent threat to win a championship and that’s what this thing is all about— winning championships. Sure you can have a combination of a strong defense and a solid QB/ running game and with some good fortune find your way to a single title, like say Dilfer’s Buccaneers did but you’ll never be a perennial threat without a franchise player under center. That’s why I would do whatever it takes to get that guy. Even if my methods seem ridiculous to more traditional thinkers. As far as the Trevor Lawrence sweepstake goes that's a highly unlikely worst case scenario. One in which Burrows and Haskins BOTH turn out to be complete flops. It’s possible, to be sure, but highly unlikely. The far more probable outcome is that at least one of them shows enough promise within a year that you can commit to him going forward. If we’re lucky both of them will show great promise and we can get a solid return when we trade the other. In response to your assertion that holding onto both QBs would be the “worst decision” imaginable I ask three questions: First, are you absolutely certain that you know which, if either, of the two QBs will be the superior pro? Second, if you had training camp and a full season to evaluate both of them do you think you would have a better chance of determining who the superior player is? Third, would it be worth the risk and the ridicule of naysayers, if at the end of the day we finally have a young strapping homegrown franchise quarterback in burgundy and gold? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PartyPosse Posted January 12, 2020 Share Posted January 12, 2020 5 minutes ago, SumTingWong said: First, are you absolutely certain that you know which, if either, of the two QBs will be the superior pro? Second, if you had training camp and a full season to evaluate both of them do you think you would have a better chance of determining who the superior player is? Third, would it be worth the risk and the ridicule of naysayers, if at the end of the day we finally have a young strapping homegrown franchise quarterback in burgundy and gold? First, do we know if anyone will be a pro? Will Lawrence? What happens if he struggles in his first year? Do you draft another QB in 2022? Second, no. They’re QBs not receivers. You can’t just plug and play. Third, almost every QB needs time to show they can be a leader. Very rarely will a QB come in and be successful and when they do it’s usually because there’s a strong team built around them. Who was the last QB to come in and singlehandedly turn their team around? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommanderInTheRye Posted January 12, 2020 Share Posted January 12, 2020 34 minutes ago, carex said: we do not have enough resources to waste them like you're proposing. We aren't overflowing with talent, we don't have a ton of draft picks Agreed! Wasting quality resources would be a travesty. But resources are only wasted if they are not used to provide something of considerable benefit. A franchise quarterback is the ULTIMATE acquisition worthy of extreme football capital. We may never have another opportunity to draft second overall with a potential franchise qb there for the taking. I say if Chase Young is gone and Burrows is available why waste the pick on a top OT or CB or hybrid LB/S or even worse trade it for several lesser talents when we have a rare opportunity to maximize our chance of acquiring a franchise quarterback? Qui audet vincet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volsmet Posted January 12, 2020 Share Posted January 12, 2020 If healthy, Tua. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins island connection Posted January 12, 2020 Share Posted January 12, 2020 Everyone would like for Haskins to improve next season; but I do question if he is really that dedicated to improving. We don't know yet, but it is clear he does need a lot of QB coaching, and the OTA's, training camp and other optional gatherings are events he will have to attend. If he doesn't, then the question of him not really being serious about bettering himself will be obvious. Burrow on the other hand, has more than 1 year of college QB, so he has seen more various defenses, play calls, etc, that benefit any QB; its experience. He has set college football on fire, and it still remains to be seen as to what he does in the big game. He looks and plays the prototypical QB position to a tee, and he has gone up against some good college defenses and played well. I'm on the taking Burrow and go from there. There's nothing that says he or Haskins cannot be traded afterwards, but they would have to see how they both do in practice. I will say that IF Burrow is taken, Haskins' emotions will come to fruition, one way or another. Either he shows significant improvement or the idea of Burrow being picked gets into his head, and it affects him in a negative way. Keep in mind, even though Haskins showed 'improvement' in the last few games, the defenses he went against wasn't exactly dining room table discussion-worthy, and honestly I have doubts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommanderInTheRye Posted January 12, 2020 Share Posted January 12, 2020 9 minutes ago, PartyPosse said: First, do we know if anyone will be a pro? Will Lawrence? What happens if he struggles in his first year? Do you draft another QB in 2022? Second, no. They’re QBs not receivers. You can’t just plug and play. Third, almost every QB needs time to show they can be a leader. Very rarely will a QB come in and be successful and when they do it’s usually because there’s a strong team built around them. Who was the last QB to come in and singlehandedly turn their team around? I respect your opinion but we are just going to have to disagree at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.