2021 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[Riggo#44]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I get Lombardi's point below.  I loved Chase but i was OK with taking Tua if they had faith in his health.  Tua is so injury prone that he makes me pause.  I never dug into Herbert to form a serious opinion on him. 

 

Sorry, I hate these small sample size overreaction. We have seen time and time again one year wonders from players that don't last. Passing on Chase Young would have been stupid. No one saw this from Herbert. No one knows if it continues. If we get Young and Fields, no one will think twice about a do over.

[Est.1974]

19 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

Sorry, I hate these small sample size overreaction. We have seen time and time again one year wonders from players that don't last. Passing on Chase Young would have been stupid. No one saw this from Herbert. No one knows if it continues. If we get Young and Fields, no one will think twice about a do over.

I disagree with this...I think...

 

Its always subjective, but I was pushing for us to pick Tua. We should have gone QB in some capacity, but I strongly believe Rivera was compelled to give Haskins a chance. 

I honestly think in a re-do, Rivera would go QB. Isn’t that obvious, after 4 weeks we had Kyle Allen in as starter.

 

Not to derail the thread, Young looks damn good to me. He’s going to be very very good.

 

We still ain’t winning **** without a QB though. We need to get lucky now with a top 3-5 pick.....again...

 

[Riggo#44]

4 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN 74 said:

We still ain’t winning **** without a QB though. We need to get lucky now with a top 3-5 pick.....again...

I agree, but we have comparable QBs available in this draft, do we not?

Is there anyone comparable to Chase Young in this draft? 

[Skinsinparadise]

31 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

Sorry, I hate these small sample size overreaction. We have seen time and time again one year wonders from players that don't last. Passing on Chase Young would have been stupid. No one saw this from Herbert. No one knows if it continues. If we get Young and Fields, no one will think twice about a do over.

 

I was pretty much lead cheerleader on the draft thread (I had plenty of company though) to take Young.  I didn't really pay any attention to Herbert but i loved Tua.  I said before the draft I'd take Tua over Chase if they were comfortable with his health but that to me is a big if.

 

I agree if they end up with both Chase and Fields no one will blink an eye.  but i am not banking on that we do.  Will see.  this organization seems to be cursed by bad luck at QB with our owner being the lead clown on that front.  I keep thinking our luck is bound to change but it never seems to.  

[Est.1974]

Just now, Riggo#44 said:

I agree, but we have comparable QBs available in this draft, do we not?

Is there anyone comparable to Chase Young in this draft? 

No there isn’t, as I said I’m not agreeing/disagreeing totally. It’s not that easy is it.

 

No denying Chase is a fantastic prospect. I love the fact we have him.

 

But we need a QB badly. As in, we are gonna suck until we get one. If we end up picking 10-15 in the draft, we are going to struggle. Top 5, I think we get a starter.

 

Reality is we need a strong 2021 free agency period, and strong 2021 draft. We should have 5 picks in the top 100-110. 
 

......but we need a QB....then we can decide if Young was a great idea maybe...

[Skinsinparadise]

From watching Lance and Wilson, I am more of a Wilson guy.  But Lance potentially could be a Lamar Jackson level runner so I get the debate from that angle.  

 

 

 

[The Consigliere]

On 11/10/2020 at 9:07 AM, Skinsinparadise said:

 

No way to know what Rivera wants.  If I had to guess based on his comments and history, I'd say he'd be more inclined to go for one in the draft than a FA.   But that's just a guess based on this...

 

A.  Rivera had Cam from the start in Carolina.  He's no dummy and am sure knows his success was somewhat driven by having good-consistent QB play for a good duration.

 

B.  He loves to tout that this is a young team that is growing together.  Seems to fit to have a QB like that, too versus a veteran at the tail end of their career.

 

C.  His recent comments about wondering whether the franchise Qb is on this roster now.  Sounds to me like a coach searching for that type of guy versus a bandaid. 

 

D.  If they end up with a top 5 pick, they might be in a unique position to get a top QB.  You can't bank on just being in the top 5 every year and continually having chances at this.  Yeah you can trade the farm to trade up or hope to get lucky by taking the 4th-5th most highly regarded QB, etc -- but we've played that game before and it hasn't worked out, yet. 

 

E.  The FA crop at the moment at Qb doesn't look hot unless Dallas lets Dak go.  Stafford is mentioned by some but he's not a FA and for the Lions to let go of him they'd have to eat a ton of cap room.  I am ok with Cam but he doesn't like he's his old self thus far. 

 

I go back to Clinton Portis' comments not that long ago when asked about why this team can't get over the hump.  His take was more or less because they've been bad but not bad enough to have a top pick to get that elite player especially at QB.  

 

Getting the QB later hasn't really worked for this franchise.   We've had in different eras under Dan -- killer O lines, great receivers, great running games, good defenses.  We've figured those things out at different times.  If there is theme to this team's failures under Dan is their struggles to find that QB.  Vinny Cerrato is a buffoon but when he was asked why can't this team win under Dan -- his answer:  QB.  We can never figure out QB. I agree with him.   They have failed spectacularly at that spot. 

 

With a high 2nd round pick, high 3rd rounder, likely mid 3rd rounder, high 4th rounder, etc and plenty of cap room -- we can build up the O line and land a Qb at the same time.  It's not A versus B IMO.  If they have a good off season they can do both. 

 

 

 

That is precisely why I supported the RGIII trade at the time and would always support such a trade up (including this year). A trade up for a franchise QB serves two separate purposes.

#1 A roll of the dice on a franchise changing quarterback. No other position, especially on a rookie contract but also in general impacts the game like a franchise QB. Nothing is remotely close in terms of how bad things are w/o them versus how much faster you can get better after having solved that issue.

 

#2 It also has the added benefit of torpedoing your team quickly so you suck bad enough to try again if you miss, and generally you are only convinced you missed by year two or three anyway so you tend to bottom out and kill your record/upside through such a move automatically putting yourself in position to try again and land that QB after you've paid off the damages from the trade.

 

It's self-reinforcing, it either works, and you're in the mix, or it doesnt and you get to try again in a few years. The single worst thing you can do is build everything else so you're perpetually a 5-9 win team and outside the zone where teams at slot 1 or 2 are normally willing to trade down too. This is precisely what Portis is describing. The Redskins habitually don't suck enough when a franchise changing QB is available (see Luck, Newton, Eli/Rivers), don't recognize the talent in front of them like most teams (Brady, Rodgers, Wilson etc, which is no sin to me, when everyone's wrong, it's a bit much to expect your team to be right, especially if you have a contender for worst front office in the league, year in and year out), or just fail at reasoning out a situation and evaluating at the same time like last years draft. I was enraged last year that we were bound and determined to make the wrong decision and take Chase over Tua. I'm not about to argue that Herbert should've been the pick, though he should've if they had a strong evaluation on him because I didn't see Herbert as a locked in franchise guy, I thought he was a typical coin toss guy but w/some more risk than usual, fine to take outside the blue chip zone, but too risky inside the top 5, and I missed on that eval and so did the team, but passing on Tua was what I regard as franchise malpractice. The only exculpatory factor at all was Tua's injury, and even that wasn't much of one because he'd been cleared by docs well before the draft. Tua was the consensus #1 for that draft for more than two years and only fell due to injury. Take advantage of that good fortune. No matter how good Chase is, he can't win you anything w/o having either every other part of team legit and w/the team having competent QB play, whereas if you've got the franchise guy, you can have issues throughout the team and be good anyway (see Seattle with Wilson, Ryan's Falcons over the years, Luck and Peyton's Colts, Mahomes defense in KC, Newton's Panther teams, Brees' saints before they built a defense, Rodgers packers teams I could go on forever). 

 

Alas, we took Chase, and here we are. We could have Herbert and be dancing in the streets, we could have Tua and have watched last weeks performance, instead we're watching a guy who nearly died, and should've retired try to quarterback this tank to a 2-14 season, AGAIN (hopefully instead of 3-13). It's very simple, and it's not complicated but we keep botching it year after year. Hopefully we get lucky and Jacksonville and the Jets back into a couple of wins, and we just land in no doubt about it slot 1 or 2 territory if we lose out, but more likely we'll be in roll the dice mode. The only saving grace there is if we come up snake eyes yet again, the defense will be out of rookie contracts and gone before we can take advantage of it, and we'll flat line in time for another QB class. All of this could've been avoided if we'd just gone QB last year, alas, we made the wrong choice. I remain amazed that so many fans don't get this part. It's not a special sauce, or superior reasoning or anything, it's just how the league is played. Getting your favorite reminder of the good old days with the hogs, or Manely/Mann/Butz etc is lovely, but it doesn't mean anything w/o that QB. Hopefully we learned our lesson and take another swing next year after hopefully tanking out the rest of the year. 

 

[Est.1974]

5 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

passing on Tua was what I regard as franchise malpractice. The only exculpatory factor at all was Tua's injury, and even that wasn't much of one because he'd been cleared by docs well before the draft. Tua was the consensus #1 for that draft for more than two years and only fell due to injury. 

Yeah it’s really hard to agree with this. 

Fortune favours the brave. Let’s got that route 2021.

[The Consigliere]

On 11/10/2020 at 9:26 AM, Skinsinparadise said:

 

To me its impossible to know. all about context.  Where do they pick in the draft?  How do they evaluate the QBs that might land in their spot?  What do they think of next years class?  What do they think of the current FA's?

 

I haven't watched all of Cam's games this season but the ones I have -- he struck me at best average.  I am more of a Stafford guy than most but are the Lions ready to cut bait and swallow a big time cap hit?  Rivers seems to be having mosty a "meh" season.  Dak I'd roll the dice on maybe but wonder about that injury and am doubting Dallas lets him go. 

 

If the top 4 QBs in this draft (at least according to draft geeks) come out.  In theory this might end up being a draft similar in theory to 2018 where there were 4 QBs coming out with some hype.  But better than that.  None of those 4 had hype similar to Lawrence and Fields.    If we are in range to take one of the top 4 QBs and Kyle Smith is hyped about that, in Rivera's shoes I'd roll the dice. 

 

 

 

The big issue w/that group was:

1.Baker: Nobody was quite sure what they had in him. The analytics are good, but we've seen that the staff there produces these guys like clockwork, so was he a system guy? Not sure, he bounced around in college before producing back to back elite seasons. I'd like to give him time, a lot of instability there since he arrived w/horrible coaching and Dorsey wrecking things, no OL until this year, new system and no offseason. We'll see. He looked great in '18, horrible in '19, and uneven at best this year.

 

2. Darnold: Had the #1 spot for '18 before turning in a middling final year for USC after his sterling effort in '16. Had all the tools, youngest QB draftee in memory, landed w/a total ---- organization w/zero talent on offense beyond Robby Anderson who couldnt stay out of trouble or healthy, and a terrible coaching staff to boot and sketchy OL. 

 

3. Josh Allen: the Jake Locker/Cam Newton/Carson Wentz type swing for the fences pick. Did not have the accuracy at all you wanted, but was a mega athlete, w/a massive arm. Was he gonna be yet another body thrown on the pile of "bust big arm QB's" going back decades, or was he going to make it anyway? So far he's taking the Cam Newton route. 

 

4. Josh Rosen: I remain utterly stunned at his failure, he's my aught teens version of Matt Leinart. I do think he had terrible luck landing first w/a team that had incompetent coaching and OC coordinating, then traded to a team trying to tank that had gotten rid of all of its talent, otoh, he also played like garbage every single time he set foot on the field. 

 

I think this class is simpler at the top, both Lawrence and Fields were tops in their recruiting class mega elite QB's in high school that did exactly the same thing in college. they've checked every single box available except Fields for multiple years w/a large enough sample size of data. the top half of the '21 class is much cleaner than any class I've seen probably since 1983. Only Andrew Luck has as clean an evaluation as these guys. 

[The Consigliere]

On 11/10/2020 at 9:55 AM, method man said:

 

The issue is that it's been reported Dan has been involved in every 1st round QB pick we've made, dating back from Ramsey. He is obviously an idiot who doesn't know how to judge QB talent. The Dan move would be to stump for Lance. I feel fairly safe if we end up with TL, Fields or Wilson

 

The other Dan move would be to trade 3 1st round picks to move up to take Fields, which would be foolish

To be fair: Nobody has figured out how to evaluate QB's well yet. The best people can do is 50/50 w/the top end prospects, a coin flip means no edge. We're hoping analytics can get us to 55/45 or 60/40 but the sample size is too small too know if it gives an edge. 

 

To be critical: There's nothing worse than an idiot who doesn't know he's an idiot and has ALL THE POWER and as a rule makes it widely know that he brooks no criticism. That description fits Snyder to a T. 

 

You can't win in a scenario where the task is as hard as evaluating QB's, and the person w/final authority is a total incompetent who still thinks he's the smartest guy in a room full of people who even if smart, got no better than a 50/50 shot of being right in the first place.

 

Also worth noting that the only big swing and miss on a QB during Snyder's reign has been RGIII and everyone missed on that one. There have been other misses galore, Ramsey, Campbell and now seemingly Haskins to name a few, but all of those were less than 50/50 shots probably (other than maybe Haskins).

 

Honestly the only QB selection the really bothered me was Campbell instead of taking Rodgers w/the pick we wasted on Carlos Rogers. As a Cal Alum I'd seen Rodgers play A LOT and was 1000% sold. He was utterly spectacular his final year including a record breaking performance against #1 ranked USC that fall. People like to say Green Bay made him but the ingredients were already there in Cal, all you had to do was luck. I remain stunned the Niners selected Smith instead, I think they were just infatuated w/the coach/QB thing there, the athleticism, and were worried about sample size (rodgers was a juco transfer that only started 1.5 seasons), plus I've always heard they were leaning Rodgers until the final week when a few players in the room tilted the eval to Smith instead. 

[Skinsinparadise]

3 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

 

The big issue w/that group was:

1.Baker: Nobody was quite sure what they had in him. The analytics are good, but we've seen that the staff there produces these guys like clockwork, so was he a system guy? Not sure, he bounced around in college before producing back to back elite seasons. I'd like to give him time, a lot of instability there since he arrived w/horrible coaching and Dorsey wrecking things, no OL until this year, new system and no offseason. We'll see. He looked great in '18, horrible in '19, and uneven at best this year.

 

2. Darnold: Had the #1 spot for '18 before turning in a middling final year for USC after his sterling effort in '16. Had all the tools, youngest QB draftee in memory, landed w/a total ---- organization w/zero talent on offense beyond Robby Anderson who couldnt stay out of trouble or healthy, and a terrible coaching staff to boot and sketchy OL. 

 

3. Josh Allen: the Jake Locker/Cam Newton/Carson Wentz type swing for the fences pick. Did not have the accuracy at all you wanted, but was a mega athlete, w/a massive arm. Was he gonna be yet another body thrown on the pile of "bust big arm QB's" going back decades, or was he going to make it anyway? So far he's taking the Cam Newton route. 

 

4. Josh Rosen: I remain utterly stunned at his failure, he's my aught teens version of Matt Leinart. I do think he had terrible luck landing first w/a team that had incompetent coaching and OC coordinating, then traded to a team trying to tank that had gotten rid of all of its talent, otoh, he also played like garbage every single time he set foot on the field. 

 

Yeah I recall the context at the time.  I didn't really study Rosen until after his rookie year when he was on the market. But when I did, i wasn't a big fan of the dude, I watched 5 college games of his closely and for a smart dude he oddly struck me as a really bad decision maker who got lucky in college where defenders missed easy picks in the games I watched.  Then you add in some questioning his intangibles.  His arm is decent but nothing special IMO but he has really good footwork though.  It doesn't shock me he's failing.  

 

I liked Mayfield.  He was such a competitive gamer.   I liked Darnold's skill set, didn't love him but i liked him.  I had a hard time figuring Allen out.  but I recall Chris Cooley who is pretty good with his evaluations loving him the most among those QBs. 

 

At the moment this crop feels more intriguing and potentially better.  Feels some like 2012 where you might have some 2nd tier guys come through over the long haul.  I haven't thought at all about the 2022 class.  But right now, I like the potential of taking a QB in this drafr.

 

[Skinsinparadise]

3 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

To be fair: Nobody has figured out how to evaluate QB's well yet. The best people can do is 50/50 w/the top end prospects, a coin flip means no edge. We're hoping analytics can get us to 55/45 or 60/40 but the sample size is too small too know if it gives an edge. 

 

To be critical: There's nothing worse than an idiot who doesn't know he's an idiot and has ALL THE POWER and as a rule makes it widely know that he brooks no criticism. That description fits Snyder to a T. 

 

You can't win in a scenario where the task is as hard as evaluating QB's, and the person w/final authority is a total incompetent who still thinks he's the smartest guy in a room full of people who even if smart, got no better than a 50/50 shot of being right in the first place.

 

 

All true.  It's hard enough for professional scouts to get it right.  Last thing, we need is our dolt owner thinking he has it figured out.  I am still amused with this story. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/redskins/daniel-snyder-washington-redskins-owner-still-struggles-to-find-formula-for-success/2014/01/04/5d86bfa4-74a4-11e3-bc6b-712d770c3715_story.html

Prior to Shanahan, Snyder played a much more active role in the draft process, even traveling at times with his personnel officials to scout college players. In 2007, he had his heart set on drafting quarterback Brady Quinn out of Notre Dame. “It took a week or so to convince him that we shouldn’t do that,” one former staffer said. “Then he wanted Teddy Ginn,” an Ohio State wide receiver. Quinn has played for five teams in seven seasons, while Ginn has started just five games in the past four years.

 

The next season, still in need of a wide receiver, the team targeted Oklahoma’s Malcolm Kelly in the second round, though the medical staff had major health concerns. When they took Michigan State wideout Devin Thomas 34th overall before nabbing Kelly 17 picks later, they passed on Jordy Nelson, whom several others in the football operation preferred, according to someone who was with the team at the time. Hobbled by knee problems for two seasons, Kelly was released in 2011 after posting just 28 receptions. In six seasons with the Green Bay Packers since going 36th overall in the draft, Nelson has 302 catches for 4,590 yards and 36 touchdowns. This season, Nelson had career highs with 85 receptions for 1,314 yards.

 

“It’s hard to say that anyone can restrain him when he wants to do something,” said one former Snyder employee, who’d worked at Snyder Communications, of the Redskins owner. “You cannot stop impulsive people from doing what they want to do.”

[The Consigliere]

On 11/11/2020 at 12:11 PM, OVCChairman said:

 

 

 

Its not just OSU, and it's not just now.  How many Alabama Qbs are successful in the NFL?  Burrow looks like he's on the right track out of LSU... but talent vs competition is a real thing. 

 

Alabama has rarely had top end QB's behind center during the Saban era. Tua was the one and only that I'm aware of. McCarron was seen as a solid late day 2 early day 3 type guy as well but that's about it. Most of their QB's were plug and play guys designed to take advantage of line play, and that's about it. Not many colleges feature elite QB's regularly. I think Georgia, USC and Clemson are the only ones that have done it somewhat well over the past two decades and even Georgia screwed it up. Generally QB's don't care about program as much as about system match, coordinator and then HC. 

[The Consigliere]

On 11/12/2020 at 6:07 AM, RichmondRedskin88 said:

There’s no tit for tat here.  People just don’t like certain peoples opinions about going to certain schools for QBs.  It is what it is.  If people want to put their hopes on the same program feel free.  Could Fields turn out to be a great QB? Absolutely but end of the day these top programs don’t care what happens to these players after they leave.  They are just pawns for a championship season. Again I point to how many QBs from top programs make it?  Not many. They have nothing to gain either way. Its not some random program trying to get NFL recognition.  Top programs will be fine after.  The fact that so many top programs don’t develop a decent QB atleast every 3-4 years when they have every resource to recruit, scout and develop them should tell you everything. Bama, LSU, OSU, UGA, Auburn, Texas, OK, etc should be putting out a decent QB at NFL but that’s not their focus.  They care about titles not whether certain players can make it. 

 

That's not what it is. You'd have a point of Fields was just any old Ohio State QB, he isn't, he wasn't even recruited to Ohio State, he's a Georgia Signee. They landed the sweepstakes for him when Fields got sick of sitting behind Fromm and having to deal with some idiot baseball teammate being caught lobbing the N word at him from the stands. 

 

Fields was the 1A to Lawrence's #1 recruit in his class, he finished ahead of Lawrence w/one recruiting site. He's not some Ohio State system guy. Never was, isn't, and never will be. 

 

As for QB's, great QB's are great QB's, they're sprinkled across the landscape from all over the map. No school has a real set trend of landing tons of them, the only one to have a couple in a small period of time lately is Clemson, a decade ago it was USC. Generally they go to find the right coaches, right system and when they have the best relationship with a recruiter. None of Ohio State's QB's other than Pryor in decades have come close to this eval and Pryor wasn't close either, he was perceived as more of an athlete than a legit throwing Quarterback when he was recruited and when he was drafted. Have to wonder if he would have been developed more professionally today, maybe? But we know that Fields has always been seen as the best QB recruit (via transfer in his case) Ohio State has gotten in my lifetime, and not only that, he was the best recruit period on the entire Ohio State roster in '19 and in '20. 

 

I understand your argument, the problem is, you're applying it to the wrong player. A better analogy would be Tajh Boyd vs Watson and Lawrence, or McCarron vs Tua. Fields doesn't fit that system QB tag at all, especially considering that he wasn't even their recruit in the first place. As for QB's, what percent actually make it? .03% Nearly all of them fail to become starters, it's exceptionally rare for any to hit. More than a hundred starters every year, probably 70-90 prospects, and how many are drafted? 15-20, nearly all of them to be 2nd/3rd stringers. 

 

I don't understand why you think the school matters. It doesn't. It's the players talent, ability, vision, and mental make up that do along with their #'s. Put it all together, make the best profile you can and hope for the best in your eval. 

[The Consigliere]

On 11/12/2020 at 7:58 AM, Number 44 said:

 

The emboldened sentence is quite obviously false.  Bart Starr, Joe Namath, and Ken Stabler are all in the HOF.

 

Even the guys that you pretend were failures really weren't.  Richard Todd enjoyed a 10-year NFL career, 9 as a starting QB.  That is not a bust.  Jeff Rutledge was a solid back-up NFL QB for 13 seasons - an excellent result for a 9th round draft pick.  AJ McCarron is in his 7th NFL season as a backup QB after being drafted in the 5th round.  Very good result.  Even 7th rounder Greg McElroy managed to make the team and spend a season as the backup.  These are not poor results.

 

And Tua is quite clearly a worthwhile draft pick.

 

It is difficult to be more wrong than you are on this point, as few schools have produced NFL quarterbacks as successfully as Alabama has.

 

I don't think he's talking about the NFL of sixty, fifty and forty years ago, I think he's talking about the modern NFL during the Saban era, and that's what he's right about and that's the only piece that really matters. I don't agree w/him w/the premise, I don't care where QB's hail from as it's irrelevant to future success generally speaking, unless it's really low level competition and even then there are exception, but yeah, Saban's Alabama has largely featured basically mediocre talents at QB. If there's someone other than McCarron let me know, as far as I can remember, they've had two guys as full time starters that NFL GM's and analytics people thought were reasonable or better prospects in the Saban years. I also don't care anyway, I'm looking for great QB prospects, don't care where they play. 

[The Consigliere]

On 11/12/2020 at 7:45 AM, philibusters said:

 

Alabama and Ohio St definitely recruit elite HS QB prospects.  The thing is in average HS class only 1 of the top 10 HS QB prospects will be become a quality NFL starter.  Maybe half of the top 10 will get some NFL starts but on average only 1 becomes a long term NFL quality starter.   Usually 11-100 produce one other NFL quality starter so that each HS class probably averages about 2 NFL Quality starters.

 

Its sort of true that an Alabama does recruit for a spectacular QB in that for example they tend to prefer pro-style QB's over dual threat guys, but they almost always have one of the top 3 or 4 pro style  HS QB's in their class.

 

The real issue why the bluebloods don't produce more NFL QB stars is just a number game.  Its not like O-Lineman where every team has five starters (so 160 starters for the league) or WR's where every team has 3 starters (96 starters for the league).  Further of the 32 NFL starting QB, maybe a third of them are not quality NFL starters who can start for a team in the long term.

 

Always a good point that people miss.

 

There are only 32 starting jobs for QB in the NFL. 

 

There are 160 starting offensive lineman jobs. 

 

There are typically somewhere in the neighborhood of what, 100-130 Linebacker jobs. 

 

64 cb jobs, really 96 if you include nickel backs. 

 

One can go on and on. 

 

There's not a lot of opportunity to start, it is hard to break in, and it's the hardest job in the league to actually do well other than GM or coach. 

[PartyPosse]

2 hours ago, Riggo#44 said:

No one saw this from Herbert.

I highly expect a zillion posters to show up now and claim they KNEW he was gonna be great coming out the gate and then they'll disappear when he comes back to earth.

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

From watching Lance and Wilson, I am more of a Wilson guy.  But Lance potentially could be a Lamar Jackson level runner so I get the debate from that angle.  

I think it's a simple case of higher floor vs higher ceiling.

1 hour ago, The Consigliere said:

Geetting your favorite reminder of the good old days with the hogs, or Manely/Mann/Butz etc is lovely, but it doesn't mean anything w/o that QB.

Ah yes. The good old days of Jay Schroeder, Doug Williams and Mark Rypien.

[PartyPosse]

57 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

Alabama has rarely had top end QB's behind center during the Saban era. Tua was the one and only that I'm aware of.

Jalen Hurts

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

From watching Lance and Wilson, I am more of a Wilson guy.  But Lance potentially could be a Lamar Jackson level runner so I get the debate from that angle.  

 

 

 

 

From what I've seen I'd definitely take Wilson over Lance if it was between the two of them. And I don't see Lance as being on the same level as LJ...he doesn't have 4.3 speed and doesn't have the quicks of Jackson to make people miss.

[The Consigliere]

2 hours ago, Riggo#44 said:

I agree, but we have comparable QBs available in this draft, do we not?

Is there anyone comparable to Chase Young in this draft? 

Has chase young mattered at all? Against teams that aren't straight trash we've given up:

30 to Arizona

34 to Cleveland

31 to Baltimore

30 to the Rams

 

We're 2-6 with wins against the Eagles missing like 50% of the starters and the Cowboys who were in the process of getting outscored 86-22 across three games after Dak went down. 

 

Chase is awesome, yes, but Chase doesn't matter at all if we don't have a QB. Chase especially doesn't matter when we don't have a QB and the strength of the team is already the DL before we even select Chase. People just wanted Chase. That's all. A sure thing that would make them feel better in the middle of the tenth double digit beat down of the season. That's what it feels like when I read these takes.

 

I don't think anyone's ever disputed that Chase is a mega elite prospect, and a potentially HOF caliber talented NFL draftee. He's also not going to matter at all unless we have a QB. And we don't. So I don't care, even a little about the DE class coming out in '21, I care that we passed on Tua and Herbert to take him and that's going to cost us for the next decade unless we find one.  

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Yeah I recall the context at the time.  I didn't really study Rosen until after his rookie year when he was on the market. But when I did, i wasn't a big fan of the dude, I watched 5 college games of his closely and for a smart dude he oddly struck me as a really bad decision maker who got lucky in college where defenders missed easy picks in the games I watched.  Then you add in some questioning his intangibles.  His arm is decent but nothing special IMO but he has really good footwork though.  It doesn't shock me he's failing.  

 

I liked Mayfield.  He was such a competitive gamer.   I liked Darnold's skill set, didn't love him but i liked him.  I had a hard time figuring Allen out.  but I recall Chris Cooley who is pretty good with his evaluations loving him the most among those QBs. 

 

At the moment this crop feels more intriguing and potentially better.  Feels some like 2012 where you might have some 2nd tier guys come through over the long haul.  I haven't thought at all about the 2022 class.  But right now, I like the potential of taking a QB in this drafr.

 

 

I had them:

1. Baker

2A: Rosen

2B: Darnold

4. Allen

 

and I didn't like Allen at all lol

 

So yeah, I was like a 3 year old trying to take an at bat w/that evaluation. 

[The Consigliere]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

All true.  It's hard enough for professional scouts to get it right.  Last thing, we need is our dolt owner thinking he has it figured out.  I am still amused with this story. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/redskins/daniel-snyder-washington-redskins-owner-still-struggles-to-find-formula-for-success/2014/01/04/5d86bfa4-74a4-11e3-bc6b-712d770c3715_story.html

Prior to Shanahan, Snyder played a much more active role in the draft process, even traveling at times with his personnel officials to scout college players. In 2007, he had his heart set on drafting quarterback Brady Quinn out of Notre Dame. “It took a week or so to convince him that we shouldn’t do that,” one former staffer said. “Then he wanted Teddy Ginn,” an Ohio State wide receiver. Quinn has played for five teams in seven seasons, while Ginn has started just five games in the past four years.

 

The next season, still in need of a wide receiver, the team targeted Oklahoma’s Malcolm Kelly in the second round, though the medical staff had major health concerns. When they took Michigan State wideout Devin Thomas 34th overall before nabbing Kelly 17 picks later, they passed on Jordy Nelson, whom several others in the football operation preferred, according to someone who was with the team at the time. Hobbled by knee problems for two seasons, Kelly was released in 2011 after posting just 28 receptions. In six seasons with the Green Bay Packers since going 36th overall in the draft, Nelson has 302 catches for 4,590 yards and 36 touchdowns. This season, Nelson had career highs with 85 receptions for 1,314 yards.

 

“It’s hard to say that anyone can restrain him when he wants to do something,” said one former Snyder employee, who’d worked at Snyder Communications, of the Redskins owner. “You cannot stop impulsive people from doing what they want to do.”

 

 

It's funny, I'm like, "Oh, I missed that one too. I understood that Quinn's stock collapsed his final year, but I was a huge fan of what I perceived of as the value the Browns and later the Panthers got taking swings at formerly top rated QB prospects who fell off their draft years out of Notre Dame (Quinn and Jimmy Clausen). I'm a sucker for looking at guys who stumbled their final year. Kinda have some "Dan Marino fell too" narrative constantly tripping me up (did work with Wilfork/the mega DT prospect who had a bad final year and dropped from a top 5ish draftee to the back end of round one his draft year). But yeah, literally every Snyder+NFL Draft story I've ever heard is the worst thing I've ever heard in my life as a redskins fan.

 

The best story is still him having the shocking insight to commission Richard Thaler to do a deep dive on NFL Draft analytics to help fix our approach (which had been a grand mal disaster from the last days of Beathard in the late eighties, through the Cerrato disaster that was the nineties and into the aughts) which had been a complete and total disaster for basically nearly two decades. Thaler then brings him the report, and Snyder than totally ignores it, and Thaler and does the opposite, over and over again for the rest of the decade (the data said we should trade down when possible, and try like mad to accumulate as many picks as possible as nothing seemed to yield extra hits on draft picks other than sheer quantity of picks). Since then analytics people have dug up insights beyond just lotsa picks (some positions yield better wins above replacement as compared to others to use a baseball team, when it comes to allocate draft capital, cap space, and hit rates on day 1 of drafts (QB, WR, Edge, CB, and I think DT, not sure though). But yeah, the Thaler story was the cherry on top of my redskins misery. Supposedly he won't even talk about the redskins, let alone the debacle anymore (he always struck me as a little smug, but I'll take smug every time if it makes my team better, and reduces poor process over time). 

[The Consigliere]

1 hour ago, PartyPosse said:

I highly expect a zillion posters to show up now and claim they KNEW he was gonna be great coming out the gate and then they'll disappear when he comes back to earth.

I think it's a simple case of higher floor vs higher ceiling.

Ah yes. The good old days of Jay Schroeder, Doug Williams and Mark Rypien.

A different world and different time, and Gibbs and those teams never get enough credit because they're the only dynasty in NFL History than featured 3 QBs, none of whom made the HOF, and only one of whom had a resume that wouldn't have been spit take/laughed out the of bar, let alone the room where such a discussion might take place. I think we collectively have a bit of a weird issue w/QB because we're the only team in history to have built a dynasty w/o a legit franchise QB (or even go to RB). Why on earth that only gets passing attention is beyond me, doesn't matter what decade you look at, those teams usually have football card/fat head poster level talents at QB, and RB and elsewhere. 

 

The eighties Niners had Roger Craig, Joe Montana, Steve Young, and Jerry Rice and mega elite defenses. 

 

The Nineties cowboys had Aikman, Emmitt, Irvin, the OL and that D.

 

The Bills had Kelly, Thomas, Reed and their defense

 

The Broncos had Elway, and Davis

 

The Packers had Favre and Rodgers and a variety of WR's and adequate RBs

 

Go back to the seventies and you have the steelers with Bradshaw, Harris, and the most decorated defense ever, the dolphins with Griese, two stud RB's, and a famous D, the Cowboys had Staubach, Dorsett and a great D, the Raiders had Stabler and that defense and Cliff Branch, the Vikes had Tarkenton and that defense.

 

You can go through any decade and the only team that comes close to looking like us that I can find are the Ravens from '99-Present. That's it, and they were a bit different, better defense than ours during that era, but we had better offenses and better QB's. But that's about it, kinda funny that the two teams that did it long term (us 1982-1993, them 1999-Present) are a couple of miles away from one another. 

 

Incredible accomplishment, and unlike the Ravens, we made a pile of super bowls in a short window in a loaded conference (the NFC of that era had the Cowboys, Giants, Bears, and Niners as our chief competition, the Ravens competition were the patriots, and to a lesser extent the Steelers and the Colts, great teams too, but in an expanded playoff with more room for error. When's the last time a team missed the playoffs w/a 10-6 record like we did in 1985 and 1989?).

 

I'm babbling.

 

[PartyPosse]

21 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

A different world and different time, and Gibbs and those teams never get enough credit because they're the only dynasty in NFL History than featured 3 QBs, none of whom made the HOF, and only one of whom had a resume that wouldn't have been spit take/laughed out the of bar, let alone the room where such a discussion might take place. I think we collectively have a bit of a weird issue w/QB because we're the only team in history to have built a dynasty w/o a legit franchise QB (or even go to RB). Why on earth that only gets passing attention is beyond me, doesn't matter what decade you look at, those teams usually have football card/fat head poster level talents at QB, and RB and elsewhere. 

I don’t know if you can say we had a dynasty per se. we were just a well-run organization that consistently won. But those three super bowl were spread out over 11 seasons and in between we had some ups and downs.

[mistertim]

More Zach Wilson opinion. Thinks he'll be the 3rd QB taken after Lawrence and Fields.

 

 

[Riggo#44]

2 hours ago, The Consigliere said:

Chase is awesome, yes, but Chase doesn't matter at all if we don't have a QB. Chase especially doesn't matter when we don't have a QB and the strength of the team is already the DL before we even select Chase. People just wanted Chase. That's all. A sure thing that would make them feel better in the middle of the tenth double digit beat down of the season. That's what it feels like when I read these takes.

 

People act like we have no shot at getting a QB....

 

Get a QB in this draft and then we have them both.