Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Rookie QB or Veteran QB for 2021???


Rookie QB or Veteran QB for next season(2021)???  

226 members have voted

  1. 1. Rookie QB or Veteran QB for next season (2021)???

    • Draft QB first round
    • Rookie QB from outside first round
    • Sign FA Veteran
    • Trade for Veteran
    • Stand Pat with one of the QBs we have on Roster, draft QB in 2022 Draft iinstead
    • I don't know
    • I don't care
    • I'm tired of 5 year development plans burned to the ground in less then 2
  2. 2. Rookie QB or Veteran QB for next season (2021)??? - (Feb 2020)

    • Draft QB first round
    • Rookie QB from outside first round
    • Sign FA Veteran
    • Trade for Veteran
      0
    • Stand Pat with one of the QBs we have on Roster, draft QB in 2022 Draft iinstead
    • I don't know
      0
    • I don't care
    • I'm tired of 5 year development plans burned to the ground in less then 2
      0


Recommended Posts

I think Watson will be too expensive, Dak is going to get tagged, Mariota will be expensive relative to cost, and we'll end up with Teddy. Open competition between Heinicke, Bridgewater and Allen for the starting job.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

 

 

As for your theory about the QB/price/value.  Judging by this off season, it looks like the desperation still exists by teams to fill the spot where they are willing to overpay. But the off season is still young so will see.

 

I was more making the point that average to above QB bubble was about to burst and it appears it has. 2016, 2017, and 2018 were years the NFL lost its mind in paying for competence at higher or equal to rate of the elite QB. It popped and now you see order has been restored and appropriate names represent the top 10 paid QBs over last two years. Average guys do not appear to be in position any longer to reset the market. 
 

The rationale during Kirk years was you have to pay him elite money, because the market says so. That was true in that bloated market, but the NFL was wrong and it since has corrected itself. 

 

The average to above guys were strong arming teams and getting away with it. 
 

 

Quote

I've read your explanations on the QB spot before.  I agree with some of it.  I think my main issue with it is if you go too far with a mindset like this - you can lose out.  To me its all about context.  And sometimes you got to overpay to strike it big.   Let's say for example, Winston at 15 million whereas you can get Colt McCoy at 3 million.     You can say Winston isn't 5 times better than Colt.  So you are getting the better deal with Colt.  Yep, sure.  But your team might stink with Colt even though you get him at the better value.  Qbs are the most important position on the field.  So while you can get both a mediocre QB and a prime receiver lets say for the same price you can get just a good QB -- the good QB probably beats the mediocre one even with the benefit of upgrading the roster with that extra receiver. 
 

 

For me it’s about cap % and not wanting an average guy to represent close to what an elite guy does in that regard. Admittedly, I don’t study cap related stuff, so my logic is the gap of play between the elite guy and average has a better chance to be made up with more money to spend on a supporting cast. 

 

Quote

 

My point is i think you have no choice but to factor a curve on the QB spot.   Also, you can manipulate the cap, stagger things for example, so if your roster is set for the kill now, it likely behooves you to be more aggressive, etc. 

 

The staggering and manipulating the cap is an interesting nuance I haven’t considered enough in the past. I was looking at Russel Wilson’s contract and it’s pretty wild what they have done and wonder if that’s related to his recent comments about the team.

 

Then that leads me to wondering if staggering contracts has value, due to players demanding extensions and more money in middle of deals. Thoughts??

 

Edited by wit33
Link to post
Share on other sites

If we punt the QB question to 2022, then Dak is probably available in FA and Aaron Rodgers becomes a lot more tradeable with his contract. Of course, there's a chance one of the in-house guys takes the starting job and runs with it, too.

 

I think it's quite wise not to overpay for a blah option this year. I'd say there's like a 60-70% chance Dak makes it to FA next year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TryTheBeal! said:

Not too shabby!

 

 

 

 

I really want Carolina to get him so that team is out of our way and reduce the competition.  They're pesky to the WFT search because they have a better draft position!

 

 

Edited by HigSkin
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

 

Really ? I thought his name would be pronounced more like...

 

 

 

 

Oh no, some of those hits were illegal, as they were shots to the helmet.

So some of those don't count.

Perhaps Waterboy is not actually the GOAT of Linebackers, after all ?

KDawg and Koolblue may be disappointed with that revelation.

But the whole GOAT Waterboy is probably a separate discussion in a separate thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

 

Why? What if Lance is Patrick Mahomes? The Chiefs traded up for him because they saw something special and they still had Alex Smith under contract for 2 years.

 

Not saying Lance is Mahomes. But you can't let "we need a QB now" be the driving force between you drafting a potential stud like Lance a year early or a middle of the road guy who might be okay in Mac Jones.


Swing for the fences. We aren't winning super bowls in 2021.

Exactly this. If people want to debate the merits of Trey Lance, that's a separate conversation, and a valid one. But the number of people whose only seeming consideration is 2021 is kind of mind-boggling. That single minded focus on 'got to win this year, what can we do to win more this year' with no vision for the long-term is exactly the thing that has doomed this organization since Snyder bought it. A discussion on whether to trade up fro Lance should be entirely about what kind of a QB you think he can be for the next decade and a half or so. To dismiss it entirely because we're desperate for a one-year run is just sad.

 

At best, A Carr level QB and a bunch of luck and maybe, maybe we can be a level of team that could win a single playoff game next year. That should hardly be the objective the team should be building towards. 

Edited by Rufus T Firefly
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Patients is a virtue.  Robbing Peter to pay Paul you go broke. The WFT isn't a QB away from winning the SB.  RR told Turner, while being down two scores, we don't have a play that can score 14 points.  So, with so many roster issues the 2021 goal should be to win the NFC East and put the roster in the 2022 off-season talk to be 1 or 2 moves away from SB contention.  This 2020 team's DL pushed them and it's coming back.  I'd rather they trade #19 for Orlando Brown OT and pay Scherff strengthening the OL.  Go get WR2 and another TE.  Fill out the other holes like they did in 2020 the best they can.  If that means you have to add a QB for competition via FA or later in the draft, fine.  Otherwise running it back with the best of the 3 from last year, in this scenario projects WFT to compete for the division while not mortgaging the future 2022 season where they wouldn't be 1 guy away from contention.  It's not as instantly gratifying as blowing your load on a new QB toy now, but a step closer to reality.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CapsSkins said:

I think Watson will be too expensive, Dak is going to get tagged, Mariota will be expensive relative to cost, and we'll end up with Teddy. Open competition between Heinicke, Bridgewater and Allen for the starting job.

 

I can't see Oakland wanting to keep Mariota when he's making 10.625 million next season.  And they probably figure he leaves them after next season as a UFA, so they'd be happy to get a 4th rounder for him.  Remember, the cap is going way down - just doesn't make sense to keep a 10 mil backup QB that'll probably leave you anyway the next year.   

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

 

I think he means Russell Wilson. Unless you're making a joke ?

I'm joking, my point being I think both are fairly lopsided.  

Edited by KillBill26
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said:

Heinicke

Gibson

Sweat

and 2 1sts...

 

For Wilson.  And we sign Allen Robinson and go FAT BOY crazy in the draft.

 

WHOS WITH ME?!?

 

Oh hell no!  Why trade Sweat?  We have an excess of DT's; not DE's.  And we got no RB's.    

1 minute ago, KillBill26 said:

I'm joking, my point being I think my proposal might be just as lopsided as his.  

If folks are making jokes - and they're that clever - can they do something to make it more obvious - maybe green font?

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

 

Oh hell no!  Why trade Sweat?  We have an excess of DT's; not DE's.  And we got no RB's.    

 

He would get here and be like "this is why I need to be involved in FO decisions...."

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

 

I can't see Oakland wanting to keep Mariota when he's making 10.625 million next season.  And they probably figure he leaves them after next season as a UFA, so they'd be happy to get a 4th rounder for him.  Remember, the cap is going way down - just doesn't make sense to keep a 10 mil backup QB that'll probably leave you anyway the next year.   

 

 

 

I tend to agree he'll be moved, but with all the bidders in the waters I wouldn't surprised to see him go for a 3rd - which would be a bit rich for me. But I could definitely see it happening. Heinicke-Allen-Mariota/Bridgewater. I can see either of those being our QB room for sure.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

No thanks on Wilson or Watson......massive contracts with no trade clauses. I love my team and my town.  Wait my team sucks because you paid me top dollar and can't afford to surround me with what made me great in the first place? Yeah gotta cover my ass and move to a SB ready team and wipe them out as well.  All about team until you get paid then it's all about you.  Rant done and some of you will go off and post **** about ownership and the like.... but damn, it must be nice to sign a biggun and then act like it's all about you.  

That's why you got sacked 400 times genius.....

Edited by tmandoug1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Mahomes is more likely the Mahomes we know because he has Andy Reid and a highly talented offensive powerhouse , we don't and don't have anybody who has Andy's history (Lavell Edwards, Mike Holmgren and his own). Also, Mahomes put up multiple quality seasons at TTU.

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, wit33 said:


 

The rationale during Kirk years was you have to pay him elite money, because the market says so. That was true in that bloated market, but the NFL was wrong and it since has corrected itself. 

 

 

 

Kirk ended up getting even more money when his contract was up in Minny.  I don't even think I'd look at Kirk's situation to be exclusive to the QB spot but FA in general.  Typically the next best player who hits FA gets a big contract regardless of them being the best at their spot ala Hooper for example at TE in the last FA crop.  Cooper got paid last year in FA above and beyond better WRs in the league but heck that's FA. As far as I can tell this pattern has continued versus stopped/corrected.

 

The QB salaries for good to elite QBS continue to rise unabated.  What was 20 million five years ago is now 30 million now.  What was 30 million now seems to be 40 million.  I agree that the cap has gone up too but when you got QBs like Dak turning down 35 million a year offers, things don't really feel that slowed down to me.

 

I think where the market has corrected is overpaying for crap QBs or QBs coming off of crap years like a Winston for example.  Teams aren't overpaying a dude like Keenum for example. 

 

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

 

 

The staggering and manipulating the cap is an interesting nuance I haven’t considered enough in the past. I was looking at Russel Wilson’s contract and it’s pretty wild what they have done and wonder if that’s related to his recent comments about the team.

 

Then that leads me to wondering if staggering contracts has value, due to players demanding extensions and more money in middle of deals. Thoughts??

 

 

Teams like the Saints have been in win now mode for years so they keep punting money forward.  As for QBs some of their contracts tend to be heaviled staggered I presume in part to win now and in part on the hope that the cap will catch up to it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Breer

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/2021/02/11/gameplan-how-2021-offseason-will-be-different

 

AFC Exec 2: “How Joe [Douglas] handles [Sam] Darnold, the second pick, etc.”

The draft this year starts at No. 2, and the Jets’ domino will be a big one. GM Joe Douglas has fielded calls on Darnold and told teams to be patient with him—which at least tells you they are considering their options at the position. And part of that process for the Jets, of course, will be putting BYU’s Zach Wilson, Ohio State’s Justin Fields and North Dakota State’s Trey Lance up on the board against Darnold.

There really are three outcomes here, each of which will reverberate across the NFL. The first one is the Jets could hang onto Darnold and make the second pick available, which will give quarterback-needy teams like Carolina, Washington and Indianapolis an avenue to get a franchise guy. The second is the team could hang onto Darnold and draft a position player (Oregon LT Penei Sewell?), which puts Miami at No. 3 in the catbird seat. The third has the Jets trading Darnold, which opens up another QB option for those teams, and taking a QB.

It’s also worth mentioning that whoever has Darnold in May will face the deadline to pick up his fifth-year option (or not), and per the new CBA, those are now fully guaranteed.

 

NFC Exec 2: “The influence or perceived influence the QB position is having on decision-makers!”

We all saw what Aaron Rodgers said after the NFC title game, and what Russell Wilson said this week, and you’d be a fool not to consider the trend there—though I think the intention of those guys (who both knew exactly what they were doing) is a little different than you might think. It’s easy to interpret it, of course, as a player shooting his way out of town. I actually think it’s more of a warning shot than that.

Look at what Buffalo did in trading for Stefon Diggs, what the Bucs did in collecting experienced, accomplished skill players (Leonard Fournette, Rob Gronkowski, Antonio Brown) and what the Chiefs have done for the last two or three years (Sammy Watkins, Le’Veon Bell, Mecole Hardman, Clyde Edwards-Helaire, etc.) All acted with a sense of urgency, and Josh Allen, Tom Brady and Patrick Mahomes reaped the rewards.

I really think this is what Rodgers and Wilson were getting at, in basically instructing their teams to build with more urgency. Whether or not listening is a great idea for those teams is a fair question. But I feel very comfortable saying that this is where these guys are coming from. So it’ll be interesting to see where both guys stand, and what their teams have done, a couple months from now.

 

NFC Exec 3: “The [Matthew] Stafford trade was the biggest. Mainly because it set the bar (fairly or unfairly) for all of the other QB movement/compensation.”

Another executive brought up Deshaun Watson as the top story line, and a third raised Wilson’s situation in Seattle. So here’s my guess as to how it’ll play out—big offers will be made on the truly elite quarterbacks that have not been made available, and big prices will be asked for in return for guys who potential are available.

The Carson Wentz situation is a perfect example. The Eagles initially asked for the Stafford return with an eye on getting a first-round pick and maybe something else. That ask pushed some teams away from the table. Others that were truly interested in Wentz stuck around but haven’t come close to what Philly wants. The truth is the market didn’t cool for Wentz. The truth is simply that the gap between what Philly asked for and what other teams were willing to give up was considerable all along.

The pace of trade talks has revealed that. And the larger point here is that with so many teams toying with the idea of looking to upgrade at the position (The Mahomes Effect, which we’ve discussed), sellers have high hopes that prices will rise on good-not-great players.

Ultimately, if Houston or Seattle ever decided to move their guys (I don’t think they will, but we’ll see), they’d be able to bring home a king’s ransom. Obviously. What’s less obvious is what players like Wentz or Darnold might bring home. Which, again, explains why the Wentz fervor of a week ago didn’t produce a trade.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
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...