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


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

The results weren’t that much different except Henry added an element that forced opponents not to be so aggressive at the line. Mariota was sacked like 30 times prior to being benched in 2019. Henry is just the type of player that once he’s on a roll he’s unstoppable. Simple as that. You just jump on his back and ride the momentum. The team was 3-4 this year when he’s held under 100 yards and 8-1 when over. Same with playoffs. Over 100 yards? Titans are 3-0. Under? 0-3.

 

So in your opinion if Mariota were to go back and replace Tannehill when Henry is suddenly "hot" he'd be doing the same thing Tannehill is? The offense drastically changed when Tannehill came in and started lighting it up; it was incredibly obvious when you watched them.

 

You seem to be looking at it as that only happened because Henry got hot, but I think it's both...teams having to respect the passing offense and not being able to stack the box certainly helped Henry.

 

I'm just not sure what your angle is here. That Mariota is actually a really good QB but was just hiding it for 6 years?

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

 

So in your opinion if Mariota were to go back and replace Tannehill when Henry is suddenly "hot" he'd be doing the same thing Tannehill is? The offense drastically changed when Tannehill came in and started lighting it up; it was incredibly obvious when you watched them.

 

You seem to be looking at it as that only happened because Henry got hot, but I think it's both...teams having to respect the passing offense and not being able to stack the box certainly helped Henry.

 

I'm just not sure what your angle is here. That Mariota is actually a really good QB but was just hiding it for 6 years?

Maybe? Who knows? I doubt anyone saw this resurgence from Tannehill after years of mediocrity in Miami. I don’t watch enough titans to have answers but I do remember watching them in the playoffs and how dominant they looked when Henry was rolling and how awful the offense looked when KC stuffed him. I think Tannehill threw for like 400 yards in all three playoff games combined.

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

IMO the fact that Tannehill has had so much success with pretty much the same supporting cast as Mariota kinda throws cold water on the "Mariota had a horrible supporting cast and that's why he was so mediocre" argument that was posted in a tweet/video earlier.

 

Top QBs always seem to be able to elevate their supporting cast; they don't have to be surrounded by superstars to succeed. It certainly doesn't hurt, but if you look at all the top QBs over the years they've had lots of success with all different types of people to throw to.

 

I think at the end of the day Mariota is just a mediocre QB who will continue to be mediocre. We could do worse, but it's not like he'd be a night and day upgrade over Allen/Heinicke most likely.

Good point. The one thing I think about some of these younger guys is that they get thrown in there so quickly that they're not always as bad as they look, they're just confused, lack confidence or in some cases can't adjust to the speed of the game. I think that takes time, years, and some of these guys will figure it out. Here's an example: Randall Cunningham. Randall was not much more than a scrambler, running, street balling QB in Philly under a defensive minded head coach in Buddy Ryan who told him to just go out there and make plays. Once Cunningham left Philly for Minnesota he went from being a so-so passer in Philly to more of a pocket passing TD throwing machine in Minnesota with two HOF WR's and a great running game. He elevated his play to the talent around him. It was pretty incredible to see his transformation. 

Given confidence. good coaching and a strong supporting cast I can see Mariota doing well in Washington, especially now that he's been in the league a few years and has learned under multiple coaches to help him. He's a high draft pick with talent, someone needs to draw that talent out of him.

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

Mariota doesn't give me Smith vibes at all. Tannehill did. Tennessee took off after benching Mariota. In a season where all their success came from having the QB hand the ball off to Derrick Henry, I'm impressed that he could somehow hold the offense back.

In fairness Mariota had a sprained throwing elbow that season. Now that brings up a whole other issue and that is his injury history. He plays through them most of the time. But he does get banged up. 

1 hour ago, mistertim said:

 

And you don't think that the Titans suddenly having a much more potent passing attack could have been a source of Henry's explosion? Teams were constantly stacking the box against Mariota but once they realized Tannehill was killing it, they had to respect the pass. I doubt it's a coincidence that Henry started putting up monster games shortly after Tannehill was ripping it up through the air.

Look at his 2018 game logs. He never had more than 18 carries prior to Tannehill taking over. More often than not he had less than 10:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HenrDe00/gamelog/2018/

Edited by clskinsfan
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, HigSkin said:

I've read a lot of people who think the same.

 

 

Yep that's how I see it too. The offense ran its absolute best when we had mobile, athletic guys running it like Allen and Heineke.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what we are all forgetting is the influence of COACHING, TIMING, and OPPORTUNITY as to why a QB like Tannehill “finds himself”after a move to another team. Sometimes it defies the numbers, like in his case. He had been with an organization 6 full years before being shipped out as not the answer and a guy who wasn’t gonna cut it. 
 

Mariota & Winston may fit that model for this years crop of FA. Trubisky is still on the younger side so not sure he does. But with Mariota, he’s  shown some ability, not as much as Tannehill, in his time as the man, but some. Winston fits as a better comparison to Tanny as a guy that could evolve.

 

So if it’s him, Mariota,  I hope the light goes on. Today I’d lean towards making a run at Winston, over him as it wouldnt cost a pick to find out.  
 


 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

In fairness Mariota had a sprained throwing elbow that season. Now that brings up a whole other issue and that is his injury history. He plays through them most of the time. But he does get banged up. 

Look at his 2018 game logs. He never had more than 18 carries prior to Tannehill taking over. More often than not he had less than 10:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HenrDe00/gamelog/2018/

 

What does 2018 have to do with Tannehill? He took over in week 7 of 2019. In 2019 with Mariota starting, Henry averaged 19 carries per game. After Tannehill took over, he averaged 21 carries per game. Not exactly an earth shattering difference. 

 

I'm still not really clear on what point you're trying to make.

Edited by mistertim
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mistertim said:

 

What does 2018 have to do with Tannehill? He took over in week 7 of 2019. In 2019 with Mariota starting, Henry averaged 19 carries per game. After Tannehill took over, he averaged 21 carries per game. Not exactly an earth shattering difference. 

 

I'm still not exactly clear on what point you're trying to make.

A wrong point. I thought Tannehill took over in 2018 :)

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, COWBOY-KILLA- said:

I think what we are all forgetting is the influence of COACHING, TIMING, and OPPORTUNITY as to why a QB like Tannehill “finds himself”after a move to another team. Sometimes it defies the numbers, like in his case. He had been with an organization 6 full years before being shipped out as not the answer and a guy who wasn’t gonna cut it. 
 

Mariota & Winston may fit that model for this years crop of FA. Trubisky is still on the younger side so not sure he does. But with Mariota, he’s  shown some ability, not as much as Tannehill, in his time as the man, but some. Winston fits as a better comparison to Tanny as a guy that could evolve.

 

So if it’s him, Mariota,  I hope the light goes on. Today I’d lean towards making a run at Winston, over him as it wouldnt cost a pick to find out.  

 

Unfortunately I think Tannehill's success in Tennessee is giving us somewhat false hope at times. He is by far the exception and not the rule. Almost always when a mediocre or poor QB plays for a few years with the team that drafted him and then eventually gets shipped out after years of underwhelming play, that QB continues pretty much on the same trajectory. 

 

Maybe we'll get super lucky, but I certainly wouldn't count on the Tannehill thing happening with any of those other guys; that's just setting ourselves up for disappointment.

 

Realistically, the most likely result of them coming here would be...the same kind of play they've had in the past and they probably wouldn't be much of an upgrade over Allen/Heinicke. I don't think Winston is going to suddenly learn to not turn the ball over a ton and I don't think Trubisky is suddenly going to evolve into anything more than an underwhelming game manager. But anything is possible I suppose. 

 

Now, don't take that as me necessarily being against kicking the tires and giving one of them a shot on a moderate "prove it" contract, but I wouldn't really want to give any of them big contracts and tie up cap money in guys who have never been anything but mediocre players.

 

13 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

A wrong point. I thought Tannehill took over in 2018 :)

 

Ok gotcha. I was racking my brain and trying to figure out if there was some 2018 correlation with Tannehill. :ols:

Edited by mistertim
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had to turn off Sheehan and Cooley's podcast today.  I don't get Sheehan's love affair with Darnold.  He was advocating trading #19 for him!

 

Darnold has:  45 TDs, 39 ints, 20 Fumbles (15 lost), under 60 % completion (in 38 games)

 

Compared him to Mariotta:  77 TDs, 45 ints, 33 Fumbles (23 lost), 63 % completion percentage (in 64 games)

 

Darnold is a human TO machine who is inaccurate.

 

Give me Mariotta anyway of the week.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Darnold is damaged goods to me. I put him in the same bucket as Josh Rosen. Rosen I was willing to trade 2nd rounder for in 2019, but that was because we had NOBODY on the roster. We have Allen and Heinicke. I don't expect them to do great things, but I'd rather spend more time and effort on them than taking an expensive flyer on damaged goods in a cap-strained year.

 

If Mariota is cheap, go for it, but if Alex is still on the roster by training camp, 1 of our 3 QBs not named Alex better be on a cheap enough contract to cut loose, and I'd rather it not be the younger QBs who still have potential to grow.

Edited by NickyJ
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

Darnold is damaged goods to me. I put him in the same bucket as Josh Rosen. Rosen I was willing to trade 2nd rounder for in 2019, but that was because we had NOBODY on the roster. We have Allen and Heinicke. I don't expect them to do great things, but I'd rather spend more time and effort on them than taking an expensive flyer on damaged goods in a cap-strained year.

 

If Mariota is cheap, go for it, but if Alex is still on the roster by training camp, 1 of our 3 QBs not named Alex better be on a cheap enough contract to cut loose, and I'd rather it not be the younger QBs who still have potential to grow.

A 2nd rounder for Rosen was a bad idea then too, even if we didn’t have anyone on the roster. He just wasn’t that good and you’re right, Darnold is similar.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mhd24 said:

I had to turn off Sheehan and Cooley's podcast today.  I don't get Sheehan's love affair with Darnold.  He was advocating trading #19 for him!

 

Darnold has:  45 TDs, 39 ints, 20 Fumbles (15 lost), under 60 % completion (in 38 games)

 

Compared him to Mariotta:  77 TDs, 45 ints, 33 Fumbles (23 lost), 63 % completion percentage (in 64 games)

 

Darnold is a human TO machine who is inaccurate.

 

Give me Mariotta anyway of the week.

 

 

 

Sheehan is my favorite WFT/local radio personality but I don't always agree with him.  He loves Darnold, he can't explain why outside of liking him in the draft and he played well in some of the rare games the Jets won.  He's talked Cooley into it too even though Cooley has admitted he hasn't watched Darnold.   

 

Then Sheehan also really digs Kyle Trask.  That came up recently.  Yuck. :ols:

 

20 minutes ago, dyst said:

A 2nd rounder for Rosen was a bad idea then too, even if we didn’t have anyone on the roster. He just wasn’t that good and you’re right, Darnold is similar.

 

they have different styles.  But they are both bad decision makers. 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

 

Question is, whether he's better than Allen and Heinicke, and whether we need 3 Heinickallens ?

3 might not even cut it.  We might need 4 to make it all the way through the season. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

Sheehan is like a lot of people who just get fixated on a guy and won't let go. Some people just choose strange hills to die on. There are posters in here who are still high on Dewey Haskins.

 

He's talented (not everyone can do solo radio).  Its weird, he didn't like Haskins at all during the draft, but after last year, he was all in and thought he was a gamer and tough.  Then, he chastised Ron pretty heavily after benching him.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mistertim said:

 

Unfortunately I think Tannehill's success in Tennessee is giving us somewhat false hope at times. He is by far the exception and not the rule. Almost always when a mediocre or poor QB plays for a few years with the team that drafted him and then eventually gets shipped out after years of underwhelming play, that QB continues pretty much on the same trajectory. 

 

Maybe we'll get super lucky, but I certainly wouldn't count on the Tannehill thing happening with any of those other guys; that's just setting ourselves up for disappointment.

 

Realistically, the most likely result of them coming here would be...the same kind of play they've had in the past and they probably wouldn't be much of an upgrade over Allen/Heinicke. I don't think Winston is going to suddenly learn to not turn the ball over a ton and I don't think Trubisky is suddenly going to evolve into anything more than an underwhelming game manager. But anything is possible I suppose. 

 

Now, don't take that as me necessarily being against kicking the tires and giving one of them a shot on a moderate "prove it" contract, but I wouldn't really want to give any of them big contracts and tie up cap money in guys who have never been anything but mediocre players.

 

 

Ok gotcha. I was racking my brain and trying to figure out if there was some 2018 correlation with Tannehill. :ols:

 

Yes absolutely, good point. It's definitely not a given, its a hope. It's one giant could be may be.  For me Winston is the choice here, will be interesting to see if they are interested at all, Ron knows him well.  But I'll roll with whomever they feel fine with...I'm resigned to the thought of us not striking it big this year at QB, but, you never know. We are dealing with Riverboat Ron so hold your chips tight. lol.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, mhd24 said:

I had to turn off Sheehan and Cooley's podcast today.  I don't get Sheehan's love affair with Darnold.  He was advocating trading #19 for him!

 

Darnold has:  45 TDs, 39 ints, 20 Fumbles (15 lost), under 60 % completion (in 38 games)

 

Compared him to Mariotta:  77 TDs, 45 ints, 33 Fumbles (23 lost), 63 % completion percentage (in 64 games)

 

Darnold is a human TO machine who is inaccurate.

 

Give me Mariotta anyway of the week.

 

 

 

I'm not sure if this is more of an indictment of Darnold or Mariota...

Mariota's TD rate is 1.20 TD's/game Darnolds is 1.18 TD's/game 

Mariota's INT rate is .70 INT's/game  Darnolds is 1.02 InT's/game

Mariota's FUM rate is .51 FUM/game  Darnolds is .52 FUM/game

Mariota's LOST FUM .35 LF/game Darnolds is .35 LF/game

 

Yikes I thought Mariota took better care of the ball...lol

So by these numbers Darnold is Mariota with more picks. 

 

So these figures got me wanting to look up Winston's numbers cuz I had but only superficially.. Wow historically bad. I forgot the fumbles too.

Read the article linked below it lays out who Winston is warts and all.

 

Winston's TD rate 1.72 TD's/game

INT rate 1.25 int's/game

FUM rate .69 FUM/game

Lost FUM rate .31 LF/game

 

And it led me deeper down the Jameis crab-leg rabbit hole as to why I had this bug that he'd be a risk worth taking and I found this.

 

https://www.theringer.com/2020/4/8/21212208/jameis-winston-interceptions-fumbles-turnovers-new-team

 

image.thumb.png.29d384d72255c0c3bc2cc4403828ffda.png

 

 

No QB available in this FA provides the upside on a flyer at QB like Jameis Winston, none.  It could however end up historically bad as well if he doesn't get the turnovers straight. 

Who's feeling lucky? lol.  If we are gonna go with mediocre QB's give me the one who throws TD's...and and... he got Lasik!

 

 

Edited by COWBOY-KILLA-
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mhd24 said:

 

He's talented (not everyone can do solo radio).  Its weird, he didn't like Haskins at all during the draft, but after last year, he was all in and thought he was a gamer and tough.  Then, he chastised Ron pretty heavily after benching him.  

 

I have nothing but respect for journalists, but being a guy who can execute a solo radio program is mostly about personality traits that have nothing to do with evaluating the NFL.  Unfortunately.

 

Sheehan is a good dude, I've met him a few times and he has solid vibes, but he gets way too into his takes, which can go 180 sometimes.  I enjoy his show but his endorsements are proven wrong more frequently than someone who deserves our deference. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, mistertim said:

I'd also be a bit shocked if they gave a potential $175+ million contract to a guy who can hardly walk at the moment.

Didn't know he was that banged up still... That sucks.
 

Anyway...

 

I think seeing Haskins, Allen, Smith, and Heinicke should give us an idea of what type of QB could produce in this offense. I could be wrong but I think the system is as fool-proof as an NFL system could realistically be.

 

With Haskins, he was awful but even with horrible decision making, he still found a way to look okay at times. Smith was sooooo limited in this offense, but even he found a way to run it despite his limitations. Heinicke and Allen ran it the best because they know it the best; it makes sense. I know it's only five quarters but Heinicke showed us what that thang looks like when it's hitting on all cylinders.

 

Knowing this, I think it's cool to want to input Mariota in this offense. I understand he had his problems in Tennessee and that he looked decent in his game with the Raiders but I don't care about that. When thinking about a QB, I try to picture what they can do in this offense based on what I've seen from the four QBs that have played in it so far.

 

What he, Mariota, could bring opens up the entire offense based on his running abilities alone. Someone will have to tell him to stop trying to run through folks but I think it could become potent. Adding another WR and TE with him could make the offense interesting.

 

It has to be for the right price. Anything higher than a third isn't worth it regardless of how well I think he can be in the offense.

  • Like 1
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
×
×
  • Create New...