Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Rookie QB or Veteran QB for 2021???


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

156 members have voted

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

    • Draft QB first round
      42
    • Rookie QB from outside first round
      17
    • Sign FA Veteran
      26
    • Trade for Veteran
      25
    • Stand Pat with one of the QBs we have on Roster, draft QB in 2022 Draft iinstead
      18
    • I don't know
      9
    • I don't care
      7
    • I'm tired of 5 year development plans burned to the ground in less then 2
      12


Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, KDawg said:


The OL yesterday wasn’t good, of course. But they were serviceable. Charles in his two play sample (can we/he catch a break?) looked really good actually. 
 

If we can get a competent LT and maybe a rookie in a guard spot or RT I think the line is much improved. Of course, that would rely on Scherff being re-upped. Which they may need to do to protect us from filling another hole. 


I was unable to catch the game yesterday.  Was Charles playing LT?  Has a medical report come back on him?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/18/2020 at 4:34 PM, Renegade7 said:

I don't want a Rookie QB in 2021.  We're going to screw it up.  

 

Are we sure we even get the #1 overall pick?  So are we trading up? We tanking to do that? Is Lawrence good enough to survive our total inability to develop rookie QBs?

 

This is NOT a right situation place right now, its just not.  I can't put all my eggs into the next guy again, we've tried this twice now in the last decade with nothing to show for it.  One cost us so many picks just to move up a couple spots, another fell in our a lap and we still mess it up.

 

I'd rather doing something crazy like trade for Stafford or stick with Kyle Allen then blow another Rookie QBs future up with no talent around them what-so-ever and a franchise that doesn't even have a name right now. Dak is a free agent. How much longer is ARod going to be in Green Bay? This is not the offseason to get our guy for the future, we'll ruin him before we even fix the oline or decide if we are keep the OC.

 

I don't know what the long game is, but I need a break from QBs that are supposed to save us from ourselves.  Chase Young isn't even doing that yet.

I'm with ya.....the way to do this is to go with the formula that won Joe Gibbs 3 rings, build the offensive line and fill in the blanks around it. Draft a stud linebacker and offensive linemen in rounds 1-3....find a TE and WR(s) in free agency (Smith-Shuster and Ertz?) Gibbs won with serviceable QB's and added key pieces where needed (Jim Lachey, Wilbur Marshall). His constant focus was on a dominant offensive line and running game to set up the downfield passes. It shouldn't be that hard to figure out if you attack the offensive line as a priority. The defensive line is set.....Sign a vet QB and build around him. 

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, kingdaddy said:

I'm with ya.....the way to do this is to go with the formula that won Joe Gibbs 3 rings, build the offensive line and fill in the blanks around it. Draft a stud linebacker and offensive linemen in rounds 1-3....find a TE and WR(s) in free agency (Smith-Shuster and Ertz?) Gibbs won with serviceable QB's and added key pieces where needed (Jim Lachey, Wilbur Marshall). His constant focus was on a dominant offensive line and running game to set up the downfield passes. It shouldn't be that hard to figure out if you attack the offensive line as a priority. The defensive line is set.....Sign a vet QB and build around him. 

This ain't the 80s anymore.

 

If you don't have a franchise QB you can't sustain success in the NFL. Period.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Warhead36 said:

This ain't the 80s anymore.

 

If you don't have a franchise QB you can't sustain success in the NFL. Period.

Thank you, just about to post the same thing.  Just so tired of the whole Joe Gibbs/three different quarterbacks analogy, that was a different time.  The teams that have lasting success in the league today more often than not have a really good quarterback.  when you consider the fact that less than a third of the teams in the league have a top 10 quarterback yet they're the teams making the majority of the playoff and super bowl appearances this should be obvious.  But sadly to some it's still not for some strange reason

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/19/2020 at 3:34 AM, Renegade7 said:

I don't want a Rookie QB in 2021.  We're going to screw it up.  

 

Are we sure we even get the #1 overall pick?  So are we trading up? We tanking to do that? Is Lawrence good enough to survive our total inability to develop rookie QBs?

 

This is NOT a right situation place right now, its just not.  I can't put all my eggs into the next guy again, we've tried this twice now in the last decade with nothing to show for it.  One cost us so many picks just to move up a couple spots, another fell in our a lap and we still mess it up.

 

I'd rather doing something crazy like trade for Stafford or stick with Kyle Allen then blow another Rookie QBs future up with no talent around them what-so-ever and a franchise that doesn't even have a name right now. Dak is a free agent. How much longer is ARod going to be in Green Bay? This is not the offseason to get our guy for the future, we'll ruin him before we even fix the oline or decide if we are keep the OC.

 

I don't know what the long game is, but I need a break from QBs that are supposed to save us from ourselves.  Chase Young isn't even doing that yet.

I'm not reading 7 pages of this forum.  I was thinking this similar issue recently so glad I saw you put it out there.

There's going to be another batch of vet QBs next year.  I'm not in total agreement about the Haskins 'getting screwed' idea, as I place more blame on this immature over hyped< over drafted< and inexperience than roster and coaching issues.  I'd agree that they weren't ready to develop a franchise rookie for certain.  

They sincerely need a 3 year plan and I think you get there by building up to that point.  Honestly, had Alex Smith not been injured then they'd be farther along.  Just have to roll with that and Dallas is going to enjoy that reality in the near future. 

Chase young has a core injury that isn't going to allow him to play at 100% this year.  He probably gets off season surgery and will come into next year healthy.  Cheers!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

This ain't the 80s anymore.

 

If you don't have a franchise QB you can't sustain success in the NFL. Period.

Do we want a Matthew Stafford situation with a guy surrounded by trash? You ain't winning with JUST a QB either.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, IrepDC said:

Do we want a Matthew Stafford situation with a guy surrounded by trash? You ain't winning with JUST a QB either.

I mean yeah nobody is saying that. But you HAVE to get the QB down. Everything else is easy in comparison.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Under the current system, a rebuilding team is on a five-year clock once they draft their "franchise" QB. They have the five years of his rookie deal to build a championship team around him before his second deal puts them in cap hell.

 

So, the real analysis is twofold: whether the WFT can build a champion around any QB from their current bare cupboard within five years, and whether there'll be a QB capable of starting from Day 1 and developing quickly so that he's at peak when the roster is ready for a championship run.

 

If the answer to the first question is no, then they need to bring in a vet and not bother drafting a QB for another couple years. Work on the rest of the roster.

 

Teams with an established starter can afford the luxury of drafting a Haskins and hope that 2-3 years on the bench are enough for him to learn the position. The Redskins were not in a position to do that. The Steelers and Packers were.

 

It's probably too late to sign a vet and have Haskins sit for two more years. Starting him early ruined that. He needs to move on.

Edited by profusion
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

This ain't the 80s anymore.

 

If you don't have a franchise QB you can't sustain success in the NFL. Period.

Just last year the 49ers made and nearly won the Super Bowl with a subpar starting QB....Jimmy G. is far from a franchise QB. By and large you are correct but Nick Foles (not even a starting QB) just won a SB with the Eagles and he beat the all time "franchise" QB in Brady. San Fran's formula of defense and running the ball last year took them far. Peyton Manning won a Super Bowl in Denver with no arm due to a great defense. 

Football will always be about winning in the trenches...The Titans went into Baltimore last year and proved that when Derrick Henry and the defense dominated the Ravens. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, kingdaddy said:

Just last year the 49ers made and nearly won the Super Bowl with a subpar starting QB....Jimmy G. is far from a franchise QB. By and large you are correct but Nick Foles (not even a starting QB) just won a SB with the Eagles and he beat the all time "franchise" QB in Brady. San Fran's formula of defense and running the ball last year took them far. Peyton Manning won a Super Bowl in Denver with no arm due to a great defense. 

Football will always be about winning in the trenches...The Titans went into Baltimore last year and proved that when Derrick Henry and the defense dominated the Ravens. 

You can always cherry pick year to year examples. But the fact remains, the teams that SUSTAIN success YEAR IN YEAR OUT have the best QBs. And the best QBs are by and large drafted in the 1st round.

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

You can always cherry pick year to year examples. But the fact remains, the teams that SUSTAIN success YEAR IN YEAR OUT have the best QBs. And the best QBs are by and large drafted in the 1st round.

 

Not necessarily at the top of the first round, though. Of 21st Century champions, I can think of only the Manning brothers as being blue chippers who won SBs. The others I can recall were lower first-round guys or  non-first-rounders (Brady, Wilson, Mahomes, Brees etc.)

 

The point being that it might be better for the WFT to build a credible team before going all in on a rookie QB, rather than drafting one in the top two or three this spring and then hoping he doesn't get killed while they try to find some starting caliber linemen to put in front of him.

Edited by profusion
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

Thank you, just about to post the same thing.  Just so tired of the whole Joe Gibbs/three different quarterbacks analogy, that was a different time.  The teams that have lasting success in the league today more often than not have a really good quarterback.  when you consider the fact that less than a third of the teams in the league have a top 10 quarterback yet they're the teams making the majority of the playoff and super bowl appearances this should be obvious.  But sadly to some it's still not for some strange reason

It isn't a different time.  Back in Gibbs 1 days, the team's with the top qbs won most of the time, no different than today.  Gibbs was just that special that he was able to do it differently.  Would have been incredible to have had someone like Jim Kelly as our qb back then.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ILikeBilly said:

It isn't a different time.  Back in Gibbs 1 days, the team's with the top qbs won most of the time, no different than today.  Gibbs was just that special that he was able to do it differently.  Would have been incredible to have had someone like Jim Kelly as our qb back then.

 

This is true but it's clearly more of a passing league now than it was back then. so the quarterback position is of even more value today.

 

What people want to conveniently forget about those three quarterbacks is at the time they won those rings every one of them was in fact playing like a franchise quarterback. People act as if they were playing like Wade Wilson but they won anyway to support the idea that you don't need a great quarterback. Again those quarterbacks were great in the at the time they won the Super Bowl, in the case of Mark Rypien when he reverted to who he really was the team went in another direction.  To expect a 10-year run with an average quarterback is setting yourself up for failure.

 

Common sense should tell us that you get more good seasons out of a quarterback who's actually good instead of one who caught lightning in a bottle like Ryp did.

Edited by Darrell Green Fan
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

This is true but it's clearly more of a passing league now than it was back then. so the quarterback position is of even more value today.

 

What people want to conveniently forget about those three quarterbacks is at the time they won those rings every one of them was in fact playing like a franchise quarterback. People act as if they were playing like Wade Wilson but they won anyway to support the idea that you don't need a great quarterback. Again those quarterbacks were great in the at the time they won the Super Bowl, in the case of Mark Rypien when he reverted to who he really was the team went in another direction.  To expect a 10-year run with an average quarterback is setting yourself up for failure.

 

Common sense should tell us that you get more good seasons out of a quarterback who's actually good instead of one who caught lightning in a bottle like Ryp did.

That's true too. Theismann won a league MVP and Rypien made multiple Pro Bowls.

 

Collectively during that 4 Super Bowl appearance/3 win in 10 year span we had the play of a franchise QB but just in three different bodies.

16 minutes ago, profusion said:

 

Not necessarily at the top of the first round, though. Of 21st Century champions, I can think of only the Manning brothers as being blue chippers who won SBs. The others I can recall were lower first-round guys or  non-first-rounders (Brady, Wilson, Mahomes, Brees etc.)

 

The point being that it might be better for the WFT to build a credible team before going all in on a rookie QB, rather than drafting one in the top two or three this spring and then hoping he doesn't get killed while they try to find some starting caliber linemen to put in front of him.

Yes that is true. Its just all about maximizing your odds.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can tell you what doesn’t work; going into every draft needing a QB.  Hit on one and the next 5 years you can pick talent to put around them.  Miss and start all over.  We just can’t seem to pick the right one.  Is it lousy scouting, horrible talent evaluation, owner meddling, desperation or maybe a bit of all of that.  I like Lawrence and Fields, but I don’t know if either of their games translates to the pros.  Haskins had a great year behind an offensive line that was better than about every defensive line they played and receivers that were 3 steps open on every route.  See how well that is working out.  Lawrence looks great beating up on lesser talent ACC schools and Fields is doing what Haskins did.  We are going to keep picking until we get it right.

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

It isn't a different time.  Back in Gibbs 1 days, the team's with the top qbs won most of the time, no different than today.  Gibbs was just that special that he was able to do it differently.  Would have been incredible to have had someone like Jim Kelly as our qb back then.

 

1 hour ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

This is true but it's clearly more of a passing league now than it was back then. so the quarterback position is of even more value today.

 

What people want to conveniently forget about those three quarterbacks is at the time they won those rings every one of them was in fact playing like a franchise quarterback. People act as if they were playing like Wade Wilson but they won anyway to support the idea that you don't need a great quarterback. Again those quarterbacks were great in the at the time they won the Super Bowl, in the case of Mark Rypien when he reverted to who he really was the team went in another direction.  To expect a 10-year run with an average quarterback is setting yourself up for failure.

 

Common sense should tell us that you get more good seasons out of a quarterback who's actually good instead of one who caught lightning in a bottle like Ryp did.

The 83 Redskins averaged 34 points a game and set an all time NFL record for points scored in a season that wasn't broken until Randall Cunningham, Randy Moss, Cris Carter and that awesome Vikings team back in the day. Gibbs came from Air Coryell so don't say the game is much different. Rypien had a game with 6 TD passes in the playoffs against Atlanta in 91. You can build winning teams without the franchise QB although it helps to have one. Dan Marino never won a Super Bowl and really only came close once when the Niners blew him out as a rookie. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, evmiii said:

I can tell you what doesn’t work; going into every draft needing a QB.  Hit on one and the next 5 years you can pick talent to put around them.  Miss and start all over.  We just can’t seem to pick the right one.  Is it lousy scouting, horrible talent evaluation, owner meddling, desperation or maybe a bit of all of that.  I like Lawrence and Fields, but I don’t know if either of their games translates to the pros.  Haskins had a great year behind an offensive line that was better than about every defensive line they played and receivers that were 3 steps open on every route.  See how well that is working out.  Lawrence looks great beating up on lesser talent ACC schools and Fields is doing what Haskins did.  We are going to keep picking until we get it right.

That's exactly what the Browns have been doing for 30 years plus.....Maybe we should've taken Tua or Herbert this year? Some franchise QB's turn out that way because of the offensive systems they are in and the team put around them, others are just tremendous talents. Would you consider Cam Newton a franchise QB at this point and would you take him right now and for the next 5 years? I actually think I would....

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...