Rookie QB or Veteran QB for "Next Season"??? (I didn't bump this, but I ended up being wrong anyway....)

[JoggingGod]

13 minutes ago, bowhunter said:

Wait?? Are you implying that we don't? As if there are many other holes to fill on this team with draft capital and salary??  Hmmmm. What are good ways to prevent overspending money and draft picks???

You missed the point. Having a top tier QB compensates for having holes at some positions. No team is going to be able to be set at every position, not even close. The only way to stay a contender in the modern NFL is to have a franchise QB.

[bowhunter]

7 minutes ago, JoggingGod said:

You missed the point. Having a top tier QB compensates for having holes at some positions. No team is going to be able to be set at every position, not even close. The only way to stay a contender in the modern NFL is to have a franchise QB.

Like Stafford or Desuan Watson? They're the two biggest names I've heard so far.  Can we even talk to them while they're still in the playoffs? You can't make hay once you've sold the farm

[JoggingGod]

6 minutes ago, bowhunter said:

Like Stafford or Desuan Watson? They're the two biggest names I've heard so far.  Can we even talk to them while they're still in the playoffs? You can't make hay once you've sold the farm

We have a way better overall team than Detroit or Houston. Now is the time to go all in and try to compete.

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

20 hours ago, JoggingGod said:

Because this QB is arguably top 5 and is just 25 years old. All 4 of the remaining teams right now have upper echolon QBs playing for them.

 

Yeah, and the last time we did that it worked out so well for us.  And when the Saints did it for Ricky Williams it worked out so great for them.  

[Redwolves92]

36 minutes ago, JoggingGod said:

You missed the point. Having a top tier QB compensates for having holes at some positions. No team is going to be able to be set at every position, not even close. The only way to stay a contender in the modern NFL is to have a franchise QB.

THIS. With all the great rookies we have we must find a qb to win now. having a franchise qb will mean paying a ton of money to that qb and that issue is inevitable if we want to truly compete for a SB. Or we could try and draft again but we all know how tough it is to find a franchise qb, its possible by the time the qb develops (if he develops) the defense will lose its key pieces to FA. 

Edited January 22, 2021 by Redwolves92

[Thinking Skins]

38 minutes ago, JoggingGod said:

We have a way better overall team than Detroit or Houston. Now is the time to go all in and try to compete.

I don't agree with this. Detroit beat us. Houston was a good team coached by a crazy man. We went 7-9 on a run at the end but just like we could have been 11-5 we could have been 3-13

[Skinsinparadise]

3 hours ago, KDawg said:

See... I have an issue with the whole “we’re going to be aggressive, damnit!” Mindset.

 

It’s basically admitting, “we’re going to force it and fleece ourselves!”

 

Nothing is saying the report is correct. And with new management maybe they change that stance a bit. Sometimes the details on these things are held back a bit.

 

Maybe it’s “we’re going to be aggressive if an opportunity presents itself and it’s not too crazy”.

 

 

 

 

The point I was emphazing is there seems to be smoke from multiple places that the powers that be aren't in love with the QB room as it is and wants to upgrade it.  And its not just that report but Rivera himself doesn't sound like his preference is riding with the status quo, and all the beat guys are saying they are hearing they are on a QB quest this off season.  And they aren't saying that in a way that gives a vibe that they are looking for a Case Keenum type to just compete with what we got in house. 

 

Rivera tends to be honest.  Last off season the emphasis and leaks weren't about focusing on QB.  

 

Multiple reports could always be BS.  But I usually do better betting on a common refrain especially if they are coming from multiple fronts then betting against it.  But will see. 

 

And i agree aggressive can mean multiple things.    I don't think anyone wants to be fleeced.  We have some disagreements on this thread on what the price likely is to obtain certain players and or whether its worth it. 

 

My personal take is it doesn't matter how aggressive they want to be because they won't end up with attractive targets.  No Dak.  No Stafford.  No Watson.  And they are drafting too low and too many QB needy teams are drafting above them for them to land any of the top 4 QBs even if they aggressively push it.

 

I'd bet aggressive ends up with a more modest conquest like Ryan Fitzpatrick because sexier targets won't manfest or end up out of their range.  But that's just a guess.   Will see.

Edited January 22, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[CapsSkins]

It would be beyond hilarious if Amari Cooper turned us down to be a Cowboy only to miss the playoffs while we win the division and then watch his franchise QB leave Dallas for Washington.

 

Again, I can't see Jerry letting that happen. But it would be beyond funny.

[Skinsinparadise]

33 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

I don't agree with this. Detroit beat us. Houston was a good team coached by a crazy man. We went 7-9 on a run at the end but just like we could have been 11-5 we could have been 3-13

 

As Arians said he rejected our record, saying it was much better than that because Haskins was no longer the QB.  Haskins was the 34th ranked out of 35 QBs via PFF.  He was horrendous.  We had no shot with him in games like the Browns one (where he single handily just about lost it for us) and the Panthers game.    We saw how Heinicke lit up that same defense that Haskins struggled with.

[actorguy1]

7 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

My personal take is it doesn't matter how aggressive they want to be because they won't end up with attractive targets.  No Dak.  No Stafford.  No Watson.  And they are drafting too high up and too many QB needy teams are drafting above them for them to land any of the top 4 QBs even if they aggressively push it.

 

I'd bet aggressive ends up with a more modest conquest like Ryan Fitzpatrick because sexier targets won't manfest or end up out of their range.  But that's just a guess.   Will see.

Agree. It's a bad off season to need a QB unless you have a high draft pick or willing to pay through the nose with draft picks to trade for one. FA wise, besides Dak is a pretty mixed bag. I would be pretty happy if the training camp QB roster was: Fitzpatrick, Kyle, Taylor and a 3rd rounder. Loser between Kyle and Taylor they try to get on the practice squad.

[Jericho]

3 hours ago, KDawg said:

See... I have an issue with the whole “we’re going to be aggressive, damnit!” Mindset.

 

It’s basically admitting, “we’re going to force it and fleece ourselves!”

 

 

 

But isn't that how all NFL teams operate? Every once in a while you see a QB needy team punt on the decision for a year. But even that isn't common. Every year there are a handful of teams in the QB market. And every year they force some solution at the QB position. Free agency at the QB has a pretty poor track record overall. Trades are even worse. And a typical draft produces maybe 1-2 bona fide starters. When teams need a QB, sometimes the best answer is none of the above. Sometimes the best answer is to simply not make a wrong answer. But that's rarely the path taken. Just seems par for the course.

 

I get why Washington wants to make a move sooner rather than later. But it seems the team iss really trying to force it and the odds that the right guy becomes available aren't great. I guess we'll see what happens.

[KDawg]

4 minutes ago, Jericho said:

 

But isn't that how all NFL teams operate? Every once in a while you see a QB needy team punt on the decision for a year. But even that isn't common. Every year there are a handful of teams in the QB market. And every year they force some solution at the QB position. Free agency at the QB has a pretty poor track record overall. Trades are even worse. And a typical draft produces maybe 1-2 bona fide starters. When teams need a QB, sometimes the best answer is none of the above. Sometimes the best answer is to simply not make a wrong answer. But that's rarely the path taken. Just seems par for the course.

 

I get why Washington wants to make a move sooner rather than later. But it seems the team iss really trying to force it and the odds that the right guy becomes available aren't great. I guess we'll see what happens.

This post confuses me. It’s arguing against my point somehow (first sentence) and with it (the rest).

[Jericho]

2 minutes ago, KDawg said:

This post confuses me. It’s arguing against my point somehow (first sentence) and with it (the rest).

 

Not really arguing against your point, just stating a fact. This is how all NFL teams operate. I don't think it's a smart way to do business, but it's pretty much how all teams do it. They always try to force some solution. Personally I don't agree with it. So if you're asking what I would do, I'd play a far more patient long game. But...I'd at least admit that there's something to be said about always taking shots. Eventually one of those shots have to pay off, right (maybe not if you're Washington :p)? 

 

I'd use two years ago as an example. The Broncos, Giants, Dolphins, and Washington all needed QBs. After Kyler Murray went 1-1 to the Cards (who arguably did not need a QB, but were ready to move on from Josh Rosen), somehow those teams ended up with the next three best prospects and the Dolphins got Josh Rosen in a trade. That seemed almost expected. But did all those teams really love those acquisitions? Or did they all just make the best moves they could throwing something against the wall? We'll never get fully honest answers (though Haskins seems to have been driven by Snyder). But I can say 3 of those 4 teams went back to the drawing board already and the Giants are probably soon to follow within a year.

 

So my 2 cents is Washington should not just do something for the sake of doing something. Instead it should actually make a move that makes sense and that the player evaluators like. I doubt that move presents itself, but it could. But I'm also prepared for this team to do something rash and likely make a bad move for the sake of making a move. It's what pretty much all teams do.

[Skinsinparadise]

Keim is like this on his podcasts, implying that's what he's hearing.   Ditto Standig. And both are almost always right.  This off season should be interesting because I got little doubt they will try to get a new starter but the stars might not align for them to do it.    

 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

56 minutes ago, Jericho said:

 

I get why Washington wants to make a move sooner rather than later. But it seems the team iss really trying to force it and the odds that the right guy becomes available aren't great. I guess we'll see what happens.

 

Why does it seem like they are trying to force it?  Nothing has even happened yet.  Rumors right now center on intent.  For all we know the best shot to do it could very well be now in 2021 and not 2022.   At the moment the potential FA QB list looks even more pathetic in 2022 than it does now.  Most draft geeks think the 2022 draft is going be "meh" at Qb and believe this current one is shaping to be much better. 

 

Yeah all of that could change.  But its perfectly plausible to me that they would be more inclined to do something rash in 2022 than they would this year if we punt on that spot and it doesn't work out and the window for winning a Sb (thanks to a cheap defense) feels even tighter and it could be a setting like that with an even smaller pool of potential QBs.

 

IMO if they have a QB they like try to go get them.  I wouldn't be conservative about it.  Tomorrow might end up worse than today.  If no prospect arrives that they really like then don't be aggressive.  Simple as that.  

 

Edited January 22, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[dyst]

No to Darnold. But definitely entertain Stafford, Dak or Watson. Dak would allow you to keep your picks.

[jnhutchi3]

4 hours ago, JoggingGod said:

You missed the point. Having a top tier QB compensates for having holes at some positions. No team is going to be able to be set at every position, not even close. The only way to stay a contender in the modern NFL is to have a franchise QB.

 

Dude, you couldn't possibly be more wrong.  We are suddenly going to be Super Bowl contenders with Stafford???  He is that much better than Heinicke or Smith???

 

You obviously went to the Dan Snyder Fantasy Football School of Player Personnel Management.

Edited January 22, 2021 by jnhutchi3

[bowhunter]

24 minutes ago, jnhutchi3 said:

 

Dude, you couldn't possibly be more wrong.  We are suddenly going to be Super Bowl contenders with Stafford???  He is that much better than Heinicke or Smith???

 

You obviously went to the Dan Snyder Fantasy Football School of Player Personnel Management.

We have a (possible) newly found diamond in the rough with Shiny Hiney and peeps on here still want to sacrifice all of our assets on one position. It's like they never learn that football is a team sport. Gaping holes on the roster with Stafford on board will get you the same number of playoff wins he had over the past 8 years and then no assets to use to fill those holes.

[RWJ]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Keim is like this on his podcasts, implying that's what he's hearing.   Ditto Standig. And both are almost always right.  This off season should be interesting because I got little doubt they will try to get a new starter but the stars might not align for them to do it.    

 

 

 

If Dak were to hit FA I can see the Skins going full steam ahead and be the leading team to sign him but Jerrah is not going to let that happen.  We all know that.  Watson is a pipe dream.  We have to keep our DF intact and.  We don't want to mortgage our future on Watson with several 1st rounders and a Sweat as part of the deal.  We have too many holes to fill.  I see them moving up in the 1st round for one of the 4 top QBs in the draft whether that be using their #19 on a player and trading back into the 1st or using the #19 and adding a 3rd rounder and a pick in 2022 like a 2nd round pick to get their guy in the first round.  All speculation at this time. 

[jnhutchi3]

25 minutes ago, bowhunter said:

We have a (possible) newly found diamond in the rough with Shiny Hiney and peeps on here still want to sacrifice all of our assets on one position. It's like they never learn that football is a team sport. Gaping holes on the roster with Stafford on board will get you the same number of playoff wins he had over the past 8 years and then no assets to use to fill those holes.

 

Amen, brother.  These dudes simply know nothing about football.  

[JoggingGod]

4 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

Detroit beat us

We beat Pittsburgh and I don’t think anyone would argue we’re better than them.

 

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I'd bet aggressive ends up with a more modest conquest like Ryan Fitzpatrick

You literally might as well roll with Heinicke in that case. Fitzpatrick and QBs of that caliber don’t get you anywhere.

58 minutes ago, bowhunter said:

We have a (possible) newly found diamond in the rough with Shiny Hiney and peeps on here still want to sacrifice all of our assets on one position. It's like they never learn that football is a team sport. Gaping holes on the roster with Stafford on board will get you the same number of playoff wins he had over the past 8 years and then no assets to use to fill those holes.

Because Heinicke has played one game and isn’t remotely the same QB that Stafford is. Once teams figure out how to scheme against Taylor you’ll see why he isn’t a starting QB.

[CapsSkins]

1 minute ago, JoggingGod said:

You literally might as well roll with Heinicke in that case. 

 

I knew you'd come around! 😂

[JoggingGod]

How many times do people who know how the league works in 2021 have to explain to you the value of a franchise QB?

 

These are the final 8 QBs playing this year: Patrick Mahomes, Josh Allen, Lamar Jackson, Baker Mayfield, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Tom Brady, Jared Goff. All of them are at least top 20 and the 4 remaining were solidified top 10 QBs this year. You’re absolutely delusional if you think that rolling with one legged Alex Smith and/or backup-caliber guys is a good idea when we have a lot of cheap young talent that won’t stay cheap. Like you’re just flat out wrong. If you’re tired of being 6-10/7-9 every year then you’ll understand why they need to be aggressive in getting at least a good QB this offseason, whether it’s a vet or one of the top rookies.

Edited January 22, 2021 by JoggingGod

[Burgundy Yoda]

2 hours ago, dyst said:

No to Darnold. But definitely entertain Stafford, Dak or Watson. Dak would allow you to keep your picks.

Stafford is by far the most realistic and I have a hunch he is the target for this team this offseason. Us targeting Mayhew really makes me think there have been discussions between him and Ron about getting his guy he drafted in 2009 over here. 

Edited January 22, 2021 by Burgundy Yoda

[Skinsinparadise]

7 hours ago, JoggingGod said:

 

 

You literally might as well roll with Heinicke in that case. Fitzpatrick and QBs of that caliber don’t get you anywhere.

 

 

I might have more posts on this thread about being aggressive to go get a QB than anyone on this thread.  So I'd love to shoot higher.  My point is the options might not materialize.