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

[Thinking Skins]

1 hour ago, MisterPinstripe said:

Except we ended the season 5-2, and those two loses were the two games Haskins had to play because of injury. With a QB like Stafford or above we are easily into the playoffs with a much better record.

 

And Hurtz and the Eagles were LOSING when he was pulled and he had 70 yards passing all game. He was not some dominate player who left the game beating us. How did they hand us the game when they were LOSING?

So true and to add to it, we have more confidence in our team overall and the players to pull through and win games. 

 

I'm not saying Heinicke is the answer but he had us down 8 with 2 plus to go. That's not on him. We could have won that game with him and gone to the next round of the playoffs. I can see wanting a definitive upgrade but part of me is frustrated because this is what happens so often with these lower round and udfa qbs, they come in, play well and are still replaced, sometimes by guys who are worse. It's Doug Flutie and Rob Johnson to the end of time. The Bills wanted Flutie Flakes and I may pop a Heiny

[Riggo#44]

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

There four things i can say with confidence based on what beat guys have leaked, Rivera's own comments, and their move for Stafford

 

A.  They don't believe the answer is in house

B.  They don't buy the theory of build a big time supporting cast and then a game manager can then win you a SB 

C.  They do believe enough in their current roster that the time is now to add a QB.

D.  There is urgency to getting the spot fixed

No arguments from me here. We will have the answer by the end of the 1st round, at the latest.

 

Reports are the extra 1st rounder out the Rams over the top for Stafford. I wonder what the rest of our offer looked like. Good for Rivera to show some restraint. I'd be okay giving up more for Watson (obviously), but not for a QB Stafford's age. The return on investment there would make me cringe.

[Darth Tater]

44 minutes ago, sportsnut said:

Assuming we won’t get Watson or dak, how would you rate the other options?

 

My ranking...

1.  Tua or Darnold in that order depending on who gets Watson

2.  Fitz albeit

3.  Heineke 

4.  Others - Mariotta, Trubisky, Tyrod, Cam

Fitz doesn't even make my list. Darnold would fit with your number 4 option (unless the Jets decided to cut him). If Miami truly wants to move of Tua after an above average season (game-wise for a rookie), I'd really be afraid to touch him (either his injury from college really is an issue or attitude).  In the above situation, I'd roll with Heineke since he could be the next Warner and, if he only lives up (down?) to what is most likely the case, we'll have the draft capital to try again.

[TysonM]

I was interested in Stafford but my reaction to the news is relief.  It cost too much.

 

Rivera made an offer though, so apparently it was an offer that Rivera felt was worth it.

 

There was a report that Stafford was interested in the Rams because he considered them the most likely team to reach and win the Super Bowl... makes sense at his age, his ultimate goal before retirement.

[Skinsinparadise]

2 hours ago, KDawg said:

 

Most would sacrifice multiple coming seasons for one trophy if we somehow get it done...and I get that... it would be beautiful...

 

But as you sit through the next 3-4 abysmal seasons remember that it’s what we as a fan base asked for. 

 

I'd take a SB with 3-4 abysmal seasons to follow.  It's not like we aren't use to abysmal seasons as is.  We are on a track of every now and then going 9-7, then going 7-9 or something and then we go 4-12.   So its mediocrity to good to abysmal.  But mostly mediocrity.   The high point period I guess is Jay's 2015-2017 3 year run of medicority to slightly above to slightly less. I admit at the time I thought it was progress but thought it was a stepping stone versus the peak or this is the new goal.  We are used to the low lows.  But we don't get the high highs.  

 

It's pretty rare though to have prolonged struggles with a top 5-6 type QB.  A season or two maybe but 3-4?  But playing along I'd still take it.  This team hasn't been immune from being awful but it hasn't sniffed a SB.  I believe we are one of only 3 teams or something like that which haven't even gotten to an NFC championship in the last 25 years. 

 

I think Keim said it well if we upgrade our roster and keep with our current Qbs or implying others of this ilk we are sort of a peak 9 win-10 win team with no SBs.   

 

We are I believe the only team in the last 25 plus years without an 11 win season.  And if our solution at QB is the status quo I'd put money that streak isn't broken this year and i'd put money against us finding a QB next year too so lol count me as a pessimist as for how this will unfold in the next two years unless we get lucky. 

 

Right now I don't see what QB surfaces on the trade market and as far as the draft its looking tough to trade up.  At the moment (and it can change) the 2022 QB market is looking less attractive than this years so I don't see how things will improve.   It's cool that Rivera has a sense of urgency to fix the Qb this off season but its tough for me to see how attractive bets materialize on that front for him to do it.  

 

   Not saying you are saying otherwise but just explaining my mindset.  😀

Edited January 31, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[kingdaddy]

1 hour ago, Rdskns2000 said:

Remember, it isn't official until March 17. So, either team can back out before that date.

So we should make a better offer?

[757SeanTaylor21]

Theres news coming out that texans are looking for 2 firsts 2 seconds and 2 defensive starters.

[kingdaddy]

25 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

So true and to add to it, we have more confidence in our team overall and the players to pull through and win games. 

 

I'm not saying Heinicke is the answer but he had us down 8 with 2 plus to go. That's not on him. We could have won that game with him and gone to the next round of the playoffs. I can see wanting a definitive upgrade but part of me is frustrated because this is what happens so often with these lower round and udfa qbs, they come in, play well and are still replaced, sometimes by guys who are worse. It's Doug Flutie and Rob Johnson to the end of time. The Bills wanted Flutie Flakes and I may pop a Heiny

Wouldn't it make you sick to see us move on from Heinicke only to watch Dallas or Philly scoop him up and then put him in to beat us? We at least have to sign him and see where it goes, either as a backup or eventually the starter. Can't let him walk.....can't do it.

[sportsnut]

1 minute ago, kingdaddy said:

Wouldn't it make you sick to see us move on from Heinicke only to watch Dallas or Philly scoop him up and then put him in to beat us? We at least have to sign him and see where it goes, either as a backup or eventually the starter. Can't let him walk.....can't do it.

I think heineke is a restricted free agent so I don’t think there is any chance we let him walk.

[CapsSkins]

I'd trade two 1's, three 2's and Tim Settle for Watson.

 

The only reason I'd press for a QB is because we won't get top WR's without a franchise QB.

 

I'd trade 19 for Derek Carr tbh. 

 

Would back up Brinks truck for Dak if he gets away from DAL.

 

But secretly, I want us to strike out on all the QBs so Heinicke gets to lead us to a 12-4 season!! Lol

[FootballZombie]

1 hour ago, Rdskns2000 said:

Remember, it isn't official until March 17. So, either team can back out before that date.

 

Nope

 

Short of  injury or physicals, nobody is backing out.

 

Any agent/team that does will be blacklisted by NFL teams.

 

A team can offer DET 3 1s for Stafford today and they wont take it.

[Skinsinparadise]

10 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

No arguments from me here. We will have the answer by the end of the 1st round, at the latest.

 

Reports are the extra 1st rounder out the Rams over the top for Stafford. I wonder what the rest of our offer looked like. Good for Rivera to show some restraint. I'd be okay giving up more for Watson (obviously), but not for a QB Stafford's age. The return on investment there would make me cringe.

 

I was opposed and said so on this thread to give up two firsts for him.   But at the same time I am not happy that Stafford is now off the market.  So I am feeling no relief about it. 

 

I felt for weeks that we are going to end up wanting the big house but will have to settle for the type of shack this franchise is accustomed to living in.  With Stafford off the market, I feel that reality is even more likely to happen.

 

I see some whether here or on twitter have the fallback of ok lets just get Trey Lance.  Will see. My gut is right now its borderline ridiculous to see him as a realistic fallback.  There are way too many needy QBs picking ahead of us and teams no longer sleep on QBs with mobility like that.

 

So if I had to guess it right now.  In a month we will be talking about rumors of them possibly liking some of the FAs and they are weighing name that random guy, Dalton versus Taylor versus Fitzpatrick.  And in the draft the conversation isn't about Lance but whether its Mac Jones or Newman or Mond.  In other words, the tier B-C options which is the land we are used to exploring.   I hope I am wrong though.  Maybe there is some odd development that is hard to see now. 

[WEARE1554]

Wonder what Darnold or Carr would take to get in draft capital? Winston with his eyes fixed wouldn’t be awful.  Also if Taylor Heinicke add some good weight/muscle he would be probably be a decent option. I wouldn’t sell the farm for someone would spend on supporting cast

[Skinsinparadise]

38 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

So true and to add to it, we have more confidence in our team overall and the players to pull through and win games. 

 

I'm not saying Heinicke is the answer but he had us down 8 with 2 plus to go. That's not on him. We could have won that game with him and gone to the next round of the playoffs. I can see wanting a definitive upgrade but part of me is frustrated because this is what happens so often with these lower round and udfa qbs, they come in, play well and are still replaced, sometimes by guys who are worse. It's Doug Flutie and Rob Johnson to the end of time. The Bills wanted Flutie Flakes and I may pop a Heiny

 

You doubted Rivera's judgment on Haskins at the time and you were really fired up about how wrong you thought he was at the time.  Now you seem to agree with him in hindsight.  

 

Wouldn't know Rivera know more than us about whether Heinicke is the goods?  

24 minutes ago, Darth Tater said:

Fitz doesn't even make my list. Darnold would fit with your number 4 option (unless the Jets decided to cut him). If Miami truly wants to move of Tua after an above average season (game-wise for a rookie), I'd really be afraid to touch him (either his injury from college really is an issue or attitude).  In the above situation, I'd roll with Heineke since he could be the next Warner and, if he only lives up (down?) to what is most likely the case, we'll have the draft capital to try again.

 

Keim gave a nugget in one of his exchanges with fans that he doesn't believe they are into Tua.  I wouldn't take it that seriously if not for recalling Craig Hoffman over a year ago when he was still on air said he has a source with the FO who told him they didn't think that highly of Tua. 

Edited January 31, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Thinking Skins]

2 minutes ago, kingdaddy said:

Wouldn't it make you sick to see us move on from Heinicke only to watch Dallas or Philly scoop him up and then put him in to beat us? We at least have to sign him and see where it goes, either as a backup or eventually the starter. Can't let him walk.....can't do it.

I had no knowledge about Heinicke before we signed him and even them I had low expectations. Even before the Seattle game I was saying if he plays its the end of the season and we're going for picks instead of the division. But when he came in there and we almost won it it was a great feeling and it was like he could be special. And we saw him again against Tampa and had the same feeling. I honestly want to go back and watch the Carolina Atlanta game to see if it fills me with similar excitement. 

 

That said, he did throw what 3 or 4 ints against Atlanta that game? It'd be interesting to see the story behind them. Because as excited as i was about guys like Nick Mullins and CJ Beathard and a bunch of other low round picks most of these guys when given a chance showed that they weren't the guys. So maybe Heinicke would be the same. I just hate to see us give up on him. 

 

It'd be one thing to get back a Rodgers, or even a Stafford, but as the line of people available goes down its like we are trading potential for a midtier starter - Darnold, Tribusky, Carr, Goff, Jimmy G, etc. These aren't top tier guys. They're 16-32 on a good day. And if Ron's going to give up on Allen and Heinicke for one of these guys, its just more of the same. I'm not against bringing them in, but I like what he said about needing a competition instead of just anointing one of these guys as the chosen one. 

 

 

 

 

 

[CapsSkins]

1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Wouldn't know Rivera know more than us about whether Heinicke is the goods?  

 

Not really. You make it seem like Rivera has decided definitively that Heinicke isn't the answer. That's IMO the wrong way to read the tea leaves. I think it's clear Rivera wants to shore up the QB position to make a SB run. That means, if there are surer options available, he'll be aggressive about pursuing them. But it doesn't mean he's written off Heinicke entirely. He just knows there's a risk factor associated with him that there wouldn't be with Watson or Stafford.

[goskins10]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Keim's take on the QB situation

 

 

 

 

 

 

Keim's take on Wrs coming here

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is a huge problem with this very faulty logic. Just becasue we do not have someone at QB right now doesn't mean we will not have one either this year or next. They clearly have a plan and Ron R and the other coaches have enough track record to convince players they will get their plan implemented. 

 

I am totally with @Skinsinparadise here that I want what Ron wants - period and hope he gets what they is. He wanted Stafford but not enough to over bid the Rams who gave up a lot. If Stafford was the only plan then they would have just upped the ante so high we get Matt - see Bruce Allen on paying too much for nothing and nothing for everything else. But like all smart FOs, I am sure they have a plan B, C, D, E, and F. All eventually get them to the main prize - at least in their minds - and that is a Super Bowl. I know it's hard to recognize since it's been quite a while we have seen common sense from the FO. 

 

I was very much Ok with spending what was needed to get Stafford IF Ron and the coaches felt like he was THE guy and they had to have him. But they showed restraint as I am sure they were given an opportunity to better the Rams offer by more. That definitely means they have a plan B they are comfortable with. Let's see what they is. And if that is giving the kitchen sink for Watson or to trade up in the draft or to go with who they have in house ( this seems very doubtful) then so be it. I will judge the product on the field. 

 

1 hour ago, 86 Snyder said:

There are so many awful takes in here since the trad ewent down I cant even keep score.

 

 

So spot on!  I started to respond to some of them but decided it was not worth the effort. But the thread has been highly entertaining as Washington QB threads often are. This should have been posted here right after the trade: 

 

 

[Riggo#44]

8 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

So if I had to guess it right now.  In a month we will be talking about rumors of them possibly liking some of the FAs and they are weighing name that random guy, Dalton versus Taylor versus Fitzpatrick.  And in the draft the conversation isn't about Lance but whether its Mac Jones or Newman or Mond.  In other words, the tier B-C options which is the land we are used to exploring.   I hope I am wrong though.  Maybe there is some odd development that is hard to see now. 

If our choices are Dalton, Fitzpatrick, or Taylor, I'd rather just roll with Allen and Mond.

 

I doubt we'll be left holding the proverbial bag at QB. I feel strongly we'll have a solid answer, and not Marcus Marita. We'll see. I think trading up for one of the big 4 is option B behind Watson.

[JoggingGod]

18 minutes ago, 757SeanTaylor21 said:

Theres news coming out that texans are looking for 2 firsts 2 seconds and 2 defensive starters.

I wouldn’t trade two defensive starters

[Ball Security]

18 minutes ago, 757SeanTaylor21 said:

Theres news coming out that texans are looking for 2 firsts 2 seconds and 2 defensive starters.

2023 and 2025 1st, 2022 and 2024 2nds, Jon Bostic and Jeremy Reaves.  Done!

[Thinking Skins]

4 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

You doubted Rivera's judgment on Haskins at the time and you were really fired up about how wrong you thought he was at the time.  Now you seem to agree with him in hindsight.  

 

Wouldn't know Rivera know more than us about whether Heinicke is the goods?  

I agree with him on the result - cutting Haskins, not necessarily the reasons behind it. I still hang to the idea that he could steadily improve. But the last straw with me was the COVID incident. I know this is a football forum so I'm not going to go into it deeply but in the middle of a pandemic I thought it was utterly naive and selfish and something he should be punished for. The fact that Heinicke came in and showed that he could play better with the same supporting cast and even less time with these players showed me that it wouldn't hurt us in the short run either. 

 

So I feel similar on Heinicke as I did with Haskins. Given Heinicke is older than Haskins but I think he definitely showed us something in those last two games (I was saying the exact same thing about Haskins). And that's not something I want to see us just throw away and say "well Smith is a veteran so lets go with him" or replace Smith with the backups I mentioned earlier and its similar or even worse because we'd be bringing in another QB and paying top money for him. 

[Skinsinparadise]

5 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

I agree with him on the result - cutting Haskins, not necessarily the reasons behind it. I still hang to the idea that he could steadily improve. But the last straw with me was the COVID incident. I know this is a football forum so I'm not going to go into it deeply but in the middle of a pandemic I thought it was utterly naive and selfish and something he should be punished for. The fact that Heinicke came in and showed that he could play better with the same supporting cast and even less time with these players showed me that it wouldn't hurt us in the short run either. 

 

So I feel similar on Heinicke as I did with Haskins. Given Heinicke is older than Haskins but I think he definitely showed us something in those last two games (I was saying the exact same thing about Haskins). And that's not something I want to see us just throw away and say "well Smith is a veteran so lets go with him" or replace Smith with the backups I mentioned earlier and its similar or even worse because we'd be bringing in another QB and paying top money for him. 

 

OK, but reading this and your other comments on the Haskins thread then its clear you don't trust Rivera to make the right call and from afar you trust your judgment over his as for the Qbs on the roster. 

 

If so, I don't get why you haven't joined the chorus, granted a small one, from earlier this season about wanting Rivera to go.

 

If I am not trusting the head coach on players he's had in house with two different teams over several years and I believe I have a better handle on it with a much more limited amount of information at my disposal, I'd want the dude out, because the dude would have to be fairly dense. 

Edited January 31, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Thinking Skins]

1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

OK, but reading this and your other comments on the Haskins thread then its clear you don't trust Rivera to make the right call and from afar you trust your judgment over his as for the Qbs on the roster. 

 

If so, I don't get why you haven't joined the chorus, granted a small one, from earlier this season about wanting Rivera to go.

 

If I am not trusting the head coach on players he's had in house with two different teams over several years and I believe I have a better handle on it with a much more limited amount of information at my disposal, I'd want the dude out, because the dude would have to be fairly dense. 

Its not calling or Ron to go because that's the extreme version of it. He's a good coach, but player evaluation is not his specialty. Heck he even makes mistakes coaching (time managment at the end of games and end of halves). 

 

Ron is human so I expect him to make mistakes. I am human so I expect to make some myself. The thing is that I'm not going to automatically support or veto any move because of the source. Even if its a Dan move, I've got to just hope that he gets lucky for once. But heck just like you evaluate players in the draft and can say we should have picked X over Y and its not a knock on Kyle Smith or the GM or anybody else, its just saying that you disagree. And I disagreed with the Haskins moves and others. Its not saying that I'm going to renounce my fandom or become some anti-Ron guy. Just voicing disagreements on a message board. 

 

But hey, if he comes in and plays Tribusky and we go on to win 12 games next year, I'll just put a zipper over my lips about it and go on to the next situation that frustrates me. 

[KillBill26]

Ive had stafford at #1 on my qb wish list, so back to the drawing board.  I don't feel very good about any of the remaining options, and I doubt the cost of any of these guys goes down from what is expected.

 

I don't want to trade up for a qb due to the picks it would take, and then we have an unknown with a limited supporting cast and a suspect OC.

 

Watson will cost a fortune.

Ryan and Carr will cost more than they should.

I don't think we will even get a shot at dak, but if he hits the open market, be aggressive.

I want no part of cam newton.

I don't have any faith in dalton, trubisky, or winston.

 

So I'm down to three guys, and they are all underwhelming, but if they don't work out, we won't carry the burden of the cost moving forward.  And I have hope they can run this offense successfully.

 

1. Tyrod taylor - did a decent job in buffalo, had about a .500 record and protected the football.   I like that he can make plays with his feet and doesn't turn the ball over.  That seems like a great fit here.   The last two years stops he was brought in as a starter/mentor, but after a minor injury the rookie played very well and he never got his job back.  He won't break the bank, will be thrilled for a chance to start, and is coming back home as a virginia boy, so I think we can get him on a very affordable contract.

2.  Marcus mariota - I like the fact he is mobile and is only 27.  He has the pedigree, and looked good in limited action this year for the raiders.  I think turner would enjoy mariotas tools in our scheme.   He is a high character guy that could do just enough to get us Ws.  Won't break the bank either.

3   Ryan fitz. This is a distant 3rd, if no other opportunity has presented itself.  Sign fitz to a one year deal to compete with allen / TH to start. Fitz has had success in multiple stops, and would at least allow for our offense to have a chance.  I'd hate for AG and TM and LT to not have a halfway decent qb to continue their own development, and fitz can sling it.

[Skinsinparadise]

18 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

There is a huge problem with this very faulty logic. Just becasue we do not have someone at QB right now doesn't mean we will not have one either this year or next. They clearly have a plan and Ron R and the other coaches have enough track record to convince players they will get their plan implemented. 

 

 

What Keim was saying there and I've heard other say similar things before if everything is equal WRs would want to go to the teams with the big time QBs.  If anything for selfish reasons which includes they are more likely to produce big stats with the bigger QBs which equals down the road to more $$$$$

 

Heck if I am Allen Robinson, i'd rather play with Matt Satfford than Kyle Allen so if the money was the same i'd go to LA.  Yeah Rivera later on might upgrade the spot but that's an unknown.  But as Keim and others say money talks, so if you outbid teams you likely get the targeted player regardless of the QB.  But if the WR weights two similar offers, which happens, some agents have told Keim they'd push them towards the better QB.

 

23 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

 

I am totally with @Skinsinparadise here that I want what Ron wants - period and hope he gets what they is. He wanted Stafford but not enough to over bid the Rams who gave up a lot. If Stafford was the only plan then they would have just upped the ante so high we get Matt - see Bruce Allen on paying too much for nothing and nothing for everything else. But like all smart FOs, I am sure they have a plan B, C, D, E, and F. All eventually get them to the main prize - at least in their minds - and that is a Super Bowl. I know it's hard to recognize since it's been quite a while we have seen common sense from the FO. 

 

 

Agree.  But wonder what Plan B is because nothing hits me that obvious.  Keim and Finlay say Watson if he hits the market but I'd be shocked if they could pull that one off.  As we know, QBs are so much harder to find than other spots. But its possible they have something up their sleeve.  Will see.