Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

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

Renegade7

By Renegade7
in The Stadium

 Share

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

227 members have voted

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

    • Draft QB first round
      52
    • Rookie QB from outside first round
      23
    • Sign FA Veteran
      40
    • Trade for Veteran
      38
    • Stand Pat with one of the QBs we have on Roster, draft QB in 2022 Draft iinstead
      38
    • I don't know
      10
    • I don't care
      9
    • I'm tired of 5 year development plans burned to the ground in less then 2
      18

  2. 2. Rookie QB or Veteran QB for next season (2021)??? - (Feb 2020)

    • Draft QB first round
      5
    • Rookie QB from outside first round
      1
    • Sign FA Veteran
      4
    • Trade for Veteran
      0
    • Stand Pat with one of the QBs we have on Roster, draft QB in 2022 Draft iinstead
      6
    • I don't know
      0
    • I don't care
      2
    • I'm tired of 5 year development plans burned to the ground in less then 2
      1

Recommended Posts

Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, wit33 said:


The other side is the Viking fan looking at this compared to what they were paying Keenum ;) 

 

 

I gather you are helping me to sell my point?  Yep the Vikings paid Keenum just 2 million. He seemed to be a one year wonder sadly and his career reverted to the mean. 

 

13 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 


That looked pre-determined. Meaning before he snapped the ball he was going to look right then make a throw over the top if it was there. Don’t think he was legitimately going to make a throw to his right, more than likely a called deep shot by the OC.
 

Some one smarter please feel free to crush me lol

 

The point the dude was making I presume was about deep ball accuracy.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wit33

wit33

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I gather you are helping me to sell my point?  Yep the Vikings paid Keenum just 2 million. He seemed to be a one year wonder sadly and his career reverted to the mean. 
 

 

Is the Viking fan happy with Kirk Cousins in your estimation? 
 

5 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

The point the dude was making I presume was about deep ball accuracy.  


Hmm... I thought the nuance to it was his ability to read the field and manipulate the defense with eyes. Cool deep ball though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

Is the Viking fan happy with Kirk Cousins in your estimation? 
 

 

Don't know.  Don't care.  But I find it odd how you like to bring up Kirk and can come off to me smug on the topic.  You had IMO the oddest position of everyone on the Kirk thread.  You weren't as critical of his play as some of his critics.  Yet, you if I recall were the only one (even among Kirk critics) who thought Bruce both played the Kirk contract fine and did all he could as for what he could have gotten in return for Kirk -- insisting again and again and again that no way Bruce could have gotten more than the 3rd round comp pick that he did for Kirk.  You ended up dead wrong on that.   

 

I'll give you credit for recently admitting that your defense of the job Bruce did in general as GM was wrong.  We all get stuff wrong, its cool. 

 

But yeah this backdoor defense of their move on Alex -- with you throwing Kirk in the mix seems to come off like you want to defend Bruce's actions like back in the day on that FO thread.  If so, sorry, IMO he mishandled both situations.   We will agree to disagree. 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wit33

wit33

Posted
Posted (edited)
35 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Don't know.  Don't care.  But I find it odd how you like to bring up Kirk and can come off to me smug on the topic.  You had IMO the oddest position of everyone on the Kirk thread.  You weren't as critical of his play as some of his critics.  Yet, you if I recall were the only one (even among Kirk critics) who thought Bruce both played the Kirk contract fine and did all he could as for what he could have gotten in return for Kirk -- insisting again and again and again that no way Bruce could have gotten more than the 3rd round comp pick that he did for Kirk.  You ended up dead wrong on that.   
 

 

It truly isn’t that serious for me, so please stop thinking I’m being smug. I enjoy going back and forth on topics, that’s where it ends. I do target a lot of your posts because you will engage and I enjoy it, but I will be more cautious on my end moving forward. 
 

I never didn’t think they could get compensation, just didn’t think it would be a first round pick. A second maybe, which lead me to ask the question at the time, is making the playoffs and having Kirk Cousins during the 2017 season worth the difference of 2nd round pick versus a 3rd round comparison pick. No way do I believe the Niners #2 pick was available and other beat guys refute this as well (John Keim I believe is one). 

 

Quote

 

I'll give you credit for recently admitting that your defense of the job Bruce did in general as GM was wrong.  We all get stuff wrong, its cool. 
 

 

I was never a fan of Bruce (a 60-40 type deal), but valued being competitive for a few years. I hated the culture and consistently made this point throughout. I was overjoyed when Scott came and it appeared we had a football guy with an understanding to build relationships and a good culture. I just didn’t care like many that he was a mean or bad guy, due to not caring about any of the team on that level.

 

Quote

 

But yeah this backdoor defense of their move on Alex -- with you throwing Kirk in the mix seems to come off like you want to defend Bruce's actions.  If so, sorry, IMO he mishandled both situations.   We will agree to disagree. 

 

I was and still am on the side that Kirk didn’t want to sign here and it went beyond Bruce and it was more about Dan and how he felt during the RG3 years. Various reports about the 2015 season and him wanting a guaranteed deal after that season, so admittedly it became philosophical and not wanting the NFL to turn into the NBA and how they treat the superstars. This left me a bit on side of Bruce, Scott, Dan, and Jay.  

Edited by wit33
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesMadisonSkins

JamesMadisonSkins

Posted
Posted

Some stuff floating around on Twitter that Mac Jones “floor” is probably the Panthers at 8. Which makes me wonder if he’s the QB4 on most teams boards over Lance. Because otherwise to expect 4 QBs to Be gone by 7 is pretty crazy. 
 

It does make me wonder if teams really view Jones over Lance because of production and recent tape. I don’t know how far Lance would fall in that scenario considering teams at 9, 12 and 15 need a QB too. But if teams view Lance as a raw talent who needs a year or two and more of a R2 type ... he could slide. But I’m not gonna get my hopes up 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
heyholetsgogrant

heyholetsgogrant

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

Some stuff floating around on Twitter that Mac Jones “floor” is probably the Panthers at 8. Which makes me wonder if he’s the QB4 on most teams boards over Lance. Because otherwise to expect 4 QBs to Be gone by 7 is pretty crazy. 
 

It does make me wonder if teams really view Jones over Lance because of production and recent tape. I don’t know how far Lance would fall in that scenario considering teams at 9, 12 and 15 need a QB too. But if teams view Lance as a raw talent who needs a year or two and more of a R2 type ... he could slide. But I’m not gonna get my hopes up 

 

Crazy he's the 28th ranked player in the draft, but because he's a QB it vaults him to a top 10 pick, potentially higher. 

Edited by heyholetsgogrant
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, wit33 said:

 

It truly isn’t that serious for me, so please stop thinking I’m being smug. I enjoy going back and forth on topics, that’s where it ends. I do target a lot of your posts because you will engage and I enjoy it, but I will be more cautious on my end moving forward. 
 

I never didn’t think they could get compensation, just didn’t think it would be a first round pick. A second maybe, which lead me to ask the question at the time, is making the playoffs and having Kirk Cousins during the 2017 season worth the difference of 2nd round pick versus a 3rd round comparison pick. No way do I believe the Niners #2 pick was available and other beat guys refute this as well (John Keim I believe is one). 

 

It's not serious for me either.  But every now and then the goading that you do my way (and others) about Kirk comes off like you doing a victory lap about how you were right and they were wrong about it.  Even though if we really go through it, I'd have no problem putting up my position on that thread versus yours.  My points on that thread centered on I'd have given Kirk the 24 million a year when they could. And i said that in real time.  I also said once they blew that, I would not have given the 27 million plus.  I also said that in real time.  I said Kirk wasn't elite but good to very good.  I criticized the games where he didn't play well.  I think I was pretty balanced on the topic. I thought Bruce blew the contract negotiation and Kirk's agent played him like a fiddle.   I think Bruce's press release and reading of it was embarassing.  My main push on the subject was about being very critical of Bruce. 

 

I don't recall you having any issues with Bruce as to how he handled things which made you very unusual among the Kirk critics because the others at least to a certain extent thought Bruce mishandled something whether it was the contract or not trading him or both.  I recall even one of Kirk's bigger critics on that thread said the Bruce press release was embarassing.

 

 It was hard for me to forget your take on defending Bruce's handling of the compensation for Kirk since that was if anything was the most unique position on that thread.  And you directly (hard for me to forget because you were the only one who did) challenged me and others every time we criticized that they could have gotten more than they did for Kirk.  You did at times said not a first but you also went beyond that and directly challenged the idea that they could have gotten more.  And you defended Bruce hard on the compensation drill.

 

 And I'll end with who gives a rats behind who is right or wrong about whatever, including Kirk, we will all nail stuff right and get things wrong.  It's all about discussing football -- the tit for tat stuff on who got what right or wrong to me seems petty and boring.   But you come off like you are gloating at times on the Kirk subject and it comes off odd to me considering my point above.

 

2 hours ago, wit33 said:

 

I was and still am on the side that Kirk didn’t want to sign here and it went beyond Bruce and it was more about Dan and how he felt during the RG3 years. Various reports about the 2015 season and him wanting a guaranteed deal after that season, so admittedly it became philosophical and not wanting the NFL to turn into the NBA and how they treat the superstars. This left me a bit on side of Bruce, Scott, Dan, and Jay.  

 

If you buy into what Jay and others have said it was a mix of things.  If he would have won that infamous Giants game by Kirk's admission and a beat reporter or two, they might have worked it out.  But that game caused tension in the negotiating and then McVay left soon after that.  McVay was Kirk's guy.  The combination of the two seemed to finish it off for good.

 

But you aren't on the side of anyone you mention there aside from Bruce.   Scot wanted to trade Kirk so did Jay.  Jay liked Kirk and he explained why.  But as Jay said if you can't retain him then get a haul.   You defending the haul they got puts your squarely at odds with Jay.  Heck even his brother made fun of the haul they got for Kirk in his own press conference.  The compensation for Kirk, isn't a minor point in the plot.  It's a major point.  If we would have gotten the 2nd pick in the first round of the draft it could have changed the fortune of this team.  Jay labeled it as the biggest regret of his tenure.  It was a big deal.  And you were the one dude who defended how they handled it.

 

And look like I said so what?  I thought Paul Richardson was a good FA signing for example.  And I got other things wrong, too.  We all get some right and wrong.   But if you are going to throw Kirk in my face every now and then where you come off pedantic -- tough for me not to feel a bit put off considering I know your take on the whole thing doesn't put you in an I told you so mode.

 

But anyway, if that's not what you are doing and just having fun, cool.  But I've held my fire on this topic for a long time eventually it would hit my breaking point where I'd give you my take so that's what this is. :ols:

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
actorguy1

actorguy1

Posted
Posted (edited)

If they can play it conservative enough with QB compensation (Mid-Tier FA or no draft trade ups in the first 3 rounds or stick with Allen, Heineke and developmental rookie) they could go in to 2022 offseason with Prescott coming off of his second tag as a free agent and Watson after sitting out all of 2021 and a motivated Texans FO looking to sell. Not ideal but nothing to scoff at.

Edited by actorguy1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SonnySideUp

SonnySideUp

Posted
Posted

Would you give 3 first round picks for Russell Wilson? I don't think he will end up leaving the Seahawks, but if he does I think he will be like Watson i.e. the WFT would have to give up too much to get two more first round picks to get him (and it may even take more than that). I would bet they are one of the 33% of the NFL who reportedly have called Seattle about trading him however.

 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/02/22/report-teams-believe-three-first-rounders-the-base-for-any-russell-wilson-trade/

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anselmheifer

Anselmheifer

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I am in the mode too of being aggressive to get Watson but if the hauls required are as ridiculous as the media makes it, I am out big time. 

 

 

I'm also in the mode of being aggressive, probably more so than others on the board. I'd give up Chase Young and probably two 1sts. I think Watson is that good and a top 5 QB is that transformative.

 

But, 6-7 players plus picks? Carolina is going to give up their best young players, CMC and Burns, plus picks? And Watson would then want to be there? Why? They are going to lose Curtis Samuel in free agency probably. What is left? Watson and Moore and Jeremy Chinn? How are they going to replace their LT, Okung, when they need a new one? They won't have the picks. 

 

On the flip side, I see our perceived lack of a QB really impairing us in FA. The top WR and TE just aren't going to want to come here. On the other hand, I would think LB and DB's would be dying to come here. Maybe it will balance out a little. 

I'm starting to think that maybe our best bet would be to invest heavily in FA and the draft, roll with Heinicke and see where we get. Then maybe swing for the fences with Aaron Rodgers next year. I honestly think that if we draft (1)LT (2)WR-Elijah Moore? (3)RB and sign Allen Robinson, that if Heinicke could stay healthy, we could be really really good. 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RWJ

RWJ

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Anselmheifer said:

 

I'm also in the mode of being aggressive, probably more so than others on the board. I'd give up Chase Young and probably two 1sts. I think Watson is that good and a top 5 QB is that transformative.

 

But, 6-7 players plus picks? Carolina is going to give up their best young players, CMC and Burns, plus picks? And Watson would then want to be there? Why? They are going to lose Curtis Samuel in free agency probably. What is left? Watson and Moore and Jeremy Chinn? How are they going to replace their LT, Okung, when they need a new one? They won't have the picks. 

 

On the flip side, I see our perceived lack of a QB really impairing us in FA. The top WR and TE just aren't going to want to come here. On the other hand, I would think LB and DB's would be dying to come here. Maybe it will balance out a little. 

I'm starting to think that maybe our best bet would be to invest heavily in FA and the draft, roll with Heinicke and see where we get. Then maybe swing for the fences with Aaron Rodgers next year. I honestly think that if we draft (1)LT (2)WR-Elijah Moore? (3)RB and sign Allen Robinson, that if Heinicke could stay healthy, we could be really really good. 

Giving up the house for Watson will set them or any team back 5-7years, IMO.  He's gets injured that's what happens.  He's already blown his ACL out twice.  NO THANKS.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...