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

[86 Snyder]

11 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

This is your response?

 

Yes.  You didn't respond to the points I made which clearly contradict to your argument.  Instead you built a couple strawmen for distraction.  Why would I respond?

 

11 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

Haskins was a first round pick going into his second year on the upswing.  Of course he had value, and the only reason Redskins fans are pretending he didn't is because they need to believe in Rivera.  They need to believe he didn't ****ing puke all over himself with his QBs this season.

 

Right now our QB situation is a dead cap hit and a pair of long shot UDFAs competing in camp for the starting job.  Abso****inglutely we'd be better right now if we hadn't made a ragtag 7-9 run and first round ass-whupping and we had a top five pick and a chance at a good QB that wouldn't require trading a bunch of picks to get.  Duh.  If we had premium draft picks we might get Russell Wilson or Deshaun Watson.  Or we could stand pat and pick someone good.  Instead we're in no man's land with no clear avenues of getting better beyond a ****ing hail mary that Taylor Heinickie is the next Kurt Warner.

 

See, this is another strawman.  Of course we would be better off having gone 5-11 and holding the #8 pick.  It has absolutely nothing to do with Haskins having "value" or Rivera "****ing puking all over himself" which is just more utter nonsense.

 

You're in O.J. land man.   None of this is based on anything other than you're inability to admit you were wrong about Haskins.  It's actually embarrassing to see the lengths you'll go to rather than just taking the L and moving on.

[PartyPosse]

32 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Did we mismanage RG3?  Jason Campbell?  Ramsey?  No, no, and no, they were garbage with ceilings we couldn't do anything with and shouldn't of picked them in the first place.  All for different reasons but very similar results.  I'm an absolute pessimist on drafting QBs right now until someone in this organization proves we can get it right.  I get where Steve is coming from, its not all BS, it still comes back to Haskins himself being BS, thus why it would've failed no matter what.  We have to accept that we are the problem by picking these bammas in the first place.

I agree with your take on Haskins but we mismanaged RG3 horribly. That’s not to say he wasn’t going to be the catalyst to his own undoing eventually but the environment was terrible for him. He was basically given complete freedom to say and do whatever he wanted. Dan treated him like his best bud, Shanahan basically let him do what he wanted in practice and didn’t bother caring that Robert spent more time fine-tuning his brand than studying the playbook. Then when he got injured, especially in the Seattle game, Mike and the trainers allowed RG3 to decide whether or not he was healthy enough to continue where we all saw he wasnt. If there was a staff in place that actually coached instead of coddled then who knows what would have happened?

Edited February 28, 2021 by PartyPosse

[Renegade7]

17 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

I agree with your take on Haskins but we mismanaged RG3 horribly. That’s not to say he wasn’t going to be the catalyst to his own undoing eventually but the environment was terrible for him. He was basically given complete freedom to say and do whatever he wanted. Dan treated him like his best bud, Shanahan basically let him do what he wanted in practice and didn’t bother caring that Robert spent more time fine-tuning his brand than studying the playbook. Then when he got injured, especially in the Seattle game, Mike and the trainers allowed RG3 to decide whether or not he was healthy enough to continue where we all saw he wasnt. If there was a staff in place that actually coached instead of coddled then who knows what would have happened?

 

Fair, but he still would've failed because he didn't have a route tree at Baylor.  We never should've made that pick, is what it is, not where I'd like to have this convo.

[Renegade7]

43 minutes ago, Darth Tater said:

Whether we mismanaged RG3, Campbell or not is irrelevant as those guys were QBs in different regimes, IF one believes RON RIVERA and the current regime mismanaged Haskins is relevant going forward. The only argument against stevemcqueen1's position is that the failure was not mismanagement, not the assertion that the failure itself is irrelevant.

 

I dont want to spend a lot of time on this, Ron was supposed to save Haskins career the way Jay was supposed to save Griffins.  They tried, they failed, there was potential there otherwise they wouldn't of been first round picks and didn't get it done.

 

I'll say this, pick the right player then we can have the conversation about whether the mismanagement mattered and to what extent. Ron is not perfect, but I don't agree he screwed up Haskins,  jus couldn't develop him and save his career.

 

Are we gonna wait to see if the Steelers figure it out or focus on who our 2021 QB is gonna be? 

 

Again, I dont care what the reason is we are failing on these rookie QBs right now, I want a veteran for a breather.  I've been debating this here for almost 20 years now, its obvious, we are picking the wrong QBs in the first place.  That's scouting, thats meddling, before coach even has a chance to screw it up.

 

Ron inherited a prospect with a **** personality.  If the only way to manage it properly was results that was never going to happen, is that fair to Ron? Is that fair to any coach to say they failed an impossible task?

[86 Snyder]

53 minutes ago, Darth Tater said:

Whether we mismanaged RG3, Campbell or not is irrelevant as those guys were QBs in different regimes, IF one believes RON RIVERA and the current regime mismanaged Haskins is relevant going forward. The only argument against stevemcqueen1's position is that the failure was not mismanagement, not the assertion that the failure itself is irrelevant.

 

Exactly.  The "we" is a totally different group of people.  

 

We're going to have to get the bat off our shoulder at some point.  It doesn't *have* to be this offseason, but it sure seems like the options in both trade and draft are much better than a typical offseason.  To continue the analogy, I either want to swing for the fences (Watson, top 4 rookies) or drop a bunt (Fitz, Mariota if released).  If we decide to bunt, it would be smart to trade back in multiple rounds and try to acquire extra ammo for next offseason because at some point, we will need to make a big investment in QB.

[The Consigliere]

1 hour ago, 86 Snyder said:

 

Exactly.  The "we" is a totally different group of people.  

 

We're going to have to get the bat off our shoulder at some point.  It doesn't *have* to be this offseason, but it sure seems like the options in both trade and draft are much better than a typical offseason.  To continue the analogy, I either want to swing for the fences (Watson, top 4 rookies) or drop a bunt (Fitz, Mariota if released).  If we decide to bunt, it would be smart to trade back in multiple rounds and try to acquire extra ammo for next offseason because at some point, we will need to make a big investment in QB.

Next years QB class is straight trash. Maybe you mean acquiring draft capital to trade for a QB? If not it’s pointless, this was the year to tank for a QB, so was last year. We botched it and now we’re screwed. It really is as simple as that and yes it is the end all be all (responding to a separate poster there) Without a QB, building a contender is a pipe dream. Rivera is set to turn us into a perpetual Norv-like team in terms of W/L record. Not bad enough to get the draft capital to fix the problems and not good enough to matter barring a saints getting Brees type scenario.

Edited February 28, 2021 by The Consigliere

[daveakl]

10 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

Next years QB class is straight trash.

Build the rest of the team. Vet QB's are always out there and if you have everything else in place, you are a destination.

Rodgers, Dak, Derek, Watson, Wilson, one of them will be available to be had either via trade or released / FA.

[86 Snyder]

20 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

Next years QB class is straight trash. Maybe you mean acquiring draft capital to trade for a QB? If not it’s pointless, this was the year to tank for a QB, so was last year. We botched it and now we’re screwed. It really is as simple as that and yes it is the end all be all (responding to a separate poster there) Without a QB, building a contender is a pipe dream. Rivera is set to turn us into a perpetual Norv-like team in terms of W/L record. Not bad enough to get the draft capital to fix the problems and not good enough to matter barring a saints getting Brees type scenario.

 

I know the early returns on 22 are not positive.  Maybe someone emerges?  Either way, I'd advocate that strategy for trade purposes or if nothing materializes, doing it again to push for the 23 class.  I'd prefer to swing big this year though for the reasons you mentioned.

 

Agreed, we'd be in better shape had they tanked and I wish they had, but it is what it is.  I'm looking for ways to find a qb within our reality.

 

 

[TheShredder]

17 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

Next years QB class is straight trash.

Yep and drafting a QB this year is probably the only option to get a Rookie trained before Free-Agency begins to dismantle your defense.  Probably why they have like 3 GM's in the FO.

There's no way to guess what they're thinking.  PATIENTS.

[Burgundy Yoda]

2 minutes ago, daveakl said:

Build the rest of the team. Vet QB's are always out there and if you have everything else in place, you are a destination.

Rodgers, Dak, Derek, Watson, Wilson, one of them will be available to be had either via trade or released / FA.

I'd rather get a rookie QB and have that friendly rookie contract for 5 years. The furthest I would move up is the 7th pick in this draft which would cost us our 2nd and our SF 3rd round pick. That's significantly cheaper than what it would cost to get one of these guys on our team. 

[PartyPosse]

23 minutes ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

I'd rather get a rookie QB and have that friendly rookie contract for 5 years. The furthest I would move up is the 7th pick in this draft which would cost us our 2nd and our SF 3rd round pick. That's significantly cheaper than what it would cost to get one of these guys on our team. 

I'm sorry but there is absolutely no chance we can move from 19 to 17 for just an additional 2nd and 3rd.

[Cooleyfan1993]

6 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

I'm sorry but there is absolutely no chance we can move from 19 to 17 for just an additional 2nd and 3rd.

7, not 17. And i agree 

[daveakl]

28 minutes ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

I'd rather get a rookie QB and have that friendly rookie contract for 5 years. The furthest I would move up is the 7th pick in this draft which would cost us our 2nd and our SF 3rd round pick. That's significantly cheaper than what it would cost to get one of these guys on our team. 

A couple of those guys will be cheaper then giving up a 1st, 2nd, and a 3rd.  The trick is to get a guy like Brady or Manning and then ALSO get the rookie to develop behind them.  Nail that and you are set for years to come.  Miss and you are Denver. (Tampa Bay outcome still TBD)

[Burgundy Yoda]

9 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

I'm sorry but there is absolutely no chance we can move from 19 to 17 for just an additional 2nd and 3rd.

It's close according to this trade value chart. https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp?RequestTeam=WAS

 

A 1st next year and the SF 3rd would be similar value. We could probably really get them to bite on picks next year and save some value if they think we'll suck and pick worse than 19th each round. I think the only picks we'll reasonably be able to trade up for are #7, #12, #13, and #14. Everyone else is a division rival or in search of a QB (maybe slash SF off this if they're going with Jimmy G in 2021). 

Edited February 28, 2021 by Burgundy Yoda

[Burgundy Yoda]

4 minutes ago, daveakl said:

A couple of those guys will be cheaper then giving up a 1st, 2nd, and a 3rd.  The trick is to get a guy like Brady or Manning and then ALSO get the rookie to develop behind them.  Nail that and you are set for years to come.  Miss and you are Denver. (Tampa Bay outcome still TBD)

Who? I see QBs that will take at least 2 1s. Green Bay is only getting rid of Rodgers once he's broken down, he won't even be worth what they'll ask for by the time he's on the market. Then you have to factor in all their colossal contracts. 

 

Peyton and Tom were both acquired via Free Agency. I'm cool with that route, but none of these guys are hitting the market. 

[daveakl]

Just now, Burgundy Yoda said:

Who? I see QBs that will take at least 2 1s. Green Bay is only getting rid of Rodgers once he's broken down, he won't even be worth what they'll ask for by the time he's on the market. Then you have to factor in all their colossal contracts. 

 

Peyton and Tom were both acquired via Free Agency. I'm cool with that route, but none of these guys are hitting the market. 

Rodgers could be a 1 and a 3 (3 escalates), remember they have their heir on the roster (or they trade Love)

Dak may be a straight up FA

Carr could be a 2 and a 2 (2 escalates)

Who knows what Watson and Wilson are going to do / go for.

[Rufus T Firefly]

On 2/28/2021 at 3:48 AM, stevemcqueen1 said:

Right now our QB situation is a dead cap hit and a pair of long shot UDFAs competing in camp for the starting job.  Abso****inglutely we'd be better right now if we hadn't made a ragtag 7-9 run and first round ass-whupping and we had a top five pick and a chance at a good QB that wouldn't require trading a bunch of picks to get.  Duh.  If we had premium draft picks we might get Russell Wilson or Deshaun Watson.  Or we could stand pat and pick someone good.  Instead we're in no man's land with no clear avenues of getting better beyond a ****ing hail mary that Taylor Heinickie is the next Kurt Warner.

He definitely wouldn't have been my first choice, but I always liked Rivera as a coach. I'd have much preferred to go with a younger, more innovative type of HC, but Rivera as Coach wasn't anywhere near the worst hire Snyder has made.

 

Rivera as de facto GM is another matter. My assumption was what we'd get with an older retread coach running personnel was a guy who would prioritize the short-term rather than recognize the opportunity the team's young talent and assets presented to potentially build a long-term powerhouse. That, imo, is exactly what transpired. 

 

Imagine someone with some vision running the organization last year. You could have traded away a number of players, maybe eating some of their salaries for a better return, in other cases maybe just moving the salary to benefit the cap. You accept that this will mean a couple of extra losses and the resultant draft position with it and prepare for the future. 

 

Right now, in that scenario, we'd be looking at likely being able to pick our QB without any trade being necessary (or, of course, we could be in position to at least be in the running if a Wilson or Watson became available) and we'd have draft capital to be able to address several other needs, maybe using said assets to move up for a couple more premium level picks. The team would have extra cap space to target a few FAs to fill things out. We'd be discussing right now exactly the best way to utilize those assets to start a long-term run at the top.

 

Instead, 7-9 and a first round playoff exit were treated as the brass ring. And we achieved it. But now it's hard to imagine how we can build on it and take the next step. That is a choice you'd expect from a coach, because you want coaches and players trying to win at all times. From a GM, though, it was a terrible choice of priorities. 

Edited March 1, 2021 by Rufus T Firefly

[86 Snyder]

18 minutes ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

It's close according to this trade value chart. https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp?RequestTeam=WAS

 

A 1st next year and the SF 3rd would be similar value. We could probably really get them to bite on picks next year and save some value if they think we'll suck and pick worse than 19th each round. 

 

 

Lol yeah it's gonna cost a whole lot more than.

[tmandoug1]

Mac Jones at 19 solves all of our issues for the next ten years! Then after one year Heinicke beats him out and leads us to the promise land. 

[Burgundy Yoda]

4 minutes ago, 86 Snyder said:

 

 

Lol yeah it's gonna cost a whole lot more than.

I mean, probably, it cost Buffalo the 53rd and 56th pick to move up to select Josh Allen from 12th to 7th. That's a pretty high price to move up 5 spots, but I bet Buffalo would do that deal every single time. You call Detroit, have this as your initial offer and move from there. I'm hoping they're willing to overpay if they love a QB prospect.

[86 Snyder]

4 minutes ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

I mean, probably, it cost Buffalo the 53rd and 56th pick to move up to select Josh Allen from 12th to 7th. That's a pretty high price to move up 5 spots, but I bet Buffalo would do that deal every single time. You call Detroit, have this as your initial offer and move from there. I'm hoping they're willing to overpay if they love a QB prospect.

 

You would need to add our 2022 1st.  I'd do it though for any of the top 4 QBs in this draft.

[Wyvern]

Whether Haskins ever finds a fit with the right team, and realizes his full potential, is a story that is still unfolding.  But the book on him in Washington is closed.  I wish him well but I also wished him farewell, and let's move on.

 

Due to a combination of factors, Haskins just didn't fit with Washington's future.  Releasing Haskins was probably the best thing that could have been done -- it gave him a chance to start over fresh, perhaps with a team where Dwayne's strongest features might fit better with the team and playbook.  IMHO, he needs to sit and learn the pro game (on and off the field) and this is still possible because he has youth on his side.  Some QBs take up to 4-5 years to be ready to compete effectively at the pro-level, and it looks like that's the case with Haskins. What he does with his window of opportunity, will depend a great deal on how quickly he learns/matures/improves.

 

To be clear, I had hoped Washington wouldn't draft Haskins. Once they did, I hoped he'd not start for for a few years, and instead be brought along slowly.  And once he was thrust into starting, the more I saw of him, the more I didn't feel he'd ever be the 'franchise QB' Washington was looking for. IT got to the point where I felt that giving him the starting QB snaps might even derail his other teammates' development into the new offensive system ( as well as the coaches' ability to assess the young players.). And his off-field  issues didn't help either.

 

I think this new coaching staff CAN develop a QB, given the right mix of factors (rookie's talent mix, maturity, fit with the system, work-ethic, ability to learn, etc), PLUS a reasonable amount of time to coach the player up.  So if Washington doesn't land either a top-tier FA QB or one of the top 4-5 QBs in the draft, they need to consider Allen, Heinicke, and drafting someone like Jamie Newman in the 4th as a project QB to develop along slowly. (I'm not sold on Montez)

 

Edited February 28, 2021 by Wyvern

[Burgundy Yoda]

7 minutes ago, 86 Snyder said:

 

You would need to add our 2022 1st.  I'd do it though for any of the top 4 QBs in this draft.

I would too, without any hesitation. Detroit is going to want picks to strengthen their rebuild too, I think they're a good team to trade up with that's high. 

Edited February 28, 2021 by Burgundy Yoda

[daveakl]

38 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

Imagine someone with some vision running the organization last year. You could have traded away a number of players, maybe eating some of their salaries for a better return, in other cases maybe just moving the salary to benefit the cap. You accept that this will mean a couple of extra losses and the resultant draft position with it and prepare for the future. 

1) Who are you trading from last years team?  Give me some players and what type of return you are getting for them.

2) Who are you cutting from last years team that gives you salary to benefit the cap?  Examples please.

[mhd24]

In an ideal setting, we'd get a cheap rookie QB while the rest of the roster (i.e. our d-line, Terry) was getting paid.  Honestly, from a roster building setting, it makes sense to wait on trying and getting a young rookie QB till next year/year after.  Lets see what Taylor and Kyle can do with a reinforced cast (LT, LB, WR) next year.