The Official QB Thread- JD5 taken #2. Randall 2.0 or Bayou Bob? Mariotta and Hartman forever. Fromm cut

[FootballZombie]

11 minutes ago, KDawg said:

That is an equally asinine take. I don’t care where Howell was drafted.

 

I think draft slot matters in this case, but not in regards to ceilings.

I think the main effect of Howell's draft slot is just that he is not pretty much guaranteed an opportunity to steer the ship at some point.

 

Dudes who are acquired through high investment are kinda shoehorned into a starting gig at some point. It may not be in their first season, but it happens eventually. They further back your drafted, the less likely this is to occur.

 

For Howell to get his shot for any reasonable stretch of games, ether the guy in front of him has to get injured or absolutely crumble. If he does not see a decent stretch in season, then no matter who is on the roster next year, there will be a QB with considerably more investment/cost on the roster outside of him, again blocking his pathway to major playtime. For Howell to get his oppo, somethings gotta happen to the guy in front of him, and given Wentz penchant for playing through injuries, he may not get a fair shot at it this year. 

 

And that's pretty much the rub here. Unless Sam logs several games this year, your not letting him walk into 2023 unquestioned QB1, and anybody your bringing in, even to just compete, will be at much greater investment.

[Koolblue13]

It's absolutely wild that the 2020 draft and offseason was an absolute QB frenzy with teams fighting and jumping over each other to get any QB they could and hardly any of them look like great choices yet, while everyone sat back and completely devalued the position this past draft and it's looking like Howell, Ridder, Malik and Pickett are all home runs.

[Skinsinparadise]

Just listened to Keim's appearance on the Junkies from yesterday, it wasn't in that segment, unless I am losing my mind and I missed it (which is possible ) they didn't even talk about Howell.

[KDawg]

35 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

He's not said that in his podcasts that I can recall.  He's said if he turns into a backup that's good pick, meaning if he's just that its still a good pick too.  I don't recall him saying though his potential is limited to a backup.  

This is the take that makes sense. 
 

When you get a guy in the fifth, it doesn’t matter where his talent SHOULD have seen him picked. You are looking at a fifth rounder as successful if they are good depth. 
 

Which is entirely different than the idea that Howel = fifth rounder. 
 

Hard to explain in words but I’ll try:

 

Fifth Rounder = Successful if quality depth. There are no names attached or reach or bust or fallen prospect status. This is a general rule. If you get quality depth out of a fifth rounder it’s a great pick.

 

Individuals are different, so while Sam Howell was a fifth rounder and fifth rounders becoming quality depth is considered a win, Sam Howell is Sam Howell.

 

Sam Howell’s ceiling is NFL starting quarterback for a good portion of time. 
 

So while drafting Howell in the fifth is a success if he’s a quality backup QB, that is a disappointing outcome for Sam Howell the human. For the organization he is a fifth rounder and a quality backup is a win.

 

I think that gets my point across…

24 minutes ago, FootballZombie said:

 

I think draft slot matters in this case, but not in regards to ceilings.

I think the main effect of Howell's draft slot is just that he is not pretty much guaranteed an opportunity to steer the ship at some point.

 

Dudes who are acquired through high investment are kinda shoehorned into a starting gig at some point. It may not be in their first season, but it happens eventually. They further back your drafted, the less likely this is to occur.

 

For Howell to get his shot for any reasonable stretch of games, ether the guy in front of him has to get injured or absolutely crumble. If he does not see a decent stretch in season, then no matter who is on the roster next year, there will be a QB with considerably more investment/cost on the roster outside of him, again blocking his pathway to major playtime. For Howell to get his oppo, somethings gotta happen to the guy in front of him, and given Wentz penchant for playing through injuries, he may not get a fair shot at it this year. 

 

And that's pretty much the rub here. Unless Sam logs several games this year, your not letting him walk into 2023 unquestioned QB1, and anybody your bringing in, even to just compete, will be at much greater investment.

But that wasn’t what was conveyed as the discussion. See my post above, I said similar to this.

 

What was conveyed as being said (I’m not sure it was) is that Sam Howell’s ceiling was as a backup QB. 
 

That is incorrect. 
 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

3 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

It's absolutely wild that the 2020 draft and offseason was an absolute QB frenzy with teams fighting and jumping over each other to get any QB they could and hardly any of them look like great choices yet, while everyone sat back and completely devalued the position this past draft and it's looking like Howell, Ridder, Malik and Pickett are all home runs.

 

Could be.  But I'd be careful about judging the preseason.  If its the preseason, then the gem of this draft would be.

 

 

 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

2 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

It's absolutely wild that the 2020 draft and offseason was an absolute QB frenzy with teams fighting and jumping over each other to get any QB they could and hardly any of them look like great choices yet, while everyone sat back and completely devalued the position this past draft and it's looking like Howell, Ridder, Malik and Pickett are all home runs.

 

In my opinion, the death blow traits for young QBs:  A.  Lack of accuracy.  B.  Poor decision making.  C.  Mediocre work ethic-bad intangibles.

 

I've far from always been right about young QBs.  But I think I've been better at calling the busts than I have been the successes. 

 

And the reasons why I've been especially harsh on Haskins (RIP), Rosen (once I had the chance to study him when he hit the trade market) and Darnold is because they really struggled in my book with at least 2 of those three metrics.  

 

I watched a lot of Rosen, Darnold and Haskins.   College and pros.  The reason why I was so down on Darnold was decision making.  You can see it at USC.  He got away with a lot of errant throws.  He still had a relatively high number of picks in college.  You watch him in the pros its the same stuff.  I think either you have good field vision or you don't.  I don't think he has it.  Same with Rosen.    You watch throw after throw and you wonder what the heck were they thinking on this throw and that throw -- and it happened almost every game with them multiple times. 

 

Bringing this to this crop of QBs, there was really none in the top 5 that I was really sour on.  They all to me didn't have fatal flaws like Darnold, Rosen, Haskins.  Ridder's sketchy accuracy bothered me.  But I loved his intangibles and mobility.  Willis was really raw and held on to the ball too long but he had a rifle and his mobility is special.  Corral ran a RPO heavy college system and thought it would take time to adjust to the NFL, and I don't like his build for the NFL but he has a lightening fast release and a strong arm.  Pickett's arm strength IMO was "meh" and I don't like the late bloomer stuff -- but love how he makes plays on boots-on the move, and he comes off like the ultimate leader-high intangibles.  With Howell I recall my reservations was pocket presence and can his mobility translate to the NFL -- but what I stressed among the things i liked was he made the most wicked great throws among this group, deep outs and had great touch in the deep ball.

 

I think all these guys have a shot.  I wouldn't bet a lot of money on them but I wouldn't put a dime against them either.    None of these guys make me cringe as a prospect the way some others have over time that I wanted nothing to do with.  

 

Arians book on QBs is great.  Among his points, he alluded to why its so hard to predict these young QBs and he goes part of that is to be a great QB you need to process quickly on the field -- some have that, some don't.  Field vision-and fast processing (something IMO that dudes like Darnold don't have).  And his other key point is their work effort.  He likens it to a golf player fine tuning his swing.  In his view, you have to constantly work at it.  Non-stop.  And one of the reasons why some QBs are so inconsistent is they don't committ enough time to make the muscle memory automatic compared to dudes he's coached ala a Peyton. 

 

So for us on our couch we got no idea how committed these guys are to their craft.  But coaches find out quick.  Shanahan said in an interview once there is a serious guessing game to drafting college QBs but once you have them in house you know quick if this dude has what it takes or doesn't.  And work ethic is part of that equation.

Edited August 31, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

Sharp mostly likes Turner but I know he doesn't like this tendency

 

 

 

 

[mhd24]

51 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Sharp mostly likes Turner but I know he doesn't like this tendency

 

 

 

 

 

To be fair to Scott, he had to do that with noodle armed Taylor, Haskins (RIP), and one-legged Alex.

[Warhead36]

4 minutes ago, mhd24 said:

 

To be fair to Scott, he had to do that with noodle armed Taylor, Haskins (RIP), and one-legged Alex.

Yep. That's why I'm not going to make any judgments on Turner until I see what the offense looks like this year.

 

Remember, this is the same fan base that didn't think highly of McVay and ran Shanahan out of town. I don't take anything people on this board say about our assistant coaches.

[NickyJ]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Could be.  But I'd be careful about judging the preseason.  If its the preseason, then the gem of this draft would be.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm going to admit, you almost had me with Skylar looking like a real gem. Then comes the 2nd tweet with Chase Daniel having the third best QB rating in the preseason. Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, I'm pumping the brakes on that lol

[Skinsinparadise]

37 minutes ago, mhd24 said:

 

To be fair to Scott, he had to do that with noodle armed Taylor, Haskins (RIP), and one-legged Alex.

 

I believe what prompted that from Sharp was that trend extended (granted small sample) to the preseason.

 

I've been one of Scott's defenders here.  Some think he stinks and he's a problem.  I don't   Some like Logan Paulsen who studied his scheme and played for Kyle  -- seems to more or less think Scott is decent, he doesn't think he's in Kyle's strata -- in his view his tendencies can be game planned for because he has many obvious tendencies and he's not the most inventive guy.  That also seems to be the take if I recall of Joe Banner too who worked with him in one stint. 

 

But Paulsen sees him as a competent coordinator.  I think I am somewhat higher than Paulsen is on Scott but I agree with his premise that he's likely not the next Kyle.  But I also agree that he's competent and not a bad coordinator the way some deem him to be here.  And I agree this season will be his best test -- more weapons, more opportunities.  So it could be a showcase year for him. 

 

I also agree that people on this board in real time have been down on ALL coordinators.  And yes some even on Sean McVay.  Going further back I recall all the criticisms of Gregg Williams.  Williams had his fans for sure.  But he had some really vocal detractors who thought we could do better.  Arguably its been like 15 years or so later and we have never done better than him. 

 

 

 

Edited August 31, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Conn]

5 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

I'm going to admit, you almost had me with Skylar looking like a real gem. Then comes the 2nd tweet with Chase Daniel having the third best QB rating in the preseason. Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, I'm pumping the brakes on that lol

I mean, given the NFL experience he has compared to almost all the scrubs he plays against in the preseason, he should dominate. It’s like when you hit that final growth spurt/athleticism increase while you’re in college and then go home to play tackle football on thanksgiving morning with your high school brother’s friends. Should feel like a man among boys with all he’s seen and done, even if he stinks in the grand scheme of things. 

Edited August 31, 2022 by Conn

[Bifflog]

 

[Est.1974]

Howell should be listed #2 on the QB depth chart. 

[88Comrade2000]

13 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

I rather doubt it because he’s been adamant that the best case scenario is to develop into a backup.  
 

You are correct. Kiem's name was in my head. It was Rick Snider who said it.

[goskins10]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I believe what prompted that from Sharp was that trend extended (granted small sample) to the preseason.

 

I've been one of Scott's defenders here.  Some think he stinks and he's a problem.  I don't   Some like Logan Paulsen who studied his scheme and played for Kyle  -- seems to more or less think Scott is decent, he doesn't think he's in Kyle's strata -- in his view his tendencies can be game planned for because he has many obvious tendencies and he's not the most inventive guy.  That also seems to be the take if I recall of Joe Banner too who worked with him in one stint. 

 

But Paulsen sees him as a competent coordinator.  I think I am somewhat higher than Paulsen is on Scott but I agree with his premise that he's likely not the next Kyle.  But I also agree that he's competent and not a bad coordinator the way some deem him to be here.  And I agree this season will be his best test -- more weapons, more opportunities.  So it could be a showcase year for him. 

 

I also agree that people on this board in real time have been down on ALL coordinators.  And yes some even on Sean McVay.  Going further back I recall all the criticisms of Gregg Williams.  Williams had his fans for sure.  But he had some really vocal detractors who thought we could do better.  Arguably its been like 15 years or so later and we have never done better than him. 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, it seems this board hates all coordinators on the team when they are here. And yes that includes Sean McVay - too young, not inovative enough, too predictable, abandons the run too soon and more. Same with Kyle S. Too much like his father, all run - no passing until it's too late. Poor RZ offense. Can't get people open. calling is bland and uninspiring. Joe Barry was called the worst DC in history here and has been declared a savior in GB. In fairness there have been some bad coordinators come through here. But not all and even many of the bad ones are as much or more due to personel than the coaches. 

 

The DCs and OCs are stuck with thier personel. Now sometimes they have some responsibility there. But outside that Scott T is the same. No one can tell me his offence was not limited last year due to Taylor H. physical limitations. In fact it was Scott's inventiveness that allowed Taylor to steal a few games before people figured him out. Not much you can do when the QB can;t throw much past 15 ytds with any real zip on it. And the year before - 4 different QBs. Enough said. This will be his first opportunity with a true NFL starting QB, even if he has a few of his own warts. At least the potential is there.  

 

Preseason is not the place to try all this "inventive" stuff when you have a new to you QB, new RBs, new WRs, and a new OL. People tried to compare us to the Chiefs who have been together for several years with a QB who should be a HOF lock. Of course the guy is gonig to make some plays, even in preseason. Same with Baltimore although that was scrubs to scrubs fro the most part. Both teams were looking for guys in specific situations to make final cuts. 

 

Need to give Scott some time with the tools. The offsence should take a huge step forweard. If not, then it may be time to say Scott is not a good OC. But he has had little more than **** to work with so far. You can't blame the driver for not being able to keep up with a Porshe if they are given a VW Beetle (youngsters look it up 🙂 ). 

[mistertim]

52 minutes ago, Est.1974 said:

Howell should be listed #2 on the QB depth chart. 

 

I think Ron has already stated that Heinicke will be their #2. I assume because he knows the playbook and they believe he can be serviceable for short periods of time.

 

Though I'm curious what would happen if Wentz had a serious injury and would miss a lot of time. The main issue with TH is that his physical limitations limit the offensive play calling, which means if teams know they're facing him and can game plan for him then it's not super difficult to shut him down. So him coming in for a short period during a game would be fine since the defense game planned for Wentz. But anything beyond that would be bad.

 

So I could see them possibly going with Howell in that situation because I don't think any of the coaches are under the illusion that we'll go anywhere with Heinicke so might as well get Howell some experience and see how he looks.

[DJHJR86]

FWIW, Logan Paulsen was on Sheehan's podcast a few weeks ago and he basically said Howell's ceiling is a backup in the vein of Heinicke.  Not that I agree with that assessment, but there are people who do think his ceiling is a backup at best.

[Voice_of_Reason]

55 minutes ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

You are correct. Kiem's name was in my head. It was Rick Snider who said it.

Ah.  Well, Rick isn't a beat reporter, his opinion is as good as yours or mine.  He knows nothing more than what we all do, and he's been semi-retired for what seems like 15 years.  He's a little like Thom Lovero, just says things to stir the pot.  He's been around forever, and his historical knowledge is good.  He USED to be much more plugged in.  But he is in the "has an opinion not based on any facts" area vs. Keim, who actually talks to people and has knowledge and understanding.  

 

 

[SkinsFTW]

2 hours ago, NickyJ said:

I'm going to admit, you almost had me with Skylar looking like a real gem. Then comes the 2nd tweet with Chase Daniel having the third best QB rating in the preseason. Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, I'm pumping the brakes on that lol

 

If the Redskins had kept Chase Daniel and started him over the past 13+ years or whatever it's been, they'd might have had a better QB on average than they actually had. 

 

That's just sad, but also probably true. And he cost absolutely nothing. Wasn't he a UDFA?

Edited August 31, 2022 by SkinsFTW

[NickyJ]

Chase was a UDFA for us in 2009's preseason. I liked him, but not as much as Colt my Beloved.

[mistertim]

28 minutes ago, DJHJR86 said:

FWIW, Logan Paulsen was on Sheehan's podcast a few weeks ago and he basically said Howell's ceiling is a backup in the vein of Heinicke.  Not that I agree with that assessment, but there are people who do think his ceiling is a backup at best.

 

I've seen this take before and it seems to be solely based on where he was drafted vs his actual talent level.

[Voice_of_Reason]

2 hours ago, mhd24 said:

To be fair to Scott, he had to do that with noodle armed Taylor, Haskins (RIP), and one-legged Alex.

Yeah, that's fair, however you are essentially guaranteeing yourself a third down if you run on 2nd and 7+.  And then you have to once again factor in he had Haskins, TH, and peg-leg Smith.  (And Kyle Allen and that other guy for a game, and I guess Fitzy for 16 snaps)  So, do you REALLY want to be in a known passing situation on third down with those QBs? I say no...

Jay used to call them "get back on schedule" plays.  I call them "Really Stupid."  

 

"Back on schedule" means you are trying to get to 3rd and 3 or 4, so it's "easy" to convert.  That's dumb.  

 

The best time to try and get a 1st down is on 1st and 2nd down.  

 

I also am more of a Turner supporter than detractor, mostly because of the QBs he's had to work with, it's almost impossible to draw any conclusion.  One had drop-foot, one didn't know the playbook, and the other couldn't run a good bit of the playbook.  So, I'm in "wait and see" mode.

 

But the one thing I have found troubling is they haven't seemed to grasp the really simple fact that the best way to get first downs is not to convert third downs, but not to get to them at all.  I think the offensive philosophy has been "get into a manageable 3rd down."  

 

And I say, "try to avoid 3rd downs, especially known passing situation 3rd downs with bad QBs."

 

And passing on 2nd and long is easier than 3rd and medium to long.  The defense at least has to pay mind to a short pass or a run.  Whereas a 3rd ad 7+, they can basically ignore everything up to the LOS, and figure they can rally to make a tackle.  (That is, every defense EXCEPT ours which seems to be completely inept at this basic concept.) 

 

I think Scott can scheme up a good offense, I think he uses motion, I think he tries to attack the opponents weaknesses.  My HOPE is he has been overly reliant on the run because he just hasn't thought the QBs could play and was just desperately trying to limit their opportunities to do bad things.  And we will see something different this year.

[Voice_of_Reason]

5 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

I've seen this take before and it seems to be solely based on where he was drafted vs his actual talent level.

Eh, Logan is pretty good about evaluating what he sees, but he's not always right, just like Cooley, when he did the same thing wasn't always right.

 

Personally, I think projecting ANYTHING on any player after their rookie preseason is just plain silly.  Sure, sometimes, rarely, you know.  Most of the time, it takes a little bit longer to figure out what they are. 

[DJHJR86]

27 minutes ago, mistertim said:

I've seen this take before and it seems to be solely based on where he was drafted vs his actual talent level.

 

 

 

You don't say things like this if he's just a year away from potentially stepping in and being the guy.