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

[The Consigliere]

50 minutes ago, MartinC said:

If you believe that the only path to a Super Bowl win is a top 4 QB I disagree. Also having a top 4 QB is no guarantee of success either. NFL history tells us that.

Matt Stafford is not a top 4 guy. Neither was the combination of Wentz and Foles. 
 

Going further back Dan Marino never won a Super Bowl and a QB as great as Peyton Manning only won two - the last which was despite him not because of him. 
 

More than one way to skin a cat and a QB who is top 10 gives you a chance if there is a team around him. 

I wouldn't argue top 4, I'd argue the more relevant, elite/franchise guy. Yes its more nebulous, but generally other than animus, people typically agree on whose good enough to fit this classification.

 

These days those guys are Josh Allen, Lamar Jackson, old D. Watson, Joe Burrow, Justin Herbet, Mahomes, and Hurts. Anybody else I'm forgetting? At any given time there are typically about 4-8 of those guys. Those guys are the guys that go to a touch under 80% of NFC and AFC title games. A few years ago and a decade ago I ran through decades worth of title games, and basically around 75-80% of QBs who make it to conference title games are those guys. And the vast majority of repeat visits, maybe 80-90% are those guys, the exceptions tend to be 1 and done unless they're surrounded by a perfect supporting cast. The Ravens of this century, the two Niners editions, one a decade ago, and the one the past few years also fit, but usually those runs are more like the Bucs in 2002 or the Jags 7 or 8 years ago, when you've got the crap QB, but everything else is perfect, it usually falls apart pretty damn quick and btw, it's harder to build a reliable contender that way, the franchise QB, as hard as they are to get, is an easier passage. Consider the exceptions that weren't 1 or 2 and done, and its so rare to build a perenial contender without a top QB its borderline laughable. Its the Ravens, Bucs, and Niners the last 25 years and thats it. 

 

Teams that did it with franchise QB's? 

Atlanta

New Orleans

Seattle

Green Bay

NYG (Eli is borderline or worst for most admittedly, but consider how god awful they were before, and after Eli compared to with)

New England

Buffalo

Pittsburgh

Cincy

Indy

San Diego (usually choking a touch before then)

Kansas City

 

I might be forgetting teams,  but there's basically around 4x as many teams able to build contenders w/QBs, as those that build w/o them, fitting my 75-80% # tightly. 

 

It's just too hard to do it without one. Sometimes you have to anyway, the Niners, Bucs and Flacco ravens were simply too good to be in range to land blue chip QB's so they had to make do with Flacco, Brad Johnson and Alex Smith and Kap, and Garoppolo and now Purdy. But this should underline why its imperative to get that QB if you can, over anything else. Settling and hoping is not a strategy, period. 

 

I can see the same argument in the comments of the NFC East Blog on theathletic about where teams are going from here, and it's funny, the journo's, especially of other teams all asume if we pick top 10, we'll go QB or trade up for one, while the fans, want to build around Howell. I agree w/the Journo's. I do want to hit the OL in free agency and w/picks, but if we do pick top 10? QB has to be a target, you don't settle on QB, being "unsure" of what you got unless you have no choice, but we do. We have a choice, and as such, we need to go after that fix, if Howell hits, we have options, including trading a guy before the deadline, or after the '24 season. QB hits will carry value, even if they only have 1 more cheap year on their deal. 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

I will say Howell and the passing game is the only reason I have any interest in watching games the remainder of the year.

 

Man if he really can develop into a legit top 10 ish QB...

 

Obviously talent trumps all.  But over time I am becoming more interested in personality as an X factor.

 

I liked Corral a lot but then soured on him to the extent i didn't want to take him in the first as I keep reading-hearing stories about him being shaky in interviews, along with his personal baggage from the past and bad Wonderlic.  

 

Carson Strong had the injury issue.  But the other thing about him was I heard-read he was an awful interview and strange bird.

 

Now watching Matt Jones' implosion in NE -- I had no idea how high strung the dude is, but the stories about him make him come off like a head case.

 

 

Edited November 3, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Thinking Skins]

Here's that same stat I posted earlier but in clearer format. 

 

 

[The Consigliere]

55 minutes ago, samy316 said:

 

You need a Top 5 QB to get you in the conversation of winning a SB.  If you're a Top 10 QB, it can still happen, but you need really talented pieces around you to get the job done.  Look at the teams that are SB contenders this year.  The only teams with Top 10 QB's that aren't serious contenders are the Vikings (Cousins), and the Chargers (Herbert).  In the case of the Vikings, they simply reverting back to form from last year, where they were the best team in NFL history in one score games (11-1) plus Cousins just tore his Achilles, so there goes their chances at any realistic shot at contention.  In the case of the Chargers, they have a terrible HC AND their highly paid defensive isn't performing up to par.  Every other team that has a Top 10 QB is a threat to win the SB.  If you don't have a Top 10 QB, then you won't win a SB, simple as that.  You're not beating top tier QB's like Mahommes, Burrow or Hurts in the postseason, if the QB on the other side isn't on that level.  San Francisco is an interesting case, because before their 3-game slide, we were wondering if Purdy was ascending before our eyes into that Top 10 plateau.  It's clear now that he's kind of a system QB, and that Shanahan is a great offensive mind in creating the SF offense to make a less talented QB like Purdy flourish.

 

In fairness to Purdy, I don't think the 3 game slide defines him anymore than the success before that. The team suffered a bunch of injuries and his play is suffering w/o some key players being consistently healthy. I've viewed him the same as Howell, in general, as I simply don't know if he's got it or not, but there's more evidence that he's good, or at least solid, then that he's a bust or a bottom 10-12 guy. Time will tell.

 

In general I agree w/the rest, w/the caveat that there are exceptions to that rule, but 1.) most of the teams that are exceptions are 1 and done teams that take a good year from an average QB w/a great team around him to bubble up, before sinking again and 2.) the exceptions that actually do stick around, are exceptionally rare: basically only the Niners and the Ravens over the past 20 years were able to have sustained success w/average QB play under Flacco, Alex Smith and Kap. Far more often the teams were like the Jets and Jags, great defenses and ----- QB's, that made a run or two and then vanished. Trying to do it in a sustained fashion without a franchise QB or near franchise QB level is simply far harder and far more rare than simply finding a top 8-10 QB, and giving him a proper build. And in fairness, sometimes it doesn't work out, even w/the guy. The Lions with Stafford, the Chargers generally with Brees, Rivers and now Herbert, Newton's Panthers only did it once etc. Sometimes it doesn't work out, even when you find that QB, but in a league that's tailored its rules to maximize the value of QB performance, you'd be a fool to try and build a team while not taking that into account. 

Edited November 3, 2023 by The Consigliere

[lovemaskins]

3 hours ago, KDawg said:

Only in Commie Land do we think a top 10 potential QB isn’t good enough.

I know right, haven't had a top 20 quarterback since Joe Theisman and now everybody is a damn GM with expert level insight and wisdom.  It’s nonsense to me personally which is why I’m tying to refrain from posting.
 

 Brother I can’t express how happy I am to have pros in the front office, cause the inmates have been running the asylum far too long…

[Est.1974]

All seems quite bizarre to me. I know we can churn out stats out to death. But the eye test isn’t that complex. Howell looks like an NFL calibre starting QB. And a good one at that.
 

With the right staff and coaching he clearly could make it. I think EB is very good for him. Forget the wider team strategy on run/pass. EB is damn good for Howell. 
 

Interesting times ahead. I think we’d be mad to check out on Howell after 2023. In fact, I think we’d be ****ing stupid. Time will tell.

[samy316]

31 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

 

In fairness to Purdy, I don't think the 3 game slide defines him anymore than the success before that. The team suffered a bunch of injuries and his play is suffering w/o some key players being consistently healthy. I've viewed him the same as Howell, in general, as I simply don't know if he's got it or not, but there's more evidence that he's good, or at least solid, then that he's a bust or a bottom 10-12 guy. Time will tell.

 

In general I agree w/the rest, w/the caveat that there are exceptions to that rule, but 1.) most of the teams that are exceptions are 1 and done teams that take a good year from an average QB w/a great team around him to bubble up, before sinking again and 2.) the exceptions that actually do stick around, are exceptionally rare: basically only the Niners and the Ravens over the past 20 years were able to have sustained success w/average QB play under Flacco, Alex Smith and Kap. Far more often the teams were like the Jets and Jags, great defenses and ----- QB's, that made a run or two and then vanished. Trying to do it in a sustained fashion without a franchise QB or near franchise QB level is simply far harder and far more rare than simply finding a top 8-10 QB, and giving him a proper build. And in fairness, sometimes it doesn't work out, even w/the guy. The Lions with Stafford, the Chargers generally with Brees, Rivers and now Herbert, Newton's Panthers only did it once etc. Sometimes it doesn't work out, even when you find that QB, but in a league that's tailored its rules to maximize the value of QB performance, you'd be a fool to try and build a team while not taking that into account. 

 

I would generally say that Mahommes, Burrow, Allen, Herbert, Jackson & Lawrence are franchise QB's that can at least get you to a SB, if you have the right coach and complimentary offense.  Hurts is right around this territory too, so I'll include him in on this list.  Goff, Cousins and Purdy CAN get you to a SB, but they'd have to have a complimentary defense or high level skillplayers (like Justin Jefferson for the Vikings) to thrive.  For everyone else, it's a long shot. 

 

Dak for me isn't in the Top 10.  He's clearly a step below the Goff's, Cousins and Purdy's of the world, let alone the franchise level QB's like Mahommes, Burrow, etc.  Dak is not clutch, he disappears in big games, and he doesn't elevate his teams in any capacity.  He shrinks when the stakes are high, and he essentially becomes a net negative for the Cowboys, if they have to come back from a deficit.  He's a frontrunner QB in every sense of the word.  He's a guy you CAN'T pay, because you're going to be handcuffing your team for the next several seasons, and there's a clear ceiling with Dak as your QB.

[The Consigliere]

1 hour ago, Est.1974 said:

All seems quite bizarre to me. I know we can churn out stats out to death. But the eye test isn’t that complex. Howell looks like an NFL calibre starting QB. And a good one at that.
 

With the right staff and coaching he clearly could make it. I think EB is very good for him. Forget the wider team strategy on run/pass. EB is damn good for Howell. 
 

Interesting times ahead. I think we’d be mad to check out on Howell after 2023. In fact, I think we’d be ****ing stupid. Time will tell.

Btw, I am not in support of bailing on him, I just don't think his presence should preclude drafting a QB in round 1. If we are in the zone to trade up for or draft a franchise QB at slot we should take that shot. 2 elite QB's is not a problem, its a dream asset. 

 

Particularly when you consider that the '25 QB class appears definitively thinner at the top than the '24. 

[PeterMP]

3 hours ago, MartinC said:

If you believe that the only path to a Super Bowl win is a top 4 QB I disagree. Also having a top 4 QB is no guarantee of success either. NFL history tells us that.

Matt Stafford is not a top 4 guy. Neither was the combination of Wentz and Foles. 
 

Going further back Dan Marino never won a Super Bowl and a QB as great as Peyton Manning only won two - the last which was despite him not because of him. 
 

More than one way to skin a cat and a QB who is top 10 gives you a chance if there is a team around him. 

 

I don't know why you would read my post and think I believe that.  I've pretty clear in multiple posts.  I've talked about other ways and said things like low probability multiple times.

 

I think it is one of the most straight forward ways.  I will point out that the Foles/Wentz combo meets my other criteria.  Neither of them were making much money.  I think you can win with a guy that is good but not great as long as they don't make that much.  But that doesn't normally happen.  Normally guys that aren't in that top range still end up making a lot of money (e.g. Daniel Jones and Kirk Cousins).  And at the time (pre-injury), Wentz definitely looked like a top 5 QB.  Before getting hurt that year, he looked like an MVP that year.

 

Stafford to me would be an exception.  And it does happen and I never said it didn't.  I just said it was very hard.  It is rare.  Stafford had one great run and turned into a Super Bowl.

Edited November 3, 2023 by PeterMP

[The Consigliere]

1 hour ago, samy316 said:

 

I would generally say that Mahommes, Burrow, Allen, Herbert, Jackson & Lawrence are franchise QB's that can at least get you to a SB, if you have the right coach and complimentary offense.  Hurts is right around this territory too, so I'll include him in on this list.  Goff, Cousins and Purdy CAN get you to a SB, but they'd have to have a complimentary defense or high level skillplayers (like Justin Jefferson for the Vikings) to thrive.  For everyone else, it's a long shot. 

 

Dak for me isn't in the Top 10.  He's clearly a step below the Goff's, Cousins and Purdy's of the world, let alone the franchise level QB's like Mahommes, Burrow, etc.  Dak is not clutch, he disappears in big games, and he doesn't elevate his teams in any capacity.  He shrinks when the stakes are high, and he essentially becomes a net negative for the Cowboys, if they have to come back from a deficit.  He's a frontrunner QB in every sense of the word.  He's a guy you CAN'T pay, because you're going to be handcuffing your team for the next several seasons, and there's a clear ceiling with Dak as your QB.

So he kinda sounds like Cousins, but inferior to that level. Whats funny is during that draft, a lot of us were looking at Dak and Brissett and trying to figure out which one had a better chance of hitting of the day 3 guys. I think most went with Brissett. I know I did. Now, like 7 or 8 years later, its pretty clear Dak had the complete game, could throw like an elite QB. The rest of what makes a franchise guy appears to be lacking. To me he's better than the Carr's of the world, that reach that Dalton plus level, Dak has produced some really good+ seasons, but yes, he's not at the level of talent of a Kirk Cousins, or Matt Ryan who are also a step lower on the ladder. 

 

It's complicated, there are fundamentally special guys (Mahomes, Burrow) there are fundamentally special guys that might just lack something or end up compromised by their teams builds (Matt Ryans, Josh Allens, Herberts maybe and Staffords) and there are guys that are prolific compilers but never look the part (Dak's and Cousins types) and then there are mediocre plus types, the Derek Carr's, the Baker's (in his good years) etc. 

 

The worst group is group 3 and 4 because we know those guys aren't ever winning super bowls, Kirk Cousins aint winning one EVER, Dak aint winning one, ever, Derek Carr aint winning one ever (yes technically if they were atop a Niner or Ravens Defense they could but it would have nothing to do with them). Group 1 and 2 is what you want. I fear we're looking at a 3 or 4 with Howell, but I have no idea. I think his ceiling is probably a high tier 3 or a low tier 2, just not sure yet. Whats exciting is that his mental make up suggests he has the tier 1/tier 2 temperament and leadership skills, which would be HUGE. He clearly never quits and is tough as ----. I love that he has a Korean grandparent, growing up in the bay, Korean culture is unbelievably hard core. I hope he got some of that :). 

[The Consigliere]

7 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

I think it is one of the most straight forward ways.  I will point out that the Foles/Wentz combo meets my other criteria.  Neither of them were making much money.  I think you can win with a guy that is good but not great as long as they don't make that much.  But that doesn't normally happen.  Normally guys that aren't in that top range still end up making a lot of money (e.g. Daniel Jones and Kirk Cousins).  And at the time (pre-injury), Wentz definitely looked like a top 5 QB.  Before getting hurt that year, he looked like an MVP that year.

 

Stafford to me would be an exception.  And it does happen.  But it is rare.  Stafford had one good run and turned into a Super Bowl.

 

Well put. My problem with letting Cousins go in '18 wasn't that we let him go, it's that we had back to back QB classes with a lot of potential answers (Trubisky, Mahomes, and Watson in '17, Baker, Darnold, Josh Allen, Lamar Jackson and Josh Rosen in '18, and then a crap class w/just Kyler in '19,  followed by the Burrow, Tua, Herbert group in '20), that was basically 11 potential franchise QB's to go after across 3 classes in four years, plus the 12th guy from '19, Kyler. Instead of having a plan and targeting one of those 3 loaded classes, or Kyler, the total dip---- involved alienated and then ejected Cousins, which could've been fine (he was never winning a super bowl with us anyway), but only if we had a genuinely intelligent plan to replacement his quality play. Instead, we made a horrendous trade for Alex Smith for a quick fix after an obvious outlier season nothing remotely like prior seasons (which I called as an outlier from the jump and it was even more outliery than I though), and then compounded the error by reaching a bit for Haskins in the one terrible QB class surrounded by four outstanding ones ('17, '18, '20, and '21). It was, and remains one of the stupidest bits of team building in 4 decades of horrendous team building for this franchise. 

 

So frustrating. Anyway, very excited we have Howell, and excited we can get a new FO that can evaluate the talent in house and the class properly and make sound decisions. 

[NoCalMike]

The Top 3-5 ranked QB is not about being unable to win a championship without one, it is that that caliber of QB usually will keep the team relevant and in the conversation every single season.   Brady, Manning, Big Ben, Rodgers, etc etc......they weren't winning the superbowl every single season but what they did do was keep those teams winning every single season for the most part.  If you are able to pretty much be a playoff team based on what your starting QB can do alone, then there is a good chance that over the course of their career, the team will end up a legitimate superbowl contender a handful of times.

Teams that win the other way(s) usually have a much smaller window and have to take the "all in for this season" risks more frequently.

[PeterMP]

6 hours ago, KDawg said:

Only in Commie Land do we think a top 10 potential QB isn’t good enough.

 

It seems to me that the people that run the Packers, the Eagles, and the Andy Reid have the same attitude.

[philibusters]

1 hour ago, samy316 said:

 

 

Dak for me isn't in the Top 10.  He's clearly a step below the Goff's, Cousins and Purdy's of the world, let alone the franchise level QB's like Mahommes, Burrow, etc.  Dak is not clutch, he disappears in big games, and he doesn't elevate his teams in any capacity.  He shrinks when the stakes are high, and he essentially becomes a net negative for the Cowboys, if they have to come back from a deficit.  He's a frontrunner QB in every sense of the word.  He's a guy you CAN'T pay, because you're going to be handcuffing your team for the next several seasons, and there's a clear ceiling with Dak as your QB.

 

I think you are selling Dak short.  I think Dak is a very good system QB.  You put him in structure and he can operate at a high level.  That said if you put him bad situations where the O-Line is blocking poorly he has poor receivers he struggles because making plays outside of structure are not his strong suit.   In a sense I think he is similar to Cousins.

Edited November 3, 2023 by philibusters

[MartinC]

1 hour ago, PeterMP said:

 

I don't know why you would read my post and think I believe that.  

Because in the post I quoted you said “and it’s really top 4 IMO”.

[Voice_of_Reason]

2 minutes ago, MartinC said:

Because in the post I quoted you said “and it’s really top 4 IMO”.

[The Team Formerly Known As WFT]

7 hours ago, KDawg said:

Only in Commie Land do we think a top 10 potential QB isn’t good enough.

Are you implying that Howell is a potential top 10 QB?  Because I definitely don't see it.

 

Any QB that has freaking 25 yards passing in the first half against the 1 - 6 Giants does not have a future as a starting QB in the NFL.

[KDawg]

6 minutes ago, The Team Formerly Known As WFT said:

Are you implying that Howell is a potential top 10 QB?  Because I definitely don't see it.

 

Any QB that has freaking 25 yards passing in the first half against the 1 - 6 Giants does not have a future as a starting QB in the NFL.

I’m implying that the person who is leading the charge said he has top 10 potential.

 

Which I agree with. I am not implying that he IS.

 

And look at the gameplan and our OL against the Giants. It matters.

Edited November 3, 2023 by KDawg

[The Team Formerly Known As WFT]

Just now, KDawg said:

I’m implying that the person who is leading the charge said he has top 10 potential.

 

Which I agree with. I am not implying that he IS.

Yeah, I'm definitely not a Howell fan.  I think he holds the ball too long and takes way too many sacks to be successful in the NFL.  And he had the same problem in college, which is a major reason why he was a 5th round QB.  I still can't believe the idiot Rivera decided to make him the starting QB.

 

I don't see the Commodes winning more than 6 games this season with Howell as QB.

[KDawg]

2 minutes ago, The Team Formerly Known As WFT said:

Yeah, I'm definitely not a Howell fan.  I think he holds the ball too long and takes way too many sacks to be successful in the NFL.  And he had the same problem in college, which is a major reason why he was a 5th round QB.  I still can't believe the idiot Rivera decided to make him the starting QB.

 

I don't see the Commodes winning more than 6 games this season with Howell as QB.

I think you’re wrong on him. He holds the ball too long because he’s trying to make something happen. He’s been bad in two games. Decent to good in 6. 
 

You want to be disappointed in someone? Look at our OL and our defense.

 

We’ll see how Howell holds up and develops, we may need a QB. But we need an improved D and OL more.

Edited November 3, 2023 by KDawg

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[The Team Formerly Known As WFT]

Just now, KDawg said:

I think you’re wrong on him. He holds the ball too long because he’s trying to make something happen. He’s been bad in two games. Decent to good in 6. 
 

You want to be disappointed in someone? Look at our OL and our defense.

 

We’ll see how Howell holds up and develops, we may need a QB. But we need an improved D and OL more.

LOL...definitely not.  He played well in the two Eagles games and the second half of the Broncos game.  He was OK against the Falcons.  And he was flat-out terrible against the Cardinals, Bills, Bears, and Giants.

[KDawg]

2 minutes ago, The Team Formerly Known As WFT said:

LOL...definitely not.  He played well in the two Eagles games and the second half of the Broncos game.  He was OK against the Falcons.  And he was flat-out terrible against the Cardinals, Bills, Bears, and Giants.

Agree to disagree. 
 

You seem to be putting the entirety of the issues on him. So we aren’t going to agree.

[The Team Formerly Known As WFT]

Just now, KDawg said:

Agree to disagree. 
 

You seem to be putting the entirety of the issues on him. So we aren’t going to agree.

I am putting most of the blame on Howell because this was a playoff team last year with Heinicke.  The offensive line was no good last year, yet Heinicke still had a 5 - 3 - 1 record.  

 

If Heinicke was still here, the Commodes win the Bears game and the Giants game and they would be at least 5 - 3 right now. Heinicke NEVER lost to bad teams like the 0 - 4 Bears and the 1 - 6 Giants.

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, PeterMP said:

 

It seems to me that the people that run the Packers, the Eagles, and the Andy Reid have the same attitude.

 

Alex was 33 about to turn 34, they gave him 5 seasons.  If Howell was established apples to apples and had a 10 year career and was about to hit his mids 30, I'd see the analogy.

 

I read a long article about the Eagles scouting Hurts.  I posted it on a thread.  The vibe then wasn't from their FO that Hurts >> Wentz.  they just liked what they saw from Hurts and believe in taking QBs.  

 

Packers?   Favre was elite.  But again pushing mid 30s.

 

I don't get the Howell comparisons?    I understand if people aren't sold yet.  Will see how it plays out.  Speaking for myself, if Howell ends up in that 10-14 range, Kirkish, but more clutch.  I'd dig it.  That would make him one of the best QBs in team history.

 

We've had mostly garbage at the spot.  Some rare "good" Brad Johnson, Kirk.  If we get good from Howell, I'd take it.

 

Look if it were easy to find an elite QB, sign me up, so i am always open on that front.    If that opportunity presents itself but I am doubting it will.  Will see.

Edited November 3, 2023 by Skinsinparadise