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

[Koolblue13]

4 minutes ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

What were Pats; chopped liver?

 

Packers - 60’s Dynasty 

Steelers - 70’s Dynasty 

49ers - 80’s Dynasty

Boys - 90’s Dynasty

Pats - 00’s & 10’s Dynasty

 

There’s always one team each decade that’s dynastic.

 

At the moment; the Chiefs look to be this decades dynasty.

When did I say there was never any dynasties?

[Skinsinparadise]

The whole Rivera debate about him being a fool for not dumping Haskins from the jump is wild to me.

 

Look I was one of Haskins biggest critics.  Yet it was tough for me to say that he didn't show flashes at the end of that season, he played well against the Eagles-Giants.  That probably ends up his career high.  Heck even Sam Darnold has some good games, pretty much every QB who has a chance to start has a good game or two.  Fortunately for Haskins it happened at the end of that season.  Then he tried to dispel his work ethic issues by actually supposedly at the time working hard for a spell.  We all saw the instagram workout videos he put out and he was trying to change the narrative.  It didn't last.  But the phase right after Rivera took the job was somewhat Haskins brief honeymoon phase ironically. 

 

So even if I am not working for a psycho owner like Dan.  It's tough to discard ANY first round pick right from day 1 but that's especially so under the context that Haskins was running a narrative that maybe he can turn things around.   And under the context that the owner loves the player.  The owner already overrode the previous coaching staff on said player.  Still with all of that in the soup apparently -- Rivera had the FO, and I presume Dan convinced to move on from Haskins if they can get Burrow because they saw him as can't miss.   But apparently that's not enough?

 

They clearly didn't see Herbert as can't miss and weren't going to lay down on the sword for him.  Herbert wasn't considered a can't miss prospect.  They weren't alone on that sentiment.  If someone here was beating the drum for Herbert and thought he was an obvious stud and are pissed that Rivera's staff at the time led by Kyle Smith didn't feel the same -- OK, that's fair IMO.  But in the context of Dan, Rivera IMO if anything in my book gets an A not an F.  He benched Haskins fast.  He took heat for doing it from much of the media and some fans including on the board.  And ultimately they released him in season.  So that showed plenty of balls including in the context of Dan IMO.  Stuff like that rarely happens as for a first round QB being let go that fast. 

 

So yeah I get the frustration about not having a QB.  And heck I get some of the frustation about Rivera but IMO the 2019 stuff is wild.

 

As for 2020, I think the shot has to be for exactly what went down versus Rivera doesn't get that a QB is important.  He's basically screaming desperation on the Qb spot.  Maybe he flirted with the idea last year that its not the end of the world to build the roster if you can't land the QB and work around it but this year he's said more or less you can't win without the QB.  So no doubt he "gets it".

 

If there is any criticism that IMO that is fair from last year, its that he should have seen what some have (me included) but many didn't see (other teams could have traded up for Mac, too though I wasn’t pushing for trading up) which is Mac Jones is a good QB.  Judging by rumors, Rivera would have taken Jones at 19 but didn't like him enough to trade capital for him.  Other than that?  Not sure what the hit is?

 

He did offer a lot for Stafford, more than most here were willing to offer.  I know it because my thought as for what to offer for Stafford back then was identical to what they offered yet many told me that was too rich before it all went down.  And he did make a trade offer for Fields but that team wanted the moon for Fields.  I like Fields but I'll reserve judgment on that, its not like Fields is off to a rocket start.

 

As for this year, we are in the rumorville for just about every QB under the sun.  And those that say Rivera prefers to shoot low for the Qb spot, isn't paying any attention to any of the local or national reports or what Rivera has said recently or they are paying attention and want to take a dig just to take a dig.

 

 

Edited February 19, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[NickyJ]

8 hours ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

So, you're saying Rivera, who let us remember was sought after for interviews in multiple places, took a job with the worst owner in sports who was dictating that he had to keep a bad QB as his starter- and he had to turn that 3-13 team into a playoff team in year one or be fired?

 

And I want to be absolutely clear on this- you're saying Rivera took the job under those conditions as a way of praising him? 

 

Just wow. 

I'm saying that I'm thankful that he took the job, because otherwise we'd be stuck with an incompetent coach who could just as easily be a Matt Nagy and screw up even with a good QB. Either Rivera takes it, or we get stuck with a loser who wouldn't have the power that Rivera does. Is that what you'd rather have? Because that's the only thing I'm getting from you complaining that Rivera took the job despite the meddling.

 

You have a gift horse in front of you in a coach that at this moment is not subject to Dan's whims. You can keep examining it's mouth. I'll take what I can get.

 

37 minutes ago, carex said:

If Rivera hadn't made the playoffs last year we'd have had higher picks nd potentially swung a trade making 2021 a totally different animal

Who would we have traded for? Who's the surefire QB that you're certain would have made 2021 a different animal and guaranteed that Rivera isn't on the hotseat after 2 failed seasons? Rivera making the playoffs after cutting the owner's pet is exactly what makes Rivera untouchable. It proved Rivera right, it proved Dan wrong. Without that, the narrative is 'Rivera cut someone in only his second year. Haskins could have turned it around and It's not like they were winning without him.' We were getting that narrative from our own posters on ES. Dan latching onto it would be disastrous.

Edited February 19, 2022 by NickyJ

[Skinsinparadise]

If it happened be interesting to get Cooleys take.  He used to worship Wentz.

 

 

[Koolblue13]

Wentz for a year and hit the draft super hard next year would probably be the best we could hope for. 

 

Imagine not going to the playoffs, because you lost to the mighty ****ing Jaguars on christmas day. What a kick in the nuts that would be. 

[Zim489]

4 hours ago, Hitman#21 said:

I could live with a move for Mayfield though. 

This would be the worst case scenario. Cause you would have to pay him 25-35 mil and welcome to purgatory. 

2 hours ago, Die Hard said:

The NFL is an entertainment business. They’re about ratings (ie profits).

 

And for better or worse, if you want to get bigger ratings (ie. audience), you have to appease the masses. 

And their research seems to be consistent with every major professional sport. More offence.

 

And judging by the numbers $$$$, it would appear they’re getting exactly what they wanted.

 

 

 

 

I think were reaching a point now where people are finally starting to realize it en masse. I know I havent been here very long but I have been on this Elite QB or die mentality for about 5 years and now you are finally getting the diehards like Sheehan saying nothing else matters. What happens when in another 5 the rest of the fans start to realize that their team has no chance? Will it become the NBA where half the teams dont get more than 60% of their stadium full week in week out because everyone knows they have no chance? Going to be wild when the slowest group of people involved (those actually in the NFL) realize it and see 5-10 teams tanking every year 

[Koolblue13]

38 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

The whole Rivera debate about him being a fool for not dumping Haskins from the jump is wild to me.

 

 

 

It's pretty dumb for sure. Making an argument for arguments sake really.

 

Haskins was a high first round rookie with 5 games under his belt on a **** team, with a lame duck coach. Or was Jay already fired?

 

Cutting him right away would be McDaniels level stupid. Ron said that it was an audition year and didn't expect much from it. He tried Haskins out and gave him a chance. He didn't work out and he cut him.

 

Haskins was a selling point and an asset for a coach to come here, not a negative. 

[Zim489]

1 hour ago, carex said:

If Rivera hadn't made the playoffs last year we'd have had higher picks nd potentially swung a trade making 2021 a totally different animal

This franchise would be in a 100 times better situation. We would have been drafting 9th and in a spot to take fields. The entire organization future is changed. 

[Koolblue13]

5 minutes ago, Zim489 said:

 purgatory. 

[Zim489]

48 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

The whole Rivera debate about him being a fool for not dumping Haskins from the jump is wild to me.

 

Look I was one of Haskins biggest critics.  Yet it was tough for me to say that he didn't show flashes at the end of that season, he played well against the Eagles-Giants.  That probably ends up his career high.  Heck even Sam Darnold has some good games, pretty much every QB who has a chance to start has a good game or two.  Fortunately for Haskins it happened at the end of that season.  Then he tried to dispel his work ethic issues by actually supposedly at the time working hard for a spell.  We all saw the instagram workout videos he put out and he was trying to change the narrative.  It didn't last.  But the phase right after Rivera took the job was somewhat Haskins brief honeymoon phase ironically. 

 

So even if I am not working for a psycho owner like Dan.  It's tough to discard ANY first round pick right from day 1 but that's especially so under the context that Haskins was running a narrative that maybe he can turn things around.   And under the context that the owner loves the player.  The owner already overrode the previous coaching staff on said player.  Still with all of that in the soup apparently -- Rivera had the FO, and I presume Dan convinced to move on from Haskins if they can get Burrow because they saw him as can't miss.   But apparently that's not enough?

 

They clearly didn't see Herbert as can't miss and weren't going to lay down on the sword for him.  Herbert wasn't considered a can't miss prospect.  They weren't alone on that sentiment.  If someone here was beating the drum for Herbert and thought he was an obvious stud and are pissed that Rivera's staff at the time led by Kyle Smith didn't feel the same -- OK, that's fair IMO.  But in the context of Dan, Rivera IMO if anything in my book gets an A not an F.  He benched Haskins fast.  He took heat for doing it from much of the media and some fans including on the board.  And ultimately they released him in season.  So that showed plenty of balls including in the context of Dan IMO.  Stuff like that rarely happens as for a first round QB being let go that fast. 

 

So yeah I get the frustration about not having a QB.  And heck I get some of the frustation about Rivera but IMO the 2019 stuff is wild.

 

As for 2020, I think the shot has to be for exactly what went down versus Rivera doesn't get that a QB is important.  He's basically screaming desperation on the Qb spot.  Maybe he flirted with the idea last year that its not the end of the world to build the roster if you can't land the QB and work around it but this year he's said more or less you can't win without the QB.  So no doubt he "gets it".

 

If there is any criticism that IMO that is fair from last year, its that he should have seen what some have (me included) but many didn't see (other teams could have traded up for Mac, too though I wasn’t pushing for trading up) which is Mac Jones is a good QB.  Judging by rumors, Rivera would have taken Jones at 19 but didn't like him enough to trade capital for him.  Other than that?  Not sure what the hit is?

 

He did offer a lot for Stafford, more than most here were willing to offer.  I know it because my thought as for what to offer for Stafford back then was identical to what they offered yet many told me that was too rich before it all went down.  And he did make a trade offer for Fields but that team wanted the moon for Fields.  I like Fields but I'll reserve judgment on that, its not like Fields is off to a rocket start.

 

As for this year, we are in the rumorville for just about every QB under the sun.  And those that say Rivera prefers to shoot low for the Qb spot, isn't paying any attention to any of the local or national reports or what Rivera has said recently or they are paying attention and want to take a dig just to take a dig.

 

 

I think its foolish as well. The bigger issue I have is Ron not assuming that Dan, a known idiot, picked Dwayne and wasnt likely to work out. From that point forward I would have been making moves to make my job in selecting a QB the following draft as easy as possible with getting rid of assets, trading back, and so on. 

 

Personally I dont think Ron places enough value on the position. Which isnt out of the norm for those in the NFL. NFL personnel and coaches specifically are among the most rigid and set in their ways people. Far too many still place value in the guys "you can win with" if everything is right. 

17 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Im well aware. A middling QB on a big money contract keeps you firmly in the middle. 

[Koolblue13]

10 minutes ago, Zim489 said:

I think its foolish as well. The bigger issue I have is Ron not assuming that Dan, a known idiot, picked Dwayne and wasnt likely to work out. From that point forward I would have been making moves to make my job in selecting a QB the following draft as easy as possible with getting rid of assets, trading back, and so on. 

 

Personally I dont think Ron places enough value on the position. Which isnt out of the norm for those in the NFL. NFL personnel and coaches specifically are among the most rigid and set in their ways people. Far too many still place value in the guys "you can win with" if everything is right. 

Im well aware. A middling QB on a big money contract keeps you firmly in the middle. 

Doesn't put enough value on the position? He tried to get the only great QB via trade last year and offered a 1rst plus more picks and a first round player and was outbid, because the player wanted to go to the Rams. Then he signed the best FA available. Now he is saying that nothing else matters and would make any trade for one. He's completely panicking about how important it is to him.

 

 

[The Consigliere]

16 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

lol, mid 30s to me isn't 32-33.  But whatever.  Your posts indicate to me that Rivera can't win with you aside from just doing one thing which is taking a QB in the top 10 but only in a year loved by mock drafters for Qb and in that year he can give up all the draft capital in the world to get said Qb.  And if he doesn't do that he's a moron. 

Wow. What is mid to to you? I guess you could keep it exclusively to 34-36? Does that work better?

 

Good lord. Back to back Mastadon scale dumps on me. It’s going to take months to clean up how thoroughly you trashed myself and my takes. I’ll look into my tone. I’ve done my best to own when I’m wrong and I am wrong plenty (McLaurin and Rosen for example). Ftr, I always like the idea of trading for a QB if you can get a top 10 graded guy for a 65tg pick when they’ve got 4 years counting the option left on the rookie deal if I like the prospect and I liked Rosen. I’d do the same for Fields or Lance and even Tua last year. I view that as a cheaper and clever way to land a potential answer at QB than trading the moon for an old vet or drafting a sketchier prospect.

 

Anyway probably a good idea not to read my posts to begin w/if there is an ignore button. I sound insanely annoying snd pompous as hell and who would want read that. Needless to say, I’ll work on my toe and fine tuning my takes for the board, I’m not looking to come across as some blank, I have opinions and some of them are quite strong and in my view correct. I’ve always had the sense that that is true of most people on here and boards in general, maybe not but that’s been my impression. Anyway good luck.

 

 

17 hours ago, Burgold said:

But we're not a 4-6 win team. We are clearly a 7 win team and very much a borderline one and done playoff team right now.  It's not hard to imagine a better QB pushing us into that 9 or 10 win spectrum or a good QB getting us there. Heck, Heinike would have got us to the playoffs if we hadn't lost half the team to Covid and lost Samuel, Thomas for the season and McKissic for half a season. In fact, I bet if just McKissic stayed healthy (and didn't have the Covid implosion) we would have been in the playoffs.

You might be right. Maybe we are that. I’m just skeptical, it feels very much like the Johnson, Boonell, McNabb, Alex Smith trades to me and unlikely to move the needle as much as people suspect plus I view Wilson as a bolting/retiring risk demanding another trade type. I am a bit worried that he may be system dependent as well. Otoh, as I mentioned before, the NFC is much more open than the AFC.

[The Consigliere]

17 hours ago, RWJ said:

That's cool.  Whatever float your boat.   Me, with the team we have in tack, I would rather put up some draft picks and a player and get me a proven QB now and win.  Just me.  

That’s fine, I just wat to build something that lasts. Nothing else matters to me as much as that. Short term or offs like ‘99, ‘05-‘07, ‘12, ‘15, ‘20 just don’t mean much but I was spoiled in the 80s and 90s.

Edited February 19, 2022 by The Consigliere

[RWJ]

2 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

That’s fine, I just wat to build something that lasts. Nothing else matters to me as much as that. Short term or offs like ‘99, ‘05-‘07, ‘12, ‘15, ‘20 just don’t mean much but I was spoiled in the 80s and 90s.

I think all of us fans can understand your thoughts, Consi.   Keep a love flowing in your post, enjoy ES like all of us.  Passion for a team that we grew up with watching our Dad's and family root for, at least a lot of us.  Have a great day and God Bless.  

[Darth Tater]

33 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

It's pretty dumb for sure. Making an argument for arguments sake really.

 

Haskins was a high first round rookie with 5 games under his belt on a **** team, with a lame duck coach. Or was Jay already fired?

 

Cutting him right away would be McDaniels level stupid. Ron said that it was an audition year and didn't expect much from it. He tried Haskins out and gave him a chance. He didn't work out and he cut him.

 

Haskins was a selling point and an asset for a coach to come here, not a negative. 

Yes, I would agree that the failure to replace Haskins or get an elite QB in trade (didn't have the assets) or draft is not really Ron's total fault. Mac Jones was the only one we really might have had a chance for that Ron seems to have been against. Thing is, a HEAD COACH is still accountable for those misses whether it is his fault or not. If you are honest, most of our fails during the Gruden period were not Gruden's fault. Same with Norv.

 

Beathard/Gibbs made some tremendous errors as far as the draft. Here are some 2nd rounders that NEVER played a down for us. Two never even played in the NFL

Richard Williams (22 games mostly as a special teams guy, none for us after we traded up for this pick)

Bob Slater (never played a down in the NFL)

Tory Nixon (4years at SFO as a back up after another big trade up by us)

Walter Murray(2 years as a back-up for the Colts after another big trade up)

Wally Kliene (never played a down in the NFL)

Of course, Nixon was the only fail in a year where we didn't get to the play-offs.

[Koolblue13]

11 minutes ago, Darth Tater said:

Yes, I would agree that the failure to replace Haskins or get an elite QB in trade (didn't have the assets) or draft is not really Ron's total fault. Mac Jones was the only one we really might have had a chance for that Ron seems to have been against. Thing is, a HEAD COACH is still accountable for those misses whether it is his fault or not. If you are honest, most of our fails during the Gruden period were not Gruden's fault. Same with Norv.

 

Beathard/Gibbs made some tremendous errors as far as the draft. Here are some 2nd rounders that NEVER played a down for us. Two never even played in the NFL

Richard Williams (22 games mostly as a special teams guy, none for us after we traded up for this pick)

Bob Slater (never played a down in the NFL)

Tory Nixon (4years at SFO as a back up after another big trade up by us)

Walter Murray(2 years as a back-up for the Colts after another big trade up)

Wally Kliene (never played a down in the NFL)

Of course, Nixon was the only fail in a year where we didn't get to the play-offs.

I agree that it all falls on him, because he's the HC. I was more replying to the notion that Ron is a moron for taking the job knowing Haskins was a bust and Dan was forcing it.

 

I'm definitely not happy with how last year went in that offseason, but Fitz had no injury history and we made a very strong push for Stafford. There wasn't a lot of trade up options, if any for us. I'm glad we didn't use 3 1rsts for Lance and Mac wasn't widely viewed as a home run pick. Plus we knew he would be a patriot.

 

Some posters make it seem like Ron is sitting on his hands, when he's doing just about anything to address it. And he acknowledges that's our main concern. 

[Mrshadow008]

I can’t blame Ron for taking a year to see if he could make Haskins work. Haskins problem isn’t talent by any stretch of the imagination. Dude has an insane amount of arm talent. Still remember a throw during his rookie season during the jets game. Had pressure up the middle scrambled to his left and threw a dime 60 yards down the field on the sideline while off balance where only Terry could get it.  It got called back due to holding but it showed the level of arm talent the kid has. He’s just a head case and wasn’t willing to put in the work needed to be great. So I’m not gonna hate Rivera for trying to get through to a kid with that level of talent. 

[The Consigliere]

45 minutes ago, RWJ said:

I think all of us fans can understand your thoughts, Consi.   Keep a love flowing in your post, enjoy ES like all of us.  Passion for a team that we grew up with watching our Dad's and family root for, at least a lot of us.  Have a great day and God Bless.  

You too but part of the problem is that the love is mostly gone now. USMNT, club soccer and dynasty fantasy hold 90% of my sporting attention where all things redskins used to be 75% of my attention. I still remember signing up for a redskins forum in the winter of ‘95-‘96 being one of the first 3 websites I logged into when the internet as a public forum was first born and I was in college. Now it’s 26 years later snd we’re still treading water but ownership is infinitely worse. I’d say 97% of whatever pleasure the redskins have provided since then has actually been provided by the forums rather than the team.

 

I still care but it’s more intellectual than passion. I appreciate you guys though. As the only source of fun tge fandom has provided in eons, those I agree and disagree with both.

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, The Consigliere said:

Wow. What is mid to to you? I guess you could keep it exclusively to 34-36? Does that work better

 

 

 

Yes, early 30s are the early 30s.  Mid 30s are the mid 30s. 35-36.  Late 30s are the late 30s.  It's not uncommon for people to slam a player by jacking up their age.  He was 32 at the time of the trade, soon was 33.  In today's NFL, that isn't old.  Part of the reason why the importance of the QB being elevated as you know has been they are protected better by the rules.  Less injuries and better conditioning is being leading to more longevity.  It's not 2005 anymore.

 

1 hour ago, The Consigliere said:

 

Good lord. Back to back Mastadon scale dumps on me. It’s going to take months to clean up how thoroughly you trashed myself and my takes. I’ll look into my tone. I’ve done my best to own when I’m wrong and I am wrong plenty (McLaurin and Rosen for example).

 

 

 

You keep focusing on the wrong argument, that's why we keep going on in circles on the subject.  You keep thinking I am giving you a hard time for missing on Rosen, Terry, etc.  Even though that's 0% of what i am doing.  Nada.  I've gotten some royally wrong too, we all have.  Who gives a crap?  

 

I'll say it again EVERY person here who spends some time doing evaulations gets players wrong, and definitely me included.  I don't give a rats behind that you got Josh Rosen wrong.  As I said many times, I appreciate anyone making the effort to guess on players.  I enjoy reading all the takes even when I disagree. The difference with some of your takes is that you had total convinction about it, had total conviction that others are wrong.  But the much larger point was this you say your "system" of evaluating players is spot on -- on the money.  So if you miss, your evaluation process is still spot on, it was just fluky that said player didn't work out, but make the case that almost any other time you will end up correct.  You've made variations of that point including the other day which is you got the process right.

 

There is a dude on this board, who I like, who would say over and over again Sam Darnold is the goods.  I trashed Darnold harder than I even did Rosen.  Yet, I haven't called out that dude even once on Darnold after the fact even for the purpose of having some good natured fun at his expense.  Why not?  Because who hasn't gotten it wrong on players.  But on point to you, he didn't make the claim that he has the process down as to how to nail the position.   

 

My point to you again centers on your fallback to when you get it wrong which is that your process is "correct".  And look you can believe that, to each their own, it doesn't upset me that you think you got it down.  But as hardcore as you feel that you got the process down, I am hardcore that there is no such thing.  And when you visit a new point with that kind of conviction, I'll challenge that conviction.  Not because i want to give you a hard time but because your whole point rests on how you have the process nailed.  I don't fault any of the logic of your arguments.  I can use similar logic ironically on some of my points.  But IMO its not definitive. 

 

There is no model IMO that fits picking a QB that is so sound that we can sell it that way.  Your sell for Rosen as I recall it centered on your theory of taking a QB high on a draft that draft geeks feel is a good draft for QBs and skip the years that aren't deemed to be that good and team that with their production in college.  And as for Rosen he came from a stacked draft perception wise.  So based on that thought, it would be a sound approach to take a QB from the 2018 "QB rich" draft and skip the 2019 peceived poor QB draft.  So Rosen = good get.

 

And my point to yours is simply that you got to evalutate every player.  For me, the idea of take a QB from a stacked QB draft perception wise and pass on the less stacked draft is too simplistic.  So I am not slamming my head coach for not adopting it as if its a no brainer kind of fail.

 

The Chiefs for example famously scoped out Mahomes for years.  And took Mahomes in the less ballyhooed 2017 draft instead of waiting for Rosen and Darnold (back in 2017 they were often projected as the top upcoming draft prospects) at the top of the 2018 draft. this goes aganist your theory.  You can say well that's an outlier.  But to me I just think you got to go deeper than an argument focused on take a dude in the hyped QB draft and don't take one in the less hyped draft if you are going to argue its the ultimate way to attack the position.   

 

But that's just my opinion.  And my only beef with your opinion on it is that you come off as if its a no brainer appoach.  IMO it is far from a no brainer approach.  If a no brainer approach worked to scope out college QBs we wouldn't have a zillion misses like we do IMHO including in drafts that mock drafters deem to be rich drafts. 

 

 

1 hour ago, The Consigliere said:

 

 

Anyway probably a good idea not to read my posts to begin w/if there is an ignore button. I sound insanely annoying snd pompous as hell and who would want read that. Needless to say, I’ll work on my toe and fine tuning my takes for the board, I’m not looking to come across as some blank, I have opinions and some of them are quite strong and in my view correct. I’ve always had the sense that that is true of most people on here and boards in general, maybe not but that’s been my impression. Anyway good luck.

 

 

 

I got no problem with anyone coming off pompous.  As I've mentioned I can come off pompus as can others here who I like.    You make some good posts that I like read.

 

Only reason why I am debating you here in this manner is I think some of your arguments against Rivera are wrong.  So like in any discussion, I'll take take them on if I disgaee.  And for you specifically I've learned over the years I got to hammer back on your "method" for evaluating since you tend to rest your argument on "the method."  We used to have a dude here, Atlanta Fan who likewise claimed he ha the right method to attack the QB position.   So when people debated him, you had no choice but to challenge "his method" considering he was resting his case on his method.  That's all.   But its nothing personal from me.  So please don't take it that way.    I've just discovered its impossbile to hit back on an argument with you without going into your method because that's the crux of what you fall back later on if you end up incorrect. 

Edited February 19, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Dark Acre]

4 hours ago, Die Hard said:

The NFL is an entertainment business. They’re about ratings (ie profits).

 

And for better or worse, if you want to get bigger ratings (ie. audience), you have to appease the masses. 

And their research seems to be consistent with every major professional sport. More offence.

 

And judging by the numbers $$$$, it would appear they’re getting exactly what they wanted.

Baseball did it in 1998 by allowing steroids.  Yeah, spare me.  Everybody, including every corrupt official at MLB knew.  Then fences were moved in.  Then the mound height got a haircut.  Then the ball was made less pitcher-friendly.  But these things benefit all teams generally equally.  The equivalent would be if MLB mandated short porches in right field and deep ones everywhere else -- teams with left-handed power hitters would have a huge advantage. 

[Darth Tater]

13 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

You too but part of the problem is that the love is mostly gone now. USMNT, club soccer and dynasty fantasy hold 90% of my sporting attention where all things redskins used to be 75% of my attention. I still remember signing up for a redskins forum in the winter of ‘95-‘96 being one of the first 3 websites I logged into when the internet as a public forum was first born and I was in college. Now it’s 26 years later snd we’re still treading water but ownership is infinitely worse. I’d say 97% of whatever pleasure the redskins have provided since then has actually been provided by the forums rather than the team.

 

I still care but it’s more intellectual than passion. I appreciate you guys though. As the only source of fun tge fandom has provided in eons, those I agree and disagree with both.

I saw a video that talked about the fact that almost every SB this century has been questionable. While some of the feeling could be because I am a Redskins fan, I have not really enjoyed the NFL much since 2008. Last SB I really watched was in 2009. Except for clips from ESPN and the like, I haven't watched any of the SBs since 2013. Sadly, what I planned as my retirement splurge (going to Redskins games) looks like it'll not be and not because of the lack of financial resources or unexpected health issues on my part.

[Skinsinparadise]

2 hours ago, Zim489 said:

I think its foolish as well. The bigger issue I have is Ron not assuming that Dan, a known idiot, picked Dwayne and wasnt likely to work out. From that point forward I would have been making moves to make my job in selecting a QB the following draft as easy as possible with getting rid of assets, trading back, and so on. 

 

 

According to Keim before that draft, trading back was something on the table.  I gather the 19th pick wasn't so atttactive.  Eagles lucked out and the Giants too from having higher picks.

 

As many media guys like to say, trading back sounds awesome but there aren't always takers to do it.  Typically if you are in the top 10 or the backhalf of the first you have a better shot to trade down.  

 

If they got an offer to trade down, no one mentioned it.  Typically it does get mentioned.  For example it came out that they could have traded down the year they took Allen.  

 

2 hours ago, Zim489 said:

I

 

Personally I dont think Ron places enough value on the position

 

It shocks me that you believe this considering how often you post on this thread and I presume read/hear the same things we do.    If there is criticism of Rivera IMO its that he's screaming to the world how desperate he is for a QB, how little else matters.    He's like some desperate teenager hanging out in front of his high school begging for dates.  I can see the criticism that Rivera's desperation is so over the top that a team might fleece him because he's not hiding his desperation.  Yet, you don't think he values the position enough? 

 

I can't recall a coach coming off this openly desperate about wanting a QB in all my years of observing the NFL.  And I am a media junkie, I read and subscribe to just about every periodical and listen to you name that podcast.   how much more desperation is he supposed to show?  It's already like I said borderline pathetic, some of the local media are starting to make fun of how desperate and over the top Ron has been in trying to sell QBs that this is a place worth coming to.

 

And nope he's not desperate for Jimmy G, he's swinging for much bigger fishes as everyone has said in both the national and local media. A lesser veteran or prospect in this draft is fallback and not plan A. 

 

2 hours ago, Zim489 said:

 

 Far too many still place value in the guys "you can win with" if everything is right. 

 

 

I think there is a middle ground on this point.  Winning 9-10 games is better for most coaches than winning 6-7.  I don't think too many coaches believe that the ideal way to go is to win with an average QB and hope everything goes right around them.  The teams that have won that way soon after moved on from these QBs.

 

Some act like things sort of work out in perfect extremes.  So lets say for example, we don't get a better QB than Heinicke and instead ride with Heinicke.  Then it will fall neatly together where we end up 3-14 and take Stround in the next draft or whatever.  But often its something in between that.  I think we can go 8-9 with Heinicke and lets say 10-7 with someone like Mariota.   One way doesn't change much as for taking you to the promised land to get a QB.  

 

I'd also add for those advocating that Rivera should have ridden with a less attractive season to lose the battle but to win the war -- the argument can come off hypocritical considering some of these same critics tend to rip Rivera for his record.  So the idea that fans would be cooler with going 8-9 versus 10-7 I really really doubt that.

Edited February 19, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

2 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

 He's completely panicking about how important it is to him.

 

 

 

Agree.  There are plenty of things to doubt in life.  Ron Rivera not feeling desperate for a QB and not thinking its a QB driven league isn't one of those things.  He's screaming desperation.  He's flat out saying it including you need a QB to win in this league.  He's flat out said this off season its a QB driven league.  He's told his best buddy in the media Mike Silver how he's swinging for the the fences for a big QB.  He's basically telegraphing he'd pay any price.

 

I think its wild for anyone to think Ron doesn't get it.  What do people want for Ron to call them personally and say look I am not BSing to the world and having one big laugh at everyone's expense by making up some wild narrative while I secretly believe the absolute opposite. 

Edited February 19, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[RWJ]

57 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

You too but part of the problem is that the love is mostly gone now. USMNT, club soccer and dynasty fantasy hold 90% of my sporting attention where all things redskins used to be 75% of my attention. I still remember signing up for a redskins forum in the winter of ‘95-‘96 being one of the first 3 websites I logged into when the internet as a public forum was first born and I was in college. Now it’s 26 years later snd we’re still treading water but ownership is infinitely worse. I’d say 97% of whatever pleasure the redskins have provided since then has actually been provided by the forums rather than the team.

 

I still care but it’s more intellectual than passion. I appreciate you guys though. As the only source of fun tge fandom has provided in eons, those I agree and disagree with both.

I hear you.   I first signed up on this forum back in 2004.  I am in another (Commander) Redskins forum but ES is my favorite. I am on here 75% of the time and the other 25% over on the other forum.  Look foward to your posted and have a blessed day.  God Bless.  

[Hitman#21]

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

If it happened be interesting to get Cooleys take.  He used to worship Wentz.

 

 

Crazy thing is there are teams with higher odds