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

[max21]

9 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 
Ok so that’s even more confusing. They are 13-4 but that’s in spite of Kirk?

 

 

 

I’m just not sold on Kirk and the Vikings, they’re the only team in NFL history to have 13 wins and a negative point differential and they’ve only won 2 games by more than 8 points. A win is certainly a win, and I’m not rooting for him to fail but he’s still Kirk Cousins that has 1 playoff win in a 10 year career, the Vikings are far from the scariest team in the postseason this year. But who knows, maybe they catch lightning in a bottle and win it all. My point mainly was im tired of trying FA quarterbacks, the Burrow, Mahomes, Allen led teams are what keeps defensive coordinators up at night. We need to keep trying to find ours via the draft, I’m not going to judge Howell too hard from 1 pro game but he certainly has some (good) Russel Wilson traits to his game. 

[Skinsinparadise]

17 minutes ago, max21 said:

I’m just not sold on Kirk and the Vikings, they’re the only team in NFL history to have 13 wins and a negative point differential and they’ve only won 2 games by more than 8 points. A win is certainly a win, and I’m not rooting for him to fail but he’s still Kirk Cousins that has 1 playoff win in a 10 year career, the Vikings are far from the scariest team in the postseason this year. But who knows, maybe they catch lightning in a bottle and win it all. My point mainly was im tired of trying FA quarterbacks, the Burrow, Mahomes, Allen led teams are what keeps defensive coordinators up at night. We need to keep trying to find ours via the draft, I’m not going to judge Howell too hard from 1 pro game but he certainly has some (good) Russel Wilson traits to his game. 

 

Don't know if the Vikings win it all.  My point though is you can win with good QB play.  Stafford, good QB IMO helped win a SB last year.  I'd love to have the next Mahomes, it sounds beyond cool.  But I think we'd be lucky to find a good QB in the draft, that alone would be a major stroke of luck.  hopefully Howell is that guy and I'll be thrilled with good.  We've ranked dead last in QBR post Kirk.  Good would be a major improvement.

 

 

Edited January 13, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[HigSkin]

It's interesting that Logan Paulsen on with Grant and Danny this week said something like "the best thing you can do for Sam is shore up that offensive line" referencing certain line positions.  Sure sounds like he's thinking Sam becomes QB1 next year.

 

Logan comes on around the 1:50 mark

 

https://omny.fm/shows/grant-and-danny/logan-paulsen-joins-g-d-14?in_playlist=podcast

[Warhead36]

12 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Don't know if the Vikings win it all.  My point though is you can win with good QB play.  Stafford, good QB IMO helped win a SB last year.  I'd love to have the next Mahomes, it sounds beyond cool.  But I think we'd be lucky to find a good QB in the draft, that alone would be a major stroke of luck.  hopefully Howell is that guy and I'll be thrilled with good.  We've ranked dead last in QBR post Kirk.  Good would be a major improvement.

 

 

Yes "good" should be the goal. You can't set your expectation to a Mahomes or Allen. Those guys are unicorns. 

[kingdaddy]

New ownership checklist:

1). Fully commit to Sam Howell as your starter for 2023 with no competition. Backup needs to know he's the backup and will commit to helping Howell develop.

2). Decide if RR is the best option to develop Howell. If not, find who is and hire him.

3). Build the offensive line and continue to bolster the defense.

4). Find a stud TE for Howell to grow with.

5). Get rid of Tuddy.

6). Build a new stadium with free parking.

7). Follow the Falcons model of 1980's concession prices.

[The Consigliere]

On 1/11/2023 at 8:01 AM, HigSkin said:

 

That was the chief bummer about Wentz and Heinicke getting those last couple of starts before it. We all knew Heinicke was donezo, and Wentz was not an answer, but I guess until they were 100% eliminated they simply weren't going to hand a start over to Howell which as we saw, was flat out foolish. Wentz had already gone up in flames in back to back seasons in Philly and Indy before flaming out here, it was obvious already he was done and after the choke job in Indy's finale last season, it was clear there was no reason to turn to him w/the season on the line. At bare minimum Howell should've gotten 2 starts, I'm just glad and have gratitude that he got at least one. 

 

Unless Howell hits, we will not have an answer at QB for a very long time, and at this point, it's been all too predictable how post-Cousins, the position became the exact same ---- show it was 2001-2011 from 2018-2022 and beyond. If Howell doesn't hit, I anticipate another 3-4 years minimum of QB/results related misery. The team simply isn't bad enough at the other position cohorts to bottom out the way Cincy, Jacksonville, San Diego, Chicago etc have in recent years to address the position effectively. The only possibility of that changing is if we flame out spectacularly in '23 w/Ron, and then the new coach drafts his guy in '24. But I don't see that happening. Feels like that awful 1997-2007 era when the team sucked, but didn't ever suck enough to land a franchise QB except in '04 but Gibbs chose a stop gap and Sean Taylor instead after getting hired. 

 

So Howell really needs to hit, or we're probably screwed, but that's been the story for 30 years so it's nothing new. 

[The Consigliere]

On 1/11/2023 at 5:32 PM, Warhead36 said:

Yeah for real. Jones improved big time but that's just absolute madness. You don't break that kinda bank for a QB unless he's a true franchise elevator. 

Thats hilarious. Downstream value of that reminds me of the only reason I liked the Scherff selection (i was 100% for Leonard Williams and hated the pick) and that was because it caused the giants supposedly to panic pick Erick Flowers, which everyone everywhere knew was idiotic. To have the Giants panic pick Jones out of fear we'd go for him, again, four years later was just glorious. One of those few highlights where you know a team took 2 steps back in part because of you :). If they signed him to anything close to this it would be a dream come true, almost, but not, make up for the fact that we got no answers at QB in the post-Cousins leaving drafts that were loaded with great QB's (other than '19 and '22 which of course became the years where we selected QB's).  

[The Consigliere]

On 1/12/2023 at 7:20 AM, Skinsinparadise said:

Pre Howell's performance I was in on Carr especially if he were released instead of traded.  But for a trade i am out.  I don't think Carr is a mediocre -- Wentz clone that some here do.  I do think he's a good QB but context to me is everything -- don't want to pay big money especially if I also have to trade assets.    Man is Jay high on Carr, talked about how smart and good he is in Standig's latest podcast but he also mentioned Brissett or Dalton as mentors for Howell.

 

 

 

 

To me, he's the penultimate nightmare QB to bring in because he so snugly, so perfectly fits into the "not good enough to matter" caliber QB whose good enough to keep you out of the trash bin, but NEVER good enough to turn you into a winning team. He's got 8 non-rookie seasons in the book, and other than a top 10, 10th overall kind of season, all of his seasons generally fit in the teens, w/a median performance around 16th. 

 

It's genuinely almost a perfect example of a high end wizards/bullets season (8 seed) as a quarterback. He is not bad, he is not good, he is perfectly average, pretty much always over the long haul, w/ups and downs in season. He's a lock to keep you floating around in draft classes between 11th and 22nd if the surrounding talent is halfway decent but that's it. 

 

My personal living nightmare, embodied in QB form of the past 30 years as a redskins fan. 

 

He would be the ultimate perfect redskins signing, or even worse, trade acquisition. Guaranteeing 6th-7th playoff seeds here and there, followed by 7-10 seasons otherwise. Blech. Either Suck, and hit for the fences, or contend, Carr is the absolute last thing we need, to me anyway. He'd push us from a 7-10 caliber team to 9-8 or 10-7 high's and more 6-11 and 7-10 floors and no progress whatsoever. 

 

I get why you like him, but he would serve only one purposes, trying to push into a .500+ team, and there's no point in pursuing that. That's what we've been, in the "high" years for the past 30 years and does anyone remember any of those seasons fondly at all? 1996-1997, 1999, 2005, 2007, 2012, 2015, 2020? For me, I never saw hope in any of them save 1999, and of course, not coincidentally, none of them were harbingers of anything to come, they were all followed by miserable seasons the following year, and other than under Gibbs, no other playoff seasons whatsoever under said regime. A flat no. 

 

I want to sink or swim with Howell, he gets it, and we build around him, or he doesn't and we bottom out and blow this ---- up next offseason. Please god, no more FA answer qb's. Didn't we suffer enough under Norv Turner/Snyder's guys (Brad Johnson and his massive trade cost, Jeff George), Boonell, McNabb, Alex Smith, Wentz. For the love of God please stop with this. Unless its a rarity like Brees in '05, pass on all this trash, and mediocrity. 

 

 

[The Consigliere]

On 1/12/2023 at 8:00 AM, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Disagree.

 

Defense is about the same, Jets a little higher on DVOA, points, we are a little higher ranked on yards.  Both teams with really good defenses.   I think WRs are about the same, I actually like ours a hair better because I am a big Dotson guy, I liked Elijah predraft but he hasn't really bloomed. 

 

RBs are about the same albeit totally different types of backs that is assuming Breece Hall recovers well from the ACL injury, not every RB does in year 1 post that injury.  

 

Weaknesses the same -- both with crap QB situations, I like ours better.    Their O line ranked next to last by PFF.  Hecks ours isn't hot but ranked 17th.  I watched the Jets-Dolphins game, and they were banged up at their spot, I'll give them that, but their pass protection was horrendous.

 

 

Nobody on the planet would take our WR's over theirs. McLaurin, point taken, Elijah Moore is legit, and was basically demoted due to system fit which is why he wanted out in a trade, we saw what he was when he got starters snaps last winter, a legit stud. Garrett Wilson is a legit stud WR1, and they have reasonable depth behind all that. I Love McLaurin and I like Dotson, but they aren't as good as the Jets options. It's also silly to compare our RB room to there's. They've got Robinson (out on a free though, I think?), Breece Hall is a top 10 RB if he comes back healthy, maybe top 5, and they have legit guys behind both of them. 

 

I like Howell far more than their QB, and I like our D probably a bit more than theirs (I think our need areas are cheaper to fix than theirs).

 

Interesting comparison though. So odd that we ended up with almost identical builds.

To me:

WFT-NYJ

QB>

RB<

WR<

OL=

DL>

I'm not familiar with their back 7? I would imagine its better than ours though. 

23 hours ago, mistertim said:

Neither Carr nor Brady are coming here. That's as much of a pipe dream as it was when people were talking about Wilson or Watson coming here (though on both of those counts we might have actually dodged a bullet).

 

Having our owner and coaching situation so completely up in the air is going to anathema to guys like that who can basically choose their destinations. Sure, we have some talent on our roster, but so do other teams with much more stable situations.

With Wilson we definitely did (and thank god we did-he gave plenty of signs he was wearing out in '21, crazy how much seattle was able to get for him, feel real bad for denver fans), with Watson its more wait and see. He was awful, but he's also been gone for 2 years. Guys generally take a while to come around at simpler positions, if he's this bad through next december though, he's probably donezo. 

[The Consigliere]

23 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I didn't say my point like that.  And if anything in the past, I've been on the obnoxious side of pushing QB or bust.  So the Qb driven league point far from escapes me.

 

My point is right now in the NFC there is a rare dearth of top flight QBs.  Not the AFC but NFC.   And if your roster is fairly loaded ala a SF you can win with a nonelite QB for a window.

 

How do you win when you don't have that guy?  SF's model is good on that front IMO, Titans for a spell, KC when they had Alex.  But at the same time keep swinging for that killer Qb of course.

 

And the idea of a team with this level of talent is just somehow crashing and burning for Caleb to me comes off like a hipster fun draft blather that sounds interesting, sort of draft party talk that is fun on a chat thread but i'd assume gets laughed at as science fiction in a FO.   

 

For me its all about the depth of the draft at the spot versus banking for one guy unless the team is terrible ala the Texans and can easily crash organically.   

 

Edit:  not saying you are saying that, i am just saying when I see some say wait for this guy, usually name that elite in theory #1 guy in a future draft, my thought is its really unlikely we are getting that guy so for me i am curious about the depth at the spot, not the top dude going first in the draft. 

 

 

 

Don't know but he's not the only dude who struggled with a new coordinator-system this year.  It wasn't the case for Stidham.  Carr has had a good career, not really up and down, last season I believe was his worst since his rookie year.

 

I don't really care though. I think almost zero chance he ends up here for multiple reasons.

I don't think the SF model is really workable. It's not a coincidence to me that the Ravens and the Niners are the only teams with sustained success w/o that franchise QB the last 2+ decades. They are model franchises with stability, elite coaches during those runs, and historically strong defense. We don't have a great FO or a great HC, you have to have everything, stability in owner, stability in FO, stability at coach (w/elite talent there) and then the elite talent actually on the field everywhere but QB.

 

That sounds MUCH harder to build than trying to get a top 5-10 QB. I know top 5-10 QB's don't grow on trees but lets be straight here, since we flushed Cousins, guaranteeing years of horrible QB play there have actually been tons of elite QB's available in the draft and we've either passed on them, or refused to trade up for them, or been unable to acquire them:

Josh Allen

Lamar Jackson

Kyler Murray

Joe Burrow

Justin Herbert

Trevor Lawrence

Maybe Justin Fields

Maybe Lance if he ever gets on the field

 

Murray, and Burrow and Lawrence were likely unavailable (though I'd have given godfather offers for the latter two) but the other guys, Allen, Jackson, Herbert, Fields all were and we passed on making serious efforts for any of them. 

 

To me, that's the problem. They do come, on average about 1.5-2 per year. You can get them, you just have to be aggressive, pay the price, and if you fail, try again. Am I forgetting anyone? 

[MrJL]

3 hours ago, max21 said:

I’m just not sold on Kirk and the Vikings, they’re the only team in NFL history to have 13 wins and a negative point differential and they’ve only won 2 games by more than 8 points. A win is certainly a win, and I’m not rooting for him to fail but he’s still Kirk Cousins that has 1 playoff win in a 10 year career, the Vikings are far from the scariest team in the postseason this year. But who knows, maybe they catch lightning in a bottle and win it all. My point mainly was im tired of trying FA quarterbacks, the Burrow, Mahomes, Allen led teams are what keeps defensive coordinators up at night. We need to keep trying to find ours via the draft, I’m not going to judge Howell too hard from 1 pro game but he certainly has some (good) Russel Wilson traits to his game. 

 

I think I've said this before but my ideal Super Bowl this year is Bills vs Vikings.  For the tagline.  "This time one of them has to win!"

[Warhead36]

13 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

I don't think the SF model is really workable. It's not a coincidence to me that the Ravens and the Niners are the only teams with sustained success w/o that franchise QB the last 2+ decades. They are model franchises with stability, elite coaches during those runs, and historically strong defense. We don't have a great FO or a great HC, you have to have everything, stability in owner, stability in FO, stability at coach (w/elite talent there) and then the elite talent actually on the field everywhere but QB.

Ravens had Flacco. While not elite, I'd definitely consider him a franchise QB.

[Skinsinparadise]

5 hours ago, The Consigliere said:

 

To me, he's the penultimate nightmare QB to bring in because he so snugly, so perfectly fits into the "not good enough to matter" caliber QB whose good enough to keep you out of the trash bin, but NEVER good enough to turn you into a winning team. He's got 8 non-rookie seasons in the book, and other than a top 10, 10th overall kind of season, all of his seasons generally fit in the teens, w/a median performance around 16th. 

 

It's genuinely almost a perfect example of a high end wizards/bullets season (8 seed) as a quarterback. He is not bad, he is not good, he is perfectly average, pretty much always over the long haul, w/ups and downs in season. He's a lock to keep you floating around in draft classes between 11th and 22nd if the surrounding talent is halfway decent but that's it. 

 

My personal living nightmare, embodied in QB form of the past 30 years as a redskins fan. 

 

He would be the ultimate perfect redskins signing, or even worse, trade acquisition. Guaranteeing 6th-7th playoff seeds here and there, followed by 7-10 seasons otherwise. Blech. Either Suck, and hit for the fences, or contend, Carr is the absolute last thing we need, to me anyway. He'd push us from a 7-10 caliber team to 9-8 or 10-7 high's and more 6-11 and 7-10 floors and no progress whatsoever. 

 

I get why you like him, but he would serve only one purposes, trying to push into a .500+ team, and there's no point in pursuing that. That's what we've been, in the "high" years for the past 30 years and does anyone remember any of those seasons fondly at all? 1996-1997, 1999, 2005, 2007, 2012, 2015, 2020? For me, I never saw hope in any of them save 1999, and of course, not coincidentally, none of them were harbingers of anything to come, they were all followed by miserable seasons the following year, and other than under Gibbs, no other playoff seasons whatsoever under said regime. A flat no. 

 

I want to sink or swim with Howell, he gets it, and we build around him, or he doesn't and we bottom out and blow this ---- up next offseason. Please god, no more FA answer qb's. Didn't we suffer enough under Norv Turner/Snyder's guys (Brad Johnson and his massive trade cost, Jeff George), Boonell, McNabb, Alex Smith, Wentz. For the love of God please stop with this. Unless its a rarity like Brees in '05, pass on all this trash, and mediocrity. 

 

 

 

I am not advocating for Carr as the answer here at the moment.  But to play along I know personnel guys would disagree on your take of him as a player, multiple articles have been written about scouts-personnel's take on Carr among other QBs, and no average wasn't what they thought.  But I don't give a rats behind about it where I care to argue.

 

My personal nightmare is continuing to have crap QB play -- I can dig good QB play.  Of course who wouldn't want great.  But a good QB to me isn't yawn.  Context matters.  IMO its not a wild and crazy binary yes or no process.  what's the price?  What's the salary?  What's the rest of the roster look like?  For example I didn't like the Alex Smith deal THEN in the context of the roster.  If they did the same thing now if we didn't have Howell, I'd be OK with it again depending on price albiet i don't really see an affordable option that i like on the market now including Carr.

 

While a rookie QB salary is ideal.  And if I got a rookie I like to ride it.  So that's what I've been pushing here.  But if we didn't have Howell, I don't give a rats behind about chasing name that player because another veteran player didn't work.  To me that's silly.  It would be like saying don't buy Microsoft stock today because you bought Intel and IBM years ago and they failed you.  Roseman nailed the process IMO years ago where he explained try everything, and keep trying, don't let past failures influence the next move.

 

I like this roster better than you do.  They just finished 500 with one of the worst QB tandems in the NFL.    I'd love the next Mahomes but i think we can have a run with a QB in the caliber of Alex for a spell while we look for the next Mahomes. 

 

5 hours ago, The Consigliere said:

I don't think the SF model is really workable. It's not a coincidence to me that the Ravens and the Niners are the only teams with sustained success w/o that franchise QB the last 2+ decades. They are model franchises with stability, elite coaches during those runs, and historically strong defense. We don't have a great FO or a great HC, you have to have everything, stability in owner, stability in FO, stability at coach (w/elite talent there) and then the elite talent actually on the field everywhere but QB.

 

That sounds MUCH harder to build than trying to get a top 5-10 QB. I know top 5-10 QB's don't grow on trees but lets be straight here, since we flushed Cousins, guaranteeing years of horrible QB play there have actually been tons of elite QB's available in the draft and we've either passed on them, or refused to trade up for them, or been unable to acquire them:

Josh Allen

Lamar Jackson

Kyler Murray

Joe Burrow

Justin Herbert

Trevor Lawrence

Maybe Justin Fields

Maybe Lance if he ever gets on the field

 

Murray, and Burrow and Lawrence were likely unavailable (though I'd have given godfather offers for the latter two) but the other guys, Allen, Jackson, Herbert, Fields all were and we passed on making serious efforts for any of them. 

 

To me, that's the problem. They do come, on average about 1.5-2 per year. You can get them, you just have to be aggressive, pay the price, and if you fail, try again. Am I forgetting anyone? 

 

Anyone here not want an elite QB?  

 

There is a middle ground while you look for one.  

Edited January 13, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[The Consigliere]

21 hours ago, slinky said:

If Purdy goes on a run in the playoffs (which he should because of defense) he likely cements himself as QB1 in San Fran next year if he has not already. Would the 9ers keep both Lance and Purdy... 2 QBs on the cheap? Could Lance, who was drafted to be their QB1, request a trade as he knows he will have to fight to get QB1 back if he has a chance at all? I saw some articles suggesting they could trade him on cheap for a 2nd rounder (cheap for what they gave up to get him)... would you trade for Lance if situation arose? I probably wouldn't... I'd likely just roll with Sam and a vet backup + rookie drafted next year and if things fail, then draft in 2024.

That's a really fun one. I think they're married to Purdy and Lance next year, but if Purdy goes Brady 2001 in a playoff run, then its very conceivable they trade Lance. I don't think they'd trade him cheap because even w/2 of 4 non option years out the door, he still has the same traits that made him a consensus top 3 guy in a strong QB class. He's still the strong armed dream dual threat guy (whether he becomes that is another question). They'd want more than a 2nd for him. Garop is gone, but Lance is the funny one. All reports on Purdy so far are incredibly positive so its deeply interesting. The fact that Purdy is getting far more out of Kittle and Aiyuk than Garop did should probably scare Lance some. 

[Skinsinparadise]

3 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

Yes "good" should be the goal. You can't set your expectation to a Mahomes or Allen. Those guys are unicorns. 

 

Good is fine IMO especially with this roster.  If I had garbage defense like the Raiders and lost my #2 WR and #1 TE for much of the season, I am not winning with a good QB especially if they are having an off seaon.  

 

If we had the crap defenses of the Gruden tenure, good QB play isn't good enough to win. 

 

But I'd take good QB play while I search for great,

 

I know some say just blow the team up, stink, and set yourself up to get a great QB at the right time.  But that's fantasy land, teams don't do that.  The rare exception I can think of is Stephen Ross with the Dolphins but heck it didn't work if the goal was to get Burrow.  I am ok with sucking but sucking in the NFL usually happens organically.

Edited January 13, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[The Consigliere]

6 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

The power of mindset, intangibles.  I know some say its all Kyle.  Well, he's had his shalre of dudes drafted higher that haven't flourised so far like Beathard, Lance.

 

These young QBs aren't all built the same as to drive, work ethic, mindset. 

 

 

It's funny, that book became all the rage in education the past half decade plus, and it intuitively makes sense, but working in education for decades, I've come to just nod along to the latest trends, data driven instruction, grit, growth mindset etc, and was amused when the latest studies came out reporting no noticable gains whatsoever for schools applying the ideas promoted in her work. No growth, at all, whatsoever. Pretty funny. At least Data Driven instruction models try to begin with the idea that you don't have all the answers but following the #'s could help, and I have my issues with that as well lol. 

 

Love Purdy, so far, hope he's successful, love to see guys like him and Howell make it. 

[The Consigliere]

58 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

Ravens had Flacco. While not elite, I'd definitely consider him a franchise QB.

I did not. Franchise QB's to me are guys that are consistently in the top 10 with top 5 upside. Flacco was never that. He was a guy sitting in the teens whose high end season or too climbed to the edges of the top 10. He was a league average guy elevated by the talent around him and he didnt last very long as a league average guy either ('08-'14), after that, he fell off to a bottom of the barrell 25th-40th percentile caliber QB in the league ('15-Present, when he played). Nothing wrong about that, but a good explanation (along with bad luck) for why that mega elite Ravens team never did any more super bowl damage beyond 2012. They simply didn't get enough from the position, and Flacco's peak abilities were basically a 10th-15th in the league caliber guy and those guys don't win super bowls beyond very rarely and rarely make conference title runs. He was carried, he didn't do the carrying, basically an Alex Smith+ but with far less erratic season to season play (he was a QB in the teens in the league his first seven years, and in the 20's ever since). 

[The Consigliere]

31 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Good is fine IMO especially with this roster.  If I had garbage defense like the Raiders and lost my #2 WR and #1 TE for much of the season, I am not winning with a good QB especially if they are having an off seaon.  

 

If we had the crap defenses of the Gruden tenure, good QB play isn't good enough to win. 

 

But I'd take good QB play while I search for great,

 

I know some say just blow the team up, stink, and set yourself up to get a great QB at the right time.  But that's fantasy land, teams don't do that.  The rare exception I can think of is Stephen Ross with the Dolphins but heck it didn't work if the goal was to get Burrow.  I am ok with sucking but sucking in the NFL usually happens organically.

 

I don't think Carr is good enough to make a difference. He never did in Oakland, and his play there was always middle of the road (always somewhere in the teens). I also don't think the team, as built, can win with joe random league average starter surrounded by these guys. That's probably the key difference for me from you (beyond how we view QB). I think the team caps out at 10-7 with competent QB play. A team that's knocked out in round 1 of the playoffs. I have no interest in that. Been there, done that. If it's not building to something long term, I don't care. Carr doesnt strike me as a guy whose suddenly going to make us a top 3 NFC team.

 

I also don't think we can keep the strengths of our team intact long term either. We had the OL, and the Defense, and not the QB or the playmakers, then we had the playmakers, but not the QB or OL, now we have the D, but not the QB or the OL. We're perpetually plugging fingers into holes, and while the talent may look inspiring now, I expect to be losing chunks of what makes it worthwhile. This D was spectacular for a year or two before bottoming out due to departures and injuries in '21. It was great again in '22. What will happen in the years to come? More losses and a fall off is more likely than strengthening. If Chase comes back to full potential, it could be really good for 2 years, maybe 3, but unlikely to be good longer than that and we have to fix the OL, and QB and fill in holes on the back end of the defense while we're dealing w/those problems. 

 

So for me, it's Howell or reboot. I don't see teams deliberately tanking unless they're hired in bottom out seasons, I don't disagree w/you there, but as a GM or coach if I was coming it, I'd come in after the bottom out, or to finish it before the build. Regardless, I do agree w/you that they kind of happen naturally, but there are things smart coaches can do to facilitate builds, like trading. The Eagles handled the last several years infinitely better than Ron for instance. He was far too averse from making franchise changing trades than the Eagles management and it shows. The Eagles have had more flexibility and can use the draft like a golden loom, meanwhile we've lost picks for their twice season gone rejected trash. There are ways to do this beyond just sucking. But we eschew all of them. Hopefully we'll get lucky with Howell. 

[Skinsinparadise]

46 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

 

I don't think Carr is good enough to make a difference. He never did in Oakland, and his play there was always middle of the road (always somewhere in the teens). I also don't think the team, as built, can win with joe random league average starter surrounded by these guys. That's probably the key difference for me from you (beyond how we view QB). I think the team caps out at 10-7 with competent QB play. A team that's knocked out in round 1 of the playoffs. I have no interest in that. Been there, done that. If it's not building to something long term, I don't care. Carr doesnt strike me as a guy whose suddenly going to make us a top 3 NFC team.

 

I also don't think we can keep the strengths of our team intact long term either. We had the OL, and the Defense, and not the QB or the playmakers, then we had the playmakers, but not the QB or OL, now we have the D, but not the QB or the OL. We're perpetually plugging fingers into holes, and while the talent may look inspiring now, I expect to be losing chunks of what makes it worthwhile. This D was spectacular for a year or two before bottoming out due to departures and injuries in '21. It was great again in '22. What will happen in the years to come? More losses and a fall off is more likely than strengthening. If Chase comes back to full potential, it could be really good for 2 years, maybe 3, but unlikely to be good longer than that and we have to fix the OL, and QB and fill in holes on the back end of the defense while we're dealing w/those problems. 

 

So for me, it's Howell or reboot. I don't see teams deliberately tanking unless they're hired in bottom out seasons, I don't disagree w/you there, but as a GM or coach if I was coming it, I'd come in after the bottom out, or to finish it before the build. Regardless, I do agree w/you that they kind of happen naturally, but there are things smart coaches can do to facilitate builds, like trading. The Eagles handled the last several years infinitely better than Ron for instance. He was far too averse from making franchise changing trades than the Eagles management and it shows. The Eagles have had more flexibility and can use the draft like a golden loom, meanwhile we've lost picks for their twice season gone rejected trash. There are ways to do this beyond just sucking. But we eschew all of them. Hopefully we'll get lucky with Howell. 

 

Yeah I do agree that you can win with average QB play with this roster if they also improve the O line and secondary and I think they can in one off season.  I think if they do that it would be the best roster we've had under Dan versus same old same old.  I am far from unqiue on this take.  So do others who have studied this team all season long and tend to be if anything cynical about things in general ala Cooley and Logan Paulsen. 

 

They actually think for once this roster is close.  So do I.  Now if Rodgers or Brady were in their prime, I'd have much bigger concerns as to competing in the NFC.  But the NFC right now is nothing special.  No juggernaut QBs right now in the NFC.   

 

As for the QB spot in general.  I post a lot on the QB threads over the years and if I anything I am probably seen as an extremiest on the point of the get a QB or bust scale.  So you don't think I am extreme enough.  But I constantly push it.  My issue with your take on it, recalling some of your past posts, is I think you have too many rigid and binary thoughts of how it works that sometimes your takes IMO lack nuance and flexibility.  I feel like I am more Zen about it.  To me every season is different.  Things change.  Circumstances change.  Context changes.  Variables change.  There are multiple ways to approach things.   

 

Yeah I agree the Eagles have a good FO.  I tout them all the time.   And it was arguably the Eagles-Howie Roseman who influenced my take on how to approach the spot more than anything.  Roseman when they were in QB purgatory, he was quoted in an article basically saying don't stop and try everything.  Finding a Qb is the hardest thing to do.  If there was just one easy path to do it, then everyone would.  So his take was throw dart after dart at it until you hit.  He traded up in the first.  He used 2nd round picks, 4th round picks, he went and got a veteran, he kept trying.  His thought wasn't there is only one way to do this.  His thought was similar to Kiper's thought about the draft which is the more you swing the more likely you will land something eventually.

 

Lol as for Carr.  It's irrelevant to me.  I am not pushing it.  And he won't want to come here.  But to play along again.  The average QB stuff is a your thing.  It's not based on most facts.  92 QB rating in his career, that's good, not average, good. 

 

He finished 14th in QBR this year, 14th the previous year, 10th the year before that.  He has some of the best stats in the league as far as clutch play, comebacks, overtime wins, etc.  

 

But yeah a good QB isn't enough to offset a bad roster.   And he's not great and has limitations, I agree with that.  But you are in your own world about Carr being just an average QB.  If you mean this year, yeah it was his worst since his rookie season but you'd find very few people agreeing with you that he's average, who would are mainly disgruntled fans, but not based on stats/personnel takes with maybe a straggler that i am not aware of?

 

Back to this team, lets say its a good 2-3 run?  That so bad based on what's happened here?  I do agree that Eagles style (cheap QB) is your best shot of creating a loaded roster is to have a rookie QB.  You can't do that if you are paying someone like Carr 30 plus million, that's one of the reasons why I'd ride with Howell.

 

 

 

 

Edited January 13, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, The Consigliere said:

I did not. Franchise QB's to me are guys that are consistently in the top 10 with top 5 upside. Flacco was never that. He was a guy sitting in the teens whose high end season or too climbed to the edges of the top 10. He was a league average guy elevated by the talent around him and he didnt last very long as a league average guy either ('08-'14), after that, he fell off to a bottom of the barrell 25th-40th percentile caliber QB in the league ('15-Present, when he played). Nothing wrong about that, but a good explanation (along with bad luck) for why that mega elite Ravens team never did any more super bowl damage beyond 2012. They simply didn't get enough from the position, and Flacco's peak abilities were basically a 10th-15th in the league caliber guy and those guys don't win super bowls beyond very rarely and rarely make conference title runs. He was carried, he didn't do the carrying, basically an Alex Smith+ but with far less erratic season to season play (he was a QB in the teens in the league his first seven years, and in the 20's ever since). 

 

Flacco is a really weird situation because for some reason one year he just went on a complete tear in the postseason. He was always a completely mediocre QB but somehow he turned into Brady in the 2012 playoffs and threw for 11 TDs with 0 INTs. Then he returned to utter mediocrity quickly afterwards.

[Koolblue13]

4 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Flacco is a really weird situation because for some reason one year he just went on a complete tear in the postseason. He was always a completely mediocre QB but somehow he turned into Brady in the 2012 playoffs and threw for 11 TDs with 0 INTs. Then he returned to utter mediocrity quickly afterwards.

He Foles'd out.

[Darth Tater]

Go with Howell sign a cheap low tier vet backup like Taylor (though resigning Taylor may create issues not his fault). Let Howell and this vet compete. First likely scenario is that we are moving on to a new coach in 2024 and don't want to handicap him with a high end QB that needs a shot (claiming a top pick at QB is for competition is BS here) who probably won't have the stats that say he is a bust or a boom. This new guy should have the total freedom to pick his own guy or stay with Howell. Also, too late for Howell, but I really don't want Rivera and his staff anywhere near an undeveloped high-end QB.

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

1 hour ago, mistertim said:

 

Flacco is a really weird situation because for some reason one year he just went on a complete tear in the postseason. He was always a completely mediocre QB but somehow he turned into Brady in the 2012 playoffs and threw for 11 TDs with 0 INTs. Then he returned to utter mediocrity quickly afterwards.

 

Ravens said **** it and redid the entire offense just for the playoffs.

 

Brand new offensive line (LT finally got healthy, moved the former LT to RT, the former RT to RG, and maybe swapped out one other).

 

They redid their passing scheme. Previously it was outside oriented, and this was instead levels inside. Lots of digs over the middle at different depths. It helped this also coincided with what the Ravens pass catchers did better. Anquan Bolding and Dennis Pitta were far better at this.

 

So basically, opponents went into the postseason blind and with no film on what the Ravens roster and scheme suddenly were.

[skinsfan66]

4 hours ago, The Consigliere said:

I don't think the SF model is really workable. It's not a coincidence to me that the Ravens and the Niners are the only teams with sustained success w/o that franchise QB the last 2+ decades. They are model franchises with stability, elite coaches during those runs, and historically strong defense. We don't have a great FO or a great HC, you have to have everything, stability in owner, stability in FO, stability at coach (w/elite talent there) and then the elite talent actually on the field everywhere but QB.

 

That sounds MUCH harder to build than trying to get a top 5-10 QB. I know top 5-10 QB's don't grow on trees but lets be straight here, since we flushed Cousins, guaranteeing years of horrible QB play there have actually been tons of elite QB's available in the draft and we've either passed on them, or refused to trade up for them, or been unable to acquire them:

Josh Allen

Lamar Jackson

Kyler Murray

Joe Burrow

Justin Herbert

Trevor Lawrence

Maybe Justin Fields

Maybe Lance if he ever gets on the field

 

Murray, and Burrow and Lawrence were likely unavailable (though I'd have given godfather offers for the latter two) but the other guys, Allen, Jackson, Herbert, Fields all were and we passed on making serious efforts for any of them. 

 

To me, that's the problem. They do come, on average about 1.5-2 per year. You can get them, you just have to be aggressive, pay the price, and if you fail, try again. Am I forgetting anyone? 

I think Herbert hurts the most, he seems to make the whole better team better, had both of his top wr's out a lot this year but kept it together. 

[The Consigliere]

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Yeah I do agree that you can win with average QB play with this roster if they also improve the O line and secondary and I think they can in one off season.  I think if they do that it would be the best roster we've had under Dan versus same old same old.  I am far from unqiue on this take.  So do others who have studied this team all season long and tend to be if anything cynical about things in general ala Cooley and Logan Paulsen. 

 

They actually think for once this roster is close.  So do I.  Now if Rodgers or Brady were in their prime, I'd have much bigger concerns as to competing in the NFC.  But the NFC right now is nothing special.  No juggernaut QBs right now in the NFC.   

 

As for the QB spot in general.  I post a lot on the QB threads over the years and if I anything I am probably seen as an extremiest on the point of the get a QB or bust scale.  So you don't think I am extreme enough.  But I constantly push it.  My issue with your take on it, recalling some of your past posts, is I think you have too many rigid and binary thoughts of how it works that sometimes your takes IMO lack nuance and flexibility.  I feel like I am more Zen about it.  To me every season is different.  Things change.  Circumstances change.  Context changes.  Variables change.  There are multiple ways to approach things.   

 

Yeah I agree the Eagles have a good FO.  I tout them all the time.   And it was arguably the Eagles-Howie Roseman who influenced my take on how to approach the spot more than anything.  Roseman when they were in QB purgatory, he was quoted in an article basically saying don't stop and try everything.  Finding a Qb is the hardest thing to do.  If there was just one easy path to do it, then everyone would.  So his take was throw dart after dart at it until you hit.  He traded up in the first.  He used 2nd round picks, 4th round picks, he went and got a veteran, he kept trying.  His thought wasn't there is only one way to do this.  His thought was similar to Kiper's thought about the draft which is the more you swing the more likely you will land something eventually.

 

Lol as for Carr.  It's irrelevant to me.  I am not pushing it.  And he won't want to come here.  But to play along again.  The average QB stuff is a your thing.  It's not based on most facts.  92 QB rating in his career, that's good, not average, good. 

 

He finished 14th in QBR this year, 14th the previous year, 10th the year before that.  He has some of the best stats in the league as far as clutch play, comebacks, overtime wins, etc.  

 

But yeah a good QB isn't enough to offset a bad roster.   And he's not great and has limitations, I agree with that.  But you are in your own world about Carr being just an average QB.  If you mean this year, yeah it was his worst since his rookie season but you'd find very few people agreeing with you that he's average, who would are mainly disgruntled fans, but not based on stats/personnel takes with maybe a straggler that i am not aware of?

 

Back to this team, lets say its a good 2-3 run?  That so bad based on what's happened here?  I do agree that Eagles style (cheap QB) is your best shot of creating a loaded roster is to have a rookie QB.  You can't do that if you are paying someone like Carr 30 plus million, that's one of the reasons why I'd ride with Howell.....

We'll see if you're right. I think that's a bit too ambitious, but lets put it this way, it looks more possible to me than the '05, '07, '12 and '15 seasons seemed to me the summer before those seasons took place. It's not like very many people we're expecting playoff caliber seasons those years after how miserable 2004, 2006, 2011 and 2014 were, so there's that, and I'd agree that this team, kinda, has pieces that suggest possibilities. Despite having issues in the back 7 on D, and an erratic offense they posted a top 5 finish with one of the toughest schedules around. That's pretty legit. The offense has finally collected a reasonable group of pass catchers. I'm not a Robinson guy, I much prefer Gibson, but I do think Robinson/Gibson is a solid 1-2 punch at RB. I think we're fine at TE. The OL needs work but does have functional legit pieces and a bit of depth, and if Howell was legit, or you plugged in a vet QB whose in that 14th-18th range, you probably get a 9-8 and 10-7 season. I'll just be straight and say: 

: That does nothing for me because #1, we've seen this story play out once every four years going back nearly 25 years and it never had staying power. The fact that the DL is primarily expensive to keep around vets, and the pass catchers are expected, and the positions that need fixing are expensive just makes me see it as long term untenable. There's not enough cheap valuable pieces to make this work for more than a season or 2 unless Howell hits. If Howell fits, holy hell, we can have 3 more seasons w/a lot more flexibility than usual because we've got QB as cheap as its humanly possible to imagine for 2023, 2024 and 2025 (I think, I can't remember how the rookie option works for day 3 picks). 

 

Worth noting, 8 games are against playoff teams I take seriously (I don't take the giants seriously, I don't think they're good). So? Hmm, artificially looking at the schedule, I see 6 out of 17 I'd put us as the favorite in. So that leaves plenty of room. We'll see. 

 

This year if I remember right I put our ceiling at 9, our floor at 5 and our expected at 7, I think Vegas had 7.5 and we got 8.

 

As for QB, I don't think we're that different, I'm just focused on franchise rookie QB period, I'm not okay w/veteran stop gaps, I've seen enough, unless you're showing me a guy w/the potential to become or already is a franchise guy, in the guise of Drew Brees in '05 or Watson this past year, I'm not interested, at all. You're more flexibile and I get that, I'm just not, I'm sick of waiting on the team making legit efforts once a decade, and then pretending they can paper over the issue the other 9 years. I'm beyond over it.

 

As for Carr, I think you're manning the barricades against Carr sucks like Wentz contingent and I dont have that take either. I don't think they're comparable. Wentz is a much more physically imposing talent than Carr, but a much less consistent actual starting QB whose basically not usable anymore long term as a starter. You can't flame out like he did 2020-2022 and really be viable. Carr is much weirder. His character is also, kind of odd, he got pluses for weird little moments, I can't remember where it was, maybe Vallejo, but I remember one story rolling round that he helped out some motorist in trouble several years ago after practice, was real quality guy that way, but I also got the sense that he rubbed a lot of teammates the wrong way w/his views in the George Floyd/Black Lives Matter moment, then again, if you dig under the hood of any team, basically you find out quickly that there is a dramatic split in locker rooms racially when it comes to politics (kind of surprised this didnt burst in 2017-2021), I'm trying to remember what I heard btw, can't remember for sure, so it's more gossip coming from me, I just distinctly remember that he did have some issues in the room a little bit a few years ago and as a result, chemistry wasn't great, but as a human being, he definitely sounds solid.

 

As a QB? He just doesn't move the needle for me. It's basically like getting the ceiling of Andy Dalton, most of the time (11th-14th), if you get Carr, w/plenty of lesser production too (more in that 15th-19th area, and I don't think that matters in the NFL unless you have a Baltimore Ravens/SF Niners caliber organization top down that's built a great team and everything else. If you've done all of that, you've got a chance at making periodic runs to the conference, and maybe even the super bowl, but I don't see that. I see Rivera as a D+/C game day coach, and a B-B man manager coach. I see the FO/Organization as at best, a C+/B- organization and of course ownership and reputation with FA's etc is probably F/D-. So from that perspective we have NONE of the things that make teams like the Niners and Ravens capable of making runs despite big gaps here and there in the roster (and technically, the Niners don't have huge problems virtually anywhere now, elite running game, elite passing weapons, good OL, great defense, great coaching, good to great FO/ownership. Ravens aren't as great but that's mostly due to injuries, the fall off of the defense in terms of talent, and the QB issues). 

 

So to me, we just look like a team that if we got average QB play, probably goes 9-8/10-7, and loses wild card weekend, before falling to 6-11 or 7-10 the next year and that's a straight pass to me. I'd rather just turn it over to Howell, and then go hunting for interesting QB prospects behind him.