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

[TradeTheBeal!]

 

[The Consigliere]

5 hours ago, Professor_Nutter_Butter said:

I can promise you that in 2025 there will be the next "can't miss" prospect to fixate on. There always is.

If you're talking QB, that's not true. The 2010, 2013, 2014, 2019 QB classes last decade were notoriously awful, and 2015 and 2016 were both exceptionally shallow. Some years the QB classes are good: 2012, 2017, 2018, 2020, 2021, 2023, 2024, sometimes they are not, like the years I previously mentioned and '22, Howell's classes. Sometimes they get the classes wrong ('18 ended up mostly a washout, with 1 league average guy in Baker, 2 studs in Allen and Lamar, and 2 wash outs in Darnold and Rosen, '21 is following a similar path with all of them busting except for Lawrence whose been disappointing). When you consider that, you need to realize that QB classes matter, the bad ones are nearly always as bad or worse than advertised, and the good ones are only sometimes as good as advertised (1983, and 2004 deliver, 2017 mostly delivered, but other famous classes like 1999, 2006, 2018 and 2021 didn't, and '12 was very hit and miss). 

 

You aren't always going to have a great QB class, most of them either suck outright, or prove to be worse than expected. That, btw, was why I was so irate when we passed on QB in 2020, and 2021, we didn't have one, and we acted like we were fine, Burrow, Tua, Herbert, Lawrence, and the busts of '21 went elsewhere, in '23 it looks like 2 of 3 were hits as well, but we sat tight again. Are we going to this year? I don't know, I will say that after the first two I don't feel super confident in the position, Daniels frightens me, but if we go away from QB, we need to have a plan for the '25 QB class in place if Howell busts next fall and part of that plan should be trading down/out with picks to add ammo to trade up with in '25. It's negligence to not do so if we eschew QB this offseason. 

5 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

If the Pats offered #2 for Howell and #4, would you take it?

 

I'd definitely think about it long and hard.

Yes, before you even finished the question. 

[The Consigliere]

4 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Standig and Sheehan just discussing this topic.  Sheehan asked Standig if he had to bet will they go Qb or not in the draft, he bet they'd go QB.  So did Sheehan.

 

Obviously we won't know until the new GM is hired.  But it feels like an interesting off season is afoot.

This underlines everything I see outside of this board and fanbase. Nobody outside of this board thinks Howell is some lock QB for us. Part of this is lack of being informed because they don't care, but part of this is also that most of us are desperately hanging onto his every performance hoping for a sign that he's the "one" and taking every little sign as an absolutist signature moment. It's already happened like 4-5 times this year. Nobody else is buying that, in fact most people seem to be arguing that he has the arm talent to make big plays from time to time but is nothing special at all. 

 

I have always felt our "Hog's" history has blinded us to how important QB is. Especially these days. It makes us aware of how much an OL can make a difference, but also a little too aware. We had elite OL's for much of the previous two decades and it meant ---- all, and several teams made super bowl runs with league average or worse OL's and HOF caliber QB's behind center. It's the QB. This aint the 80's anymore, you can't survive on Schroeder, Doug Williams, Mark Rypien, and Joe Theismann's retirement tour. It's a testament to how great Joe Gibbs and his staff and the players were that they were able to make average and worse (other than Theismann in '82-'83, and Rypien '89-'91) QB lead teams into super bowl winners and contenders, but that doesn't happen anymore. Not on the regular. 

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

2 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

This underlines everything I see outside of this board and fanbase. Nobody outside of this board thinks Howell is some lock QB for us. Part of this is lack of being informed because they don't care, but part of this is also that most of us are desperately hanging onto his every performance hoping for a sign that he's the "one" and taking every little sign as an absolutist signature moment. It's already happened like 4-5 times this year. Nobody else is buying that, in fact most people seem to be arguing that he has the arm talent to make big plays from time to time but is nothing special at all. 

 

I have always felt our "Hog's" history has blinded us to how important QB is. Especially these days. It makes us aware of how much an OL can make a difference, but also a little too aware. We had elite OL's for much of the previous two decades and it meant ---- all, and several teams made super bowl runs with league average or worse OL's and HOF caliber QB's behind center. It's the QB. This aint the 80's anymore, you can't survive on Schroeder, Doug Williams, Mark Rypien, and Joe Theismann's retirement tour. It's a testament to how great Joe Gibbs and his staff and the players were that they were able to make average and worse (other than Theismann in '82-'83, and Rypien '89-'91) QB lead teams into super bowl winners and contenders, but that doesn't happen anymore. Not on the regular. 

Knocked it out of the park with this one. 

[mcsluggo]

47 minutes ago, BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 said:

90% of fans will describe their olines like you just did. We always think ours is the worst. Don’t get me wrong. It stinks. But I guess my point is that most Olines stink relative to what fans think is acceptable play. I guess my point is that even if they add 2 good linemen next season, the consensus will be that the line stinks amongst fans. 

 

ok... but how do non-homers-looking-through-****-and-pain-stained-goggles views the Washington O-line?

 

(i am not going to vouch for ANY of these, i just googled "2023 o-line rankings", any or all of these rankings may suck, but none are designed to crap on the WFT, and they ALL rank the DC o-line in the bottom quarter of the league)

 

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-offensive-line-rankings-2023-offseason

pre-season 27th  (of 32)

 

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-offensive-line-rankings-2023-offseason

pre-season-- say Washington was worst in league in 22, and then got worse.  (32 of 32)

 

https://thegameday.com/nfl/power-rankings/ol/

pre-season-- 26th

 

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/fantasy/news/nfl-offensive-line-rankings-2023-best-fantasy-sleepers-busts/c7utc4lstwkkzegv8pee6uxq

pre-season:   30th

 

https://www.profootballnetwork.com/best-offensive-lines-nfl-rankings/

this is a midseason ranking that has washington moving up to 24th.. woot!!

 

 

meanwhile... the midseason rankings of offense performance (not just the o-line) has washington 14th overall, and 9th in passing

https://www.foxsports.com/articles/nfl/2023-nfl-offense-rankings-team-pass-and-rush-stats

no small part of that high ranking is hw truly awful the D has been, forcing the O to always have to try to catch up... but the rookie-ish QB has been doing a decent-ish job delivering (with mistakes) behind an objectively ****-awful, not just mediocre, offense line

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

27 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

the ST's are okay.

Not to pick a fight over ST.

 

But..

 

Cheeseman is HORRENDOUS.

 

Way is other-worldly.

 

And Slye is Meh.

 

But the fact Cheeseman is HORRENDOUS I think you downgrade STs from "ok" to Bad and you slip Way into a separate category of MVP.  

[mcsluggo]

5 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

This underlines everything I see outside of this board and fanbase. Nobody outside of this board thinks Howell is some lock QB for us. Part of this is lack of being informed because they don't care, but part of this is also that most of us are desperately hanging onto his every performance hoping for a sign that he's the "one" and taking every little sign as an absolutist signature moment. It's already happened like 4-5 times this year. Nobody else is buying that, in fact most people seem to be arguing that he has the arm talent to make big plays from time to time but is nothing special at all. 

 

I have always felt our "Hog's" history has blinded us to how important QB is. Especially these days. It makes us aware of how much an OL can make a difference, but also a little too aware. We had elite OL's for much of the previous two decades and it meant ---- all, and several teams made super bowl runs with league average or worse OL's and HOF caliber QB's behind center. It's the QB. This aint the 80's anymore, you can't survive on Schroeder, Doug Williams, Mark Rypien, and Joe Theismann's retirement tour. It's a testament to how great Joe Gibbs and his staff and the players were that they were able to make average and worse (other than Theismann in '82-'83, and Rypien '89-'91) QB lead teams into super bowl winners and contenders, but that doesn't happen anymore. Not on the regular. 

 

but they universally think he has some "sizzle", and some potential and intrigue.   that STILL puts him in the top 2 of Washington QBs in the last 30 years.  

 

(rypien was a bottom half of the nfl qb that could hurl a long ball if you kept his spotless behind one of the top-of-all-time O-lines.   that particular season was the best year for one of the best lines ever.   Mark Sanchez and Zach Wilson would've looked decent behind that line--- possibly ) 

[Voice_of_Reason]

I really don't know what we have in Howell.  I like a lot of what I've seen.  Like, a lot a lot.

 

But the supporting cast is SO suspect.  It's tough to grade him.

 

The play design and play calling has been at best suspect and at worst just terrible.

The OL is deplorable

The WRs drop too many balls and don't separate

 

And yet he's probably going to finish the season in the top 5 for total yards and have a respectable TD number.

 

There will be some bad stats as well, like Sacks, INTs and Pick-6's. 

 

But for a guy in his situation as a first year, 23 year old starter, he's done more good than bad.  

 

I'd like to see him in a progressive organization with a better supporting cast, predominantly a MUCH improved OL.  

[mcsluggo]

14 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

This underlines everything I see outside of this board and fanbase. Nobody outside of this board thinks Howell is some lock QB for us. Part of this is lack of being informed because they don't care, but part of this is also that most of us are desperately hanging onto his every performance hoping for a sign that he's the "one" and taking every little sign as an absolutist signature moment. It's already happened like 4-5 times this year. Nobody else is buying that, in fact most people seem to be arguing that he has the arm talent to make big plays from time to time but is nothing special at all. 

 

I have always felt our "Hog's" history has blinded us to how important QB is. Especially these days. It makes us aware of how much an OL can make a difference, but also a little too aware. We had elite OL's for much of the previous two decades and it meant ---- all, and several teams made super bowl runs with league average or worse OL's and HOF caliber QB's behind center. It's the QB. This aint the 80's anymore, you can't survive on Schroeder, Doug Williams, Mark Rypien, and Joe Theismann's retirement tour. It's a testament to how great Joe Gibbs and his staff and the players were that they were able to make average and worse (other than Theismann in '82-'83, and Rypien '89-'91) QB lead teams into super bowl winners and contenders, but that doesn't happen anymore. Not on the regular. 

 

and what "locks" are there?  you blow a ton of picks to move up to #2 to rent RG3 for one-year?  or heath Schler at #3?   or Patrick Ramsey/Jason Campbell/Dwayne Haskins in the first round???       there are no locks

 

this "rank all the qbs selected in the first round this century (from 2 years ago) 

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/list/ranking-every-nfl-quarterback-drafted-first-round-since-2000/16obdsowna7kk1gnhl9iqrp2pg#:~:text=Ranking every NFL quarterback drafted in the first,Manziel (2014-15) 8 Josh Rosen (2018-present) More items 

has Carson Wentz and Joe Flacco in the BEST 15 round 1 QB home runs of this century.....      first rooud draft QBS are far from locks, just like prospects with less than 1 year of play are....

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

1 hour ago, BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 said:

90% of fans will describe their olines like you just did. We always think ours is the worst. Don’t get me wrong. It stinks. But I guess my point is that most Olines stink relative to what fans think is acceptable play. I guess my point is that even if they add 2 good linemen next season, the consensus will be that the line stinks amongst fans. 

There’s a difference between the average line that fans think stinks because they give up some big plays to elite players and this one.  This line is getting the brakes beat off them on most snaps, often times immediately beat at critical junctures, by dudes off the street that haven’t sniffed a sack.  Which is why it ties back to coaching for me.  A lot of teams lack talent, few teams can’t mask those deficiencies via scheme and teach the simplest of concepts.  We have the horrid combination of little talent, poor coaching and scheming - which is why every snap looks like Vietnam.

 

 

Edited December 4, 2023 by BatteredFanSyndrome

[The Consigliere]

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I am not an Ewers guy.   Yawn for me.  Whose next after him Beck?  i like but don't love Sanders but will see after another year but I never expect to be picking first in the draft to take the top guy and unlike some I don't expect teams to just trade away that pick,  considering most of the time they don't.   So the teams can take the best QB and have a unique opportunity to do it, yet they just pass off the opportunity?  It doesn't happen that often for obvious reasons. 

 

The fact that right now Ewers is the 2nd QB considered in that draft makes the point for me.    Some other dude I guess will emerge.  But the idea that some say (not you) that every Qb class has some studs -- isn't always true especially if you go past the first Qb that never seems to be witin our reach.

 

I know I am the only one stressing this specific point on this thread but if I am the GM heck yeah I'd consider the idea that if I don't take that QB then a division rivals end up with that player.  I am not saying Daniels is Lamar but for just for arguments sake if Howell ends up peak Derek Carr at best and we pass over Daniels who ends up Lamar like for NY and ensures they are better than us for years to come -- our GM will have to wear that and no one will let go of it. 

 

So I do think that GM will feel a bit more under the gun to evaluate these 2024 QBs as opposed to punting it to 2025.  And that's before considering the crop is unlikely to be as good and we don't know we will suck and pick as high as this year.

 

Yeah, I guess Im different. I don't really give a ---- because I don't really think we're competing with NYG. NYG went to the Super Bowl in the 2000, 2007, and 2011 seasons. They've had multiple successful seasons despite largely never building a legit long term contender this century, repeatedly. They are considered a great team, even if they're down. We are what we thought of the Cardinals, and Bucs, Colts and Saints back when I was a kid in the eighties. Totally irrelevant, a joke franchise. We aren't competing with the Giants, we're miles upon miles worse as a franchise long term this century. I don't care what they do, other than what they do that makes me laugh, I care what we do. Lets make the right decisions and let that flush NYG down the toilet. 

 

I don't know how to handle QB because I don't know what the '25 class is, I had heard they had one stud, and then it was pretty blah, definitely worse than '23, '21, '20, '18, '17, but probably better than '19 and '22. 

To me, if the QB class is average we can build a plan that makes sense, by either choosing QB now, or choosing Howell now, but loading up the ammo truck with picks in '25 to help a trade up if we're wrong about Howell. We have 6 top 105ish picks, 4 top 70ish, we can trade down for '25 assets if we decide to focus on OL, and TE, and WR or whatever. If we avoid QB w/that first rounder we absolutely should either trade down w/our first, or w/one of our 2nds with a key piece being an asset in '25. That's what I'd argue:

 

Option 1: Take a QB

Option 2: Take best player available, either trading down from slot in round 1 or round 2 for '25 assets. 

 

That would be my plan and go from there. 

 

In terms of QB, I'm one of those guys that's very aware of the general trend line of QB classes which historically seem to fall into 3 groups:

 

Bad Projected Class which was bad.

Middling or good project class which wasn't good.

Good Projected class that was good.

 

I honestly cannot remember a single class that was projected to be bad that wasn't. Maybe somebody can tell me, but I can't think of any, at all. I've been following the NFL since 1979-1980, and the draft since 1988 (wasn't aware of it until then). And I can leaf through draft histories. I am sure that are exceptions, but since I've been paying attention, QB classes have either been bad, as expected, bad as wasn't expected, or good, with the latter being the rarest (1983, 2004, part of 2017 etc). As an example, just since Gibbs II, numerous supposed good classes, stunk. 2007-the Young/Leinart/Cutler class sucked, the 2011 class was notoriously god awful, the 2012 class, the best since the 1999 group that also busted, busted, with Weeden, Foles, RGIII, Brock Lobster and more all failing, and only Luck and Wilson hitting, the '10, '13, '14, '19 and '22 classes were called crap early, and were evern worse than advertised. 

 

It's an ugly history. I liked Lance, and loved Fields and Lawrence in '21, and no QB from that much loved class has delivered, with only Lawrence looking competent 3 seasons down the line, pretty horrible (I take some pride in rightly thinking the Jets were insane, but not too much since Fields failure stunned me, and I liked Lance enough as a project, I just thought Mac was a floor pick, and feel like the Patriots broke him similarly to how we broke RGIII (although RGIII broke himself too, considering how system dependent he was). 

 

Anyway, looking ahead, it's not pleasant, we can dive in this class, or pray for the '25 class or Howell to deliver. I'd lean the latter for now but I simply don't know enough about Daniels, and what I know freaks me out. 

Edited December 4, 2023 by The Consigliere

[Conn]

2 hours ago, TheGoodBits said:

Best case scenario for our rebuild (imo) is landing a good enough draft pick to take Daniels, and trading it to someone who isn't in the division. Get down to the 5-10 range and draft a stud LT. Acquire extra picks.

I haven't watched a ton of college ball this year nor am I one to "study tape," however my scouting credentials do include strongly favoring Stoud over Young last year. Daniels highlight reel is devoid of mid level NFL throws. He's either throwing over the top of the defense or running the ball. And he takes more hits running it than would be ideal. He reminds me a lot more of RG3 than Lamar. 

I’m not sure if you’re being literal about using the word “highlights” and I haven’t studied him yet, but I just want to point out that you aren’t generally going to see workmanlike NFL MOF 12-20 yard throws on a highlight tape unless they resulted in a TD. Highlights are almost exclusively going to be deep balls, downfield sideline balls, redzone TD passes, and explosive running plays.  

[Conn]

Have really appreciated reading the thoughtful, considering-both-sides posting of @The Consigliere and @Skinsinparadise in this thread. This is going to be an enormous moment for our franchise. Anyone posting confidently like it’s obvious what the answer is on this topic is being irrational. The ONLY rational stance imo is essentially what SIP is arguing—that even if you like Howell, you’d be an idiot not to at least consider another high-upside option if we’re drafting high enough to take one without a franchise-altering trade. Consider deeply. 
 

Maybe none of this matters bc we end up beating the Jets and QB isn’t even an option. Could very well happen. But anyone who thinks they can boil this down to a black and white definite answer today on 12/4/23 is frankly full of ****. 

[The Consigliere]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I am stuck on the good.  And is that good enough for me?  Yes.  And in most drafts, I wouldn't even consider other options. 

 

But by happenstance this is in theory the best draft for QBs since 2012.  And we are picking high.  I think we have to consider.  Not per se do. But consider the other meals on the plate considering they are more intriguing than the typical draft.

Nah, going into the draft (I always couch it that way because that's how the draft is: you only know the college CV going in, how things playing out is up to the fates, the players themselves, landing spot, talent, mental make up etc ad infinitum, way too many things to know ahead of time with any certainty, so when you talk classes you should talk about them from before their pro experience and after, not simply evaluate them afterwards, to me anyway).

 

But anyway, since I've been paying attention because the Redskins sucked, the best classes since 1983 going in were probably:

 

1999: 5 guys basically taken in the top half of the draft, 4 with top 10 grades.

2004: 3 top 10 overall caliber guys

2007: 3 top 15 guys with through the roof evals.

2012: around 5 guys plus some russell wilson love (Luck, RGIII, Foles, Weeden, Brock Lobster, Wilson, and at least one other guy)

2017: Trubisky/Watson/Mahomes class

2018: very similar to '99 and '12: you had 4 top 10ish guys (Baker, Darnold, Allen and Rosen, and then Lamar Jackson who fell)

2020: 3 top 10's like '04.

2021: another 5 guy group like '99, '12, and '18

2023; 3 top 5 guys, a rarity. 

 

Interesting to note that the classes that had 5ish guys all failed horrible, seems like the 3-4 man classes do better, but maybe that's just randomness. 

 

I would say that '99, '12, '18 and '21 all had better reviews than '24, but I think what makes '24 unique is that it is the first class since 2012 where the top 2 guys are considered near generational types, I don't think people felt the same for the non-Lawrence guys in '21, or for Baker and Darnold and Allen in '18, or for Trubisky or Mahomes or Watson in '17, so I cede your point there.

 

I just think it lacks top end depth that '99, '12, '18, appeared to have (but in retrospect did not, in terms of professional level talent, busts will happen). 

 

 

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

6 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

If the Pats offered #2 for Howell and #4, would you take it?

 

I'd definitely think about it long and hard.

 

6 hours ago, NYSkins21 said:

Without a doubt. Not even a second thought. Not that I think Maye or Williams would have better careers but mainly based on gaining the two years of rookie contract back to help rebuild this thing. I just wouldn’t know why the Pats would do it?

 

6 hours ago, BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 said:

Without question lol. That would be a ridiculous trade for NE to make. 
 

They would then have 2 young QBs on their roster that they’d be unsure about extending in the next year or so. 

 

6 hours ago, zCommander said:

 

That would be the most embarrassing thing they can do. They passed on Howell and selected Zappe only a few picks before we selected Howell.

 

Regardless, so you are also saying that Howell is worth a #2 then why not keep him instead of hoping his teammate from college can do better? Howell is still better than Maye though. 

To me, that seems like a dumb trade for us. Right now our assets are a QB who may or may not be good and a high first round pick. I don’t see the point in giving away both to just get back another QB who may or may not be good.

[The Consigliere]

1 hour ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Not to pick a fight over ST.

 

But..

 

Cheeseman is HORRENDOUS.

 

Way is other-worldly.

 

And Slye is Meh.

 

But the fact Cheeseman is HORRENDOUS I think you downgrade STs from "ok" to Bad and you slip Way into a separate category of MVP.  

I was just thinking about Punter. Slye sucks, so I take your point. I was being lazy because we have an excellent punter. Agreed. Way is great the rest, blech. And Slye btw, was known suck. I don't understand lateral moves like Slye. Hopkins is actually killing it this year, though I don't believe in the guy long term, its just an outlier seasons, but if you decide to move off a kicker you should at least be looking at kickers with quality pedigree's, they get cut all the time because of kicking yips, see the kid in Atlanta, who washed out from the pressure in LA, but then was reborn away from the all the pressure in LA after leaving. Look for guys like Koo, that under the hood, have promising CV's. Same with the guy Dallas cut the other year. He may wash out. I think he got cut again, but the guy has an interesting profile. Slye is just crap. He's not horrible, but he's never going to be good either, and not typically above average either. It just speaks of laziness. Matt Gay was available. Interesting kicker, Koo was available a few years back, that Dallas guy had a playoff melt down and got cut (or was it december, can't remember which). They are interesting. Slye, stinks, always has. To be fair to him, he's not the worst, but historically he's consistently aimed for average and usually finished below. Why is that your move when you cut your guy and go Kicker hunting? Just seems incredibly stupid. I'd like to think with a modern analytics team they can get stuff like Kicker more right, or at least wrong but for the right reasons (they pick the right guy but he has a bad year, that kind of thing-it happens with kickers). 

1 hour ago, mcsluggo said:

 

but they universally think he has some "sizzle", and some potential and intrigue.   that STILL puts him in the top 2 of Washington QBs in the last 30 years.  

 

(rypien was a bottom half of the nfl qb that could hurl a long ball if you kept his spotless behind one of the top-of-all-time O-lines.   that particular season was the best year for one of the best lines ever.   Mark Sanchez and Zach Wilson would've looked decent behind that line--- possibly ) 

It doesn't matter though, right now, he's basically sitting somewhere between 17th and about 20th in terms of median play and worse depending upon the metrics. That isn't good enough, ever. Btw, I thought about editing my Rypien post elsewhere, I still remember the anecdote of Rice supposedly asking Monk or Clark at a Pro Bowl in '89 or '90 ("how the ---- do you guys win with this guy," after yet another "malone" (my fav eighties joke was that some steelers fans referred to any pass that bounced 6 yards in front of or 10 yards behind a WR as a "Malone" after the infamous post-Bradshaw QB). Rypie could play well in an ideal situation but even then he was periodically erratic, especially in '88, '89, and '92 and after he left.

 

But back to the point, I don't care that our QB's sucked for the last 30 years and that Howell is the best of the manure pile, it's still a pile of manure, even if you found a patch that isn't as stinky (in fairness to Howell, I don't know if he's manure like the rest were yet, I just know that the rest were, other than Cousins, and that so far Howell has been closer to manure, then a rose). 

[Conn]

9 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

 

 

 

To me, that seems like a dumb trade for us. Right now our assets are a QB who may or may not be good and a high first round pick. I don’t see the point in giving away both to just get back another QB who may or may not be good.

Simplifying things pretty far at that point right? I may as well marry a pine tree instead of my girl because they’re both carbon-based life forms. 
 

I think even someone who is very confident in Howell can admit there’s more nuance to comparing prospects than what you’ve posted above here. 

[The Consigliere]

58 minutes ago, mcsluggo said:

 

and what "locks" are there?  you blow a ton of picks to move up to #2 to rent RG3 for one-year?  or heath Schler at #3?   or Patrick Ramsey/Jason Campbell/Dwayne Haskins in the first round???       there are no locks

 

this "rank all the qbs selected in the first round this century (from 2 years ago) 

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/list/ranking-every-nfl-quarterback-drafted-first-round-since-2000/16obdsowna7kk1gnhl9iqrp2pg#:~:text=Ranking every NFL quarterback drafted in the first,Manziel (2014-15) 8 Josh Rosen (2018-present) More items 

has Carson Wentz and Joe Flacco in the BEST 15 round 1 QB home runs of this century.....      first rooud draft QBS are far from locks, just like prospects with less than 1 year of play are....

You're acting like you're talking to someone who doesn't know everyone of those drafts inside and out lol. I don't care. I pull the trigger OVER AND OVER AND OVER again until I hit on one. After I hit, I keep pulling the trigger on guys on day 2, trying to find more. 

 

I was the nut that kinda liked Jake Locker as a discount target nearly 15 years ago (until he suddenly went much higher than expected), I loved Leinart, Eli, Rodgers, hated the Campbell picked, liked Ramsey, liked Brees, hated Weeden, liked Foles, and RGIII and Luck, hated the awful '09 and '10 and '13 and '14 classes, and later the '19 and '22 classes with Howell, Willis and Corral the only QB's I liked in '22. I am very, very hit and miss, with a lot of miss (though I nearly always am right if I think a guy sucks), but in terms of philosophy you just keep swinging, you have too, this is a QB's league. Until you have one, you've got a 90-95% chance of not being able to build a sustained contender. Only the Niners the past decade and the Ravens have been able to do it since the Bucs semi-dynasty closed their doors in 2004 after the Brad Super Bowl. 

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

1 minute ago, Conn said:

Simplifying things pretty far at that point right? I may as well marry a pine tree instead of my girl because they’re both carbon-based life forms. 
 

I think even someone who is very confident in Howell can admit there’s more nuance to comparing prospects than what you’ve posted above here. 

Well yeah. Of course.

 

And at the same time… I feel like my simplified assessment pretty much captures the essence of the situation.

[Conn]

Just now, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

Well yeah. Of course.

 

And at the same time… I feel like my simplified assessment pretty much captures the essence of the situation.

For someone who doesn’t want to dig deeper, yeah it would suffice. Like saying Twilight and Dracula are both about vampires. I think we can probably do better here (but will only need to delve deeper if we end up with the #3 or #4 pick, in all likelihood). 
 

I’m not trying to be a jerk I just don’t get what your point is. We can’t compare players if they both have an element of unknown upside to them? Two players who haven’t proven what they are yet can’t have different trade values? 

[FootballZombie]

44 minutes ago, Conn said:

I just want to point out that you aren’t generally going to see workmanlike NFL MOF 12-20 yard throws on a highlight tape unless they resulted in a TD.

 

You will if the guy sucks.

lol

 

 

If we could get him back for lets say... 6.5 Mil, what would be everyone's interest in bringing back JB as a continued backup/mentor?

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

5 minutes ago, Conn said:

For someone who doesn’t want to dig deeper, yeah it would suffice. Like saying Twilight and Dracula are both about vampires. I think we can probably do better here (but will only need to delve deeper if we end up with the #3 or #4 pick, in all likelihood). 
 

I’m not trying to be a jerk I just don’t get what your point is. We can’t compare players if they both have an element of unknown upside to them? Two players who haven’t proven what they are yet can’t have different trade values? 

I mean, we shouldn’t spend too much time on this because it’s a silly hypothetical that isn’t ever going to happen, but I just thought it seemed like a dumb trade. Would you rather have Sam Howell’s potential plus a stud left tackle or just Drake Maye’s potential? Seems like an easy choice to me.

Edited December 4, 2023 by Sacks 'n' Stuff

[Conn]

29 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

I mean, we shouldn’t spend too much time on this because it’s a silly hypothetical that isn’t ever going to happen, but I just thought it seemed like a dumb trade. Would you rather have Sam Howell’s potential plus a stud left tackle or just Drake Maye’s potential? Seems like an easy choice to me.

That would be your argument on the topic, I think that’s fine. Their skill-sets and value can definitely be debated, and you may very well be right.
 

That’s not what you said though, you said they are both QBs who may or may not be good so what’s the point. Those are two separate conversations. One has merit imo. 
 

edit: I agree that it’s a silly hypothetical that kicked this off, but the idea that we may be debating the merits of Howell vs a rookie QB prospect very soon is very real. 

Edited December 5, 2023 by Conn

[Professor_Nutter_Butter]

2 hours ago, The Consigliere said:

If you're talking QB, that's not true. The 2010, 2013, 2014, 2019 QB classes last decade were notoriously awful, and 2015 and 2016 were both exceptionally shallow. Some years the QB classes are good: 2012, 2017, 2018, 2020, 2021, 2023, 2024, sometimes they are not, like the years I previously mentioned and '22, Howell's classes. Sometimes they get the classes wrong ('18 ended up mostly a washout, with 1 league average guy in Baker, 2 studs in Allen and Lamar, and 2 wash outs in Darnold and Rosen, '21 is following a similar path with all of them busting except for Lawrence whose been disappointing). When you consider that, you need to realize that QB classes matter, the bad ones are nearly always as bad or worse than advertised, and the good ones are only sometimes as good as advertised (1983, and 2004 deliver, 2017 mostly delivered, but other famous classes like 1999, 2006, 2018 and 2021 didn't, and '12 was very hit and miss). 

 

You aren't always going to have a great QB class, most of them either suck outright, or prove to be worse than expected. That, btw, was why I was so irate when we passed on QB in 2020, and 2021, we didn't have one, and we acted like we were fine, Burrow, Tua, Herbert, Lawrence, and the busts of '21 went elsewhere, in '23 it looks like 2 of 3 were hits as well, but we sat tight again. Are we going to this year? I don't know, I will say that after the first two I don't feel super confident in the position, Daniels frightens me, but if we go away from QB, we need to have a plan for the '25 QB class in place if Howell busts next fall and part of that plan should be trading down/out with picks to add ammo to trade up with in '25. It's negligence to not do so if we eschew QB this offseason. 

Yes, before you even finished the question. 

Will all due respect, there will Always be a hyped QB up-and-comer. If I remember correctly, wasn't Jimmy Clausen super hyped up leading to the draft as this great QB? Who did Washington end up going with in 2010 at No. 4? Trent Williams. You get guys who you think will make your team better. That doesn't always mean QB. Believe me, this team definitely needs to focus on the O-line.

 

Howell 2024. Another QB in 2025 if needed.

 

EDIT: I'm an idiot for misremembering Jimmy freaking Clausen.

Edited December 5, 2023 by Professor_Nutter_Butter

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

3 minutes ago, Conn said:

That would be your argument on the topic, I think that’s fine. Their skill-sets and value can definitely be debated, and you may very well be right.
 

That’s not what you said though, you said they are both QBs who may or may not be good so what’s the point. Those are two separate conversations. One has merit imo. 

Alright. I guess I didn’t say it specifically but I like Sam’s potential at least as much as Drake Maye’s… actually more.

 

and at the same time, none of us really knows. The people who are the best in the world at evaluating quarterbacks usually get it wrong.

Edited December 5, 2023 by Sacks 'n' Stuff