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

[Renegade7]

22 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

Putting all your eggs in one basket is a risky decision.I also think you're overestimating what other teams would pay for someone like Taylor if he went to FA. 

 

You seem to be worried about him regressing next year, another if being thrown out there.  I do know folks overpay QBs, even bad ones, and Taylor wants to start. Another if, too many ifs, I get it, cover your bases.  Its tough trying to say let's wait to see what happens the next couple weeks on a discussion board, what would there be to discuss?

17 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Correct. He is not Tom Brady and we are not going to waste 2 first round picks. 

 

He's going to win the starting job for next season and we are going to draft a rookie. It'll be called an open competition that will be won by Heinicke and he will be our starter. 

 

If he gets injured or has a string of crappy games again, the rookie may start. If he plays great, he may get a contract extension and continue to start.

 

Brady Bloodsoe, Alex Mahomes, Montana Young, Farve Rodgers, etc. These things happen and there are a heck of a lot of amazing QBs far better than Taylor Heinicke who were beat out by younger guys on the bench and it was better for the team. 

 

None of those guys were in there 20s when their replacement was drafted, the plan was always to replace them, not see what happens.

5 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

I do admire his loyalty towards doing whatever it takes to keep him in a WFT uniform until he retires.

 

Gross misrepresentation.  I said wait a year, not forever. 

Edited November 24, 2021 by Renegade7

[PartyPosse]

5 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

You seem to be worried about him regressing next year, another if being thrown out there.  I do know folks overpay QBs, even bad ones, and Taylor wants to start. Another if, too many ifs, I get it, cover your bases.  Its tough trying to say let's wait to see what happens the next couple weeks on a discussion board, what would there be to discuss?

Well, it's tough to say what a regression would look like because we still don't know what he is. If you want to pick and choose the last two weeks to define what he is then obviously regression is a very possible thing. If you want to look at the season as a whole, well then I don't necessarily know if a regression matters.  People keep saying "he's been improving throughout the season" but all I saw was a guy that was actually regressing prior to the bye and came out of it with two real good games. It wasn't a steady improvement week by week until he broke out against TB. That worries me and it will continue to worry me until I personally feel confident that he's able to be consistently effective for a long stretch. Others have different benchmarks as to how they perceive what a QB is capable of. 

Edited November 24, 2021 by PartyPosse

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, Thinking Skins said:

So I think this is a discussion of semantics. I'm saying that people who are saying he's not a starting QB or not the future are the haters. It's not the same, and you have yourself some leeway with this last post, but it's like people have been calling him a backup since Tampa last year. If that's what he measures it to, so be it, but I think he's gunning for a starting job. 

 

So I'm adding myself what would it take to convince Sheehan or HogsHaven (I think it's Kevin Smith for gm) or some others who say he's just a really good backup? And one thing you don't see too often is a QB least3 their team to the playoffs and be replaced. Well it happened with Keenum but that's normally enough. 

 

But I think a lot of that is just people being intense with their opinions.  Sheehan was intense pro Darnold for example.  But he's just intense period with his takes.  Grant is intense too.   And when someone is intense it can rub us the wrong way when its a different take than ours. 

 

I loved for example when Sheehan pounded the table for Stafford.  Because I agreed with him.  I hated it when he pounded the table for Darnold because I disagreed.  With Grant he's annoying the heck out of me with the trashing of Jamin Davis.  But sometimes I agree with him.

 

Bringing this back to Heinicke.  As I said before I think there is a missing middle ground on the debate.

 

The debate seems to be mostly this:

 

A.  Heinicke is a high end backup-low end starter.  To defend that point of view that's what mutliple beat guys have said that they heard that the FO thinks of him currently.

 

B.  Heinicke is likey the answer, jump on the bandwagon.  Those that disagree are being too picky, forgetting what happened to Kirk, or are haters depending on the post. 

 

Personally I think the debate has a natural middle ground which is C.

 

C.  Is Heinicke sort of mid-tier starter.  He's no Dak or Murray or even the 10-15 types like Ryan and Carr, etc.  But is he in that next group around 18 or so.  Or can he potentially be that?  I can see him potentially be that.  i am not really sure.  But I get those who want to knock down the idea that Heinicke is just a backup.  I also get those who say hold your horses on the dude and they don't think he's a franchise QB.  I think potentially the answer might be somewhere in the middle of those opposing views.

 

But I think regardless the bottom line we are all rooting for him to be great.  I don't give a crap about whether I get predictions right or wrong.   The fun for me is giving it the college try.  I've gotten enough right and enough wrong to feel like I am at least average at guessing on players.  So adding another notch to my belt or another miss doesn't mean anything to me.  I just want the team to win.  I am a bigger believer in some of our players versus others but I root for them all equally.  And I don't think I am unique to that.

 

Edited November 24, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Renegade7]

1 minute ago, PartyPosse said:

Well, it's tough to say what a regression would look like because we still don't know what he is. If you want to pick and choose the last two weeks to define what he is then obviously regression is a very possible thing. If you want to look at the season as a whole, well then I don't necessarily know if a regression matters.  People keep saying "he's been improving throughout the season" but all I saw was a guy that was actually regressing prior to the bye and came out of it with two real good games. It wasn't a steady improvement week by week until he broke out against TB. That worries me and it will continue to worry me until I personally feel confident that he's able to be consistently effective for a long stretch. Others have different benchmarks as to how they perceive what a QB is capable of. 

 

And thats perfectly fair.

 

A lot of people have made up their minds we have to draft his replacement already because his ceiling isn't elite. 

 

I'll admit I haven't seen him the same way since I saw him in person.  And this is the first time he's done it in back to back games, something I've been blasting him for prior to the bye.

 

If he finishes strong, we have other holes on the team to fill, and shouldn't waste a first round pick on a potential multi-year backup jus to feel safe. You can do that with a pick outside the first round. He can't win the job and have an open competition, if he finishes strong, dont Jeff George the dude.  If he doesn't, im still not convinced our guy to replace him is in this draft and will need more time to feel comfortable with that.

[NewCliche21]

4 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

<snipped great explanation>

 

Ah, okay, thanks!  I'm sorry if it seemed like I was being argumentative, I just wanted to make sure I understood.

[Renegade7]

53 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I love Gibbs but he was so past his prime as for knowing offense when he came back that he benched himself as the offensive coordinator.  Plus he was never the talent evaulator during the glory years, that was Beathard.

 

 

And Ron has never had this much power before, this is new, we are seeing if this will work in real time.

 

53 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

You'll be lucky he drops out of the top 10 let alone to the 2nd.  Corral has played well in most of his games not just that one though.

 

 

Note - I never said Carroll had one good game, I said that one was jus way too easy for him.  Willis on the other hand is shredding no name teams left and right, and looked extremely mortal against an SEC team.  CBS is only mock that has Willis dropping out the first, with the same thing in the other ones: raw, hut talent worth taking a risk on.  Combine may have a lot to say about that.

 

53 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Not in this context.  If I am hiring someone to make a call like that and I don't trust them.   Then I made the wrong hire.  

 

You and I didn't make the hire, Snyder did.  He may have earned Snyder's trust, but he hasn't earned mine on picking a QB yet.  That doesn't mean he doesn't deserve the chance to make the pick, normally you prove you can do more then what you are hired for before given a promotion to a position where you are expected to do it on a regular basis. 

 

In this case he was asked to turn the culture around and picking a QB came with power and territory he was given.  Its a tough call, he could completely undo everything he's accomplished here with the wrong QB pick, which happens all the time in this league. 

 

53 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Bottom half of the draft?  So a playoff run?  I am not counting on that.  I'd love for you to be right.  If it goes down like that -- count me with you being worried about Heinicke, we'd need to lock him up, if this season ends up that good.

 

Lolz, noted.

 

53 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Keim also said that he was told Hurney was infatuated with Herbert.  

 

I believe it, and he lost that case to take him though. Did Rivera overrule him on trading down to get him then?

 

53 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Someone suggested that on the thread just yesterday let alone no one does.  The 2nd-4th round pick idea has been suggested by plenty over the years.  I recall it well because I've debated them on it and have done it plenty.

 

I may have missed it then, but I'm not seeing that nearly as often as some of the same repeated points seen here and other threads.  Its a minority arguement that I dont support.

 

53 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

If you don't think they can do it. I'd want them gone then in your shoes.  To each their own.  If I felt the powers that be didn't have the competence to pick a QB, I am then ready for the next regime.  But that's me.  I do have confidence right now though in their competence.  I am not guaranteeing it but I do think Rivera and company are smart.

 

Like I said, I really like Rivera, and on the fence with how much power he has considering the results.  I would've been jus fine with him being a coach that didn't have the final say on personell the way he does.

 

53 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

As for revisionist history, I think your point applies better if the same people are making the decisions.  If I am working for a client.  I am not beholden to what the previous consultant did for the client.  One has nothing to do with another.

 

And I said that about each regime here for the last 20 years until I recognized it was a pattern no matter who was in charge.  Whether it be voodoo, bad luck, or jus bad front office structure, the results have been consistent when it comes to drafting first round QBs for this franchise for decades now, failure.  If they can prove me wrong, ill be jus as happy as anyone else.  But I'm not holding my breath.

[PartyPosse]

21 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

A lot of people have made up their minds we have to draft his replacement already because his ceiling isn't elite. 

And I don’t see it as drafting his replacement, so much as drafting a safety net. If we continue to build the team around him and Taylor struggles or gets injured then we’re back to square one. 

[Renegade7]

Just now, PartyPosse said:

And I don’t see it as drafting his replacement, so much as drafting a safety net. If we continue to build the team around him and Taylor struggles or gets injured then we’re back to square one. 

 

If that happens, we'll have a much higher pick in 2023 draft then we will in this one, better shot at a better prospect.  Especially if we trade down in 2022 like I'm suggesting, we could move up even higher in 2023.  

[PartyPosse]

11 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

If that happens, we'll have a much higher pick in 2023 draft then we will in this one, better shot at a better prospect.  Especially if we trade down in 2022 like I'm suggesting, we could move up even higher in 2023.  

You’re creating a whole lot of scenarios for two years down the road. Draft someone next year, either they get a chance to show what they can do, Heinecke runs with the job or neither excels and we need to draft someone else. Who we praying for in 23? The Bama guy? The Ohio guy? The Clemson guy? It’s always the same **** every year. We punted QB this past year and it would be foolish to do the same.

[Skinsinparadise]

49 minutes ago, NewCliche21 said:

 

Ah, okay, thanks!  I'm sorry if it seemed like I was being argumentative, I just wanted to make sure I understood.

 

It's cool, I didn't find you being argumentative.  I was just explaining my perspective.   Hopefully I didn't come off argumentative.  It's all in fun.

 

You can feel the intensity on this thread and we haven't even hit the off season yet.  It's going to likely be a wild time as for debating QB until it goes down.

 

I got my own intense feelings about it.  But for anyone who disagrees, its not personal.   It's just i am fired up about it as some others clearly are too. 

[Warhead36]

After the end of the season, Rivera, Turner, Zampese, and the FO need to get together and ask themselves: Is Heinicke the long term franchise QB answer? Do you realistically see this team being a year in year out 10+ win contender for the next 5 years with Heinicke as the starter? The next 5 years would be Heinicke's ages 29-33 seasons which is basically the prime years for most QBs.

 

If the answer is no, then we have to address that and find a guy we think can be that guy. Whether it's an experienced vet or someone in the draft. None of this competition crap, no stop gaps like Fitzpatrick again, get a guy and lets get going.

 

If the answer is yes, then lets go for it and try to win. we have Heinicke on one more year on a cheap contract so go out and address our needs aggressively in FA and use the draft to get guys who can help us win now(no Jamin Davis like projects in round 1).

 

These next seven games are going to determine Rivera's future with this team.

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

 

And Ron has never had this much power before, this is new, we are seeing if this will work in real time.

 

 

Supposedly Hurney's wheel house is QB and apparently he dug Herbert.  I think he's the lead here on this.  He's been at some of the big college games involving QB.

 

1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Note - I never said Carroll had one good game, I said that one was jus way too easy for him.  

 

OK.  You mentioned that game specifically as for what you've watched and you seemed to underplay Corral's performance in it considering the opposition.  So I simply was saying, he's had other big games, too. 

 

1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

Willis on the other hand is shredding no name teams left and right, and looked extremely mortal against an SEC team.  CBS is only mock that has Willis dropping out the first, with the same thing in the other ones: raw, hut talent worth taking a risk on.  Combine may have a lot to say about that.

 

Jordan Reid was on Finlay's show today, talking up that's the dude he'd want if he were the WFT.    As for Willis some mock draft types have mixed views on, more have positive takes than negative.  Personally I am still digesting Willis but lean positive myself.   He looked mortal in the first half but much better in the 2nd half.  Dudes like Willis, high upside but raw, typically aren't embraced by some on the board pre-draft.  And some of us ended up dead wrong on that front.  I am not saying Willis ends up another example of it.  But the idea that he has critics here and skeptics isn't novel.  I recall the critics on some of the high ceiling-low floor QBs I mentioned in another post.

 

1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

 

You and I didn't make the hire, Snyder did.  He may have earned Snyder's trust, but he hasn't earned mine on picking a QB yet.  That doesn't mean he doesn't deserve the chance to make the pick, normally you prove you can do more then what you are hired for before given a promotion to a position where you are expected to do it on a regular basis. 

 

 

Yeah I didn't hire Rivera obviously.  But I liked the hire.  And I trust him.  If I don't like a coach or didn't trust their acumen, then I want them gone.  See Zorn.  See Shanny in 2013.  But that's me.    

 

1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

 

I believe it, and he lost that case to take him though. Did Rivera overrule him on trading down to get him then?

 

 

Rivera didn't have authority over Hurney.  So no it wouldn't be Rivera overruling him.  Carolina didn't pick before the Chargers.   So they didn't pass over Herbert. I guess they were hoping the Chargers would pick someone else. 

 

1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Like I said, I really like Rivera, and on the fence with how much power he has considering the results.  I would've been jus fine with him being a coach that didn't have the final say on personell the way he does.

 

 

The whole pacakge is what it is.  IMO you have to both trust the coach and the dude who oversees personnel or not because its a package deal.  Similar to Shanny when he was here.    I liked Shanny the coach.  I wasn't in love with Shanny the personnel guy so eventually i wanted him gone.

 

1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

 

And I said that about each regime here for the last 20 years until I recognized it was a pattern no matter who was in charge.  Whether it be voodoo, bad luck, or jus bad front office structure, the results have been consistent when it comes to drafting first round QBs for this franchise for decades now, failure.  If they can prove me wrong, ill be jus as happy as anyone else.  But I'm not holding my breath.

 

The thing is for me its not hard to dissect their mistakes.   

 

We've done our version of the Vikings taking Christian Ponder in the first  -- and did it THREE times in the draft.  Jason Campbell, Haskins, and Ramsey were considered by some 2nd round talents that this FO overreached for.  Gibbs is to blame IMO for Campbell.   Dan for Haskins.  Dan for Ramsey.  Those swings should have failed.  And they did.  

 

RG3 was IMO the only real swing for the fences attempt.  Yeah it failed but the one year where it succeeded was wow. 

Edited November 24, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

2 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

If we draft a rookie QB very high and Heinicke turns into Tom Brady, then that's ****ing AWESOME!!! Who gives a **** if we "wasted a pick" if we have a starter like that? 

 

Who cares if a rookie has to sit for a year or two, because the guy we signed when we had absolutely nobody turned into the next Tom Brady? NOBODY!

 

If Heinicke lights it up and does incredible, does anyone actually think we'll let him walk, just because we drafted a guy? Of course not. That's absurd.

 

If we draft a QB, even if we use two 1rsts to get him and Heinicke blows up to be even better he will keep his job and get resigned and even if that rookie just magically turns to dust and we get nothing for him, it doesn't matter because we already have a QB and if that's the road it took to get there, so be it. 

 

I'd add if we draft a guy and Heinicke blows up so we'd want to trade the rookie we drafted.  That should be very doable.   Teams aren't stupid.  If they see Heinicke morph into Aaron Rodgers or whatever they'd get why we are riding with him and trading who we drafted. 

 

The Cards drafted Rosen and discarded him the next year and got a 2nd rounder and change.

 

This is what some would call Rich Man's problems.  So I am not worried about this team which has been dirt poor at QB, all of a sudden having to navigate a bounty at that spot.

 

To me all of this sounds like a wild QB wet dream.  Just fun fantasy.  But if we need to make this a serious debate than OK, we can deal with Heinicke exploding and then discarding our first round QB.  That's an awesome problem to have.  

Edited November 24, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Renegade7]

53 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

You’re creating a whole lot of scenarios for two years down the road. Draft someone next year, either they get a chance to show what they can do, Heinecke runs with the job or neither excels and we need to draft someone else. Who we praying for in 23? The Bama guy? The Ohio guy? The Clemson guy? It’s always the same **** every year. We punted QB this past year and it would be foolish to do the same.

 

****, who are we praying for this year?  It's always a prayer, draft is a crapshoot, you know that.

 

The if game is what it is, again why I'm saying wait until this season is over before making up our minds now we have to draft a first round QB this offseason. 

 

We are all going in circles based on how Taylor finishes the season, its the elephant in the room, so let him finish the season already to help answer a lot of these ifs.  Thats what I've been saying for two weeks now.

 

[PartyPosse]

5 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

The if game is what it is, again why I'm saying wait until this season is over before making up our minds now we have to draft a first round QB this offseason. 

I agree with that. If it's not a first, we absolutely must draft one on Day 2.

[Renegade7]

Is Josh Rosen the rule or the exception? Does anyone think the Packers will get a 2nd for Love?

[CapsSkins]

@Renegade7 the problem with waiting another year is that it's very possible if not likely that whichever rookie we draft would need a year on the bench anyway.

[Renegade7]

1 minute ago, CapsSkins said:

@Renegade7 the problem with waiting another year is that it's very possible if not likely that whichever rookie we draft would need a year on the bench anyway.

 

If we draft a guy that actually isn't ready to play at this level day one, we've made a mistake. Please, please, no projects, please.

[CapsSkins]

Just now, Renegade7 said:

 

If we draft a guy that actually isn't ready to play at this level day one, we've made a mistake. Please, please, no projects, please.

 

Not every franchise QB is a day 1 starter. The goal is drafting a franchise QB. Not every single one of those guys can start day 1, and moreover, some of those guys might really benefit from a year learning the pro game before getting thrown into live fire. Again, thinking about Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Mahomes, etc. 

[Renegade7]

10 minutes ago, CapsSkins said:

 

Not every franchise QB is a day 1 starter. The goal is drafting a franchise QB. Not every single one of those guys can start day 1, and moreover, some of those guys might really benefit from a year learning the pro game before getting thrown into live fire. Again, thinking about Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Mahomes, etc. 

 

Are you really making the case that all those guys were projects that couldn't play day one?  Brees was drafted in the second round, not the first, he doesn't fit case you're making for first round pick qb. Brady was a 6th rounder, not a first.

Edited November 25, 2021 by Renegade7

[skins island connection]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I'd add if we draft a guy and Heinicke blows up so we'd want to trade the rookie we drafted.  That should be very doable.   Teams aren't stupid.  If they see Heinicke morph into Aaron Rodgers or whatever they'd get why we are riding with him and trading who we drafted. 

 

The Cards drafted Rosen and discarded him the next year and got a 2nd rounder and change.

 

This is what some would call Rich Man's problems.  So I am not worried about this team which has been dirt poor at QB, all of a sudden having to navigate a bounty at that spot.

 

To me all of this sounds like a wild QB wet dream.  Just fun fantasy.  But if we need to make this a serious debate than OK, we can deal with Heinicke exploding and then discarding our first round QB.  That's an awesome problem to have.  

 

 Monkey wrench time!!!

Ok, let's say that TH plays fairly good; not superb, but good, all things considered.

Being the draft table { at this moment } doesn't look to be a blockbuster for QBs, whats your view of 'other weapons'?

i.e.; a big time FA WR or a pro-worthy one from the draft? 

 

I ask this from my view, that whats missing from this team and TH is a big time WR threat, like a Hopkins or Adams or Antonio Brown.

Hopefully Thomas will be back soon, but regarding WRs its McLaurin, and thats it. Nobody else poses a threat to any secondary, so defenses can shadow him and pretty much single cover the others, but a second big play WR would definitely help out TH and the offense. 

[DWinzit]

58 minutes ago, skins island connection said:

 

 Monkey wrench time!!!

Ok, let's say that TH plays fairly good; not superb, but good, all things considered.

Being the draft table { at this moment } doesn't look to be a blockbuster for QBs, whats your view of 'other weapons'?

i.e.; a big time FA WR or a pro-worthy one from the draft? 

 

I ask this from my view, that whats missing from this team and TH is a big time WR threat, like a Hopkins or Adams or Antonio Brown.

Hopefully Thomas will be back soon, but regarding WRs its McLaurin, and thats it. Nobody else poses a threat to any secondary, so defenses can shadow him and pretty much single cover the others, but a second big play WR would definitely help out TH and the offense. 

Sure it would be nice to add another big time WR. Samuels and to a lesser extent Brown were to be the weapons you are correctly stating has been missing. If healthy Samuels and Thomas changie the dynamics of the offense. Actually I imagine Fitz too would have changed everything

 

If TH doesn't light it up the remainder of the year they will rightfully go at a top QB in the draft. If he does light it up they should still bring in a QB by no later than the second round, like a late first on Ridder.

 

the team distinctly needs another RB to match up with Gibson and hopefully McKisick If they don't resign him they need 2 backs

 

[dunfer]

Id rather get a bluechip LB, DB or OL

(if Taylor continues his up trend) I understand an org needs to keep spending capital to find their qb until they find their qb

Edited November 25, 2021 by dunfer

[ananoman]

2 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Are you really making the case that all those guys were projects that couldn't play day one?  Brees was drafted in the second round, not the first, he doesn't fit case you're making for first round pick qb. Brady was a 6th rounder, not a first.

How much of a "project" their respective teams thought those guys were, we will never know.  But the fact is, not a single one of those guys, not Brady, not Rodgers, not Brees, not Mahomes, played on day one.  In fact, they all rode the bench their rookie years and didn't become starters until year 2, with the exception of Rodgers, who rode the bench for 3 seasons before transitioning to starter midway through his 4th season.

[Skinsinparadise]

3 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

Is Josh Rosen the rule or the exception? Does anyone think the Packers will get a 2nd for Love?

 

I do. Heck Sam Darnold bombed for a number of years and the Jets still got a 3rd and 2 other picks along with it.  But the idea of Heinicke turning into some stud, and we'd have to dump our first round pick QB in turn, that's a nice problem to have.  I won't lose sleep over that on the wild off chance it goes down like that. 

Edited November 25, 2021 by Skinsinparadise