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

[Est.1974]

Just now, zskins said:

 

The best we could do is picking at #7 even if we lose the next two games. 

Not if we then trade up with a team that already has a QB in place. That’s what I was getting at.

[skinny21]

1 hour ago, KDawg said:

 

Business wise... I don't think the current office/coaching personnel survive another stinker of a season. So if we are picking higher in 2023 it means there's PROBABLY going to be a new coaching staff. Which is something Ron-Mart would probably like to avoid. So I think the answer is: It doesn't matter if we're drafting higher in 23 or if the class is better. This is the class we're going to make a move in. 

You could well be right.  It certainly makes sense from a “that’s how the NFL works” perspective.  I do think it may come down to 1) do we have a qb that gives us hope (a rook that flashes or a vet that does well) and 2) injuries.  Obviously Snyder, the fans, or whoever could say “sure, you have injuries, but every team gets injured and you haven’t built the team well enough to overcome them.  Of course, I’m referring to losing the qb, or a bunch of olinemen, most of the receiving weapons, etc., not just some injuries here and there.  And, ironically, I think many fans may be more fickle/impatient/unforgiving than Snyder - this year has been a(nother) rough one from an injury standpoint, yet here we are, in year 2 of RR with a lot of fans saying he needs to go or has one last year.  Seems like Snyder probably gives Ron at least 4 years based on recent history, or at least into his 4th year (a mid season firing deal), but I could well be wrong.  To your point though, finishing next year with say 4 or few wins… that could be all she wrote.

57 minutes ago, zskins said:

 

I don't think Ron will be on the hot seat. Too soon. We stayed with Gruden longer. I just don't want Ron to get an okay QB just for the sake of it or because it makes the fans happy. I want to see some stability and long term solution. I envy the Steelers FO. They don't fire the coaches because of couple of bad years. 

Yeah, to me, RR should at least get the leash Gruden had.  I’m mainly quoting your post though because I share your concern about going the safe route re qb, rather than chasing upside - ie focusing more on the floor vs the ceiling.  Interesting though that two “safe qbs” that might be available - Carr and Ryan - come with big time risk in terms of losing assets to help build the team.  I don’t love the idea of adding a Mariotta/Trubisky, but for the fact it might mean the staff is more willing to take a risk going after a qb in the draft (drafting Willis).  I’d certainly prefer it to Ryan and (probably) Carr.

[skinny21]

2 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

Thats a good point, and gives some extra context, the lack of explosive plays and lack of ability to get off the field quickly with 6 at least on some drives can’t help at all.

My initial thought was it’s kind of ridiculous to try to blame Heinicke (or any qb) for oline injuries, especially since the argument can be extrapolated to “winning time of possession is bad for your team”, but you make a good point.  Of course, the flip side is that your defense is potentially on the field more, so you’d risk more injuries on that side of the ball.

 

Of course, if there is truth to it, (and you’d think analytics would bear this out if so), it brings up a lot of questions.

Does this mean shootouts are preferable?

Does this mean you don’t want to keep the opposing qb on the bench?

Does this mean you should value run stuffers on the dline over pass rushers?

And so on.

 

I think I’m probably trying to read way too much into it, lol - the obvious answer of course is that teams should want to be balanced.  Needing to go to a run heavy offense (to hide qb deficiencies) isn’t ideal, unless it’s to help a young qb get their feet wet (or if you’re down to your 3rd/4th string qb).  But of course, having a qb with deficiencies isn’t ideal either… lol

[Warhead36]

You can't bank on consistently going on 9+ minute drives. The ability to do it is great, but you need to be able to get big plays and not just rely on 100% perfect execution because you're doomed to make a mistake at some point(or the defense makes a play). We have an offense that if we throw a single in-completion the drive is basically over, let alone a lost yardage play or penalty.

[Burgold]

1 hour ago, skinny21 said:

My initial thought was it’s kind of ridiculous to try to blame Heinicke (or any qb) for oline injuries, 

 

Of course, if there is truth to it, (and you’d think analytics would bear this out if so), it brings up a lot of questions.

Does this mean shootouts are preferable?

Does this mean you don’t want to keep the opposing qb on the bench?

Does this mean you should value run stuffers on the dline over pass rushers?

And so on.

The old logic was that running was better for the o-linemen because it's better to deliver the blow than receive it. I always thought that spoke to player safety as well.

[Skinsinparadise]

I think this season was the perfect storm of bad luck.

 

A.  What team thrives when the lose both their starting QB and at least projected best pass rusher early on?

 

B.  Ricky Seals is the top TE for most of the season.  And Deandre Carter the #2 WR.

 

C.  You get the usual O line injuries along with Scherff missing 6 games

 

D.  Have one of the hardest schedules in the NFL including playing a bunch of teams with bye weeks and extra rest.  Sharp if I recall ranked us as having the 2nd most unfair schedule in the NFL judging by rest -- teams with extra days to prepare

 

E.  Get one of the worst COVID outbreaks in the league

 

F.  No only did we have one of the worst COVID ourtbreaks but we also played some of the only teams not effected by COVID.

 

I am not saying this to give excuses.  I am just saying I doubt we have all of these hurdles next season.  Thaty should help whatever QB starts.

[CapsSkins]

I think we gotta let go of any delusions that Wilson or Rodgers will come here. They are Hall of Famers who will pick their destination and not only is our owner/FO universally hated (including by the fans), but the roster isn't all that close either the way Tampa was pre-Brady.

 

Watson I don't want bc of the character concerns. Don't really want to debate that here but 22 women coming forward with accusations is enough for me. God knows this franchise has enough problems on this front.

 

From a veteran standpoint, the guy I was banging on the table for last summer - and took my fair share of arrows for it - is Derek Carr. If we can pry him away from LV, we gotta do it. I claimed he was a top-10 QB in the thread last year and that led to a lot of healthy debate. The reality is, that wasn't a hill I cared to die on I just thought he was in the conversation as an upper-tier starter and I still feel that way.

 

From a draft standpoint, if you can get one of the top guys in the 1st round and you love the guy then do it. I don't watch college football so I have zero insight as to who's good or not. There are some names floated every year. I'm no talent evaluator, but I am a professional investor and I know you gotta commit to taking shots if you want to hit.

 

Personally, I'm good with trading a haul for Carr and drafting a guy in the 4th, like RG3 + Cousins but IMO better risk-adjusted because Carr is your guy for the next five years and if for some reason he flames out, you got a young guy who's developing (or who could become your long term backup).

 

WE MUST FIX THIS ISSUE. SEEING TERRY GET UNDERTHROWN AND MAKE CONTESTED CATCHES OR LOSE OPPORTUNITIES MAKES ME WANT TO CRY

 

 

Edited December 28, 2021 by CapsSkins

[88Comrade2000]

3 minutes ago, CapsSkins said:

I think we gotta let go of any delusions that Wilson or Rodgers will come here. They are Hall of Famers who will pick their destination and not only is our owner/FO universally hated (including by the fans), but the roster isn't all that close either the way Tampa was pre-Brady.

 

Watson I don't want bc of the character concerns. Don't really want to debate that here but 22 women coming forward with accusations is enough for me. God knows this franchise has enough problems on this front.

 

From a veteran standpoint, the guy I was banging on the table for last summer - and took my fair share of arrows for it - is Derek Carr. If we can pry him away from LV, we gotta do it. I claimed he was a top-10 QB in the thread last year and that led to a lot of healthy debate. The reality is, that wasn't a hill I cared to die on I just thought he was in the conversation as an upper-tier starter and I still feel that way.

 

From a draft standpoint, if you can get one of the top guys in the 1st round and you love the guy then do it. I don't watch college football so I have zero insight as to who's good or not. There are some names floated every year. I'm no talent evaluator, but I am a professional investor and I know you gotta commit to taking shots if you want to hit.

 

Personally, I'm good with trading a haul for Carr and drafting a guy in the 4th, like RG3 + Cousins but IMO better risk-adjusted because Carr is your guy for the next five years and if for some reason he flames out, you got a young guy who's developing (or who could become your long term backup).

 

WE MUST FIX THIS ISSUE. SEEING TERRY GET UNDERTHROWN AND MAKE CONTESTED CATCHES OR LOSE OPPORTUNITIES MAKES ME WANT TO CRY

 

 

22 the qb issue must be solved or else someone else will try to solve it in 23.

[CapsSkins]

Just now, Rdskns2000 said:

22 the qb issue must be solved or else someone else will try to solve it in 23.

 

They will.

 

I think Rivera is getting a lot of undue, reactionary criticism.

 

I believe Ron was very clear-eyed about getting lucky winning the division last year at 7-9. He knew we were farther away than that, and he knew the 1st place schedule was going to be tough this year. Obviously, we've been particularly unlucky with injuries and COVID. 

 

But look at what happened in the summer. Ron tried to fix the position with Stafford. Matt didn't want to come here. Watson turned out to be a potential sex criminal. Green Bay and Seattle weren't trading Rodgers or Russ. What are you gonna do? Fitz was the best available option.

 

Ron hired the Marty's essentially to go find the franchise QB. Everyone knows the situation, they know they have to get it fixed. I have full faith in them taking a shot to get that guy this summer. They may not hit on the right player, but I would be genuinely shocked if they went into 2022 without a veteran starter or high draft pick on the roster.  

 

[Skinsinparadise]

7 hours ago, UK SKINS FAN 74 said:

Rivera wanting to see more of Kyle Allen in the last couple of games...I mean they must know what he gives them. They brought him across via trade in the first place. Strange.
 

Secondly, the Rivera comments posted by SIP on the previous page. Feels like we are seriously going to go all in for a QB. FA trade, move up in the draft. Dare I say that I could actually see us moving up into the top 3 in the draft.....

 

Yep.  The rest below is me venting and has nothing to do with your post. 

 

I don't know if some of the beat guys are being negative to just feed off of fans venting.  But some of these guys who are around the team yet keep saying a variation of Rivera has no plan at QB -- that rap drives me nuts. 

 

How is it that I can recall gossip about what they are thinking, including reading Mike Silver's (who is super close with Rivera) long expose about what their thinking was at QB during the last off season, and Rivera's own comments from various interviews about what he was thinking.   And some who cover or talk about the team especially on talk radio don't know squat about any of it.  It's just hard for me to believe that they are that dense?  So I think they are just pandering to the angst of the fan base. 

 

If so its going to be a long off season because knowing Rivera's style he's not going to tell the local media his plan.  They will find out when its done.  It's like some on talk radio blasting Rivera for vacillating on who is starting the last 2 games and how he doesn't have it together because he's vacillating.  I am listening to that and thinking come on guys.  He's not waffiling, he just doesn't want to spell out his plan to the media and the Eagles, that's all. 

 

But Rivera whether via his own comments, Mike Silver or leaks to Keim practically has a billboard out as for his thoughts.  But I gather I am going to have to endure months of Rivera has no idea what he's doing at QB until it goes down. 😀

 

I think the Silver article in particular spelled out their plan.   But Keim in particular would say only if the cards fell right would they make an aggressive move last off season -- the idea is the aggressive move is likely going down in 2022 not 2021.

 

If you follow their 2021 thinking, they will swing hard for veterans first and if they fail they will trade up if needed for whatever QB they target.

 

The Silver article flat out said they were interested in Rodgers or Wilson if they hit the trade market.   we all agree they won't want to come here but the article flat out indicated Rivera would try.

 

https://www.washingtonfootball.com/news/washington-football-ron-rivera-explains-signing-ryan-fitzpatrick

At various times, Rivera contemplated making a run at Wilson, Watson (before his legal troubles surfaced, including 22 civil lawsuits accusing the Texans quarterback of sexual assault and sexual misconduct) or Rodgers, whose dissatisfaction with the Packers became public hours before the start of the draft.

 

The article also said they considered trading up, Rivera said the same.  Keim said he heard they'd only be willing to make a small move that wouldn't cost much draft capital but that attitude would change next year if they didn't land the guy this year.  So next year is upon us.

https://www.washingtonfootball.com/news/washington-football-ron-rivera-explains-signing-ryan-fitzpatrick

Then, heading into the draft, Rivera thought hard about trading up to acquire a quarterback. Ultimately, he balked at the price

 

 

 

Edited December 28, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Silvernon]

Rivera talked about QB yesterday answering Nicky's question in his presser.

 

Short answer: They're getting one this off-season.

 

 

[clskinsfan]

In fairness to Rivera he pushed hard for Stafford. But Stafford didnt want any part of being here. At this point I am all in on Kenny Pickett or whatever guy they think is their guy. Give up what you have to give up to get your guy. I am sick of watching retreads at the QB position. It is time for a young QB to take the reins. This team has drafted exactly TWO QB's since Rg3. TWO in 9 drafts since that draft. Unacceptable. 

[method man]

3 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

In fairness to Rivera he pushed hard for Stafford. But Stafford didnt want any part of being here. At this point I am all in on Kenny Pickett or whatever guy they think is their guy. Give up what you have to give up to get your guy. I am sick of watching retreads at the QB position. It is time for a young QB to take the reins. This team has drafted exactly TWO QB's since Rg3. TWO in 9 drafts since that draft. Unacceptable. 

 

I think the Rams just had too many advantages in the Stafford process. First, they gave up 2 1sts. Second, one of their personnel guys was hired to be the Lions' GM. Third, McVay and Stafford were vacationing in the same place and they were able to spend time together in person ahead of the trade going down

[wit33]

16 hours ago, NoCalMike said:

 

It sort of feels like to me the coaches are still figuring this stuff out.  They drafted Gibson to be the workhorse RB, who was a WR.  I don't know how/why you do that without acknowledging it is going to take a few seasons to even get him performing like an actual RB.  Then on top of that Scott Turner barely even draws anything up for Gibson that would utilize the skillsets he already possesses.  It is hard to have an identity when every week there is a new player in the skill position.  I honestly think we have more of a modern style of personnel on offense but a more traditional style coordinator.  

I agree on Gibson needing to be used more as a WR/split out. As some have shared and I agree, another talented back or two must be added to the roster. Would love to see him come off just one fly sweep to see what happens when he has a full head of steam. 

 

1 hour ago, CapsSkins said:

I think we gotta let go of any delusions that Wilson or Rodgers will come here. They are Hall of Famers who will pick their destination and not only is our owner/FO universally hated (including by the fans), but the roster isn't all that close either the way Tampa was pre-Brady.

 

Watson I don't want bc of the character concerns. Don't really want to debate that here but 22 women coming forward with accusations is enough for me. God knows this franchise has enough problems on this front.

 

From a veteran standpoint, the guy I was banging on the table for last summer - and took my fair share of arrows for it - is Derek Carr. If we can pry him away from LV, we gotta do it. I claimed he was a top-10 QB in the thread last year and that led to a lot of healthy debate. The reality is, that wasn't a hill I cared to die on I just thought he was in the conversation as an upper-tier starter and I still feel that way.

 

From a draft standpoint, if you can get one of the top guys in the 1st round and you love the guy then do it. I don't watch college football so I have zero insight as to who's good or not. There are some names floated every year. I'm no talent evaluator, but I am a professional investor and I know you gotta commit to taking shots if you want to hit.

 

Personally, I'm good with trading a haul for Carr and drafting a guy in the 4th, like RG3 + Cousins but IMO better risk-adjusted because Carr is your guy for the next five years and if for some reason he flames out, you got a young guy who's developing (or who could become your long term backup).

 

WE MUST FIX THIS ISSUE. SEEING TERRY GET UNDERTHROWN AND MAKE CONTESTED CATCHES OR LOSE OPPORTUNITIES MAKES ME WANT TO CRY

 

 

I disagree and feel Dan Snyder will be an asset if the team chooses to join the Rodgers and Wilson sweepstakes. Players love Dan and he’s built many strong relationships over the years. He’s shown he can lure big name talent, players and coaches.

 

I expect Rodgers to be a free agent, so we’ll see how that one works out, but expect Dan to use all his experience to lure guys in to be used to its fullest this off season. 

[Redskins 2021]

I am new to the site but I have been reading for awhile. I made a list of possible available QB this year. Let me know what you think and what the price for trade would be.

 

Arron Rogers 

Deshawn Watson 

Russell Wilson 

Derrick Carr 

Mitch Trubisky 

Marcus Marrota 

Baker Mayfield 

Jimmy Garofalo 

Jamies Winston 

Kirk Cousin 

Teddy Bridgewater

Matt Ryan

 

I think we should go after  D Watson first. I know the problem but if he willing to play here he gives us everything we need. 

Next I go for Baker Mayfield would be an upgrade over henike. Very similarlbut much better with deep ball and can run.

Last I would draft a rookie and bring M. Marrota to complete with Henike. Henike a great story but I don't think week in week out he can do it. 

 I be willing to send a some combo of the defensive linemen for Watson and a 1st round pick. Defense was bad but offense played big role. If we had better offense we would have beat Denver, Green Bay. We only had one first down against KC in second half. Let me know what you think.

[theTruthTeller]

This is only loosely related to the topic, but is Scherff expected to sign next year?

 

If I were a free agent quarterback and my agent called me with news of a big offer from WFT, my first question would be "have they signed Scherff?"

[CapsSkins]

21 minutes ago, theTruthTeller said:

This is only loosely related to the topic, but is Scherff expected to sign next year?

 

If I were a free agent quarterback and my agent called me with news of a big offer from WFT, my first question would be "have they signed Scherff?"

 

Why? Are you expecting to only be starting QB for 60% of the games?

[KDawg]

1 hour ago, Redskins 2021 said:

I am new to the site but I have been reading for awhile. I made a list of possible available QB this year. Let me know what you think and what the price for trade would be.

 

Arron Rogers 

Deshawn Watson 

Russell Wilson 

Derrick Carr 

Mitch Trubisky 

Marcus Marrota 

Baker Mayfield 

Jimmy Garofalo 

Jamies Winston 

Kirk Cousin 

Teddy Bridgewater

Matt Ryan

 

I think we should go after  D Watson first. I know the problem but if he willing to play here he gives us everything we need. 

Next I go for Baker Mayfield would be an upgrade over henike. Very similarlbut much better with deep ball and can run.

Last I would draft a rookie and bring M. Marrota to complete with Henike. Henike a great story but I don't think week in week out he can do it. 

 I be willing to send a some combo of the defensive linemen for Watson and a 1st round pick. Defense was bad but offense played big role. If we had better offense we would have beat Denver, Green Bay. We only had one first down against KC in second half. Let me know what you think.

Baker will be costly. I’d rather have Heinicke for what he’d cost… and that’s saying something. But he is a better QB.

 

Trubisky, Carr, Mariota, Rodgers are the QBs on the list I’m interested in.

 

Rodgers is the only one I think is a bonafide starter. 
 

We need our guy in the draft. Top ten. If Howell may be available later I’m okay with a gamble especially if we have a few guys we like sitting there and trading back. But really… if the guy is there in our draft position pull the trigger and don’t look back. 

[theTruthTeller]

17 minutes ago, CapsSkins said:

 

Why? Are you expecting to only be starting QB for 60% of the games?

Well, this year we're 6-3 in games Scherff started and 0-6 in the games he didn't start.  In 2020, we were 0-3 when he didn't start.  In 2019, we were 0-5 in games he didn't start.  We did much better in 2018 - we were 2-6 in games he didn't start.  That makes us 2-20 in the last four years when he didn't start and 21-20 when he did start.

[Conn]

1 hour ago, theTruthTeller said:

This is only loosely related to the topic, but is Scherff expected to sign next year?

 

If I were a free agent quarterback and my agent called me with news of a big offer from WFT, my first question would be "have they signed Scherff?"

Why? He’s a good player but until we had other injuries/COVID absences the OL performed fine with and without Scherff. He wouldn’t be a priority for me. He’s simply a good player with a lot of name recognition who probably won’t get paid nearly as much as he wanted last year now that he’s continued to prove he’s injury-prone. He isn’t special and he doesn’t change how we gameplan or execute. He’s talented and good, not special. He’s just been biding his time waiting for FA and I say we let him test his market. We should not have franchised him at all. 
 

Not to mention that a good QB will only help the OL. A dirty analytical secret (not really a secret but nobody here seems to talk about this) is that once you pass a certain threshold of QB talent, sacks are 90% a QB stat. The QB controls the cost-benefit analysis of when he feels it’s worth taking a sack versus throwing the ball away versus leaving the pocket versus making a risky throw earlier than he planned. That’s why Rodgers has one of the lowest INT rates ever but one of the higher sack rates—he made the decision long ago and continues to decide every week that in many situations, the benefit of holding the ball longer looking downfield and just taking the sack if he doesn’t get the look he wants outweighs the risk of tossing up an interceptable  ball. Cousins did a similar arithmetic but with way less awareness. A stud QB controls almost exclusively how many sacks he takes, and if your QB isn’t at that level of talent then you aren’t going anywhere regardless of your OL. That isn’t to say if you have a good QB you shouldn’t invest in OL—every millisecond counts and the OL is very important for the run game and setting a physical tone. But a good QB hides a bad OL most of the time and compounds the effectiveness of your OL if it’s actually good, and ours isn’t bad even without Scherff. 

[Warhead36]

3 hours ago, method man said:

 

I think the Rams just had too many advantages in the Stafford process. First, they gave up 2 1sts. Second, one of their personnel guys was hired to be the Lions' GM. Third, McVay and Stafford were vacationing in the same place and they were able to spend time together in person ahead of the trade going down

More importantly they have a better team, in a better city, with a new stadium and ownership that isn't completely toxic.

[Conn]

52 minutes ago, theTruthTeller said:

Well, this year we're 6-3 in games Scherff started and 0-6 in the games he didn't start.  In 2020, we were 0-3 when he didn't start.  In 2019, we were 0-5 in games he didn't start.  We did much better in 2018 - we were 2-6 in games he didn't start.  That makes us 2-20 in the last four years when he didn't start and 21-20 when he did start.

This is noise. The OL does not fall apart without Scherff in recent years and his absence is not a leading reason we’ve lost. We just lose a ton of games regardless because we’re a bad team, and he misses a lot of games. A lot of time these things happen at the same time, it doesn’t mean there’s causation. It also so happens in recent years that when he’s missed stretches of games we’ve been missing a ton of other talent as well. Our injury luck has been horrible for years now. 

[CapsSkins]

58 minutes ago, theTruthTeller said:

Well, this year we're 6-3 in games Scherff started and 0-6 in the games he didn't start.  In 2020, we were 0-3 when he didn't start.  In 2019, we were 0-5 in games he didn't start.  We did much better in 2018 - we were 2-6 in games he didn't start.  That makes us 2-20 in the last four years when he didn't start and 21-20 when he did start.

 

You missed my point... Scherff is a difference-making player, when he's on the field. But he is so unreliable, that he's actually very reliable to miss half the season every year. And he wants to be paid top dollar. Not a good investment + time to move on.

[Warhead36]

1 minute ago, CapsSkins said:

 

You missed my point... Scherff is a difference-making player, when he's on the field. But he is so unreliable, that he's actually very reliable to miss half the season every year. And he wants to be paid top dollar. Not a good investment + time to move on.

Agree with this. Scherff is elite. The only better Gs probably are Martin in Dallas and Nelson in Indy.

 

But ultimately, the G position isn't THAT important that you should sacrifice a bunch of your cap for it, especially for a guy who has an injury history and will be over 30.

[Redskins 2021]

12 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

Why? He’s a good player but until we had other injuries/COVID absences the OL performed fine with and without Scherff. He wouldn’t be a priority for me. He’s simply a good player with a lot of name recognition who probably won’t get paid nearly as much as he wanted last year now that he’s continued to prove he’s injury-prone. He isn’t special and he doesn’t change how we gameplan or execute. He’s talented and good, not special. He’s just been biding his time waiting for FA and I say we let him test his market. We should not have franchised him at all. 
 

Not to mention that a good QB will only help the OL. A dirty analytical secret (not really a secret but nobody here seems to talk about this) is that once you pass a certain threshold of QB talent, sacks are 90% a QB stat. The QB controls the cost-benefit analysis of when he feels it’s worth taking a sack versus throwing the ball away versus leaving the pocket versus making a risky throw earlier than he planned. That’s why Rodgers has one of the lowest INT rates ever but one of the higher sack rates—he made the decision long ago and continues to decide every week that in many situations, the benefit of holding the ball longer looking downfield and just taking the sack if he doesn’t get the look he wants outweighs the risk of tossing up an interceptable  ball. Cousins did a similar arithmetic but with way less awareness. A stud QB controls almost exclusively how many sacks he takes, and if your QB isn’t at that level of talent then you aren’t going anywhere regardless of your OL. That isn’t to say if you have a good QB you shouldn’t invest in OL—every millisecond counts and the OL is very important for the run game and setting a physical tone. But a good QB hides a bad OL most of the time and compounds the effectiveness 

Would they franchise him again if not what would he get on the open market. 

Edited December 29, 2021 by Redskins 2021