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

[Renegade7]

12 minutes ago, 86 Snyder said:

Picture a piece of paper.

 

Write all the names of QBs in the league who objectively have the ability to get to a Super Bowl.  
 

Draw a line underneath it.  

 

There’s all sorts of names under the line.  Heinicke, Wentz, Geno, Mac Jones, Mariota, Winston, Matt Ryan, Zach Wilson, Brissette, etc, etc

 

There’s all kinds of them.  Some are 1st round picks, some are old vets, some have never been real starters, it goes on and on.

 

If you’re choosing from that pool, you should choose based on your circumstances.  Maybe you’re playing for draft position, maybe you’re playing not to get a coach fired, maybe you’re on a little win streak and somehow have a shot at the playoffs.

 

Heinicke makes a world of sense for this team given their circumstances.  Wentz does not.  He already ruled himself out.

 

I get where you coming from...

 

It's hard for me to look at Taylor's play today and accept being trapped with that against San Fran, or this home and away against New York, or a potential playin game in Dallas.

 

You are coming across like you are the making argument that stats aren't admissible in the debate because it didn't save the Colts last year during their playoff run last year...

 

If Ron felt same way as you he'd of said that by now, or it would've been leaked by now...its hard for me to just say "fine" in this one, I'm not liking standing pat for December at all...

4 minutes ago, CapsSkins said:

People were generally hopeful about Haskins (RIP) after 2019. There's no way Rivera could have known just how immature Dwayne was and just how horrendous his judgment was.

 

Yet a lot of folks correctly called him as a bust and Giants notoriously passed on him (which Haksins called them out on).  I'm not buying he had no idea, he was jus wrong he could fix it.

[Renegade7]

One more thing about Ron not having final say on Haskins when he was hired...we all saw how ballistic Ron went on having final say to get Wentz, yet Snyder had final say to keep Haskins when Ron was first hired...

 

Call me dead ass wrong all you want, I'm skeptical at best...

Edited November 21, 2022 by Renegade7

[86 Snyder]

6 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

I get where you coming from...

 

It's hard for me to look at Taylor's play today and accept being trapped with that against San Fran, or this home and away against New York, or a potential playin game in Dallas.

 

You are coming across like you are the making argument that stats aren't admissible in the debate because it didn't save the Colts last year during their playoff run last year...

 

If Ron felt same way as you he'd of said that by now, or it would've been leaked by now...its hard for me to just say "fine" in this one, I'm not liking standing pat for December at all...

Im not the one that brought up Indy.  I’m certainly not making an argument about how last season for a different team finished impacts this season.  In fact I said it’s not comparable.

 

Trapped is a good way to put it, but Wentz puts the team in a trap also.  It’s just two different traps, which is why we’re doomed to failure.  Only difference is, one trap was tried and the result was a 2-4 record with a bunch of stinkers.  The other trap resulted in 4-1 record with a bunch of stinkers.

 

Its not a difficult decision.

[dc1]

36 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Sure, there's obviously going to be a difference between guys who don't care and guys who are trying hard. But I think some people are overstating it as if Heinicke is somehow lifting the whole team up or something.

 

I think there are probably far more banal and easily quantifiable reasons for it. OL healthier and run blocking better, having B Rob, defense playing lights out, better game planning. Obviously that does include some stuff that Heinicke brings like being able to avoid pressure better.

I understand money ball.

 

But when you have multiple offensive/defensive leaders and coaches advocating for TH then you can't chalk it up to banal and easily quantifiable reasons. Unqualififiable motivational factors should also be considered here.   

 

As MJ said "....and I took that personally" is a thing.

 

Taylor isn't the end all be all, but I would have loved to have an extra 25m to play with in free agency.

[Voice_of_Reason]

32 minutes ago, Conn said:

 

That’s nice. We all wish we had taken the risk of Herbert over Young now. Who gives a ****, it wasn’t a realistic decision at the time because Haskins was Snyder’s guy. That pick was never happening and nobody liked Herbert (or Tua) that much. Only Burrow was breaking through that Haskins situation. So it’s stupid to keep bringing up and talking about. We all wish we had Herbert, it’s a waste of pixels on the screen. 

The only way we would taken a chance on Herbert is with a trade down, but it would have to have been before the Chargers, obviously.  If we picked a QB at 2, regardless if Haskins was on the roster or not, it was Tua.  He was the consensus #2 QB based on all the reporting from the teams.  (Forget the know-nothing draftniks.)

 

Ron said if Burrow was there they would have picked him.  
 

Hindsight being 20/20, Herbert goes #2 overall not question.  But young was the better prospect at the time, and it wasn’t close. 

[Renegade7]

5 minutes ago, 86 Snyder said:

Im not the one that brought up Indy.  I’m certainly not making an argument about how last season for a different team finished impacts this season.  In fact I said it’s not comparable.

 

Trapped is a good way to put it, but Wentz puts the team in a trap also.  It’s just two different traps, which is why we’re doomed to failure.  Only difference is, one trap was tried and the result was a 2-4 record with a bunch of stinkers.  The other trap resulted in 4-1 record with a bunch of stinkers.

 

Its not a difficult decision.

 

It is when its clear as day Taylor isn't only reason the record changed.  Argument can be made we won in spite of him today. And this isn't first game this year we've had to do that, nor would it be the last if he remains the starter.

 

2022 Record should NOT be the trump card here...

Edited November 21, 2022 by Renegade7

[mistertim]

21 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Mah, this notion Ron had no choice but to stay with Haskins because of Snyder but cuts him same season doest add up to me, it just doesn't.

 

What seems more likely is a defensive coach salivate at the easy out to take Young over trading down to address the larger need at QB.

 

Your claim half of folks thought Herbert was a bust doesn't address the other half.  None of this address even an average QB on a rookie contract is better then what we are dealing with right now trying to figure out what to do for 2023, year fn 4 of this regime...

 

I think we also need to take into account the apparent fact that Ron truly did believe Haskins had made strides in the offseason after 2019. Unfortunately, it was all smoke and mirrors, and once they were in training camp that sorta went the way of the dodo.

 

But due to COVID, there was no way for Ron to actually get a full first person hands on perspective on whether Haskins had truly leveled up or not until it was too late. DH had also shown some promise and flashes of really good play at the end of the 2019 season, so I think it's understandable that Ron didn't immediately jettison him as soon as he arrived, especially when there wasn't a true "can't miss" blue chip QB prospect available.

 

From what I've read, they loved Burrow and would have taken him if he was available, but he wasn't, and they weren't enamored with Herbert and were put off by Tua's injury history.

 

Not taking Young at #2 is all hindsight at this point.

[86 Snyder]

1 minute ago, Renegade7 said:

 

It is when its clear as day Taylor isn't only reason the record changed.  Argument can be made we won in spite of him today. And this isn't first game this year we've had to do that, more would it be the last if he remains the starter.

 

2022 Record should NOT be the trump card here...

Sure, why base it on the most important thing?  Or the fact the locker room has a clear preference? 

 

Just let them rock, paper, scissors for it.

[Renegade7]

1 minute ago, mistertim said:

 

I think we also need to take into account the apparent fact that Ron truly did believe Haskins had made strides in the offseason after 2019. Unfortunately, it was all smoke and mirrors, and once they were in training camp that sorta went the way of the dodo.

 

But due to COVID, there was no way for Ron to actually get a full first person hands on perspective on whether Haskins had truly leveled up or not until it was too late. DH had also shown some promise and flashes of really good play at the end of the 2019 season, so I think it's understandable that Ron didn't immediately jettison him as soon as he arrived, especially when there wasn't a true "can't miss" blue chip QB prospect available.

 

From what I've read, they loved Burrow and would have taken him if he was available, but he wasn't, and they weren't enamored with Herbert and were put off by Tua's injury history.

 

Not taking Young at #2 is all hindsight at this point.

 

At the end of the day, if Ron was serious about taking Burrow if he fell to him, he knew Haskins wasn't the guy.  You don't do that otherwise.

[mistertim]

Just now, Renegade7 said:

 

At the end of the day, if Ron was serious about taking Burrow if he fell to him, he knew Haskins wasn't the guy.  You don't do that otherwise.

 

I think it would be less "Ron knew Haskins wasn't the guy" and more "This guy who's falling to us is a can't miss elite prospect who we think will become an elite NFL QB"

 

In that instance, given how important the position is, you absolutely take that QB, even if the guy you already have is decent and has shown some promise.

[Voice_of_Reason]

2 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

2022 Record should NOT be the trump card here...

I think, though, it is the “he gets to keep playing this year” card.

 

Who knows what the future will bring.  But for now you don’t mess with success.  
 

Next week will be really telling.  
 

If they beat Atlanta with this style of football, they really have a great chance to get to a record they couldn’t have dreamed off a few weeks ago, because I think they absolutely can beat the Giants playing this style of football.

 

If they win the next 2, at 8-5, that would be a hell of a good record.  
 

I don’t think they could beat the Chiefs, Bills, 49ers or Cowboys with this style of football.  They have 2 if those teams on the schedule.  
 

It’s possible Dallas is resting everybody.  
 

I dunno.  Next week is huge. 

[IrepDC]

21 hours ago, CapsSkins said:

 

Renfrow and Waller are both injured and have each only played 5 out of 9 games for the Raiders this year. Outside of Davante, they don't really have any pass-catchers. Running-wise they have Josh Jacobs and nobody else.  

That adds more context. I am still not understanding why they would move on from him, though. From what I saw, today was another one of his slow start, let him hang around, clutch finish type of games. Did something happen to cause them to want him gone?

[CapsSkins]

3 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

At the end of the day, if Ron was serious about taking Burrow if he fell to him, he knew Haskins wasn't the guy.  You don't do that otherwise.

 

Life is not so black and white. You have a guy you think has potential, but if you can get a guy you have a ton more belief in, you take him. But that doesn't mean you don't think your raw young QB has potential. At least enough to make you comfortable taking the "generational talent" at #2.  

[Voice_of_Reason]

4 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

At the end of the day, if Ron was serious about taking Burrow if he fell to him, he knew Haskins wasn't the guy.  You don't do that otherwise.

Eh, you can think you have a starter but if  you have the chance to get an elite starter you take them.  

[Renegade7]

3 minutes ago, 86 Snyder said:

Sure, why base it on the most important thing?  Or the fact the locker room has a clear preference? 

 

Just let them rock, paper, scissors for it.

 

Stop it, man, if win lose record was the end all be all we wouldn't be having this convo and Taylor would already be named starter for the season.

 

You see the team have a clear preference today?  Looking on twitter before Black Panther comes in. Crickets...

[mistertim]

11 minutes ago, dc1 said:

I understand money ball.

 

But when you have multiple offensive/defensive leaders and coaches advocating for TH then you can't chalk it up to banal and easily quantifiable reasons. Unqualififiable motivational factors should also be considered here.   

 

As MJ said "....and I took that personally" is a thing.

 

Taylor isn't the end all be all, but I would have loved to have an extra 25m to play with in free agency.

 

I don't think we should immediately conflate players cheering on and being supportive of their starting QB with them wanting him over someone else. Could it be? Sure, possibly. But good teammates are going to rally around their guys and speak highly of them, regardless (unless the guy in question is just a complete asshole, in which case they'll most likely just be quiet about it, but obviously TH doesn't fit into that category)

[Califan007 The Constipated]

1 minute ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

I think, though, it is the “he gets to keep playing this year” card.

 

 

 

 

Hopefully nothing more than that (in terms of starting, anyway).

 

 

[Zim489]

5 minutes ago, mistertim said:

Not taking Young at #2 is all hindsight at this point.

The only hindsight you could have is trade down. Probably should have been the way to go. I remember ATL wanting to move up heavily. It would have had to been 2 1s probably at minimum to move up to 2 from 16. 

 

2020 1 2 4 4 

2021 1 3

2022 2 

 

Could have been super likely. At worst. With out chase we dont make the play offs. Austin Jackson at 16. 2021 we likely get fields and another top 10-15 pick from ATL (they picked 4th) Pick of like Parsons Slater Jaelyn Phillips. 

 

Good lord the franchise is in a significantly different outlook

[Renegade7]

14 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

I think it would be less "Ron knew Haskins wasn't the guy" and more "This guy who's falling to us is a can't miss elite prospect who we think will become an elite NFL QB"

 

In that instance, given how important the position is, you absolutely take that QB, even if the guy you already have is decent and has shown some promise.

 

12 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Eh, you can think you have a starter but if  you have the chance to get an elite starter you take them.  

 

No loyalty, business only level up decision...got it...

Edited November 21, 2022 by Renegade7

[mistertim]

7 minutes ago, Califan007 The Constipated said:

 

 

Hopefully nothing more than that (in terms of starting, anyway).

 

 

 

I'll see your Vampire's Kiss and raise you a Face/Off

 

 

Edited November 21, 2022 by mistertim

[dunfer]

**** if you mentioned what would happen if burrow wasnt picked 1st around here youd get pitchforked. We were taking Chase.

 

I believe in him, you think our d is good now. Just wait

[Conn]

11 minutes ago, Zim489 said:

The only hindsight you could have is trade down. Probably should have been the way to go. I remember ATL wanting to move up heavily. It would have had to been 2 1s probably at minimum to move up to 2 from 16. 

 

2020 1 2 4 4 

2021 1 3

2022 2 

 

Could have been super likely. At worst. With out chase we dont make the play offs. Austin Jackson at 16. 2021 we likely get fields and another top 10-15 pick from ATL (they picked 4th) Pick of like Parsons Slater Jaelyn Phillips. 

 

Good lord the franchise is in a significantly different outlook

 

Yeah if all that stuff you made up had happened things would be a lot different, that is true 

[justice98]

35 minutes ago, Califan007 The Constipated said:

 

Yeah, they will...if there are scouts worth their salaries, an established offensive scheme that everyone understands and is on board with, a clear understanding of what type of talent fits the offensive scheme, and stability in place, you're gonna find that QB regardless of where you pick in the 1st round unless only 3 QBs enter the draft or something. And if you don't have those things, your QB won't succeed no matter where you draft him unless he's a clone of Peyton Manning or Aaron Rodgers.

 

My concern would be this regime drafting the QB THEY want and then getting dumped.  And then a new regime being stuck trying to make this person work.  Basically reliving what Rivera had to do with Haskins. 

 

And depending on the new owner's feelings on Rivera, maybe reliving Gruden having to decide if he has the patience for developing a young QB when he's on the hot seat.

[Renegade7]

15 minutes ago, CapsSkins said:

 

Life is not so black and white. You have a guy you think has potential, but if you can get a guy you have a ton more belief in, you take him. But that doesn't mean you don't think your raw young QB has potential. At least enough to make you comfortable taking the "generational talent" at #2.  

 

Where's the precedent on that?

 

How often has a team drafted a QB in the first round with one they jus drafted still on the roster and that old one not pushed out to becoming a bust elsewhere?

[88Comrade2000]

The long term qb isn’t happening in 23.