Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

The Official QB Thread- With Howell the Season Went and the #2 Pick, What's next. Including Rookie QB Talk.


Koolblue13

Recommended Posts

On 9/19/2023 at 8:52 AM, Skinsinparadise said:

It’s early granted but fun nonetheless 

 

 

 

 

This isn't crazy to me. How many of us had Howell ahead of Pickett in '22? I'm raising my hand. As an example. Zero shares of Pickett on any dynasty team.s At my peak, I had him on 6 of 16 (had to cut him for roster space on one, darn it).

 

Never ever thought Pickett was better, period. The worst thing about Pickett to me, and why I always thought he was crazy as a 1st rounder was I just never saw the franchise QB ceiling. If EVERYTHING went right, everything, he seemed like maybe a Dalton/Dalton Plus kind of talent, a guy whose upside was a little ahead of smack dab in the middle (16th/32), basically a Carr-Lite, but w/o Carr's ability to occasionally play like a 9th-12th caliber QB in the league. 

 

So taking him in round 1 was insanity to me. I liked Howell better period, higher ceiling, lower floor (more bust potential), but also he appeared guaranteed to last at least another 15-30 picks longer in the draft (it turned out about 120). So much better return for your investment in terms of draft capital, and contract its night and freaking day. 

 

I expect Howell to be better long term, but I think the most likely outcomes are probably:

Howell above average.

Howell average

Pickett average to below avereage

Howell Bust

 

That's how I saw it coming into the draft. 

 

Not surprised it looks like that right now. I think Pickett's played some tough teams too defensively though and in bad weather in one. But I expect in a complete season if he's healthy, he'll finish between 17th and 32nd in the league. If Howell stays healthy, he's probably 11th-22nd. 

On 9/19/2023 at 11:03 AM, Warhead36 said:

Tua already has injury concerns and the other guys you listed played like 40-50+ years ago.

 

I didn't say height equals great. I said the best QBs tend to be a little bit taller. You don't have to be a giant but being shorter puts you at a disadvantage.

 

Think of it this way: all the great traits Howell has, the other real good QBs also have it, AND they're taller.

Yep, it's worth mentioning lineman on both sides of the ball are bigger, I don't know for a fact, but I would guess on average they are also taller than they were 35-50 years ago too. That being said, the league has figured out how to scheme out ways for shorter QB's to still be successful, but it's definitely a problem all the same. Would much prefer him to be taller, but not more than I want him to actually be good lol. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People get so excited over athletic quarterbacks and I get why but at the same time if you can't read and react quickly and pass the ball accurately you're not going to have much of a chance. Good luck tucking the ball and running with it consistently as a QB because eventually you're going to get injured or concussed and we have already seen that with Anthony Richardson.

 

I have no clue what the end result of Sam will be but he's got that full package of pocket awareness and being able to read and react quickly (not consistently but I think that'll get better the more reps he gets) and he's deadly accurate. He's also very tough, he reminds me of Kirk the way he will stand in that pocket and deliver the ball knowing he's going to get hammered, not all of these young QBs will do that.

Edited by JSSkinz
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, philibusters said:

 

But I think he is in that denial stage, where he is refusing to accept he is not good.   He needs to accept he is not good  if he will ever develop into a starting QB so that he'll be driven to improve.

 

That is the challenge of evaluating College QBs and projecting them into the NFL. What they were good at in College and what drove their success are not necessarily the things that they will need to do to be successful in the NFL.  I think what he is alluding to in his comments is he is being asked to process and make defined reads and play within the structure of an offense. Thats his 'robot' reference. But his success was using his athletic ability to create explosive plays (pass and rush) plus making easy reads to wide open elite receivers. His "just play football" comment is about using his athletic gifts and creating outside the scheme using his feet. 

 

 

2 hours ago, philibusters said:

The one thing Chicago did not do, that they could have, is 100% embraced his running ability and hired Greg Roman to be the OC after Baltimore fired him.  In that type of system, Fields would be a fine starter.  Probably not Lamar Jackson level, but a QB that can get a team to the playoffs.   The Bears did not go that route and if Fields in going to succeed in his current environment he is going to have to become a better passer within the structure of the offense.

 

Yep. If you decide to draft a QB like Fields you need to pair him with a coach committed to getting the best out of him and designing a system around what he can do rather than trying to get him to play within a system that requires processing and defined reads. But how sustainable is that long term - is that kind of QB someone you should be drafting really high? Thats the question teams have to work through.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Consigliere said:

I pretty much disagree across the board except for most of the evaluations.

I'm not entirely sure what you're disagreeing wtih.

 

My first point was anybody who needed to hear from Grant Paulsen leveled up from Hallock to Howell is a damn fool.  NOTE:  There are a lot of damn fools out there.  But if anybody was paying attention even a little bit, Howell was going to be a level up from Hallock because he can throw the ball more than 15 yards.  

 

My second point is counter to the "probably should have traded up for Fields."  With hindsight or not, that was going to be a bad move.  I've been through this a million times, but we would have had to trade up to at least the #8 spot to get him, and that's the RGIII trade to do it, for a prospect which wasn't even remotely as highly rated.  There is no way we should have traded up for Fields.  And I said that at the time.  The level of prospect was not going to be worth the cost it was going to take to go from 19 to 8.  

 

My third point was Howell is in a good spot compared to other QBs drafted in his draft or after.

 

My fourth point was he will improve.

 

I don't disagree getting him in round 5 was luck.  Sure it was.  Should they have drafted him earlier?  Maybe.  Should they have not signed Wentz and drafted him as "the answer?"  Maybe. But it appears as though his sitting a year really was good for him to work on fundamentals.  So ... who knows. Maybe he's pressed into action and is nowhere near as good.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I'd be okay trading mid round picks for young OL with upside but definitely not trading Young. He's just getting back into game wrecking form and you don't trade a guy like that unless you're getting an All Pro franchise LT in return(and even then...).

 

He's on the last year of his contract. You can't get a franchise anything for him. 

 

That's just spit balling btw. Im not married to anything beyond us being proactive about adding talent to the OL so we don't David Carr a potential 1st round value caliber QB prospect in Howell because we couldn't be bothered to effectively address the OL while adding luxury defensive picks in round 1 year after year after year. 

 

If we can acquire some OL talent for day 2 and day 3 picks (not 1st or 2nd round) I'd really consider it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

I'm not entirely sure what you're disagreeing wtih.

 

My first point was anybody who needed to hear from Grant Paulsen leveled up from Hallock to Howell is a damn fool.  NOTE:  There are a lot of damn fools out there.  But if anybody was paying attention even a little bit, Howell was going to be a level up from Hallock because he can throw the ball more than 15 yards.  

 

My second point is counter to the "probably should have traded up for Fields."  With hindsight or not, that was going to be a bad move.  I've been through this a million times, but we would have had to trade up to at least the #8 spot to get him, and that's the RGIII trade to do it, for a prospect which wasn't even remotely as highly rated.  There is no way we should have traded up for Fields.  And I said that at the time.  The level of prospect was not going to be worth the cost it was going to take to go from 19 to 8.  

 

My third point was Howell is in a good spot compared to other QBs drafted in his draft or after.

 

My fourth point was he will improve.

 

I don't disagree getting him in round 5 was luck.  Sure it was.  Should they have drafted him earlier?  Maybe.  Should they have not signed Wentz and drafted him as "the answer?"  Maybe. But it appears as though his sitting a year really was good for him to work on fundamentals.  So ... who knows. Maybe he's pressed into action and is nowhere near as good.  

 

Interesting side note in the last passage. 

 

I definitely think Wentz was the wrong decision, period, but if we found an answer in Howell, and it looks like we might have, that trumps everything across the board, then everything and everything is about building out that OL, getting a difference making RB since Gibson is out the door (Robinson is fine, but he's never going to be special at anything), fixing TE etc, all the little extra's. Everything turns on this, and it's impossible to deny that for now, after 3 starts (too many people aren't referencing the fact that the returns in his 1 start in '22 were positive as well), he's looking better than all the QB's in the '22 class except maybe Purdy (sample size) and in '21 minus Lawrence. That's spectacular news. 

 

Not sure if the year off helped or not, but regardless, I'll take the returns we're getting now. It would be spectacular to have new ownership and a franchise QB at the same time in '23 after 30 years in the wilderness, and 23 years of misery with Snyder. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Consigliere said:

 

This isn't crazy to me. How many of us had Howell ahead of Pickett in '22? I'm raising my hand.

 

I am raising my hand too. 

 

But I think its premature of course to put in a verdict.

 

But yeah I had Howell rated higher than Pickett.  I wasn't down on Pickett but I had more question marks about him. Some brush off the small hands.  I'd brush them off too if there was no connection to anything relating to that.  But there was.  He fumbled the ball a ton in college.  He was also a late bloomer.  The seasons before his last one weren't nearly as good.  His arm strength IMO is average. 

 

But he was an efficient QB, threw well on the move and had rocket high intangibles. 

 

I read back recently most of the draft thread from that year and I think all the posts from the Pickett-Howell matchup that year were interesting to reread.  As to my posts then, I touted Howell more so than Pickett in that game and really played up his toughness.  And bringing that to today, Howell is definitely a tough dude, baller.   That trait has clearly carried.

Edited by Skinsinparadise
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For now it's just 3 games. Reminds me of Frerotte looking like a God early on circa Halloweenish 1994, and that ended up being Frerotte is Joe Average (not bad, certainly better than Shuler, and pretty impressive to build a 15 year career from his draft capital position, but not a franchise QB either). 

 

So I'm not getting in over my ski's yet, I just think that his ceiling was always higher than Pickett's, to me anyway, and while his floor was lower, especially w/that draft capital, he always looked good enough to be a backup at bare minimum, and that's actually a solid return for a 5th round QB. 

 

Really liked what Howell did when he had weapons and tended to think '21 was more about his WR's and RB's leaving, than about him regressing (and he added a nice running element that year, '21 wasn't a total loss). 

 

Pickett was solid enough, but I saw nothing that said elite, pretty much ever, and I tend to be real skeptical of guys that only put it together as older prospects and are basically nothings preceeding that. I was alarmed at that with him. 

 

Also love that Korean heritage. Grew up amongst a large Korean community in the bay, and while its a gross generalization in general, I've never met a Korean kid or adult that didn't grind in whatever they were passionate about. Glad to see he's carrying on that cultural tradition. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Consigliere said:

 

This isn't crazy to me. How many of us had Howell ahead of Pickett in '22? I'm raising my hand. As an example. Zero shares of Pickett on any dynasty team.s At my peak, I had him on 6 of 16 (had to cut him for roster space on one, darn it).

 

 

I had Kenny Pickett and Malik Willis in tier 1, Corral and Howell in tier 2, and Ridder and Strong in tier 3, and a bunch of guys including Zappe and Purdy in tier 4.  It was a mild surprise to me that Ridder and especially Zappe went ahead of Howell.   I knew Wilis was super raw and could easily bust, but I saw him as having the best physical tools of the bunch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, philibusters said:

 

I had Kenny Pickett and Malik Willis in tier 1, Corral and Howell in tier 2, and Ridder and Strong in tier 3, and a bunch of guys including Zappe and Purdy in tier 4.  It was a mild surprise to me that Ridder and especially Zappe went ahead of Howell.   I knew Wilis was super raw and could easily bust, but I saw him as having the best physical tools of the bunch.

I had Malik Willis with him for one reason and one reason only. If that dude hit, he was gonna be on that Steve McNair level hit. Just a physical weapon. But he had to actually hit. I didn't rate Pickett as anything other than a moderately high floor, blah guy. Corral had a really low floor, but if he hit, it was Howell level upside for me. I didn't care at all about Ridder. He's fine, but like Pickett for me, I just never saw him becoming anything better than a guy, that you're constantly considering replacing, like the Raiders were with Carr, but worse because Carr could touch the edge of the top 10 in terms of upside every once in a while, I never saw that happening for Pickett or Ridder. I live outside reno, so I got to see Strong play a bunch, several times live, I think I posted some plays from my cell phone of him. The big problem with him was the medicals, and he's not mobile at all, period. I had no feelings about Zappe, didn't see him, and I had never heard of Purdy until last fall. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Conn said:

 


Next level coaching! Love this approach, especially when balanced with extremely high standards like EB has. Not the only way, but melds well with psychology of todays athlete. Reid goes a step further and will allow player designed plays to be called at times during games. 

  • Like 1
  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I know is the national media has been speaking favorably of Sam and EB this week and the Bears are now the Commanders (chaos) from years past!

 

Note - McNabb on the radio mentioned Hurts is still dealing with a shoulder problem from last SB and Cowboys Diggs suffered a torn ACL today in practice.  This division is gonna getting interesting.

 

 

Edited by HigSkin
  • Super Duper Ain't No Party Pooper Two Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never seen this guy before. But nice breakdown on some of Sam's better plays, including the throw to Terry. Although seeing it from the top it could be argued he was late with the throw. If he goes there sooner Terry does not have to fight for the ball and he walks into the EZ. I guess if you have the arm - and that ball was on a rope, you can take those kind of chances, esepcailly with terry. More importantly, it's easy for me to say seeing it in slow motion, from a birds eye view, 5 days later  🤣

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, HigSkin said:

Note - McNabb on the radio mentioned Hurts is still dealing with a shoulder problem from last SB and Cowboys Diggs suffered a torn ACL today in practice.  This division is gonna getting interesting.

I heard this the other day and was surprised, why is he still nursing an injury 7 months later?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...