Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Totally agree regarding the defense. They got gashed last night and need to fill in some spots to truly compete in the playoffs.Brunell4MVP said:
I don't think it is that complicated. Bring Heinicke back and let him compete for the starting job. Kyle Allen will almost certainly be back (Spotrac has him as an exclusive rights free agent).
Speculation is that he has lost a ton of muscle there due to all the surgeries. That just doesn't regenerate, so he is always going to be weaker/susceptible to injury.
The complication is the team doesn't just get to decide to bring him back. He's a UFA. They have to compete for him. I love what I've seen from him. But, at the same time, I don't want to overpay. Then, on the other hand, I'd hate to see another team "overpay" and then not really be overpaying because he turns out to be good and someone we should have pushed for harder.
I don't see any team offering Heinicke a starting QB position based on 1 1/4 games he has played. It is also clear that Heinicke does not look as good in practice since he has gone from team to team and even surprised Rivera when he got the chance. I think offering Heinicke as chance to compete for the starting job is more than other teams will offer him.
Good points and I hope you're right.
The calf strain is indeed related to the leg injury, based on the fact that half of the calf muscle was used in the muscle transplant to cover his front leg. So he effectively has 50% of his calf remaining in that leg. This was covered in the "Project 11" documentary. See the reference from Chris Mortenson below:
Weird that it says that and on the radio today Ron Rivera said Heinicke was a “restricted” free agent and even Heinicke himself says he is restricted in this article.
This was my understanding as well. I think Sportrac is wrong on this one. If he is indeed a restricted FA he becomes much easier to retain. If they wanted to, the team could even place a 1st round tender on him on a 1 year deal for around 4 mil and they would get a 1st in comp if anyone signed him to a bigger offer sheet and we decline to match. Doubtful that would happen, but you never know.
Nice post. Lots of good info in there. Here is another confirmation that Heinicke is indeed a restricted FA. It was confirmed by his college coach, who spoke with Taylor and his agent:
This is a really big deal, and can benefit teams like WAS if they play this smart. Almost half of the NFL has less than $8mil of cap space going into FA/draft. More than a third of the league is already over the 2021 cap. I realize some of those contracts will just be restructured but that is a lot of restructuring for those teams that are up against it. WAS could build this team very fast this offseason and I'd be all for it just as long as they don't spend it the wrong way like they have in the past. Really, the team needs to improve at every unit other than DL.
Agreed. It would be so WAS to assume that they know what they have in Heinicke based on one game and think that this is their guy. At least they don't have Bruce Allen around anymore, I'm sure he would lock Heinicke into a long term contract at the absolute apex of his perceived value.
Good post. Right after the game, I was so encouraged, I was thinking: "Let Heinicke start!" But as you say, there are questions. He has a lot going for him, but based on his physical size (exceptions such as Brees, Wilson or Murray aside) and injury history, it's probably not best to go "all in" on him right now. He is probably a capable backup under Turner's system and so I think it's well worth making him an offer, but agreed on either drafting a guy or bringing in a vet. Thoughts on the follwowing?
It's a tough decision. The end goal is a Super Bowl capable team within 3 years (if not immediately).MikeApf said:
If Stafford, Watson, or Ryan are starting next year, this team becomes immensely better. I won't be upset about any of them, and Watson would be like a dream. The question is cost.
I wouldn't want to give up more than a 3rd or 4th for Ryan or Stafford, but I'd gladly give up an RG3 type offer for Watson. Our team is young, don't want to have to reboot again in 2-3 years when Ryan and Stafford fall off the cliff.
Based on the longevity of QBs these days, I think you're looking at 5+ years with either Ryan or Stafford, if they want to keep playing.
Brad Johnson cost a 1st and 3rd. Alex Smith was traded for Kendall Fuller and a 3rd. Kyle Allen costs a 5th round pick.
You are right. But still, we should go all in for a franchise QB who hasn't even reached his peak vs buying one that's already on the decline.
see i dont agree if it means selling the farm. Id rather have a vet on the decline that can help develop the rest of the team while suring up the defense and other key postions and then taking chances on qbs be it mid round draft picks or others like Heineken. The teams that have success for long periods do it this way. The defense is the most important thing. you can compete with an average QB and a top Defense. Thats where the focus needs to be.
I think Gibbs once said (paraphrasing): "There are about 5 guys who can excel at QB without protection. There are about 100 who can with protection." I think that makes sense. Watson is great, but I'm not sure if he's a guy who can carry a team if you have too many holes elsewhere. Right now, I'd prefer to continue on the current path and potentially pay much less for a Stafford or Ryan and continue to look for a more affordable young guy.
so true. Look at Eli. What did the Giants do so well? They didnt pay for players and coached them up. They always had good wrs and never really paid a high price for them other than say ODB. Eli wasnt great all the time. hell the years they won the SB it was their defense that carried them. So i think thats the right thing. Its easier to build a strong line and defense then hit on a HOF QB.
I will admit, though, that part of my distaste for trading for someone like Watson is that I really like a lot of our players. For example, I heard suggestions that we should trade multiple 1s and Jonathan Allen for Watson. I love Allen. I don't want him to go. I love so many of these players. We obviously have DL depth so maybe it does make sense to move one of them, but I just don't want any of them to go. I know falling in love with players isn't a good way to manage a team (reason #845 why I'm not a GM), but I just really want to keep so many of these guys for as long as possible.
the thing about Stafford is, he's real good, but he hasn't in fact taken a team with bad talent to the promised land. Hell, he didn't do that when he had Megatron! I'm not saying Stafford sucks. He doesn't suck. He's good It's just, let's look at this based on facts. Stafford with a depleted surrounding cast (due to trading picks or defensive linemen) is not likely going to the Super Bowl. And I like Stafford. I'm just thinking if we don't get OL and WR around him he's not going to automatically overcome that. We'll see what happens, but I'm seriously starting to warm to the idea of a 1-2 year Fitz rental until we see what we have with a new draft pick or Beer Man...
I think if we bring in a vet, be it Fitz or Stafford, the goal isnt necessarily to win a superbowl. Its to be competitive and build up the supporting cast while we find younger QB talent and get them ready to play.
I guess we differ here, cause to me that's the only goal. nothing else matters. being competitive for a few years and not winning the SB makes means nothing. Look at the Falcons 2008-2017. Mostly excellent seasons. A SB appearance. Matt Ryan. Julio Jones. And you know, nobody will remember any of it since they never got he Lombardi trophy.
Im not saying the end goal isnt to win a superbowl. It most definitely is. Id also like to have a good team for a while because that also drives talent to the org. But being realistic, every season isnt a season where thats realistic to win a superbowl. Like this season for example or those seasons danny overpaid players because he wanted to win a superbowl when everyone knew we were nowhere close to that. But this season we were competitive, and developed some young talent and got better as a team. Thats whats important as we find the final pieces and exit rebuilding and focus on a run.
I was thinking about this. Do Eli's Giant Super Bowl wins seem really fluky? In 2008, they needed the David Tyree catch to beat the Patriots. I don't remember the other one that much.
I always thought Tyrod Taylor was a decent QB. Like Fitz, he has made a career to being the bridge starting QB until the young QB is ready.
The fact is there is still a lot of luck needed to win the Super Bowl. It takes winning 3 or 4 consecutive games in the post season.
After seeing Tyler Huntley play QB yesterday, fresh off the practice squad, and Heinicke for the Redskins earlier, it makes me rethink just how bad Haskins was. I think a lot of the hope in Haskins was just hope that a 1st round pick will turn into a decent QB.
Tyrod has mobility, but he's even more conservative than Alex when it comes to passing. I would pass on him. I would rather just roll with a Heinicke/Allen combo next year if Tyrod is the only other option.
Yes. 2008 were carried by his defense. 2008 he was middle of the pack. He played better in the post season but his d shut down the best offense in history to win the superbowl. 2011 Eli put them on his back and ill give him that. Defense also stepped up after a poor reg season that year.
I agree, and what makes it even worse is that his "1st round pedigree" was certified by our dumb owner and not the scouting department, who didn't seem to even have a first round grade on him.
And I don't know if you can ever truly coach the "stupid" out of someone. (And by stupid, I mean game smarts, not book smarts). Sometimes you have the talent for them to tolerate it, other times you are Haskins.
I love me some Tyrod. He is such a good guy. Beloved at VT and in the NFL by fans, players, and coaches. Everywhere he goes, they love him but someone takes his job whether he gets stuck backing up a vet, gets injury or the team drafts someone new. His NFL career is nowhere near what it should have been. He handles it with class.
Meh. Seems fine. Experienced. Probably knows other GMs well. As long as it isn't that dope Bruce Allen, all good.nittanylion said:
