Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

***OFFICIAL*** Washington Football Team Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 7.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Ummm...that's terrible behavior but... That's it?

I like to see guys stay, too, and I think Cousins is a decent QB. But he's gone already. Sure, he'll play this year, but only for the franchise $$$ and not because he wants to be here. I really don't

I think I went through the same emotional steps with this trade as I do with a regular season game. Trade for Alex Smith = We're playing pretty well, got an early lead, maybe we can win this gam

9 hours ago, babydemon90 said:

Heinicke looked fun, but if you can get Watson somehow for a 1st rounder, you should def do that. I don't think they'll get multiple firsts....

I think Houston would get at least 2 first round picks, unless one of them is really high.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, dgreen said:

In a QB-starved league, someone will make Heinicke a nice offer. 

The Football team is most likely the only team to offer him a shot at starting.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, avoiding injuries said:

TBs OL did a good job protecting Brady and gave him plenty of time. They also did a good job containing Young on the outside. Young got close many times, just not close enough. 

TB offense looked really good.  Their OL handled the pass rush quite well.  Brady made the correct reads all day long and for the most part, threw accurate passes.  And they are loaded with players in the skill positions.  Chris Godwin actually had a pretty bad day with 3 drops, which really hurt a number of TB drives.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DallasDMac said:

Only saw a few highlights but I see Brady hung 380 yards, and the TDs I saw were once again cases were the DBs were hardly in the shot. Was the defense as bas a the stats made it look? Was Chase Young even in the game? His stats were anemic.

He was double teamed and held on several occasions. Not trying to take anything away from the Bucs, they are a more complete team without a doubt, but I swear our d-line got held  a dozen times and it wasn't called. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Marvelous said:

TB offense looked really good.  Their OL handled the pass rush quite well.  Brady made the correct reads all day long and for the most part, threw accurate passes.  And they are loaded with players in the skill positions.  Chris Godwin actually had a pretty bad day with 3 drops, which really hurt a number of TB drives.

This.  Honestly we played the goat and he was excellent.  We would have needed a better secondary and more pressure to slow him down.  
 

the team played well considering they lost imo. I expected a blowout and started a bunch of bucs in dfs. :shrug:  Lots to look forward to and improve on though.

Edited by PinkydaPimp
Link to post
Share on other sites

D is still not there.  Team needs LBs.  Especially a MLB.  Jon Bostic is not good.  He wasn't strong enough against the run and he wasn't fast enough against the pass.  So other teams run at will, making del rio have to scheme to stop the run, leaving the secondary exposed and forcing Allen and Payne to do too much.  The LBs aren't filling the right run gaps, they aren't good in coverage, and they get pushed around.  Holcomb is decent, but nobody else is even average.

Heincike and Allen can be solid backups.  But once teams scheme for them, I think they'd still be below average QBs.  Need a QB with feet.  If Heinicke was a pocket passer, he would have been sacked many times.  He showed what a mobile QB can do for an offense.  And i think they need another TE or WR.  Anything to give them another possession and goal line receiving option.  But some good adds this year ... Gibson, Young, Curl.

Overall the team looked better - a well run team that simply lacks enough talent.  You can see a future where they continue to improve.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Brunell4MVP said:

D is still not there.  Team needs LBs.  Especially a MLB.  Jon Bostic is not good.  He wasn't strong enough against the run and he wasn't fast enough against the pass.  So other teams run at will, making del rio have to scheme to stop the run, leaving the secondary exposed and forcing Allen and Payne to do too much.  The LBs aren't filling the right run gaps, they aren't good in coverage, and they get pushed around.  Holcomb is decent, but nobody else is even average.

Heincike and Allen can be solid backups.  But once teams scheme for them, I think they'd still be below average QBs.  Need a QB with feet.  If Heinicke was a pocket passer, he would have been sacked many times.  He showed what a mobile QB can do for an offense.  And i think they need another TE or WR.  Anything to give them another possession and goal line receiving option.  But some good adds this year ... Gibson, Young, Curl.

Overall the team looked better - a well run team that simply lacks enough talent.  You can see a future where they continue to improve.

Totally agree regarding the defense. They got gashed last night and need to fill in some spots to truly compete in the playoffs.

From what I’m hearing, Heinecke is an restricted FA? If that’s the case, I think he’ll definitely be back.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Johnny Utah #9 said:

Totally agree regarding the defense. They got gashed last night and need to fill in some spots to truly compete in the playoffs.

From what I’m hearing, Heinecke is an restricted FA? If that’s the case, I think he’ll definitely be back.

 

Spotrac says he is an unrestricted free agent.

link

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Marvelous said:

Spotrac says he is an unrestricted free agent.

link

Speaking of Spotrac, anyone see this tweet the other day:

Quote

The Washington Football Team are sending out a QB1, RB1, RB2, WR1, WR2, WR3, WR4, TE1, & TE2 for the Wild Card Round that combine for just $10.1M of cap this season.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, dgreen said:

I don't like being in this situation with Heinicke. It feels like a tough decision what to do with him. 

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). 

I think the big decision is does Alex Smith want to come back, and if so, does the team want him or is he too big of a risk?  From what I have read, the calf strain is not related to his injury, but there was one reference that is not just a simple calf strain.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Marvelous said:

From what I have read, the calf strain is not related to his injury, but there was one reference that is not just a simple calf strain.

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.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Marvelous 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). 

I think the big decision is does Alex Smith want to come back, and if so, does the team want him or is he too big of a risk?  From what I have read, the calf strain is not related to his injury, but there was one reference that is not just a simple calf strain.

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.

If Stafford or someone else falls in our lap, then it becomes easier. If other teams don't make an aggressive offer, then it's also easier.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And I see Alex Smith as an extremely easy decision. Either he retires or he's cut. That's about $14m in cap savings next year. I love his story and the fact that, somehow, the W-L split with him vs without him the last three was night and day, but there's no chance I'd have him back under his current contract.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dgreen said:

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.

If Stafford or someone else falls in our lap, then it becomes easier. If other teams don't make an aggressive offer, then it's also easier.

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.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Marvelous said:

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.

Here's some context of QB salaries: https://overthecap.com/position/quarterback/

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Marvelous 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). 

I think the big decision is does Alex Smith want to come back, and if so, does the team want him or is he too big of a risk?  From what I have read, the calf strain is not related to his injury, but there was one reference that is not just a simple calf strain.

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:

https://twitter.com/mortreport/status/1343217025989144579

This is just indicative of the fact that there is no way to realistically expect Smith to hold up to the rigors of another full NFL season. The guy is a warrior and what he has done is remarkable, but for the sake of himself and his family, he needs to retire this offseason. He has nothing left to prove. And if he doesn't retire, the Skins can't bring him back at that contract number. His availability is too much of a risk at this point, and they simply need better production from the QB position than he can provide at this point.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Concerning the Heinecke contract:

I think the Skins will bring him back at a reasonable number to compete for the starting job next year, or at the least the backup job if they bring in another vet this offseason. I agree with everyone here saying that it's highly unlikely any other team offers him a starting position based on his 1.25 games played over the last two years. It's in his best interest to resign with us as well, considering the starting job is within reach and he knows Turner's system so extremely well.

For as amazing as he looked in that WC game, I hope Ron keeps things in perspective and doesn't shy away from bringing in some other QB talent. The main concerns with Heinecke in my opinion are as follows:

1) Sample size- The guy has looked great for 5 quarters of football, but this is a minuscule sample size. There are countless examples of QBs coming in hot and once there is more tape available on these guys they come back down to earth. The prime example of this is a guy like Matt Flynn, who parlayed a limited stretch of good play for GB into a ridiculous contract from Seattle, only to lose his job to some kid named Russell Wilson.

2) Durability- This is the biggest knock on Heinecke and I suspect the main reason he has found himself out of football despite his on-field talent. In both games he has started (in Carolina and last Saturday) he has gotten hurt. And he ended up on the IR in both Houston and Minnesota before he was cut by those teams. His smaller stature combined with his aggressive playing style is the most likely reason for this. He can possibly learn to reign this in and protect himself (slide more, etc.), but given his track record it's highly unlikely he could hold up to the rigors of a full season. For this reason alone, it seems like his best role would be a solid back-up QB. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Kevrunner said:

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.

Heinicke Link

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.

Edited by Johnny Utah #9
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Johnny Utah #9 said:

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.

Heinicke will know this better than Spotrac.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just read up on the Restricted Free Agency.

In 2020, 1st round tender was $4.641M.  2nd round tender was $3.259M.   Original round tender and Right of First Refusal tender was $2.133M.  Player can negotiate with other teams and get an offer sheet.  Football Team would have a chance to match the offer.

Pretty sure no team will negotiate with Heinicke with a 1st round tender.  Mostly likely not with a 2nd round tender either.

Also, the salary cap may not be going up this year due to COVID-19.  If it does not, the tender amounts will not go up.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Marvelous said:

I just read up on the Restricted Free Agency.

In 2020, 1st round tender was $4.641M.  2nd round tender was $3.259M.   Original round tender and Right of First Refusal tender was $2.133M.  Player can negotiate with other teams and get an offer sheet.  Football Team would have a chance to match the offer.

Pretty sure no team will negotiate with Heinicke with a 1st round tender.  Mostly likely not with a 2nd round tender either.

Also, the salary cap may not be going up this year due to COVID-19.  If it does not, the tender amounts will not go up.

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: 

https://twitter.com/AlGaldi/status/1348772784118386690

This is great news for our prospects of bringing him back. I would probably offer him at a 2nd round tender. Yes, it's probably unlikely that another team makes a run at him with that comp involved and maybe it's overkill, but it only takes one team to make an offer. And he did have one hell of an audition for the whole world to see. If we offered the original round tender, while we would get the right to match, we wouldn't receive any comp if some team signs him to a crazy offer sheet and we let him walk. For me, the difference in value of 1 mil is worth the premium as insurance against him getting poached. Worst case scenario is he signs an offer sheet that we decline to match and we receive a 2nd round pick in return for a guy who was sitting on his couch a month ago. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Marvelous said:

Also, the salary cap may not be going up this year due to COVID-19.  

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. 

Heinecke had a nice game and it would be smart to bring him back but they should absolutely bring in some competition for the job(and I'm assuming like others Smith is gone). This won't be a popular opinion but IMO they should bring in both Darnold and Trubisky to battle it out with Heinecke. If all three blow up(which is possible) you just draft your guy in the '22 draft. Honestly, they probably should have given up on Haskins earlier last year and brought in Rosen in 2020 when you consider all the time they wasted having Haskins on the bench for most of the season. Until you have a shot at drafting that franchise guy just bring in cheap options that cost little to get rid of if they don't work out. 

People are going to lose their mind when NE uses ~$60mil of free cap space, get back some players that opted out due to covid and rebuild for another multi-year stretch of playoffs while TB kind of has a one shot chance with Brady/Arians before yet another complete rebuild in TB.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/12/2021 at 4:43 AM, DallasDMac said:

I'm a little surprised how much demand people think there is going to be for Heinicke based off of one game.

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.

With Brady, Brees, Ben, and Rivers at the very end there may be some pent up demand at QB and if anyone would be willing to throw a 2nd rounder by signing Heinicke I would take it in a heartbeat. Not that I dislike him, he's just likely to be a waiver wire guy that is about to get paid well above his production based on 5 quarters of football.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/11/2021 at 11:29 PM, Johnny Utah #9 said:

Concerning the Heinecke contract:

I think the Skins will bring him back at a reasonable number to compete for the starting job next year, or at the least the backup job if they bring in another vet this offseason. I agree with everyone here saying that it's highly unlikely any other team offers him a starting position based on his 1.25 games played over the last two years. It's in his best interest to resign with us as well, considering the starting job is within reach and he knows Turner's system so extremely well.

For as amazing as he looked in that WC game, I hope Ron keeps things in perspective and doesn't shy away from bringing in some other QB talent. The main concerns with Heinecke in my opinion are as follows:

1) Sample size- The guy has looked great for 5 quarters of football, but this is a minuscule sample size. There are countless examples of QBs coming in hot and once there is more tape available on these guys they come back down to earth. The prime example of this is a guy like Matt Flynn, who parlayed a limited stretch of good play for GB into a ridiculous contract from Seattle, only to lose his job to some kid named Russell Wilson.

2) Durability- This is the biggest knock on Heinecke and I suspect the main reason he has found himself out of football despite his on-field talent. In both games he has started (in Carolina and last Saturday) he has gotten hurt. And he ended up on the IR in both Houston and Minnesota before he was cut by those teams. His smaller stature combined with his aggressive playing style is the most likely reason for this. He can possibly learn to reign this in and protect himself (slide more, etc.), but given his track record it's highly unlikely he could hold up to the rigors of a full season. For this reason alone, it seems like his best role would be a solid back-up QB. 

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?

Drafting a guy:  I'm not bullish on drafting a guy at 19.  It would probably be Mac Jones.  Not sure honestly he has significantly more potential than Allen or Heinicke already in house. If you can get him second round, go for it though.  But would rather go OL or WR.  First round pick needs to be someone who can help us win in 2021.  Jones not that guy.  OL or WR could be that guy.

Vet:  A lot of talk about bringing in a guy like Stafford for 3-5 years.  I guess if we can get him, why not. But I have a question what it would cost, because he's still under contract.  Lions won't give him away.  It will cost at least our # 1 and maybe more.  It also means there is no QB competition/questions in 2021. Stafford the starter, Allen and maybe Heinicke as backups, period.  There are pros and cons to this.  Yes, we net a legit QB.  But no, we don't fill as many other needs and also don't see what we have in Allen/Heinicke for long term.

A wrinkle on the vet signing situation, if we are really bullish on Allen and Heinicke, is to sign a guy like Fitzpatrick, who will be a a free agent, to a one or two year deal.  This too has pros and cons.  Pros:  Fitzgerald is ultimately flexible.  He can start right away or he's shown the willingness to be a backup.  Guys like Stafford MUST start.  Fitz could do either, allowing you to see what you have in the young guys and even start them if you want.  Additionally, you will not give up draft capital to get Fitz .  Which means you don't just get Fitz, you get Fitz PLUS an OL or WR.  So the comparison is not Fitz vs. Stafford, it's something like Fitz + Waddle vs. Stafford.  That legit could change the balance of what you do.  Cons:  as good as he is, probably not on the level of Stafford, and won't play as long most likely.

Curious as to thoughts on this.  Stafford safer, but idea of FA QB like Fitz paired with a first round pick intriguinig...

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/13/2021 at 9:15 AM, MikeApf said:

Curious as to thoughts on this. 

It's a tough decision.  The end goal is a Super Bowl capable team within 3 years (if not immediately). 

  • Do you risk going with Allen, Heinicke, and a mid level vet surrounded by free agents/picks that fix major holes?
  • Do you risk going with Allen, Heinicke, and a rookie surrounded by free agents/picks that fix major holes?
  • Do you give up picks to get Stafford or Watson?  I love both.  But how expensive are they to get.

The good news is they have cap to play with so should get better.   They aren't losing anyone I consider key.  Heck, you may be able to trade a DT.  And if they only sign one of Heinicke and Allen, that's fine too.  No reason to overpay either of them.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

May have been based on nothing but saw an article saying Redskins might make a play for Matt Ryan. I hope not, as they would have to give up picks. Unless we are talking Watson, I'd much rather roll the dice with youth/draft picks than try the vet at the end of his career. We all know how that worked out here with McNabb, Jeff George, Dion, just too many bad memories of paying over the hill players. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ffmail4me said:

May have been based on nothing but saw an article saying Redskins might make a play for Matt Ryan. I hope not, as they would have to give up picks. Unless we are talking Watson, I'd much rather roll the dice with youth/draft picks than try the vet at the end of his career. We all know how that worked out here with McNabb, Jeff George, Dion, just too many bad memories of paying over the hill players. 

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Brunell4MVP 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. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, ffmail4me said:

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ffmail4me said:

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. 

Brad Johnson cost a 1st and 3rd.  Alex Smith was traded for Kendall Fuller and a 3rd.  Kyle Allen costs a 5th round pick.

Nobody is getting Ryan or Stafford for a 3rd or 4th.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Marvelous said:

Brad Johnson cost a 1st and 3rd.  Alex Smith was traded for Kendall Fuller and a 3rd.  Kyle Allen costs a 5th round pick.

Nobody is getting Ryan or Stafford for a 3rd or 4th.

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. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ffmail4me said:

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.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, PinkydaPimp said:

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.

I know that goes against the conventional wisdom. Everyone thinks you have to have a HOF-caliber QB to win the SB. Just recently, there are SB wins with Foles, an ineffective Peyton Manning, Flacco, and a couple by Eli.

Now, if you have the resources to keep a solid overall roster together and get a great QB, then go for it. But I'm not sure we're quite there yet.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, dgreen said:

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.

I know that goes against the conventional wisdom. Everyone thinks you have to have a HOF-caliber QB to win the SB. Just recently, there are SB wins with Foles, an ineffective Peyton Manning, Flacco, and a couple by Eli.

Now, if you have the resources to keep a solid overall roster together and get a great QB, then go for it. But I'm not sure we're quite there yet.

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. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, PinkydaPimp said:

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A major piece of what anchors the Rivera-Del Rio defensive philosophy is based off of is having a pair of Defensive Tackles who are extremely capable of both stopping the run and rushing the passer, so much so that they occupy multiple blockers, thus allowing the Linebackers less encumbrance, and greater ability to make plays in the offensive backfield and within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage. I'm as big a fan of Ioaniddis and Settle as the next guy, but Allen and Payne, they ain't. Those guys are 1st round picks who are living up to their investment, and providing that foundational anchor, in spades. Allen's and Payne's don't grow on trees, and the WFTskins are lucky that they've panned out as a critical duo that can mature together and provide stability in a key area. Not recognizing how special and integral those 2 players are individually, and as components to the quality and success of this defense, requires a deeper look into them. They are both exceptional, with flashes of elite play that may become the norm as they continue to mature. Moving one of them in trade would be akin to removing some of the foundation of one's house in order to build an addition elsewhere. There's no way a competent personnel executive, with a complete understanding of the Rivera/Del Rio defensive philosophy, would move either of them, either at this stage of their careers, or at this point in the development of the defense, and the Team as a whole.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dgreen said:

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.

I know that goes against the conventional wisdom. Everyone thinks you have to have a HOF-caliber QB to win the SB. Just recently, there are SB wins with Foles, an ineffective Peyton Manning, Flacco, and a couple by Eli.

Now, if you have the resources to keep a solid overall roster together and get a great QB, then go for it. But I'm not sure we're quite there yet.

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...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, MikeApf said:

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. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, PinkydaPimp said:

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Brunell4MVP said:

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.

Had haskins panned out next season might have been it, but he didnt.  so now we continue to build and get better and once we see a path to competing for a superbowl we take it.    IMO a strong defense gets us there quicker. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Watching this Ravens defense versus the Bills tonight, I can’t help but feel disappointed in how the Skins D just got rolled by Brady and the Bucs last week. For as great as the D was last season, last Saturday night was definitely a letdown performance. I never in a million years thought I would say that the Skins D let down Taylor Heinicke in a playoff game, but that appeared to be the case.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/15/2021 at 11:24 AM, PinkydaPimp said:

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 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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/15/2021 at 2:10 PM, PinkydaPimp said:

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 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.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/15/2021 at 9:37 PM, Brunell4MVP said:

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.

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.

Atlanta's chances were pretty good by having 10 mostly excellent seasons, but it didn't happen.  But their chances were much greater than the Redskins, where were mostly a dumpster fire those 10 years.  

So the goal needs to be increasing the chances of winning the Super Bowl.  No GM can control all the factors that wins the big game.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...