Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

***OFFICIAL*** Washington Football Team Thread


dgreen

Recommended Posts

Just now, Marvelous said:

I just read in the Washington Post that Watson has requested a trade and the new management is hoping to talk him out of it.

Read elsewhere that Stafford has bonus due shortly after the league year starts.

So there is a high probability that Stafford's destination will need to be finalized before Watson's destination.  So the bigger domino may not fall first in this case.

I heard someone the other day saying they assumed the Stafford deal would be like the Alex Smith deal in terms of timing. That there could be news about an agreement being reached before the Super Bowl, but obviously doesn't officially happen until the new league year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/28/2021 at 12:00 AM, dgreen said:

McVay and Goff are 42-20 together in the regular season. Why do you say McVay can’t win with him?

 

On 1/28/2021 at 2:08 AM, nittanylion said:

I'm not skilled with quoting posts from other Threads, so I had to copy/paste this from the Goff Thread, courtesy of @Judge Smails, some time in late December:

"Plaschke from the LA Times absolutely shredded Goff today. 39 turnovers since 2019 most in the league. Called him “Jameis Winston West”. Ouch"

Hard pass, indeed. As I'm a glutton for punishment, I religiously follow the careers of every Coach and Player who leaves the WFTskins for greener, or otherwise, pastures. Sean McVay is young, and is very confident in himself (I'm not criticizing him for either characteristic) , but these things sometimes impede him from reaching his ceiling, but the guy is a proven offensive whiz kid, with a complex offense that he's dying to unlock, and Goff has proven to be an impediment to that goal. Most seasons under the McVay/Goff tandem, the Rams have been blessed with the ability to run the ball effectively, an above-average-to elite WR corps and are supported by and above-average-to-elite defense. That they've achieved the record they have with Goff under center has, much of the time, been in spite of Goff, rather than because of him. Just look at the game logs. Then go look at some game footage. The guy makes some incomprehensibly stupid decisions at times. Often, he does these things in situations where there are no mitigating factors. The salary cap #'s look like they'd be prohibitive to calling his acquisition a wise move, as well. I think the Rams would love it if Bruce was still calling the shots in the personnel department here. I can't imagine Goff producing much more than what the Allen/Heinecke tandem will be able to do with one more year in the scheme. I'd much rather stand pat at the position and fortify other positions of need that acquire a QB of Jared Goff's caliber, thank you very much.

Couldn't have said it better myself nittanylion. The fact that McVay realizes that he needs an upgrade from Goff means that we would be hopeless in unlocking any potential that is still there (doubtful). Like you said, the Rams largely won the bulk of those games in spite of Goff. Honestly it was crazy that the Rams gave him such a big contract to begin with. Of the potential QBs that might be available as FAs or for trade, Goff is near the bottom of my list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All else being equal...

Watson > Stafford > Garrapolo > Goff > Darnold

Watson - starter for a decade

Stafford - starter for five years

Garrapolo - comes in as starter but I assume we are looking to upgrade again in a couple years

Goff - competes for the job and some upside if he can regain form of a couple years ago, continue looking for upgrade

Darnold - competes for job but I assume he’d lose out to Allen or Heinicke

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, dgreen said:

All else being equal...

Watson > Stafford > Garrapolo > Goff > Darnold

Watson - starter for a decade

Stafford - starter for five years

Garrapolo - comes in as starter but I assume we are looking to upgrade again in a couple years

Goff - competes for the job and some upside if he can regain form of a couple years ago, continue looking for upgrade

Darnold - competes for job but I assume he’d lose out to Allen or Heinicke

I’d be ok with any of them but if it’s garrapolo Goff or darnold i would t want to pay anything really.  Especially for Darnold.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dgreen said:

All else being equal...

Watson > Stafford > Garrapolo > Goff > Darnold

Watson - starter for a decade

Stafford - starter for five years

Garrapolo - comes in as starter but I assume we are looking to upgrade again in a couple years

Goff - competes for the job and some upside if he can regain form of a couple years ago, continue looking for upgrade

Darnold - competes for job but I assume he’d lose out to Allen or Heinicke

Watson and Stafford are the only ones I would even consider giving up draft compensation for. I kind of put Jimmy G in the same bucket as Goff. Both  are marginal options that should be looked at as “buyer beware” since their offensively gifted coaches are ready to give up on them. I like Jimmy over Goff, but neither are a great option, and not really an upgrade over what we already have in Allen and Hienicke.

Sam “seeing ghosts” Darnold would be a warm body for the QB room, but that’s about it. I doubt he could beat out Allen and Hienicke. I know it’s trendy to assume there is a post Gase bump with these guys, but Darnold is really bad. Check out the Jets thread here for their thoughts on him going forward. It’s very possible he’s just completely shell shocked and ruined like our old friend Patrick Ramsey under Spurrier. 

If we are unable to land Watson or Stafford, I would much rather just sign Fitzmagic for the short term over any of these other options.

Edited by Johnny Utah #9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, dgreen said:

If that’s what Stafford goes for, Watson will be way out of reach. 

2 future 1s, a 3rd and Goff for Stafford. Wow. If Stafford gets 2 firsts, Watson should be worth at least 4 or 5.

Goff is whatever, but two firsts and a 3rd is huge. The Rams really hate 1st round picks.

The Skins dodged a bullet here. That is simply way too much for Stafford. These move also takes Jimmy G off the block, so he and Goff aren’t possibilities anymore (no big loss there imo). Best option for the Skins at this point is probably Fitzmagic.

Edited by Johnny Utah #9
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ffmail4me said:

So thoughts on maybe Washington trying to trade up in the top 5 to get a QB? Give up a good player and their 1st? 

I wouldn’t give up significant draft capital for any of these QBs this year outside of Lawrence. I think the class of QBs this year are overhyped and nowhere near as good as last years class. I want absolutely no part of Fields. Wilson is intriguing but played a pillow soft schedule so he is a bit risky. Lance has upside but is as raw as you can get and his bust potential is particularly high. Jones and Trask are largely system QBs imo and I don’t like their chances of being anything above average at the next level.

The only one I would consider using a top 5 pick on is Wilson, but I wouldn’t be willing to give up as much as it would take to trade up to get him. Assuming we can’t get Watson, I think our best move at this point is to sign Fitz, bring Heinecke and Allen back, and have a true competition for the job next year.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ffmail4me said:

I wonder if we would kick the tires on Winston? he could get it to Terry deep :clap:

I think the Saints bring him back regardless, but I also can’t see Ron wanting to buy a ticket to the Famous Jameis Experience.

Too turnover prone for his tastes most likely. Could be a train wreck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn’t be surprised at all if the Skins had the 19 and the 3rd on the table, and maybe even another 2nd or 3rd, but they rightfully balked at adding the 2nd first round pick. I did think the Skins bringing Mayhew in was at least partially due to his ability to make a run at Stafford, but he wisely stepped away from the table on this one.

The Rams truly have very little regard for first rounders. What is the last 1st rounder they actually used? Seems like an awful way to build a team in the long term, but I guess they figure their future is screwed anyway so why not go all in this year.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Johnny Utah #9 said:

2 future 1s, a 3rd and Goff for Stafford. Wow. If Stafford gets 2 firsts, Watson should be worth at least 4 or 5.

Goff is whatever, but two firsts and a 3rd is huge. The Rams really hate 1st round picks.

The Skins dodged a bullet here. That is simply way too much for Stafford. These move also takes Jimmy G off the block, so he and Goff aren’t possibilities anymore (no big loss there imo). Best option for the Skins at this point is probably Fitzmagic.

I'd actually be curious what the price would have been for just Stafford.  I have a feeling that the rams actually had to give a little extra to include Goff and that horrible contract.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a Redskins forum they are saying Washington offered a better offer, but didn't want to take on Goff's contract. If that is true, we dodged a bullet. But it also tells me Ron is serious about upgrading at QB. I think we make a push for Watson. I really do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, nittanylion said:

I'm just going start praying that the Lions next move is not to flip Goff to the B&G for more Draft capital.

Please, Lord, don't let that happen.

Ron is running the show now, so I'm not worried about that happening. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, ffmail4me said:

On a Redskins forum they are saying Washington offered a better offer, but didn't want to take on Goff's contract. If that is true, we dodged a bullet. But it also tells me Ron is serious about upgrading at QB. I think we make a push for Watson. I really do. 

I’m guessing what they are referring to there is a Josina Anderson report that WFT made a “better offer” whatever that means. I’m assuming it was the 19 plus a 3rd this year at least. Is that considered better because it is a 1st rounder this year and not a future 1st? I highly doubt our offer included an additional first or the Lions would have taken it. We will probably never know our offer regardless, but that additional 1st the Rams coughed up was huge. A lot can happen in the NFL in two years and the Rams are really exposing themselves to some risk here. They play in the toughest division in football and if they get some injuries etc, they could be looking like like the Texans right now.

Edited by Johnny Utah #9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure that Stafford went for that much more than people originally thought.  It is clear a 1st round pick this year is worth more than a 1st round pick next year. 

If a pick needs to increase a round due to waiting a year, and numerous trades every year so this (say a 3nd round pick this year for a 2nd round pick next), then the Stafford package is equivalent to a 2021 2nd round picks, two 2021 3rd round picks, and Goff.

If a pick is equal to two picks in the following round (and some trades have done this in the past), the 2nd and 3rd round picks could be equivalent to a 1st round pick.  That would make the trade equivalent to a 1st and 3rd in this years draft and Goff.

Obviously we can quibble able the exact values and try to bring in the trade value chart, but you cannot ignore the time value of draft picks here.

If the Football Team offered the 1st and 3rd this year, I could see they are in the ball park.  But they may have been asked to add another draft pick if they would not take Goff's contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From WaPo reporter:

https://mobile.twitter.com/NickiJhabvala/status/1355748357155778568

”Per source, Washington's offer for Matthew Stafford was better for the Lions this year than what the Rams offered. L.A. deal includes a third-rounder in 2021.”

“This year” being the key phrase here. This is kind of a dumb report honestly, as it doesn’t speak to what offer was better in total for the Lions overall. All this confirms is that the Skins were willing to give up their 1st this year (Rams lack one this year) plus probably their 3rd this year. Who cares if it’s better for the Lions “next year”? They are obviously going to be a dumpster fire next year regardless, so it’s in their best interest to bottom out and tank hard anyway. Those future firsts give them ammo for a draft trade up in the future if they choose to go that direction as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still need a QB.

I kinda re-thunk it and I don't like WAS getting a mid tier vet (Tyrod, Fitz).  I mean it is the simple move.  But what of that is different than rolling out the same 3 QBs as last year?  Are any of them that much better than A Smith?  Maybe a bit, but not all that much.  And I hate to see WAS blow a 1st on question marks like Trey Lance or Mac Jones.  And is going after a failed QB elsewhere for cheap a smart move, like Darnold or turdbisky?  Not really

This is a tough situation.   

The only option out there that makes WAS an 11+ win team is Watson.  Based on the Stafford price, you have to give up two firsts and a DT or another pick to get him.   You fix QB for the next 4-6 years, hopefully more.   You are paying him $32M per year or so, which is not that bad for a top young QB.  And then you go fix the holes.  WR, ILB, FS.  And those are findable in the 2nd/3rd round and on the FA market.  But without a stud QB, everything is piecemeal.  Watson is that stud QB.  What Heinicke did vs TB, Watson can do far better. 

Give up the farm for Watson and LFG.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Brunell4MVP
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Marvelous said:

I am not sure that Stafford went for that much more than people originally thought.  It is clear a 1st round pick this year is worth more than a 1st round pick next year. 

If a pick needs to increase a round due to waiting a year, and numerous trades every year so this (say a 3nd round pick this year for a 2nd round pick next), then the Stafford package is equivalent to a 2021 2nd round picks, two 2021 3rd round picks, and Goff.

If a pick is equal to two picks in the following round (and some trades have done this in the past), the 2nd and 3rd round picks could be equivalent to a 1st round pick.  That would make the trade equivalent to a 1st and 3rd in this years draft and Goff.

Obviously we can quibble able the exact values and try to bring in the trade value chart, but you cannot ignore the time value of draft picks here.

If the Football Team offered the 1st and 3rd this year, I could see they are in the ball park.  But they may have been asked to add another draft pick if they would not take Goff's contract.

It’s true that normally future firsts get discounted by a round over present firsts, but I think this year might be an exception to this practice. Given the lack of combine, shortened season, etc. this year’s draft is going to be a crap shoot like no other. Wouldn’t be surprised if GMs realize this and are not looking at the value of 1sts this year in the same light as a standard year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Brunell4MVP said:

Still need a QB.

I kinda re-thunk it and I don't like WAS getting a mid tier vet (Tyrod, Fitz).  I mean it is the simple move.  But what of that is different than rolling out the same 3 QBs as last year?  Are any of them that much better than A Smith?  Maybe a bit, but not all that much.  And I hate to see WAS blow a 1st on question marks like Trey Lance or Mac Jones.  And is going after a failed QB elsewhere for cheap a smart move, like Darnold or turdbisky?  Not really

This is a tough situation.   

The only option out there that makes WAS an 11+ win team is Watson.  Based on the Stafford price, you have to give up two firsts and a DT or another pick to get him.   You fix QB for the next 4-6 years, hopefully more.   You are paying him $32M per year or so, which is not that bad for a top young QB.  And then you go fix the holes.  WR, ILB, FS.  And those are findable in the 2nd/3rd round and on the FA market.  But without a stud QB, everything is piecemeal.  Watson is that stud QB.  What Heinicke did vs TB, Watson can do far better. 

Give up the farm for Watson and LFG.

 

 

 

 

I think Fitz would indeed be a real upgrade over Smith, but I agree with the sentiment here that we should still at least take a run at Watson here. I disagree with the expected cost here. I don’t think Houston picks up the phone for less than 3 firsts (especially from where we would be presumably picking).

I think they wouldn’t even entertain an offer of anything less than 3 firsts and one of our D lineman. I think we would be realistically looking at a deal like 4 firsts and Allen/Payne to get it done. That is a crazy high price but in order to beat a deal from Miami or Jets I think that’s what it would take to get it done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Brunell4MVP said:

Still need a QB.

 

The only option out there that makes WAS an 11+ win team is Watson.  Based on the Stafford price, you have to give up two firsts and a DT or another pick to get him.   You fix QB for the next 4-6 years, hopefully more.   You are paying him $32M per year or so, which is not that bad for a top young QB.  And then you go fix the holes.  WR, ILB, FS.  And those are findable in the 2nd/3rd round and on the FA market.  But without a stud QB, everything is piecemeal.  Watson is that stud QB.  What Heinicke did vs TB, Watson can do far better. 

Give up the farm for Watson and LFG.

 

 

 

 

I've been saying this for weeks. He IS worth it. ZERO character concerns. ELITE on every level. And we have the salary cap to address the WR position and continue to fill holes on the roster. We become a double digit win team in the foreseeable future with Watson running our offense and a top 5 defense. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ffmail4me said:

I've been saying this for weeks. He IS worth it. ZERO character concerns. ELITE on every level. And we have the salary cap to address the WR position and continue to fill holes on the roster. We become a double digit win team in the foreseeable future with Watson running our offense and a top 5 defense. 

I agree, but would you be willing to give up 3 firsts and a DT for him? Or 4 firsts? As crazy as it might sound on the sound on the surface, I probably would. The price for him will seem astronomical, but there has never really been a talent like him available on the open market before so we are in uncharted territory here. 25 year old, top 3-5 franchise QBs simply never hit the market, so it makes sense that the compensation will be off the charts. It’s true that he has leverage over the Texans with the no trade clause, but if they do end up dealing him I just have a very hard time seeing us being able to beat an offer from Miami or the Jets (where he reportedly would be willing to play). The only advantage we might have is a desire for them to trade him out of conference.

Edited by Johnny Utah #9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll go in-depth into this when I have more time, but if anyone is asking me to believe that adding Watson to THIS Team (the current personnel), playing THIS schedule (2021, including the 17th game v the Bills)...I have to be shown the 11 wins. 11 wins guarantees a playoff berth in the 6 (now 7) team playoff format. 10 wins does not, and less than 10 is a crapshoot. Less than 10 10, and maybe even 10 wins requires winning the Division as well, rather like a parlay vs a straight bet.

 So, show me 11 wins. To keep everyone from donning their rose-colored glasses, and being honest, there are some stipulations:

Remember, we are talking about THIS Team + Watson. For THIS Roster to provide Watson the support to notch 11 victories minimum, in addition to acquiring him, we will need to add the following items:

1. A slashing bruiser at RB, who is capable of doing more than falling down for 3 or less yards, consistently. I love Gibson and McKissic as much as the next guy, but I will not suffer anyone telling me Gibson is a bellcow, and McKissic is anything more than Chris Thompson revisited. This is a committee backfield that is currently one man short of being complete and effective. Need a Mike Davis type, but he is likely going to be too expensive. Without a complete backfield, I doubt the Watsonskins can win 11 games.

2. Keeping Scherff and upgrading another spot on the Offensive Line. Lucas was a pleasant surprise, I guess Schweitzer held his own, and I'm OK with Roullier at C...but there are players available who would be upgrades over any of those 3. Morgan Moses has evolved into a fine RT. This unit as a whole will need to both run and pass block better if the Watsonskins have a shot at 11 wins.

3. BOTH a #2 and a #3 WR. Outside of McLaurin, there is not another WR on the WFTskins current Roster who would be anything more than a #4 WR on every single other one of all 31 NFL Teams. Need to add both an #2 and a #3, and Watson would have to be acquired in a time frame that would allow him to have excellent chemistry with all 3 WR as well as Logan Thomas by 2021 Week 1. Can't get to 11 wins if you don't come out of the gate strong, and will all pistons firing. Winning 2 out of every 3 +1 doesn't allow much margin for error or holes to dig out of.

4. A playmaking 2-way, 3-down LB (Micah Parsons, who probably won't fall to us, but you can't get (or move up) if you can't pick, or a LB of that caliber). Having a great DL is a commodity. It's EXPONENTIALLY, not incrementally, but exponentially improved upon by having a guy behind acting as a finisher. Dalton (Patrick Swayze) touched upon this concept in Roadhouse - 'You are the bouncers, I am the cleaner'. We currently have (will all personnel intact, a very good-to-great defense. We do not have an elite defense. An elite defense would not have been handled by the Buccaneers. Augment an elite DL with that stud LB, and you are have a legitimate elite front 7. That's 2/3's of an elite defense, and makes the secondary's job much easier. Missing that piece is not conducive to fielding a defense capable of supporting the Watsonskins win 11 games.

5. One more starter-caliber player in the secondary. Was Landon Collins worth acquiring? Will he be Landon Collins when he takes the field again post injury? Kendall Fuller is legit. Curl was a nice surprise and Everett can play, but are either optimal as starters? We got more out of Darby than many expected and I hope he maintains that level, and Moreau holds his own most of the time, but a coverage safety and/or CB who is a legit unquestioned starter is a must-add for this secondary to be consistently good enough for an 11 (or more) win Season...and in order to not waste a single year of Watson, you have to start winning 11 games RIGHT AWAY.

So, we add Watson. We likely weaken our biggest strength (DL) - and most would agree that that strength is one of two foundational pieces (OL and DL that almost every 11+ win Team possesses), through loss of a key personnel. We lose a 1st Round piece this year, next year, and possible 2023 as well. You know how good you have to be at hitting on Draft Picks and Free Agents to sustain that kind of loss of capital, when the hit rate of even the best teams isn't close to 100% in either area? Such a massive ask, one could almost say impossible, without a big helping of luck to augment some near-perfect decision making.

OK to mortgage the future when you're i6n a window, but we're not even in a window yet without upgrading multiple positions on both sides of the football...and the winning will have to start immediately. It's the only way you justify the cost.

6. Assuming 3-3 in the Division, which is a reasonable benchmark since it's reasonable to assume we are not improving in a vacuum while everyone else in the Division stands pat or gets worse (how much worse can our Division mates get after last year?), and assuming 1 win vs the Chiefs, Packers, Seahawks, Bucs (with Brady, who we have no reason to expect will retire) and Bills (if we play them, which is likely). That's 4-7 right there. That means 6-0 vs Saints, Panthers, Falcons, Chargers, Raiders and Broncos just to get to 10-6 or 10-7. I just can't buy into that. Assume that we, as most improving Teams do, likely will win one we're supposed to lose, and lose one we're supposed to win.

Don't win the Division and get the auto-berth, then we're thrown into the mix of 12 Teams competing for 3 WC berths, and road games throughout the Playoffs, if you get there.

That's where I'm at with this Team and this schedule, adding Watson or not, if we don't address everything else as well. Sorry to be Debbie Downer, but having been born a fan, and consciously been emotionally invested in this Team for 46 of my 52 years, and having endured the last 20 or so (the Sndyer era) in complete abject misery, I'm most comfortable being a harsh realist at this point in my fandom.

Show me the path to 11 wins and a playoff berth in 2021. Otherwise I remain convinced we use our existing capital to continue to improve everywhere else (and there are many areas in which to improve if we're to achieve the correct goal which is SUSTAINED excellence), and make the QB move, however we acquire it, next Season, when there's a better foundation in place to maximize the price of such an acquisition.

PS: I'd be all in on Fitz for cheap for 2021. Not only is he gunslinger exciting and possesses those rare leadership intangibles, but he's a proven mentor with more arm strength and versatility than Alex Smith possesses at this point. Ultimate bridge QB.

Stay patient, don't get greedy, overconfident or reaching for the shiny new toy that can't be utilized to the maximum right out of the box. Keep building. Don't put the cart ahead of the horse. Achieve an around .500 record vs a tougher slate than 2020, and strive for sustained excellence in 2022 and beyond. IMHO, that's the plan, and I'm sticking to it unless I can be convinced otherwise...and I'm open to it!

Guess I found the time, after all. Cheers!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Johnny Utah #9 said:

I think Fitz would indeed be a real upgrade over Smith, but I agree with the sentiment here that we should still at least take a run at Watson here. I disagree with the expected cost here. I don’t think Houston picks up the phone for less than 3 firsts (especially from where we would be presumably picking).

I think they wouldn’t even entertain an offer of anything less than 3 firsts and one of our D lineman. I think we would be realistically looking at a deal like 4 firsts and Allen/Payne to get it done. That is a crazy high price but in order to beat a deal from Miami or Jets I think that’s what it would take to get it done.

Watson's situation is pretty complicated.  

1.  Houston has a new front office and coach.  As of right now, they are saying they are keeping Watson.

2.  So Watson needs to convince them that it is better to trade him.

3.  Watson has a no trade clause, which he can waive.  This give Watson the ability to pick the team he is traded to.  

4.  So once Watson is allowed to talk to other teams, the key it to convince Watson that the Football Team is the best place for him.  I like what Rivera has done, but that will be a difficult sell.

5.  Once that is done, then they need to negotiate the package with Houston.  It may not be as steep as people think because at this point, Houston does not have much leverage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, nittanylion said:

I'll go in-depth into this when I have more time, but if anyone is asking me to believe that adding Watson to THIS Team (the current personnel), playing THIS schedule (2021, including the 17th game v the Bills)...I have to be shown the 11 wins. 11 wins guarantees a playoff berth in the 6 (now 7) team playoff format. 10 wins does not, and less than 10 is a crapshoot. Less than 10 10, and maybe even 10 wins requires winning the Division as well, rather like a parlay vs a straight bet.

 So, show me 11 wins. To keep everyone from donning their rose-colored glasses, and being honest, there are some stipulations:

Remember, we are talking about THIS Team + Watson. For THIS Roster to provide Watson the support to notch 11 victories minimum, in addition to acquiring him, we will need to add the following items:

1. A slashing bruiser at RB, who is capable of doing more than falling down for 3 or less yards, consistently. I love Gibson and McKissic as much as the next guy, but I will not suffer anyone telling me Gibson is a bellcow, and McKissic is anything more than Chris Thompson revisited. This is a committee backfield that is currently one man short of being complete and effective. Need a Mike Davis type, but he is likely going to be too expensive. Without a complete backfield, I doubt the Watsonskins can win 11 games.

2. Keeping Scherff and upgrading another spot on the Offensive Line. Lucas was a pleasant surprise, I guess Schweitzer held his own, and I'm OK with Roullier at C...but there are players available who would be upgrades over any of those 3. Morgan Moses has evolved into a fine RT. This unit as a whole will need to both run and pass block better if the Watsonskins have a shot at 11 wins.

3. BOTH a #2 and a #3 WR. Outside of McLaurin, there is not another WR on the WFTskins current Roster who would be anything more than a #4 WR on every single other one of all 31 NFL Teams. Need to add both an #2 and a #3, and Watson would have to be acquired in a time frame that would allow him to have excellent chemistry with all 3 WR as well as Logan Thomas by 2021 Week 1. Can't get to 11 wins if you don't come out of the gate strong, and will all pistons firing. Winning 2 out of every 3 +1 doesn't allow much margin for error or holes to dig out of.

4. A playmaking 2-way, 3-down LB (Micah Parsons, who probably won't fall to us, but you can't get (or move up) if you can't pick, or a LB of that caliber). Having a great DL is a commodity. It's EXPONENTIALLY, not incrementally, but exponentially improved upon by having a guy behind acting as a finisher. Dalton (Patrick Swayze) touched upon this concept in Roadhouse - 'You are the bouncers, I am the cleaner'. We currently have (will all personnel intact, a very good-to-great defense. We do not have an elite defense. An elite defense would not have been handled by the Buccaneers. Augment an elite DL with that stud LB, and you are have a legitimate elite front 7. That's 2/3's of an elite defense, and makes the secondary's job much easier. Missing that piece is not conducive to fielding a defense capable of supporting the Watsonskins win 11 games.

5. One more starter-caliber player in the secondary. Was Landon Collins worth acquiring? Will he be Landon Collins when he takes the field again post injury? Kendall Fuller is legit. Curl was a nice surprise and Everett can play, but are either optimal as starters? We got more out of Darby than many expected and I hope he maintains that level, and Moreau holds his own most of the time, but a coverage safety and/or CB who is a legit unquestioned starter is a must-add for this secondary to be consistently good enough for an 11 (or more) win Season...and in order to not waste a single year of Watson, you have to start winning 11 games RIGHT AWAY.

So, we add Watson. We likely weaken our biggest strength (DL) - and most would agree that that strength is one of two foundational pieces (OL and DL that almost every 11+ win Team possesses), through loss of a key personnel. We lose a 1st Round piece this year, next year, and possible 2023 as well. You know how good you have to be at hitting on Draft Picks and Free Agents to sustain that kind of loss of capital, when the hit rate of even the best teams isn't close to 100% in either area? Such a massive ask, one could almost say impossible, without a big helping of luck to augment some near-perfect decision making.

OK to mortgage the future when you're i6n a window, but we're not even in a window yet without upgrading multiple positions on both sides of the football...and the winning will have to start immediately. It's the only way you justify the cost.

6. Assuming 3-3 in the Division, which is a reasonable benchmark since it's reasonable to assume we are not improving in a vacuum while everyone else in the Division stands pat or gets worse (how much worse can our Division mates get after last year?), and assuming 1 win vs the Chiefs, Packers, Seahawks, Bucs (with Brady, who we have no reason to expect will retire) and Bills (if we play them, which is likely). That's 4-7 right there. That means 6-0 vs Saints, Panthers, Falcons, Chargers, Raiders and Broncos just to get to 10-6 or 10-7. I just can't buy into that. Assume that we, as most improving Teams do, likely will win one we're supposed to lose, and lose one we're supposed to win.

Don't win the Division and get the auto-berth, then we're thrown into the mix of 12 Teams competing for 3 WC berths, and road games throughout the Playoffs, if you get there.

That's where I'm at with this Team and this schedule, adding Watson or not, if we don't address everything else as well. Sorry to be Debbie Downer, but having been born a fan, and consciously been emotionally invested in this Team for 46 of my 52 years, and having endured the last 20 or so (the Sndyer era) in complete abject misery, I'm most comfortable being a harsh realist at this point in my fandom.

Show me the path to 11 wins and a playoff berth in 2021. Otherwise I remain convinced we use our existing capital to continue to improve everywhere else (and there are many areas in which to improve if we're to achieve the correct goal which is SUSTAINED excellence), and make the QB move, however we acquire it, next Season, when there's a better foundation in place to maximize the price of such an acquisition.

PS: I'd be all in on Fitz for cheap for 2021. Not only is he gunslinger exciting and possesses those rare leadership intangibles, but he's a proven mentor with more arm strength and versatility than Alex Smith possesses at this point. Ultimate bridge QB.

Stay patient, don't get greedy, overconfident or reaching for the shiny new toy that can't be utilized to the maximum right out of the box. Keep building. Don't put the cart ahead of the horse. Achieve an around .500 record vs a tougher slate than 2020, and strive for sustained excellence in 2022 and beyond. IMHO, that's the plan, and I'm sticking to it unless I can be convinced otherwise...and I'm open to it!

Guess I found the time, after all. Cheers!

This is a great in-depth post and I love the Dalton Road House reference! As you can tell by my user name, I'm a big Swayze fan. I'll add some of my thoughts to your points numbered out below:

1) I agree we could use another RB, but I think you are selling Gibson short. The problem earlier in the year was he was getting up to speed playing the position and Turner was reluctant to put too much on his plate early on. I personally think he should have been used more by Turner (and the run game in general was underutilized) but Gibson started to really come on towards the end of the year before the toe injury. I think he's a special talent and his arrow is pointing way up next year. While we could use another back to supplement him, this shouldn't be hard to come by with a later round pick. RBs are a dime a dozen in this league.

2) I think we are going to have to bring back Scherff, although I'm going to cringe at the number we will end up giving him. For continuity's sake, he should be brought back, but I agree we need some upgrades here. It's amazing what Matsko was able to do with some patchwork parts last season. Hopefully Charles is up to speed and can be a factor next season, but we do need to address tackle in the draft. Lucky for us, this year's draft is deep at OL so we should have some nice options available in the 2nd or 3rd round (in the case of us dealing our first this season)

3) WR is also very deep in this year's draft class, so I think we will be able to find some good options there within the first 4-5 rounds. This is also an absurdly deep free agent class at WR this year. Of all the positions we need to upgrade, I have no doubt that WR can be successfully addressed this year through the draft and FA.

4) Strongly agree with the need to upgrade at LB and while Parsons will be off the board at 19, this is the position where I would like the Skins to take a hard look at 19 if they keep that pick. I would love the kid out of Notre Dame or Zaven Collins out of Tulsa here. 

5) I think the secondary is in pretty good shape, although I agree we need a true coverage safety. Landon Collins is a disaster and I would try to convert him to LB if we could. I would also consider outright cutting him, but it's more expensive for us to cut him than keep him this year. Bottom line is he stinks, and Curl is already better than him. There are some decent options available at safety in free agency, but I think we can look to the draft here. Fuller and Darby are fine imo. Darby showed well and unless he wants to break the bank, he should be brought back at a reasonable number. 

6) This is where I definitely disagree with your take here. If we land Watson (and make some assumed upgrades at WR) we will be the odds on favorite to win the NFC East going forward for at least a few years. 3-3 is too conservative an estimate. The division is awful. The Eagles are an absolute mess, the Giants would not sweep us next year, and the Cowboys are screwed as currently constructed with that horrible defense. The NFC East will still be by far the worst division in football next year, and if we land Watson we would rule it like the Pats ruled the AFC East. I think we could pick up 2 wins out of that Chiefs, Packers, Seahawks, Bucs group. And I think the wild card is a moot point since I predict we would easily punch our ticket to the playoffs by winning this crappy division. 

I understand the skepticism and as Skins fans (in the Snyder era at least) we are used to being downtrodden and having our dreams crushed. This team most likely won't be a complete finished product in one offseason regardless. The appeal with Watson is a player like him (25 yr old, top 3-5 QB) covers up a lot of holes. I think this Watson hypothetical is moot since I don't see us having the horses to compete with Miami or NYJ in draft comp to get it done. But I would definitely give it a try. 

What I don't want to see happen is for this team to fail to upgrade the QB position, and just upgrade around the position and think that will lead to success. Teams like the Bears and Rams have been solidly built but held back by their subpar QB play for years, and have wasted their window to win with their great defenses. The Rams finally came to terms with the fact that they needed to upgrade, and now overpaid to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Marvelous said:

Watson's situation is pretty complicated.  

1.  Houston has a new front office and coach.  As of right now, they are saying they are keeping Watson.

2.  So Watson needs to convince them that it is better to trade him.

3.  Watson has a no trade clause, which he can waive.  This give Watson the ability to pick the team he is traded to.  

4.  So once Watson is allowed to talk to other teams, the key it to convince Watson that the Football Team is the best place for him.  I like what Rivera has done, but that will be a difficult sell.

5.  Once that is done, then they need to negotiate the package with Houston.  It may not be as steep as people think because at this point, Houston does not have much leverage.

These are all good points.

1. If the rumors are to believed it sounds like HOU is putting a priority on improving the defense right away with a veteran or two. This matches with what the WAS can readily give up to make room for a Watson salary and spending on a FA WR to pair with McLaurin to make the move worthwhile.

2. Really, Watson just needs to convince him that he's willing to sit out a year if he's not traded. If HOU believes he's willing to go full Lev Bell they will trade him.... especially with a new regime that doesn't want to lose a full year on the rebuild(with next to no picks to do it with). 

3. Yes and no. Antonio Brown also was supposed to have input into where he would land but in the end he ended up agreeing to get traded to OAK even though he obviously had no interest in playing for them. Watson will have input but he and HOU will have to work together to find the deal/destination that works for both of them.

4. This one is tough to gauge but I do think this would have been a tougher sell a year ago than it is today. WAS looks to be in position to contend for divisional titles(ESPECIALLY if you add Watson to that roster) and if Watson is looking for an organization that is willing to not only interview for minority hires WAS has pretty much been in forefront in this area for the past year. And not just with assistant coaches either.

5. Hearing that HOU is borderline desperate for defensive starters makes a WAS deal more likely than just draft pick deals imo. For instance if you gave up Ioannidis(DT) and Landon Collins(SS) they would instantly start on HOU. I might even throw in Kendall Fuller(CB). The day the trade was made those would instantly be the best DB's on HOU. With those players maybe a 2021 1st, a 2022 2nd, a 2023 1st, and a 2024 2nd would be enough. I'm not sure anyone else offers 2 1sts, 2 2nds, and three defensive starters that can also afford to take on the Watson contract. For instance, both the Pats and Colts have the salary cap room to make that type of deal but I don't think they trade that many draft picks to get it done. And if the Jets are giving up 2 1st rounders you have to think that idea hurts them more than most teams since their 1st rounders have been top~5 picks most years. Honestly, I'm not sure how many NFL starters the Jets even have on their team to throw into a potential trade. After Q.Williams and Maye can you name a Jet defensive player? A possible advantage WAS could have is they can at least lose starting caliber defensive players and still keep the heart and soul of their defense together. This may go back to point #4 but if the Jets go all-in for Watson I just don't see how they add enough around him to make them relevant. Whereas WAS has assets beyond just draft picks and could probably still retain enough talent to win the division after making the trade. BUF has enough young talent to be a road block in the AFC East for awhile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, nittanylion said:

I'll go in-depth into this when I have more time, but if anyone is asking me to believe that adding Watson to THIS Team (the current personnel), playing THIS schedule (2021, including the 17th game v the Bills)...I have to be shown the 11 wins. 11 wins guarantees a playoff berth in the 6 (now 7) team playoff format. 10 wins does not, and less than 10 is a crapshoot. Less than 10 10, and maybe even 10 wins requires winning the Division as well, rather like a parlay vs a straight bet.

 So, show me 11 wins. To keep everyone from donning their rose-colored glasses, and being honest, there are some stipulations:

Remember, we are talking about THIS Team + Watson. For THIS Roster to provide Watson the support to notch 11 victories minimum, in addition to acquiring him, we will need to add the following items:

1. A slashing bruiser at RB, who is capable of doing more than falling down for 3 or less yards, consistently. I love Gibson and McKissic as much as the next guy, but I will not suffer anyone telling me Gibson is a bellcow, and McKissic is anything more than Chris Thompson revisited. This is a committee backfield that is currently one man short of being complete and effective. Need a Mike Davis type, but he is likely going to be too expensive. Without a complete backfield, I doubt the Watsonskins can win 11 games.

2. Keeping Scherff and upgrading another spot on the Offensive Line. Lucas was a pleasant surprise, I guess Schweitzer held his own, and I'm OK with Roullier at C...but there are players available who would be upgrades over any of those 3. Morgan Moses has evolved into a fine RT. This unit as a whole will need to both run and pass block better if the Watsonskins have a shot at 11 wins.

3. BOTH a #2 and a #3 WR. Outside of McLaurin, there is not another WR on the WFTskins current Roster who would be anything more than a #4 WR on every single other one of all 31 NFL Teams. Need to add both an #2 and a #3, and Watson would have to be acquired in a time frame that would allow him to have excellent chemistry with all 3 WR as well as Logan Thomas by 2021 Week 1. Can't get to 11 wins if you don't come out of the gate strong, and will all pistons firing. Winning 2 out of every 3 +1 doesn't allow much margin for error or holes to dig out of.

4. A playmaking 2-way, 3-down LB (Micah Parsons, who probably won't fall to us, but you can't get (or move up) if you can't pick, or a LB of that caliber). Having a great DL is a commodity. It's EXPONENTIALLY, not incrementally, but exponentially improved upon by having a guy behind acting as a finisher. Dalton (Patrick Swayze) touched upon this concept in Roadhouse - 'You are the bouncers, I am the cleaner'. We currently have (will all personnel intact, a very good-to-great defense. We do not have an elite defense. An elite defense would not have been handled by the Buccaneers. Augment an elite DL with that stud LB, and you are have a legitimate elite front 7. That's 2/3's of an elite defense, and makes the secondary's job much easier. Missing that piece is not conducive to fielding a defense capable of supporting the Watsonskins win 11 games.

5. One more starter-caliber player in the secondary. Was Landon Collins worth acquiring? Will he be Landon Collins when he takes the field again post injury? Kendall Fuller is legit. Curl was a nice surprise and Everett can play, but are either optimal as starters? We got more out of Darby than many expected and I hope he maintains that level, and Moreau holds his own most of the time, but a coverage safety and/or CB who is a legit unquestioned starter is a must-add for this secondary to be consistently good enough for an 11 (or more) win Season...and in order to not waste a single year of Watson, you have to start winning 11 games RIGHT AWAY.

So, we add Watson. We likely weaken our biggest strength (DL) - and most would agree that that strength is one of two foundational pieces (OL and DL that almost every 11+ win Team possesses), through loss of a key personnel. We lose a 1st Round piece this year, next year, and possible 2023 as well. You know how good you have to be at hitting on Draft Picks and Free Agents to sustain that kind of loss of capital, when the hit rate of even the best teams isn't close to 100% in either area? Such a massive ask, one could almost say impossible, without a big helping of luck to augment some near-perfect decision making.

OK to mortgage the future when you're i6n a window, but we're not even in a window yet without upgrading multiple positions on both sides of the football...and the winning will have to start immediately. It's the only way you justify the cost.

6. Assuming 3-3 in the Division, which is a reasonable benchmark since it's reasonable to assume we are not improving in a vacuum while everyone else in the Division stands pat or gets worse (how much worse can our Division mates get after last year?), and assuming 1 win vs the Chiefs, Packers, Seahawks, Bucs (with Brady, who we have no reason to expect will retire) and Bills (if we play them, which is likely). That's 4-7 right there. That means 6-0 vs Saints, Panthers, Falcons, Chargers, Raiders and Broncos just to get to 10-6 or 10-7. I just can't buy into that. Assume that we, as most improving Teams do, likely will win one we're supposed to lose, and lose one we're supposed to win.

Don't win the Division and get the auto-berth, then we're thrown into the mix of 12 Teams competing for 3 WC berths, and road games throughout the Playoffs, if you get there.

That's where I'm at with this Team and this schedule, adding Watson or not, if we don't address everything else as well. Sorry to be Debbie Downer, but having been born a fan, and consciously been emotionally invested in this Team for 46 of my 52 years, and having endured the last 20 or so (the Sndyer era) in complete abject misery, I'm most comfortable being a harsh realist at this point in my fandom.

Show me the path to 11 wins and a playoff berth in 2021. Otherwise I remain convinced we use our existing capital to continue to improve everywhere else (and there are many areas in which to improve if we're to achieve the correct goal which is SUSTAINED excellence), and make the QB move, however we acquire it, next Season, when there's a better foundation in place to maximize the price of such an acquisition.

PS: I'd be all in on Fitz for cheap for 2021. Not only is he gunslinger exciting and possesses those rare leadership intangibles, but he's a proven mentor with more arm strength and versatility than Alex Smith possesses at this point. Ultimate bridge QB.

Stay patient, don't get greedy, overconfident or reaching for the shiny new toy that can't be utilized to the maximum right out of the box. Keep building. Don't put the cart ahead of the horse. Achieve an around .500 record vs a tougher slate than 2020, and strive for sustained excellence in 2022 and beyond. IMHO, that's the plan, and I'm sticking to it unless I can be convinced otherwise...and I'm open to it!

Guess I found the time, after all. Cheers!

Good post.  I too like the idea of adding someone like Fitz on the cheap for a bridge QB while we groom someone else.  You do a great job of laying out all our needs and why it would not be wise to part with players and picks for one player, even if that one player is a great one.  

The question I have is:  based on where we pick:  what are our available options for young talent to groom while Fitz tries to win over the next 2 years (9-10 wins with Fitz is not crazy to consider):

-- Kyle Allen:  coaching staff seems to think he has starter potential...do we (the fans) believe that?

-- Tyler Heinicke:  flashed ability vs. TB, but that's a very limited sample size and he has substantial injury concerns

-- Jones or Trask (late first rounders, early second rounders):  I don't think either are considered ready to start right now.  BUT, are they legit prospects to start in two years if we use Fitz as a bridge?  That's the question.

-- Players deeper in draft

-- What about second tier vets like Marcus Mariotta, still young with raw skills and much cheaper to aquire...anything there?

-- My other "dream" would be if Miami tries to draft a QB high and trades Tua for something more reasonable than Stafford...I'd pounce on that.

What say you?  What options do we have for building long term, if we do not expect to get a top 5 pick next year...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Johnny Utah #9 said:

This is a great in-depth post and I love the Dalton Road House reference! As you can tell by my user name, I'm a big Swayze fan. I'll add some of my thoughts to your points numbered out below:

1) I agree we could use another RB, but I think you are selling Gibson short. The problem earlier in the year was he was getting up to speed playing the position and Turner was reluctant to put too much on his plate early on. I personally think he should have been used more by Turner (and the run game in general was underutilized) but Gibson started to really come on towards the end of the year before the toe injury. I think he's a special talent and his arrow is pointing way up next year. While we could use another back to supplement him, this shouldn't be hard to come by with a later round pick. RBs are a dime a dozen in this league.

2) I think we are going to have to bring back Scherff, although I'm going to cringe at the number we will end up giving him. For continuity's sake, he should be brought back, but I agree we need some upgrades here. It's amazing what Matsko was able to do with some patchwork parts last season. Hopefully Charles is up to speed and can be a factor next season, but we do need to address tackle in the draft. Lucky for us, this year's draft is deep at OL so we should have some nice options available in the 2nd or 3rd round (in the case of us dealing our first this season)

3) WR is also very deep in this year's draft class, so I think we will be able to find some good options there within the first 4-5 rounds. This is also an absurdly deep free agent class at WR this year. Of all the positions we need to upgrade, I have no doubt that WR can be successfully addressed this year through the draft and FA.

4) Strongly agree with the need to upgrade at LB and while Parsons will be off the board at 19, this is the position where I would like the Skins to take a hard look at 19 if they keep that pick. I would love the kid out of Notre Dame or Zaven Collins out of Tulsa here. 

5) I think the secondary is in pretty good shape, although I agree we need a true coverage safety. Landon Collins is a disaster and I would try to convert him to LB if we could. I would also consider outright cutting him, but it's more expensive for us to cut him than keep him this year. Bottom line is he stinks, and Curl is already better than him. There are some decent options available at safety in free agency, but I think we can look to the draft here. Fuller and Darby are fine imo. Darby showed well and unless he wants to break the bank, he should be brought back at a reasonable number. 

6) This is where I definitely disagree with your take here. If we land Watson (and make some assumed upgrades at WR) we will be the odds on favorite to win the NFC East going forward for at least a few years. 3-3 is too conservative an estimate. The division is awful. The Eagles are an absolute mess, the Giants would not sweep us next year, and the Cowboys are screwed as currently constructed with that horrible defense. The NFC East will still be by far the worst division in football next year, and if we land Watson we would rule it like the Pats ruled the AFC East. I think we could pick up 2 wins out of that Chiefs, Packers, Seahawks, Bucs group. And I think the wild card is a moot point since I predict we would easily punch our ticket to the playoffs by winning this crappy division. 

I understand the skepticism and as Skins fans (in the Snyder era at least) we are used to being downtrodden and having our dreams crushed. This team most likely won't be a complete finished product in one offseason regardless. The appeal with Watson is a player like him (25 yr old, top 3-5 QB) covers up a lot of holes. I think this Watson hypothetical is moot since I don't see us having the horses to compete with Miami or NYJ in draft comp to get it done. But I would definitely give it a try. 

What I don't want to see happen is for this team to fail to upgrade the QB position, and just upgrade around the position and think that will lead to success. Teams like the Bears and Rams have been solidly built but held back by their subpar QB play for years, and have wasted their window to win with their great defenses. The Rams finally came to terms with the fact that they needed to upgrade, and now overpaid to do so.

I think it's worth giving it a try but I do balk at giving up so much for him.  Watson can indeed cover a lot of holes but he can't automatically elevate a team.  He has been good for 10/11 wins a few years but Houston also went 4-12 last year, even while Watson played great.  So, while it's true a great QB can cover some deficiencies, there are some limits as well.  The question is, are the WFT "close enough" that we just need that one more piece to put us over the top?

The thinking I have seen online in media articles seems to be that we can give up picks and top defensive talent for Watson, and we'll have Watson and a top 5 defense.  But if we give up top defensive talent, we're no longer a top 5 defense, so I'm not sure that argument holds.  If you give up Johnathan Allen, for instance, you can't say we have the same defense.  We just don't.  He's that good.  I think the defensive guys I might be willing to give up are Ionitis and Collins, because we have Settle and Kurl to fill in, without a monster drop off.  But when you start talking about giving up Allen or Sweat, then that's a drop.  Keep in mind we're also losing Kerrigan next year...so we're losing a pro bowl calliber defender already.

I guess if the price was a first this year, a first  next year, and Ionitis and Collins, something like that, I could be on board.  But three first or people like Allen and Payne.  We're just gonna end up with a situation where we have a great QB on an 8-8 team for years to come...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, MikeApf said:

Good post.  I too like the idea of adding someone like Fitz on the cheap for a bridge QB while we groom someone else.  You do a great job of laying out all our needs and why it would not be wise to part with players and picks for one player, even if that one player is a great one.  

The question I have is:  based on where we pick:  what are our available options for young talent to groom while Fitz tries to win over the next 2 years (9-10 wins with Fitz is not crazy to consider):

-- Kyle Allen:  coaching staff seems to think he has starter potential...do we (the fans) believe that?

-- Tyler Heinicke:  flashed ability vs. TB, but that's a very limited sample size and he has substantial injury concerns

-- Jones or Trask (late first rounders, early second rounders):  I don't think either are considered ready to start right now.  BUT, are they legit prospects to start in two years if we use Fitz as a bridge?  That's the question.

-- Players deeper in draft

-- What about second tier vets like Marcus Mariotta, still young with raw skills and much cheaper to aquire...anything there?

-- My other "dream" would be if Miami tries to draft a QB high and trades Tua for something more reasonable than Stafford...I'd pounce on that.

What say you?  What options do we have for building long term, if we do not expect to get a top 5 pick next year...?

Additionally:  if we think Jones or Trask are worth of being projects to groom, a bonus here could actually be trading down in the first round for additional picks, then selecting Jones or Trask where they likely really fall, rather than a reach at 19...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ffmail4me said:

So Peter King said we offered a 1st and 3rd for Stafford. I wonder if they would offer a d-lineman, 1st, and 1st next year for Watson? Seems easily worth that to me...

I'm sure they would but I don't see Houston accepting that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, nittanylion said:

I'll go in-depth into this when I have more time, but if anyone is asking me to believe that adding Watson to THIS Team (the current personnel), playing THIS schedule (2021, including the 17th game v the Bills)...I have to be shown the 11 wins. 11 wins guarantees a playoff berth in the 6 (now 7) team playoff format. 10 wins does not, and less than 10 is a crapshoot. Less than 10 10, and maybe even 10 wins requires winning the Division as well, rather like a parlay vs a straight bet.

 So, show me 11 wins. To keep everyone from donning their rose-colored glasses, and being honest, there are some stipulations:

Remember, we are talking about THIS Team + Watson. For THIS Roster to provide Watson the support to notch 11 victories minimum, in addition to acquiring him, we will need to add the following items:

1. A slashing bruiser at RB, who is capable of doing more than falling down for 3 or less yards, consistently. I love Gibson and McKissic as much as the next guy, but I will not suffer anyone telling me Gibson is a bellcow, and McKissic is anything more than Chris Thompson revisited. This is a committee backfield that is currently one man short of being complete and effective. Need a Mike Davis type, but he is likely going to be too expensive. Without a complete backfield, I doubt the Watsonskins can win 11 games.

2. Keeping Scherff and upgrading another spot on the Offensive Line. Lucas was a pleasant surprise, I guess Schweitzer held his own, and I'm OK with Roullier at C...but there are players available who would be upgrades over any of those 3. Morgan Moses has evolved into a fine RT. This unit as a whole will need to both run and pass block better if the Watsonskins have a shot at 11 wins.

3. BOTH a #2 and a #3 WR. Outside of McLaurin, there is not another WR on the WFTskins current Roster who would be anything more than a #4 WR on every single other one of all 31 NFL Teams. Need to add both an #2 and a #3, and Watson would have to be acquired in a time frame that would allow him to have excellent chemistry with all 3 WR as well as Logan Thomas by 2021 Week 1. Can't get to 11 wins if you don't come out of the gate strong, and will all pistons firing. Winning 2 out of every 3 +1 doesn't allow much margin for error or holes to dig out of.

4. A playmaking 2-way, 3-down LB (Micah Parsons, who probably won't fall to us, but you can't get (or move up) if you can't pick, or a LB of that caliber). Having a great DL is a commodity. It's EXPONENTIALLY, not incrementally, but exponentially improved upon by having a guy behind acting as a finisher. Dalton (Patrick Swayze) touched upon this concept in Roadhouse - 'You are the bouncers, I am the cleaner'. We currently have (will all personnel intact, a very good-to-great defense. We do not have an elite defense. An elite defense would not have been handled by the Buccaneers. Augment an elite DL with that stud LB, and you are have a legitimate elite front 7. That's 2/3's of an elite defense, and makes the secondary's job much easier. Missing that piece is not conducive to fielding a defense capable of supporting the Watsonskins win 11 games.

5. One more starter-caliber player in the secondary. Was Landon Collins worth acquiring? Will he be Landon Collins when he takes the field again post injury? Kendall Fuller is legit. Curl was a nice surprise and Everett can play, but are either optimal as starters? We got more out of Darby than many expected and I hope he maintains that level, and Moreau holds his own most of the time, but a coverage safety and/or CB who is a legit unquestioned starter is a must-add for this secondary to be consistently good enough for an 11 (or more) win Season...and in order to not waste a single year of Watson, you have to start winning 11 games RIGHT AWAY.

So, we add Watson. We likely weaken our biggest strength (DL) - and most would agree that that strength is one of two foundational pieces (OL and DL that almost every 11+ win Team possesses), through loss of a key personnel. We lose a 1st Round piece this year, next year, and possible 2023 as well. You know how good you have to be at hitting on Draft Picks and Free Agents to sustain that kind of loss of capital, when the hit rate of even the best teams isn't close to 100% in either area? Such a massive ask, one could almost say impossible, without a big helping of luck to augment some near-perfect decision making.

OK to mortgage the future when you're i6n a window, but we're not even in a window yet without upgrading multiple positions on both sides of the football...and the winning will have to start immediately. It's the only way you justify the cost.

6. Assuming 3-3 in the Division, which is a reasonable benchmark since it's reasonable to assume we are not improving in a vacuum while everyone else in the Division stands pat or gets worse (how much worse can our Division mates get after last year?), and assuming 1 win vs the Chiefs, Packers, Seahawks, Bucs (with Brady, who we have no reason to expect will retire) and Bills (if we play them, which is likely). That's 4-7 right there. That means 6-0 vs Saints, Panthers, Falcons, Chargers, Raiders and Broncos just to get to 10-6 or 10-7. I just can't buy into that. Assume that we, as most improving Teams do, likely will win one we're supposed to lose, and lose one we're supposed to win.

Don't win the Division and get the auto-berth, then we're thrown into the mix of 12 Teams competing for 3 WC berths, and road games throughout the Playoffs, if you get there.

That's where I'm at with this Team and this schedule, adding Watson or not, if we don't address everything else as well. Sorry to be Debbie Downer, but having been born a fan, and consciously been emotionally invested in this Team for 46 of my 52 years, and having endured the last 20 or so (the Sndyer era) in complete abject misery, I'm most comfortable being a harsh realist at this point in my fandom.

Show me the path to 11 wins and a playoff berth in 2021. Otherwise I remain convinced we use our existing capital to continue to improve everywhere else (and there are many areas in which to improve if we're to achieve the correct goal which is SUSTAINED excellence), and make the QB move, however we acquire it, next Season, when there's a better foundation in place to maximize the price of such an acquisition.

PS: I'd be all in on Fitz for cheap for 2021. Not only is he gunslinger exciting and possesses those rare leadership intangibles, but he's a proven mentor with more arm strength and versatility than Alex Smith possesses at this point. Ultimate bridge QB.

Stay patient, don't get greedy, overconfident or reaching for the shiny new toy that can't be utilized to the maximum right out of the box. Keep building. Don't put the cart ahead of the horse. Achieve an around .500 record vs a tougher slate than 2020, and strive for sustained excellence in 2022 and beyond. IMHO, that's the plan, and I'm sticking to it unless I can be convinced otherwise...and I'm open to it!

Guess I found the time, after all. Cheers!

You guys lost a bunch of close games last year with one of the worst QB situations in the NFL. If you get Watson, you'd have one of the best QB situations in the NFL. Right there is a good chance at 3-4 more wins over last years team IMO. 4-2 seems much more likely in the division than 3-3 as well considering you went 4-2 this year (again, with terrible QB play). Sure, you may lose to Dallas, but you likely won't get swept by NYG again.

Obviously the team has other holes to fill (who doesn't?), and you don't want to downgrade too much elsewhere to add him as it would defeat the purpose, but if it's 1 player and a bunch of picks I think this team is built to compete next year. They're in a better cap situation than most, and the NFC isn't exactly a powerhouse (particularly the NFC East).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, humpback said:

You guys lost a bunch of close games last year with one of the worst QB situations in the NFL. If you get Watson, you'd have one of the best QB situations in the NFL. Right there is a good chance at 3-4 more wins over last years team IMO. 4-2 seems much more likely in the division than 3-3 as well considering you went 4-2 this year (again, with terrible QB play). Sure, you may lose to Dallas, but you likely won't get swept by NYG again.

Obviously the team has other holes to fill (who doesn't?), and you don't want to downgrade too much elsewhere to add him as it would defeat the purpose, but if it's 1 player and a bunch of picks I think this team is built to compete next year. They're in a better cap situation than most, and the NFC isn't exactly a powerhouse (particularly the NFC East).

Problem is if you do that and impact the defense then maybe we aren’t as impactful.  Strong d can make a team more competitive and we could try to get lucky on a qb.  I’d rather that route unless we get a good deal.  The defense is the key to this team competing though.  That can’t be sacrificed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter what HOU wants.  They are just begging.  Watson holds the cards here.  He only needs the willingness to say he will sit out all year if not traded.   And with the no trade clause, Watson is in charge of where he can be dealt. The only way HOU can stop all that is to convince him things are gonna get better.  They have to fire their GM to make that happen.

I think HOU demands are the high point, not the low point.  If they get two 1s and a starting DT, they may take it.  Heck, throw in a 3rd also.  It's not like we don't have $s to go after free agents.  After cutting Smith and taking on Watson and trading a DT, WAS has about $30M to spend.  That gets 4-5 starters. 

Yes, even with Watson maybe we aren't a great team.  But we are a lot closer to it with him here than we are with a 1st round WR, a pick next year, and K Allen starting.

Allen and Heinicke are solid backups, but when a team game plans for them, the deficiencies will show.  There is a reason nobody else wanted them.

THERE IS NO QB ON THIS TEAM.  And the vet on the way out the door won 5 of the 7 games won during the year.

👆  The trick is getting Watson to buy into the idea WAS is a good spot to be.

Editing to say, look at it this way.   If WAS could have given up five 1sts for Aaron Rodgers when he was 26 years old, do you think we would be better off?  Of course.  The 1st don't matter as much as the QB.

Edited by Brunell4MVP
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PinkydaPimp said:

Problem is if you do that and impact the defense then maybe we aren’t as impactful.  Strong d can make a team more competitive and we could try to get lucky on a qb.  I’d rather that route unless we get a good deal.  The defense is the key to this team competing though.  That can’t be sacrificed.

Of course, which is why I included the 2nd paragraph- robbing Peter to pay Paul wouldn't help much, you have to try and find a way to add him without sacrificing too much of the current roster. I was responding to his very first sentence- adding Watson to THIS team hypothetically would give them more wins and makes them a contender IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Brunell4MVP said:

It doesn't matter what HOU wants.  They are just begging.  Watson holds the cards here.  He only needs the willingness to say he will sit out all year if not traded.   And with the no trade clause, Watson is in charge of where he can be dealt. The only way HOU can stop all that is to convince him things are gonna get better.  They have to fire their GM to make that happen.

I think HOU demands are the high point, not the low point.  If they get two 1s and a starting DT, they may take it.  Heck, throw in a 3rd also.  It's not like we don't have $s to go after free agents.  After cutting Smith and taking on Watson and trading a DT, WAS has about $30M to spend.  That gets 4-5 starters. 

Yes, even with Watson maybe we aren't a great team.  But we are a lot closer to it with him here than we are with a 1st round WR, a pick next year, and K Allen starting.

Allen and Heinicke are solid backups, but when a team game plans for them, the deficiencies will show.  There is a reason nobody else wanted them.

THERE IS NO QB ON THIS TEAM.  And the vet on the way out the door won 5 of the 7 games won during the year.

👆  The trick is getting Watson to buy into the idea WAS is a good spot to be.

Editing to say, look at it this way.   If WAS could have given up five 1sts for Aaron Rodgers when he was 26 years old, do you think we would be better off?  Of course.  The 1st don't matter as much as the QB.

I think the only way Houston has any leverage is to negotiate compensation before giving permission to talk to Watson.  

I completely agree that the initial ask is the starting point to their negotiations.  And Watson really does hold the leverage here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, MikeApf said:

I think it's worth giving it a try but I do balk at giving up so much for him.  Watson can indeed cover a lot of holes but he can't automatically elevate a team.  He has been good for 10/11 wins a few years but Houston also went 4-12 last year, even while Watson played great.  So, while it's true a great QB can cover some deficiencies, there are some limits as well.  The question is, are the WFT "close enough" that we just need that one more piece to put us over the top?

The thinking I have seen online in media articles seems to be that we can give up picks and top defensive talent for Watson, and we'll have Watson and a top 5 defense.  But if we give up top defensive talent, we're no longer a top 5 defense, so I'm not sure that argument holds.  If you give up Johnathan Allen, for instance, you can't say we have the same defense.  We just don't.  He's that good.  I think the defensive guys I might be willing to give up are Ionitis and Collins, because we have Settle and Kurl to fill in, without a monster drop off.  But when you start talking about giving up Allen or Sweat, then that's a drop.  Keep in mind we're also losing Kerrigan next year...so we're losing a pro bowl calliber defender already.

I guess if the price was a first this year, a first  next year, and Ionitis and Collins, something like that, I could be on board.  But three first or people like Allen and Payne.  We're just gonna end up with a situation where we have a great QB on an 8-8 team for years to come...

 

I have a hard time believing Houston (or a to other NFL for that matter) would want Collins and that contract. The guy is a box safety and one of the highest paid safeties in the league. He’s a negative asset imo, but if Houston could be convinced to take him, that would be great. As for Ion-man, I think he has more value to us than a team like Houston. I doubt they see him as an attractive piece as Allen or Payne would be. Maybe it’s the draft pedigree, but I imagine the ‘Bama boys just have more trade value.

I don’t think anyone here wants to weaken the defense, but I haven’t seen many people addressing the reality that if we are looking long term, it will be extremely hard to sign all four of our stud D lineman to big 2nd contracts. At some point, we are going to have to make a decision here. It might be best to get out in front of this issue if it could help land us Watson. I think Allen or Payne would be a nice chip in this deal, and we have the depth at DT to backfill the position with Ion-man and Settle. Of the two (Allen and Payne), I would prefer to keep Payne and deal Allen, as I think Payne has more upside and he is under team control longer on his rookie deal. But it’s probably for this reason that Houston would prefer him over Allen as they won’t want to turn around and give him a big contract next year.

It is very interesting though that it was reported that Houston wants defensive starters. We actually have an advantage here as we have such great depth at DT. So in conclusion, I don’t know how realistic it would be to expect to just give up Ion-man and Collins. In addition to the 2 1sts and 2 2nds, it might have to be Allen/Payne and a guy like Moreland.

Given what landing Watson would mean to the future of this team, and also considering the probable reality that we aren’t going to be able to retain both Allen and Payne (without crushing our cap on the D Line, as I’m assuming Chase and Sweat are no brainer priorities to retain), I would make this deal.

Edited by Johnny Utah #9
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Brunell4MVP said:

It doesn't matter what HOU wants.  They are just begging.  Watson holds the cards here.  He only needs the willingness to say he will sit out all year if not traded.   And with the no trade clause, Watson is in charge of where he can be dealt. The only way HOU can stop all that is to convince him things are gonna get better.  They have to fire their GM to make that happen.

I think HOU demands are the high point, not the low point.  If they get two 1s and a starting DT, they may take it.  Heck, throw in a 3rd also.  It's not like we don't have $s to go after free agents.  After cutting Smith and taking on Watson and trading a DT, WAS has about $30M to spend.  That gets 4-5 starters. 

Yes, even with Watson maybe we aren't a great team.  But we are a lot closer to it with him here than we are with a 1st round WR, a pick next year, and K Allen starting.

Allen and Heinicke are solid backups, but when a team game plans for them, the deficiencies will show.  There is a reason nobody else wanted them.

THERE IS NO QB ON THIS TEAM.  And the vet on the way out the door won 5 of the 7 games won during the year.

👆  The trick is getting Watson to buy into the idea WAS is a good spot to be.

Editing to say, look at it this way.   If WAS could have given up five 1sts for Aaron Rodgers when he was 26 years old, do you think we would be better off?  Of course.  The 1st don't matter as much as the QB.

Good post. I agree that Watson has some leverage here. The problem is that his reported top 2 desired designations (Jets and Miami) have a treasure trove of draft compensation that would make it very hard to compete with. Why Watson wants to go to the Jets when they still need so much and will be hamstrung in building around him with no draft capital is a debate for another topic I guess. Miami at least makes sense as they already have a solid defense in place. 

Regardless, the Skins can’t compete with these teams when it comes to draft compensation, which is why it was interesting to read that Houston wants two defensive starters with the picks. This is one area we could have an advantage, as we have some depth at DT to make a move here and not have it crush us. 

Edited by Johnny Utah #9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One quick thought:  Lots of people have mentioned Collins as a trade chip.  This really strikes me as wishful thinking, since we not want him next year.

A more valuable player would be Kamren Curl.  He is young, looks promising, and has 3 years left on his inexpensive rookie deal.  We could always go back to having Collins as our starting safety.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Marvelous said:

One quick thought:  Lots of people have mentioned Collins as a trade chip.  This really strikes me as wishful thinking, since we not want him next year.

A more valuable player would be Kamren Curl.  He is young, looks promising, and has 3 years left on his inexpensive rookie deal.  We could always go back to having Collins as our starting safety.

I agree on Collins. I’ve been saying all along here he has no trade value. As for Curl, I would keep him since his performance outweighs his trade value right now. He should be the starter going forward and hopefully we can cut Collins next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Marvelous said:

One quick thought:  Lots of people have mentioned Collins as a trade chip.  This really strikes me as wishful thinking, since we not want him next year.

A more valuable player would be Kamren Curl.  He is young, looks promising, and has 3 years left on his inexpensive rookie deal.  We could always go back to having Collins as our starting safety.

Agree on Collins. 1) Can't imagine anyone wants him at his salary.  2) WAS eats a ton of cap space by trading Collins before June 1.  $13.8M to be exact. Which kinda defeats the idea of trading for a QB and filling the holes with free agents.   After June 1 it's $4M or so. 

Allen or Payne are the only valuable Def tradable assets from a salary perspective.  Could throw in lower tier players like Apke, Everett, Settle though.  I suspect all could start for HOU.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Brunell4MVP said:

Agree on Collins. 1) Can't imagine anyone wants him at his salary.  2) WAS eats a ton of cap space by trading Collins before June 1.  $13.8M to be exact. Which kinda defeats the idea of trading for a QB and filling the holes with free agents.   After June 1 it's $4M or so. 

Allen or Payne are the only valuable Def tradable assets from a salary perspective.  Could throw in lower tier players like Apke, Everett, Settle though.  I suspect all could start for HOU.

Agree with all of this. And this is exactly why if we are putting together a package for Watson, Allen or Payne would have to be part of it. And as I said earlier, it also makes sense from the standpoint that we most likely can’t afford to keep both of them long term (4 DL on massive 2nd contracts isn’t tenable). And we just happen have the depth to fill in for one of them. I obviously wouldn’t be looking to give one of them away, but as a part of a package to land Watson I definitely would make this move.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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...