Is it time to cut Sudfeld?

[gkekoa]

I can't believe how often we discuss Suds. Nobody will take him from the PS. Is he even eligible for the PS?

 

[Buffalo_Nickel_1]

I can't believe how often we discuss Suds. Nobody will take him from the PS. Is he even eligible for the PS?

 

[Stymietee]

Don't think Suds will ever dress anyway. With Cousins, McCoy and Pryor as the emergency QB, no need for Suds on Sunday's. Honestly, the team can improve that 3rd string position by looking around. I'm also holding out hope there is another LG surprise cut that can help us or a veteran RB who is let go.

Keep an eye on the Cincinnati Bengals who are pretty loaded at RB. Unless Marvin surprises and attempts to keep them all or trade one a pretty good RB will be let go there.

 

[Stymietee]

i brought this up a month ago why did we not bring in some qbs in training camp there should have been more in camp nobody responded if kirk goes down we are fucked period we have not seen sudfeld with the ones yet but stymie always says something like we should always be trying to up grade the qb spot always trying to find someone better i think that was stymie who said this ... i just dont under stand we should have brought in some udfa qbs

Yep something like that. We should always be in upgrade mode at every position including QB, to be more accurate. Why? because poor teams, rebuild.....average teams, are stagnant.....and great teams, reload.

 

[Stymietee]

McCoy is fine for a backup and knows he offense. If Kc leaves next year then that is a different story.

I don't like either Colt or Nate as the backup here. To me the backup QB should be a guy who has a legitimate ability to push the starter for PT. Yep, even at the QB position. You know that in the event that your #1 guys is hurt or injured the drop off is not that drastic. Unless there's someone here that believes that Colt is not that big a drop of from Kirk, then obviously we are in trouble if Kirk is not available.

 

[Sportster 72]

I think economics dictate that it ends up being a sub par player. The days of grooming someone are getting further and further apart unless you get a Cousin's, Ty Taylor or maybe even McCarron situation.

Cousin's first year as a starter he made $660,000

 

[gkekoa]

I don't like either Colt or Nate as the backup here. To me the backup QB should be a guy who has a legitimate ability to push the starter for PT. Yep, even at the QB position. You know that in the event that your #1 guys is hurt or injured the drop off is not that drastic. Unless there's someone here that believes that Colt is not that big a drop of from Kirk, then obviously we are in trouble if Kirk is not available.

It is all about money. Guys that can push a top ten QB cost money.

 

[skinsdad62]

It is all about money. Guys that can push a top ten QB cost money.

yep

 

[Stymietee]

Let me write this with as much humility as I can with apologies towards anyone who gets offended.

One of the reasons why poor teams often have to rebuild is because they don't prepare to move on from current players. So let's talk QB's.....

1. Never draft a QB lower than the 3rd round (OK 4th in those rare occasions where higher round talent is there)

2. It's a wasted pick to draft them lower than that because it rarely works out (Brady)

3. It's going to cost a bit more to sign them considering the CBA rookie scale, so don't go 1st round if you don't need them immediately. (See Kansas City, Houston, Cincinnati and N.E) You have 3 years to either make the determination to keep the new guy or your current starter or not, then trade one of them for draft or other value.

4. Knowing WHEN to draft them is the key to success. If you have a locked in starter that time is about halfway through his time as a starter (about 4 or 5 years) if he's really, really, good. Sooner if he's just OK.

5. Always draft for potential or damned near starting talent....no projects, again it's a wasted pick. They are lower round picks for a reason.

6. It is the loser mentality to set the standard at either rebuilding or standing pat. Again winners reload and that means getting the potential replacement and having him in place sooner rather than later. Anybody here really believe that Colt or Nate are equal or better as replacements for Kirk?......Really??......REALLY??

7. Using this formula, you'll never or rarely use your 1st rounder on a QB unless you want to. That pick goes towards other positions and winning/ reloading becomes the norm. For those of you that are so concerned about money/cost, there's your solution.

Now I fully expect to have counters to my position on this, but before you do, ask yourself, what DOES it mean and take to always be in upgrade mode?

 

[Stymietee]

***McCarron was a 5th round pick with 2nd or 3rd round talent.

 

[Sportster 72]

Let me write this with as much humility as I can with apologies towards anyone who gets offended.

One of the reasons why poor teams often have to rebuild is because they don't prepare to move on from current players. So let's talk QB's.....

1. Never draft a QB lower than the 3rd round (OK 4th in those rare occasions where higher round talent is there)

2. It's a wasted pick to draft them lower than that because it rarely works out (Brady)

3. It's going to cost a bit more to sign them considering the CBA rookie scale, so don't go 1st round if you don't need them immediately. (See Kansas City, Houston, Cincinnati and N.E) You have 3 years to either make the determination to keep the new guy or your current starter or not, then trade one of them for draft or other value.

4. Knowing WHEN to draft them is the key to success. If you have a locked in starter that time is about halfway through his time as a starter (about 4 or 5 years) if he's really, really, good. Sooner if he's just OK.

5. Always draft for potential or damned near starting talent....no projects, again it's a wasted pick. They are lower round picks for a reason.

6. It is the loser mentality to set the standard at either rebuilding or standing pat. Again winners reload and that means getting the potential replacement and having him in place sooner rather than later. Anybody here really believe that Colt or Nate are equal or better as replacements for Kirk?......Really??......REALLY??

7. Using this formula, you'll never or rarely use your 1st rounder on a QB unless you want to. That pick goes towards other positions and winning/ reloading becomes the norm. For those of you that are so concerned about money/cost, there's your solution.

Now I fully expect to have counters to my position on this, but before you do, ask yourself, what DOES it mean and take to always be in upgrade mode?

I couldn't' agree more Sty, additional proof would be:

Norm Snead
Heath Shuler
Patrick Ramsey
Jason Campbell*
Robert Griffin*

In the case of the guys with asterisks I would add we should trade away players or draft picks whenever possible.

Stay away from players like:
Johnny Unitas
Tom Brady
Tony Romo
Trent Green
Kirk Cousins
Dak Prescott

I used 5 Redskin 1st round picks and six guys drafted 4th round or later off the top of my head that support your point.

 

[skinsdad62]

has this team reached a point where you can reload ? i dont think so , not even close

 

[j_y19]

Let me write this with as much humility as I can with apologies towards anyone who gets offended.

One of the reasons why poor teams often have to rebuild is because they don't prepare to move on from current players. So let's talk QB's.....

1. Never draft a QB lower than the 3rd round (OK 4th in those rare occasions where higher round talent is there)

2. It's a wasted pick to draft them lower than that because it rarely works out (Brady)

3. It's going to cost a bit more to sign them considering the CBA rookie scale, so don't go 1st round if you don't need them immediately. (See Kansas City, Houston, Cincinnati and N.E) You have 3 years to either make the determination to keep the new guy or your current starter or not, then trade one of them for draft or other value.

4. Knowing WHEN to draft them is the key to success. If you have a locked in starter that time is about halfway through his time as a starter (about 4 or 5 years) if he's really, really, good. Sooner if he's just OK.

5. Always draft for potential or damned near starting talent....no projects, again it's a wasted pick. They are lower round picks for a reason.

6. It is the loser mentality to set the standard at either rebuilding or standing pat. Again winners reload and that means getting the potential replacement and having him in place sooner rather than later. Anybody here really believe that Colt or Nate are equal or better as replacements for Kirk?......Really??......REALLY??

7. Using this formula, you'll never or rarely use your 1st rounder on a QB unless you want to. That pick goes towards other positions and winning/ reloading becomes the norm. For those of you that are so concerned about money/cost, there's your solution.

Now I fully expect to have counters to my position on this, but before you do, ask yourself, what DOES it mean and take to always be in upgrade mode?

While in theory your strategy makes a whole lot of sense, in practice its just not that simple. First, there just aren't that many QBs coming out of college that are damned near starting talent. This is what causes so many teams to reach. So to just find an almost starter in rounds 2-3 is a huge part luck. Now we did it with KC in the 4th. But that is the first guy we have drafted at that position in 20 years, in any round, that had starter potential. I do agree that using a pick on a long shot potential, like a Sudfeld, is probably a wasted pick. We could have just as easily found a UFA that would be just as far along as Sudfeld at this point in his career.

Clearly you always want to be in upgrade/replacement mode at every position on the team (including coaches). Part of the problem with teams such as us, CLE, Jax, etc is that we have historically had so little depth across the board that we have so many parts that always need replacing every year. This is the first year in a long while where I actually see significant depth at many key positions. Unfortunately, QB is probably not one of them. What we need to get out of is the major reloads every year where 30-40% of our starting line up is being reloaded (like our entire DL from last year to this year). Teams like NE may just reload a position or two every year, but the bulk of the team stays in place from year to year.

 

[Stymietee]

has this team reached a point where you can reload ? i dont think so , not even close

Yep, I agree our team is one of the historically poor teams. I honestly believe that before the hiring of McCloughan they never rose to the rebuild level. Now that he's gone.........

 

[Sportster 72]

Yep, I agree our team is one of the historically poor teams. I honestly believe that before the hiring of McCloughan they never rose to the rebuild level. Now that he's gone.........

Agree. We were short talent when Snyder bought the team. Since then our FO has spent a ton on average or worse FAs. Mostly ignored the draft or drafted poorly, which includes giving away tons of draft picks under almost every HC until the last few years. Shanahan drafted some of the best players on the team but there aren't enough complimentary players.

IMO we have the best talent we have had since Snyder bought the team but need more to be a very good team.

 

[Stymietee]

While in theory your strategy makes a whole lot of sense, in practice its just not that simple. First, there just aren't that many QBs coming out of college that are damned near starting talent. This is what causes so many teams to reach. So to just find an almost starter in rounds 2-3 is a huge part luck. Now we did it with KC in the 4th. But that is the first guy we have drafted at that position in 20 years, in any round, that had starter potential. I do agree that using a pick on a long shot potential, like a Sudfeld, is probably a wasted pick. We could have just as easily found a UFA that would be just as far along as Sudfeld at this point in his career.

I believe that the reach in this instance are with the 1st round picks. Desperation being the key factor as it was here with you know who, not only compelled this organization to way overpay for the privilege to get him but also in pushing a starter role when clearly he was NOT prepared for the transition into the NFL.

In fact, contrary to your point that "there just aren't that many QBs coming out of college that are damned near starting talent." I believe that almost all of them fit this description. With few exceptions, most will require some sort of adjustment period in becoming NFL ready. This is increasingly true as schools are using more mobile guys and tailoring their offenses in order to make things simpler for them (one read, or cutting the field in half type stuff)

To be fair, there is the school of thought that insists that, high 1st round picks generally should come in as starters. I ADAMANTLY DISAGREE with this philosophy. Impatience leading to this type of desperation does two things IMO;

1. increases the rate of failure because they aren't properly transitioned to the NFL game.

2. Puts pressure on the organization to force the Coaches hand in starting them knowing that #1 above is true.

Think about that for a second.....You're a HC and you've just acquired a really talented player who is not quite ready, but you have to play him because your boss and general practice compels you to go against everything that you know to be right as a coach. So you start him knowing that his success rate is far below what it would have been had you taken the time to properly transition him.

I'm not saying that this should or should not take years to do, players being individuals will adjust according to their own constitutions. The rare few will almost get it right away, some will take a relatively short bit of time, while others will either take longer or never master it. Almost all of it will depend on the organizational structure, which must include a highly qualified QB's coach.

 

[Stymietee]

While in theory your strategy makes a whole lot of sense, in practice its just not that simple. First, there just aren't that many QBs coming out of college that are damned near starting talent. This is what causes so many teams to reach. So to just find an almost starter in rounds 2-3 is a huge part luck. Now we did it with KC in the 4th. But that is the first guy we have drafted at that position in 20 years, in any round, that had starter potential. I do agree that using a pick on a long shot potential, like a Sudfeld, is probably a wasted pick. We could have just as easily found a UFA that would be just as far along as Sudfeld at this point in his career.

Clearly you always want to be in upgrade/replacement mode at every position on the team (including coaches). Part of the problem with teams such as us, CLE, Jax, etc is that we have historically had so little depth across the board that we have so many parts that always need replacing every year. This is the first year in a long while where I actually see significant depth at many key positions. Unfortunately, QB is probably not one of them. What we need to get out of is the major reloads every year where 30-40% of our starting line up is being reloaded (like our entire DL from last year to this year). Teams like NE may just reload a position or two every year, but the bulk of the team stays in place from year to year.

I believe that the reach in this instance are with the 1st round picks. Desperation being the key factor as it was here with you know who, not only compelled this organization to way overpay for the privilege to get him but also in pushing a starter role when clearly he was NOT prepared for the transition into the NFL.

In fact, contrary to your point that "there just aren't that many QBs coming out of college that are damned near starting talent." I believe that almost all of them fit this description. With few exceptions, most will require some sort of adjustment period in becoming NFL ready. This is increasingly true as schools are using more mobile guys and tailoring their offenses in order to make things simpler for them (one read, or cutting the field in half type stuff)

To be fair, there is the school of thought that insists that, high 1st round picks generally should come in as starters. I ADAMANTLY DISAGREE with this philosophy. Impatience leading to this type of desperation does two things IMO;

1. increases the rate of failure because they aren't properly transitioned to the NFL game.

2. Puts pressure on the organization to force the Coaches hand in starting them knowing that #1 above is true.

Think about that for a second.....You're a HC and you've just acquired a really talented player who is not quite ready, but you have to play him because your boss and general practice compels you to go against everything that you know to be right as a coach. So you start him knowing that his success rate is far below what it would have been had you taken the time to properly transition him.

I'm not saying that this should or should not take years to do, players being individuals will adjust according to their own constitutions. The rare few will almost get it right away, some will take a relatively short bit of time, while others will either take longer or never master it at all. Almost all of it will depend on the organizational structure, which must include a highly qualified QB's coach, a patient owner, and a GM who selects the player most qualified to fit his HC's system......AND.......a whole lot of honesty between them. Shit ain't rocket science guys!

 

[SoCalWizFan]

Agree. We were short talent when Snyder bought the team. Since then our FO has spent a ton on average or worse FAs. Mostly ignored the draft or drafted poorly, which includes giving away tons of draft picks under almost every HC until the last few years. Shanahan drafted some of the best players on the team but there aren't enough complimentary players.

IMO we have the best talent we have had since Snyder bought the team but need more to be a very good team.

Agree but would caveat that by stating that if they somehow let Cousins go next offseason a lot of this would go out the window. It would then be a crapshoot at QB which is a very critical position. BTW - as far as these drafting guidelines go - here is another one.

Never, ever trade a ton of draft choices to obtain a QB high in the draft unless it is an almost 100% certainty that the guy is a once in a lifetime QB (e.g. not RG3). For the sake of one decent season RG3 set this franchise back quite a bit. Some folks here like to argue that not paying Cousins extra money would free things up in other areas (kind of a false pretense) but just ignore what the Redskins could have acquired with all of those draft picks used for the RG3 trade. Bottom line is try to develop your own QB as much as possible and draft replacements QBs with your own picks.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

While in theory your strategy makes a whole lot of sense, in practice its just not that simple. First, there just aren't that many QBs coming out of college that are damned near starting talent. This is what causes so many teams to reach. So to just find an almost starter in rounds 2-3 is a huge part luck. Now we did it with KC in the 4th. But that is the first guy we have drafted at that position in 20 years, in any round, that had starter potential. I do agree that using a pick on a long shot potential, like a Sudfeld, is probably a wasted pick. We could have just as easily found a UFA that would be just as far along as Sudfeld at this point in his career.

Clearly you always want to be in upgrade/replacement mode at every position on the team (including coaches). Part of the problem with teams such as us, CLE, Jax, etc is that we have historically had so little depth across the board that we have so many parts that always need replacing every year. This is the first year in a long while where I actually see significant depth at many key positions. Unfortunately, QB is probably not one of them. What we need to get out of is the major reloads every year where 30-40% of our starting line up is being reloaded (like our entire DL from last year to this year). Teams like NE may just reload a position or two every year, but the bulk of the team stays in place from year to year.

Agree. The problem is that the offenses for big time college teams are not the same type that thrive in the NFL. As a result you never know if the QBs on these teams will truly do well in the NFL & many have failed including those taken in the top 5 of the draft.

Some of the QBs who play at smaller schools or who don't thrive as well in college are actually more suited for the NFL game or they just may be late bloomers. These are some of the guys who may make it in the NFL in spite of being drafted late or perhaps not at all. This is not an exact science. You can't make a blanket statement that no QB drafted in the 5th rd or later won't thrive in the NFL. Sure the odds are against it but not completely. You also have to factor in that late picks are not necessarily supposed to thrive so it is always a crapshoot anyhow. Good teams don't need to hit on all draft picks - just retain picks & try to hit on at least 50% of them if possible.

 

[j_y19]

Agree. The problem is that the offenses for big time college teams are not the same type that thrive in the NFL. As a result you never know if the QBs on these teams will truly do well in the NFL & many have failed including those taken in the top 5 of the draft.

Some of the QBs who play at smaller schools or who don't thrive as well in college are actually more suited for the NFL game or they just may be late bloomers. These are some of the guys who may make it in the NFL in spite of being drafted late or perhaps not at all. This is not an exact science. You can't make a blanket statement that no QB drafted in the 5th rd or later won't thrive in the NFL. Sure the odds are against it but not completely. You also have to factor in that late picks are not necessarily supposed to thrive so it is always a crapshoot anyhow. Good teams don't need to hit on all draft picks - just retain picks & try to hit on at least 50% of them if possible.

Yup. I almost think that the type of offense a QB runs in college is just as important to his NFL transition and success as his overall numbers. He who shall not be named is a perfect example. At Baylor, he destroyed everybody with pure speed and athleticism. He plays backyard football where he just ran around until someone was wide open or he himself could pick up large chunks of yards. But he had zero experience in running an NFL offense and it turns out that his skill set doesn't translate to success in the NFL. And the smaller school guys are constantly overlooked by the media so the fly under the radar.