commanders off season thread 2023

[duke1861]

It was anybody but TH b/c of the overpay for CW and the drafting of Howell. IF ther was confidence in TH those two things wouldn't have happened. TH started b/c CW got hurt. Im saying we should of went with Howell at that point to see what we have in him. The team knew what is had in TH.

That isn't true Dean. You keep telling yourself that but that doesn't make it true.

Wentz was slated to be the starter
TH was slated to be the backup
Howell was slated to be the developmental QB who was going to hold the clipboard for year 1.

Rivera knew Wentz could be cut after 1 year and that TH would be a free agent in 2023. The plan made sense...except...they targeted Carson Wentz as a the QB. You supported this move wholeheartedly and posted articles and were here on Thanksgiving and Christmas Day arguing with people about Wentz.

TH got the start because the staff did not believe Howell was ready at that point. Its pretty simple. If Howell was not progressing in practice like he should have and TH was out performing Howell, then yes, you start TH. This is common sense.

 

[deanpet21]

Well Dean will disagree here.

He specifically said we found our qb after week 1 and said that turner simply needed a strong arm qb. He said the trade could be one of the best in recent history.
When presented with data and facts, he got mad and told me to get off the board.

Dean has admitted he was wrong but still continues to defend wentz in a way and bashes TH.

At the time we needed a qb that is why the trade was made. it didnt work out so they should of went to Howell. Huge mistake.

 

[duke1861]

I m not denying CW was supposed to be the starter. We should of gave Howell a chance after the CW injury. Why are you confused on that point? Now we dont know what we really have in Howell. FWIW Howell outplayed TH in training camp. TH played b/c he had more experience in Turners system.

Howell wasn't ready Dean...the coaching staff clearly thought that. WHy start Howell when he wasn't ready?

 

[duke1861]

At the time we needed a qb that is why the trade was made. it didnt work out so they should of went to Howell. Huge mistake.

The bigger mistake was Wentz and you know it.
You are still defending Wentz Dean.

 

[deanpet21]

That isn't true Dean. You keep telling yourself that but that doesn't make it true.

Wentz was slated to be the starter
TH was slated to be the backup
Howell was slated to be the developmental QB who was going to hold the clipboard for year 1.

Rivera knew Wentz could be cut after 1 year and that TH would be a free agent in 2023. The plan made sense...except...they targeted Carson Wentz as a the QB. You supported this move wholeheartedly and posted articles and were here on Thanksgiving and Christmas Day arguing with people about Wentz.

TH got the start because the staff did not believe Howell was ready at that point. Its pretty simple. If Howell was not progressing in practice like he should have and TH was out performing Howell, then yes, you start TH. This is common sense.

yes the plan was to bring in a vet starting QB which they did. When the plan failed Howell should of gotten a shot. The team knew what they had in TH, they didn't know what they had in Howell.

 

[deanpet21]

Howell wasn't ready Dean...the coaching staff clearly thought that. WHy start Howell when he wasn't ready?

thats nonsense. i dont believe that

 

[deanpet21]

The bigger mistake was Wentz and you know it.
You are still defending Wentz Dean.

not defending him, im defending the move to get a QB in here. You cant fault RR for trying to get a starting QB here. of course i was excirted to get a qb here b/c i knew what we had in TH

 

[duke1861]

not defending him, im defending the move to get a QB in here. You cant fault RR for trying to get a starting QB here

I can fault him for picking a bust, overpaying him, and then starting him again in a must win game.

yes, you are defending Wentz. You know he is a crappy QB and you know you were wrong about him.

 

[duke1861]

thats nonsense. i dont believe that

Well, it is the apparent truth Dean.

Do you still believe we will sweep the Giants and win 11 games as well? Do you still believe Turner's offense will work as well?

 

[duke1861]

yes the plan was to bring in a vet starting QB which they did. When the plan failed Howell should of gotten a shot. The team knew what they had in TH, they didn't know what they had in Howell.

So you admit that Wentz was NOT the answer that you thought he was?

 

[skinsdad62]

I'm pretty clear on the whole competition bit but have yet to hear about who and what that competition must be.

The goal, I think, is to upgrade the position, and without trading for the same, if available offers us zero competition.

IMO drafting a late-round QB puts us in the same situation as not having drafted a late-round QB. I simply don't believe in them and even when they show promise, the gigantic leaps and bounds that they have to make just to become a middle-tier NFL QB are daunting! I'm not saying that it can't be done, I just don't believe in this long-shot approach. Washington has been doing that for the entirety of the Snyder ownership AND they've taken this approach without hiring an accompanying complimentary HC who develops him, through a scheme, that uses the strengths of said player.

Signing a veteran that can at least make all of the throws AND is available was just tried... I give you... Carson Wince!!

One other thing, right now, Sam Howell is just another novice with one game's worth of experience. What makes him a novice? Well, unless they hire an OC in-house who wants to stick with the old offensive scheme, he too will be new to the new offense. How on earth do you sell the idea to your veterans that the plan is to go with a second-year rookie, a late-round rookie, and a dud whose job will be that of an I.C.E guy? (I.C.E. = In Case of Emergency)

Hey wait we have Jake Fromme on the futures contract roster

 

[deanpet21]

I can fault him for picking a bust, overpaying him, and then starting him again in a must win game.

yes, you are defending Wentz. You know he is a crappy QB and you know you were wrong about him.

right i thought he would be better than TH. I was wrong about that but at the time I thought it was an upgrade.

 

[deanpet21]

Well, it is the apparent truth Dean.

Do you still believe we will sweep the Giants and win 11 games as well? Do you still believe Turner's offense will work as well?

we got 8. Should have been more.

 

[deanpet21]

So you admit that Wentz was NOT the answer that you thought he was?

yes now but not at the time of the trade.

 

[dcrising]

Jesus i am so sick of this. didn't this conversation take place 6 weeks ago and beyond?

 

[skinsdad62]

i agree with this and made the same arguments to keep BS and Flowers. Turning strengths into avg isnt good policy

 

[duke1861]

i agree with this and made the same arguments to keep BS and Flowers. Turning strengths into avg isnt good policy

I can see both sides. The problem is that we start to soak up cap room and neglect other areas.
Say we sign Payne to a 20 million-a-year deal. I think we have all expressed interest in keeping Sweat and Young (most likely). I am giving Sweat and Young 20 million a year as an assumption that we resign them. The current cap is 220 million a year. This will obviously increase a bit.

The problem is then that you are dedicating about 37% of your total cap to the DLine. To me, that doesn't make sense. The DLine is important, but so is also spreading out the cap and securing talent everywhere on the field. We will eventually need to resign Howell or sign a QB to a long-term deal. A top 10 QB commands over 35 million currently. You are now looking at 53% of your cap going just to the QB and DLine.

Again, just because we draft someone doesn't mean we need to keep them. In a perfect world, that would be ideal; however, we have one of the worst LB corp and OLines in the entire NFL. Why continue to payout each drafted 1st round DLineman and be forced to cheaper on other areas of need? Having Sweat, Young, Allen, and either Mathis/Ridgeway is not an average DLine at all. If Payne wants to be here, great, let's get a deal done that makes sense for both parties. Tagging him literally makes no sense at all. It did work with Cousins or BS...and it won't work with Payne. At some point, we have to stop going cheap on other units and address them. We literally need 3-4 OLineman...the money must go there in my opinion. I am NOT against resigning Payne, I simply think we have more pressing needs and we do not have endless cap room. I am not understanding the notion here that resigning Payne is a must or else the defense will fall apart.

There again, I was against drafting four straight DLineman with our 1st round pick to begin with. It made no sense to me. Also, if we resign Payne, you are really forcing the new HC to bring in a DC who runs a 4-3. I could be wrong but only 12 of 32 teams run a 4-3...most of the NFL runs a 3-4 scheme.

 

[Rowdy]

i agree with this and made the same arguments to keep BS and Flowers. Turning strengths into avg isnt good policy

You do realize flowers went the whole year not being signed, and many teams could’ve used guards? I think there was more to his story

 

[skinsdad62]

You do realize flowers went the whole year not being signed, and many teams could’ve used guards? I think there was more to his story

Perhaps

 

[skinsdad62]

I can see both sides. The problem is that we start to soak up cap room and neglect other areas.
Say we sign Payne to a 20 million-a-year deal. I think we have all expressed interest in keeping Sweat and Young (most likely). I am giving Sweat and Young 20 million a year as an assumption that we resign them. The current cap is 220 million a year. This will obviously increase a bit.

The problem is then that you are dedicating about 37% of your total cap to the DLine. To me, that doesn't make sense. The DLine is important, but so is also spreading out the cap and securing talent everywhere on the field. We will eventually need to resign Howell or sign a QB to a long-term deal. A top 10 QB commands over 35 million currently. You are now looking at 53% of your cap going just to the QB and DLine.

Again, just because we draft someone doesn't mean we need to keep them. In a perfect world, that would be ideal; however, we have one of the worst LB corp and OLines in the entire NFL. Why continue to payout each drafted 1st round DLineman and be forced to cheaper on other areas of need? Having Sweat, Young, Allen, and either Mathis/Ridgeway is not an average DLine at all. If Payne wants to be here, great, let's get a deal done that makes sense for both parties. Tagging him literally makes no sense at all. It did work with Cousins or BS...and it won't work with Payne. At some point, we have to stop going cheap on other units and address them. We literally need 3-4 OLineman...the money must go there in my opinion. I am NOT against resigning Payne, I simply think we have more pressing needs and we do not have endless cap room. I am not understanding the notion here that resigning Payne is a must or else the defense will fall apart.

There again, I was against drafting four straight DLineman with our 1st round pick to begin with. It made no sense to me. Also, if we resign Payne, you are really forcing the new HC to bring in a DC who runs a 4-3. I could be wrong but only 12 of 32 teams run a 4-3...most of the NFL runs a 3-4 scheme.

The cap is an excuse , the money will be there