Game Thread: Week 6: Redskins @ Jets

[SoCalWizFan]

3 will never be ready. The only reason I want to see him on the field is so he can finally prove that he is nothing more than a one trick pony and so we can take the cap hit for him next year.

Until proven otherwise neither Cousins nor RG3 is truly NFL ready (for different reasons). Honestly - barring a dramatic turnaround at the QB position - this team will be focusing elsewhere on the QB position next season. Again - it doesn't need to be a top 5 draft pick - just someone who can actually be somewhat talented, fundamentally sound to a degree and doesn't make game altering mistakes on a regular basis. They don't have to be the next Rodgers or Brady - just someone you can trust to contribute to a successful team. Sorry - but I just don't see that player on the current roster.

 

[Stymietee]

Until proven otherwise neither Cousins nor RG3 is truly NFL ready (for different reasons). Honestly - barring a dramatic turnaround at the QB position - this team will be focusing elsewhere on the QB position next season. Again - it doesn't need to be a top 5 draft pick - just someone who can actually be somewhat talented, fundamentally sound to a degree and doesn't make game altering mistakes on a regular basis. They don't have to be the next Rodgers or Brady - just someone you can trust to contribute to a successful team. Sorry - but I just don't see that player on the current roster.

It certainly would be (or would have been) helpful if this organization had the foresight to set up a QB school the way Green Bay had/has for their guys.

 

[Sharkinva]

It certainly would be (or would have been) helpful if this organization had the foresight to set up a QB school the way Green Bay had/has for their guys.

It would be nice to have a Hall of Fame bound QB as your starter that would ALLOW a team to set up a 3-4 year apprenticeship program for a young QB. Sadly we have the three stooges and none of them are likely to be on roster next year. So the concept of having a QB on roster for 3-4 years holding a clip board is a pipe dream and you know it as such. Next year happens one of two ways.

1. We draft a young QB early in the draft, he is fed to the wolves from day one and proceeds to get damaged.
2. The team decides to hang onto you know who for $16 million and we are drafting a QB in 2017.

IN either case Gruden is likely gone at the end of this season. Because despite all the "talent" we are a 3 win team.

 

[Stymietee]

It would be nice to have a Hall of Fame bound QB as your starter that would ALLOW a team to set up a 3-4 year apprenticeship program for a young QB. Sadly we have the three stooges and none of them are likely to be on roster next year. So the concept of having a QB on roster for 3-4 years holding a clip board is a pipe dream and you know it as such. Next year happens one of two ways.

1. We draft a young QB early in the draft, he is fed to the wolves from day one and proceeds to get damaged.
2. The team decides to hang onto you know who for $16 million and we are drafting a QB in 2017.

IN either case Gruden is likely gone at the end of this season. Because despite all the "talent" we are a 3 win team.

I know no such thing!!! I'm old school and that's evident. What's foolish is the number of people abandoning the tried and true for sink or swim. We all know the line Shark, patience is a.............. (bet you were able to finish it!)

 

[Sharkinva]

I know no such thing!!! I'm old school and that's evident. What's foolish is the number of people abandoning the tried and true for sink or swim. We all know the line Shark, patience is a.............. (bet you were able to finish it!)

Sty... your line of thinking would work if

1. We had a good starting QB to give us time to TEACH a young QB ( assuming of course we had drafted on worth the effort)

2. It would work if this were 25 years ago and we had the luxury of holding a players rights for 6 or 7 years.

We dont have either of those. So until we FIND a QB who can hold it down and do well for a 3-4 year stretch, we wont see this team draft a guy and simply sit him while he learns to play the position.

The reality is that in this era, a kid can either play at a high level by year three, or he is a backup in most cases. The only teams that are afforded the luxury of the tried and true are the ones that HAVE established starters in place.

 

[Sharkinva]

BUt I will bite Sty... who starts for the next 3-5 years while we set up a QB school to TEACH a young guy the position??

 

[Stymietee]

Couple of things Shark,
1. Nobody needs a HOF QB on their roster in order to set up a QB school, would it be helpful, yeah.
2. Didn't we have another young QB who would've qualified for such training in the first three or four years of his career? I believe that he's starting now.

 

[Stymietee]

BUt I will bite Sty... who starts for the next 3-5 years while we set up a QB school to TEACH a young guy the position??

You're not biting you're dodging the obvious, in fact you've said as much in other threads. So let me ask, if the team drafts a young QB next spring, who QB's while he learns?

Very unfortunate that the years expand to attempt tomarginalize a extremely strong point. The training program takes all of a couple of dedicated months. Graduation from the same will depend on the student. So please stop with the 3-5 years.

 

[Sharkinva]

You're not biting you're dodging the obvious, in fact you've said as much in other threads. So let me ask, if the team drafts a young QB next spring, who QB's while he learns?

NO one, because if we draft a QB next spring he will start. Plain and simple the only way you get the LUXURY of having a guy play sit and learn is IF you have an established starer in front of him. Kirk didnt get that benefit because all the QB coaches time was spent trying to FIX Bob. The next guy we draft wont get that chance because he will but thrown into starting from the moment we draft him. This simply isnt the NFL of the 60's through 90's Sty. SO unless you have a Brady, Manning, Favre or such on your roster, most teams are not going to have the luxury of drafting a young guy to teach. Hell even Dallas who has had an established starter has NOT had the ability to draft a young guy and teach him which is why they are dragging through guys like Weeden and Cassel right now with Romo injured. Its a product of the current NFL. And i dont see that changing, and especially not in DC>

 

[Stymietee]

Sty... your line of thinking would work if

1. We had a good starting QB to give us time to TEACH a young QB ( assuming of course we had drafted on worth the effort)

2. It would work if this were 25 years ago and we had the luxury of holding a players rights for 6 or 7 years.

We dont have either of those. So until we FIND a QB who can hold it down and do well for a 3-4 year stretch, we wont see this team draft a guy and simply sit him while he learns to play the position.

The reality is that in this era, a kid can either play at a high level by year three, or he is a backup in most cases. The only teams that are afforded the luxury of the tried and true are the ones that HAVE established starters in place.

This is madness!! So we've shifted from what could/should have been done to present tense. OK, let's play it your way. I will concede ALL of your points to you except under one condition............That the team in question is not rebuilding. This one is doing exactly that!!!! Draft the guy and while building your team, he
gets to know the offense better than the HC, runs the scout team, and works on fundamentals. Let any one of the guys that everyone now says are not the future here play as the team gets stronger. Bonus, you have a backup as one of the three stooges fills that role and in subsequent draft (s) another student goes to school.

 

[Stymietee]

NO one, because if we draft a QB next spring he will start. Plain and simple the only way you get the LUXURY of having a guy play sit and learn is IF you have an established starer in front of him. Kirk didnt get that benefit because all the QB coaches time was spent trying to FIX Bob. The next guy we draft wont get that chance because he will but thrown into starting from the moment we draft him. This simply isnt the NFL of the 60's through 90's Sty. SO unless you have a Brady, Manning, Favre or such on your roster, most teams are not going to have the luxury of drafting a young guy to teach. Hell even Dallas who has had an established starter has NOT had the ability to draft a young guy and teach him which is why they are dragging through guys like Weeden and Cassel right now with Romo injured. Its a product of the current NFL. And i dont see that changing, and especially not in DC>

You may be right about it not happening in D.C., however, there is a better way to assure steady QB play and it is as prescribed. Successful trends are set or bought back, maybe it's time to set another.

 

[Sharkinva]

This is madness!! So we've shifted from what could/should have been done to present tense. OK, let's play it your way. I will concede ALL of your points to you except under one condition............That the team in question is not rebuilding. This one is doing exactly that!!!! Draft the guy and while building your team, he
gets to know the offense better than the HC, runs the scout team, and works on fundamentals. Let any one of the guys that everyone now says are not the future here play as the team gets stronger. Bonus, you have a backup as one of the three stooges fills that role and in subsequent draft (s) another student goes to school.

Sty.... you are playing in hypotheticals. Name me the last top five or hell top 15 QB drafted in the last 20 years who has not come in as the day one starter for his team?? Lets stop trying to say well the Skins just mismanaged Bob which is what you are really hinting at. Lets look at the league as a whole. How many teams over the past 20 years have had a QB school where they mentor a guy for a few years BEFORE he gets thrust in as the starter?? I can name TWO... Romo and Rogers. One was an undrafted FA and the other was sitting behind a HOF QB. The QB school you speak of generally does not exist around the NFL any more.

 

[Stymietee]

NO one, because if we draft a QB next spring he will start. Plain and simple the only way you get the LUXURY of having a guy play sit and learn is IF you have an established starer in front of him. Kirk didnt get that benefit because all the QB coaches time was spent trying to FIX Bob. The next guy we draft wont get that chance because he will but thrown into starting from the moment we draft him. This simply isnt the NFL of the 60's through 90's Sty. SO unless you have a Brady, Manning, Favre or such on your roster, most teams are not going to have the luxury of drafting a young guy to teach. Hell even Dallas who has had an established starter has NOT had the ability to draft a young guy and teach him which is why they are dragging through guys like Weeden and Cassel right now with Romo injured. Its a product of the current NFL. And i dont see that changing, and especially not in DC>

While it may not be the 60's thru 90's NFL, one thing is certain the current method of developing an increasing number of QB's coming from schools that use spread offenses, for lack of a better word......BLOWS!!! Something will change in the coming years, might as well get ahead of the curve. I read your posts Shark, you've already tabbed the next drafted guy dogmeat because you like myself, don't see a lot to be desired in the draft. This team has already demonstrated what not to do with a highly touted young QB or two. Do you honestly believe that they would dare do the same thing hoping for a different result?

 

[Sharkinva]

While it may not be the 60's thru 90's NFL, one thing is certain the current method of developing an increasing number of QB's coming from schools that use spread offenses, for lack of a better word......BLOWS!!! Something will change in the coming years, might as well get ahead of the curve. I read your posts Shark, you've already tabbed the next drafted guy dogmeat because you like myself, don't see a lot to be desired in the draft. This team has already demonstrated what not to do with a highly touted young QB or two. Do you honestly believe that they would dare do the same thing hoping for a different result?

I think this is the new NFL. If you are drafted as a first round QB, you are expected to be able to start from day one. And this is not limited to the Redskins. Look at the Bucs, Titans and a few other teams who have drafted guys in the first round to play QB. I say again who was the last top 15 drafted QB to NOT start from day one for his team??

 

[skinsdad62]

i doubt you get an answer to this

i say this perhaps you can get a paxton lynch in round 2-4 and develop him the way sty sees it but you cant spend a 1st round pick on a qb and trot out brian hoyer , or colt mccoy or matt cassell for the next 3 years and retain this coach or the new one

the HC needs to win some too that is why shanny played robert day one . he had 2 losing seasons and he needed to appease an impatient owner and fan base to boot

 

[Stymietee]

Sty.... you are playing in hypotheticals. Name me the last top five or hell top 15 QB drafted in the last 20 years who has not come in as the day one starter for his team?? Lets stop trying to say well the Skins just mismanaged Bob which is what you are really hinting at. Lets look at the league as a whole. How many teams over the past 20 years have had a QB school where they mentor a guy for a few years BEFORE he gets thrust in as the starter?? I can name TWO... Romo and Rogers. One was an undrafted FA and the other was sitting behind a HOF QB. The QB school you speak of generally does not exist around the NFL any more.

Brady
Foles
Rivers
Vick

All sat in addition to the ones that you've named, of course, Brady was a 6th round pick but by your rules he was a top 10 Quarterback selection ( 7th QB taken in his draft class)

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Brady
Foles
Rivers
Vick

All sat in addition to the ones that you've named, of course, Brady was a 6th round pick but by your rules he was a top 10 Quarterback selection ( 7th QB taken in his draft class)

I'm a bit confused on your position Sty. . You have made it clear that the Green Bay model of grooming Rogers for several years was the way to go. Now you are saying months which is a total departure from your earlier position.

Not sure why you would prop up a guy like Nick Foles to use to prove your point but he was starting for an injured Vick in his rookie season and the full time starter in year 2. Vick was the full time starter in Atlanta by Year 2 . These other franchise QBs were full time starters by Year 2, most started their rookie sesson: Rothlisburger, Ryan, Luck, Brees, Newton, Wilson, Peyton, Palmer as well as Super Bowl winners Eli and Flacco. So in case you still believe the Rogers model is the only way to go, well it isn't.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

i doubt you get an answer to this

i say this perhaps you can get a paxton lynch in round 2-4 and develop him the way sty sees it but you cant spend a 1st round pick on a qb and trot out brian hoyer , or colt mccoy or matt cassell for the next 3 years and retain this coach or the new one

the HC needs to win some too that is why shanny played robert day one . he had 2 losing seasons and he needed to appease an impatient owner and fan base to boot

Why does it need to be one of those extremes? Guys - tone down the drama a bit. I liked your initial take Skinsdad but then you had to amp it up for some reason. The difference between now and several years ago is SM. The problem with 3 years ago was that Shanahan was the coach and de facto GM - that rarely works & causes issues like the ones we witnessed.

Barring a major turnaround this season I see nothing wrong with going w/ your draft suggestion & finding a vet QB to perhaps play for a year or so - not 3 or 4 years unless they shock everyone. I can see this working with or without Gruden.

 

[skinsdad62]

Why does it need to be one of those extremes? Guys - tone down the drama a bit. I liked your initial take Skinsdad but then you had to amp it up for some reason. The difference between now and several years ago is SM. The problem with 3 years ago was that Shanahan was the coach and de facto GM - that rarely works & causes issues like the ones we witnessed.

Barring a major turnaround this season I see nothing wrong with going w/ your draft suggestion & finding a vet QB to perhaps play for a year or so - not 3 or 4 years unless they shock everyone. I can see this working with or without Gruden.

i am not sure how i amped up anything . if you are giving an HC 2 years to win before wanting him gone you cant take a 1st round resource and sit him

 

[Krusheasy]

Next year happens one of two ways.

1. We draft a young QB early in the draft, he is fed to the wolves from day one and proceeds to get damaged.
2. The team decides to hang onto you know who for $16 million and we are drafting a QB in 2017.

IN either case Gruden is likely gone at the end of this season. Because despite all the "talent" we are a 3 win team.

option 3 ...

we address the secondary & other pressing issues and continue with the Cousins/McCoy/Grossman/Beck circus one more year & wait to throw a boat load of money at Andrew Luck in 2017 free agency.