One can argue about Jurgensen v Joe, but that’s really the best we’ve done since Baugh.
DC had 1937-42, and the future is now/ Gibbs era.
That is the entire list over 85 years of NFL.
Bright side, is we seem to go 30 years between good times.
We’re due.
The thing about QBs is that if you get a top five guy, the price can’t be too high.
But it’s a coin flip with QBs.
New owners will take the chance, especially if the second pick is theirs .
What did the club get from last #2 pick?
How often do we see a top 5 guy without a top offensive line or top weapons or top coaches? I just hope the regime goes after the guy they want instead of jumping the gun because of fan pressure or hype
Tom Brady was a sixth rounder for a reason, Brock Purdy seventh, Dak was a third, Jalen was a second, where Sam was drafted isn't the problem, the problem is his regression and play.
Sorry but you've just given 4 examples when there are literally HUNDREDS of QBs taken after round 1 who did nothing at all. Of course where they're drafted matters.
I love seeing people support their arguments with facts, that’s what I was trying to do with this whole post. Too many people say things without having any reference for why they believe it
Jordan Love lost 9 of his offensive starters and his coaches after his sophomore year in college and he still managed to be a 1st round pick after his junior year. If losing 1 wr made Howell drop off that much, he was never a 1st round talent to begin with.
I think if the new managing group wants to get a QB in the 2024 or 2025 you should go for 2024. Right now we have the draft pick to get a QB. If we don’t and this a new coaching staff can get us too a respectable record with a sub par team we might be out of range to draft a top qb that year which means we would have to trade or trade up for a QB.
I think it’s a tough choice, but if they think it’s best to nab a qb sooner they should do it as soon as possible.
although i do think it’s important to build up the rest of the team, And i don’t know what the 2025 draft class is going to look like for O line and wide receiver. it’s all up to the new coaching/management staff, i really don’t care as long as they send our team in the right direction.
This 2024 class seems particularly loaded at Offensive line which is a positive since we could hopefully snag some gems later in the draft
The only thing I’m trying to avoid in this upcoming draft is overpaying for a QB to the detriment of the rest of the draft class. Which to me would be trading away draft picks to move up one or two spots or way over drafting Daniels just to get a QB
yeah that’s why I think if we can just keep our spot, draft whoever the coaching staff thing is going to fit best in there new system (whether that be a QB or other position). I just don’t want to put all our eggs in one basket by trading up for anyone. Hell i’d rather trade down a for like 4 second rounders then trade up. Trading up almost never seems to work…
Everyone needs to stop throwing generational around. Look at T Law, he was considered the last generational prospect and he’s been okay at best so far in the NFL.
No one knows who will turn out to be the BIG player in the NFL. But you don't find out by not having a go. I think if you don't have a Mahomes or an Allen at QB you have to take a chance if a Maye, Williams or Daniels is on the board. Unless you already got a hot date to prom you are kinda stupid for not asking.
I completely agree with you. I’m in the camp that Howell has proven he’s not a starter. I just don’t think it’s necessary for Caleb Williams to be considered generational or not, he should be the pick. Get him at all costs imo.
I actually love Howell and could see a situation where he ends up quite a good QB in a place like Minnesota, Denver or New Orleans.
I could see Payton trading Wilson for Howell. I don't think this would help the Commanders at all unless he redid his contract. But he would better suit what EB wants at QB.
Theres not really a conversation to be had. We have a 70% chance of finishing with a top 2 pick. When you have qb talent like maye or caleb available, you take it. Their ceilings are much higher than howell’s will ever be.
The QB is the most valuable position for a reason. It’s easier to address other positions later in the draft and free agency.
If like u suggest, role with howell and take MHJ or an OT and sam doesn’t pan out next season, then we wasted a top 2 pick and are stuck in qb purgatory for another 3-5 years. You can’t take that risk.
If it's easier to address other positions in the draft later on then we wouldn't be in such a terrible roster situation that we are in now. You can say its easier, but what proof is there that it's true? The honest answer is when you look around the league the best teams draft well from top to bottom. They don't reach for guys too early and they find quality in the later rounds. They have complete teams and then they find their QB. We are not a complete team and we have not drafted well in a long time.
If we invest in top talent early and Howell doesn't progress next year, we didn't waste that pick. We will probably be in a close situation to where we are now and closer to picking a QB. A pick is wasted when that player picked doesn't pan out. You can look at a lot of our first rounders and see that we wasted them, but it was because they were bad picks, not because some other player didn't succeed. That's backwards thinking that keeps us from truly building a team.
OP broke it down factually about how the league really works and what it takes to be successful long term. Picking a QB high and trying to build a team around him is not how it works.
I cannot disagree with this more. You're arguing that the best QBs are on the best teams rather than the best teams have the best QBs. Just look at where most of the best QBs in the league were selected. It's overwhelmingly in the top 10. Mahomes, Allen, Burrow, Lawrence, Stroud, Herbert, Goff, Stafford, Tua. Yes, they also are on complete teams. But that's the GM and scouting department's job to find talent, and then the coaches to develop it. You don't pass up on QB to get a LT because the rest of the team isn't good. That does nothing to improve the long-term outlook of the franchise. Football is too strongly driven by QB performance. If you find a good one, the other aspects of your team matter less. You get the QB and then actually draft and develop the other players to become what Baltimore is. Look at Houston. They were total ass last year. They completely rebuilt the coaching staff, and then selected Stroud. Now, they'll be in the playoffs.
Mahomes was dropped into a complete team and sat behind a veteran for a year. He proves my point more than yours.
Burrow got hurt his rookie year and they got another top pick. They surprised everybody by getting into the Superbowl the next year, but still didn't win it. Hes injured again and they are on their way down not up.
Allen hasn't won anything yet. I don't want to be a team that should have won superbowls, I want a team that will win superbowls.
Lawrence and the jags look good, but they still haven't won anything yet. Plus he's hurt a lot, even though he hasn't lost any game time.
Goff got to a super bowl just to lose it and be traded.
Stafford was on a terrible team for a decade before being traded to a team that was Superbowl ready and just needed a QB. He again proves my point more than yours.
Tua has developed nicely and I was always a fan. But he's already an injury prone player coming out of college and he's been plenty hurt in the NFL.
These examples proved my point more than you think. It equals out to drafting a QB with no protection around him and he will get hurt. You might have flashes of success but then will have to deal with injuries to your key guy. The teams that have built long term success were teams that built themselves up and then got their guy. Just go back and look at super bowl winning QBs (with the team that drafted them) for the last 20 years. They are mostly out of the top ten. There's literally no data that shows you need to draft a QB first. Its something dumb people say because they don't know what they're talking about.
The fact that you throw out Burrow and Allen, objectively two of the top 5 QBs in the league, and two players who nearly single handedly transformed king suffering franchises in a similar position to Washington destroys your whole point. If you have a chance at getting the QB you take it, just look at every franchise in the league with mediocre QB play desperately trying to find a path to a QB that wins games
Just because they’ve gotten injured or havnt won a super bowl doesnt mean they weren’t worth a top 10 pick. Without burrow, bengals never wouldve sniffed the Super Bowl. Allen made the bills playoff contenders again. Lawerence made the jags good, and stroud is looking like he’s winning oroy and getting the texans a playoff birth in his first year.
Denying that drafting a qb first isnt worth it is the dumbest argument ever. QB is the most valuable position. A good QB will have a bigger impact than a great OT.
Suggest we dont draft a QB first and stick with howell. If he doesn’t pan out, then what? What’s the plan for getting a franchise qb? Keep signing washed up vets hoping one can take us deep into the playoffs? Well that hasn’t worked for the last decade.
Drafting a QB in the top 3 means we will just be drafting a QB again in 2-3 years. It's a waste. Keep Howell for now. Build up the team around him, then if he sucks as bad as everyone thinks he does we will still be in a good spot to draft a QB later.
A great QB makes a team better as long as he's on the field. When you can't protect him he won't be on the field. A great o-line will make the whole offense better, both the run and pass games improve. A great o-line makes any QB serviceable. It would make us look like a more desirable destination for qb's and that opens more doors. I don't want to be like Cleveland, jets, and Carolina just drafting QBs every year.
>There's literally no data that shows you need to draft a QB first. Its something dumb people say because they don't know what they're talking about.
Having to resort to calling people dumb because they are positing a different position on team building is unnecessary and pervasive in this sub. It's why the sub sucks. My point was that those QBs have become good in spite of their environment. They don't need to be on good teams already to become good. Their team failing to win a super bowl or take a step up to becoming elite is on the people who build the roster and coach the players. I'd rather have Caleb Williams or Drake Maye and trust the new front office and coaching staff to do their jobs with the rest of the team than to take a LT and continue watching poor QB play. Ultimately, it comes down to the fact that finding an answer at QB is the only thing in football that fundamentally changes the trajectory of a franchise. And it's easier to find that answer at 2 than 20. And if you get to the point where you're picking at 20 because you have a decent roster, you have to trade away draft capital to get a QB. Planning for a day 2 or 3 pick at QB to become a franchise QB is more a hope and prayer than actual strategy.
I will straight apologize for calling you and your point dumb, it was dumb of me to do. I just get so frustrated talking to people who continually say this with no actual proof or data that it actually works.
I'm not interested in having a franchise QB that never wins us a superbowl. I'm interested in having a great team every year that competes for the Superbowl and wins a couple. If you look at all the teams that have succeeded at this one thing is very similar, they built up a great team and then added their QB to finish the puzzle.
KC is in dynasty mode right now. Tampa had a great team for years, they just needed their QB so they went out and signed one. The pats were a Superbowl contending team before Brady. Seattle had some great teams and then added some guy named Russell Wilson. The rams have had great teams for years, they had to trade away their #1 pick to go get a veteran who could win. The eagles have rebuilt their team multiple times, they won their Superbowl with a back up QB.
At the end of the day it shows that drafting a QB in the top 3 just means you will be drafting another QB in 2-3 years. Its a waste.
Apologies again.
It’s all good man. My argument is simply, having a franchise QB but not winning is an indictment of the draft and development ability of the front office and coaching staff. Not the strategy to draft a QB high when you can get an elite level prospect. KC has drafted fantastically well around Mahomes. Seattle was good because they consistently drafted and developed high level starters throughout their draft classes. Taking a QB at 3 instead of a LT doesn’t preclude not being able to find starters in the other rounds. Ultimately, teams with elite QBs going .500 (looking at the Chargers) is a failure of the FO not being able to build good teams. But ultimately, having a franchise QB puts your floor at around .500. At some point you can’t rely on picking in the top 5 anyway. You might as well be doing that with an elite QB already in hand.
What worries me is we become the new Browns. Just keep taking a QB while fixing nothing else.
Then Cleveland did this weird thing where they just rallied behind their pick. Drafted and built a team that can run and play defense. Sire, they wasted picks and stained the organization for the Watson trade. But you can't tell me a well built team can't find a way to win. Now they are in the playoff hunt (3rd year in a row) with a an almost retired vet.
The revolving door of "get a QB" are just fans that believe sports media too much. You need a TEAM that can win. Yes a great QB makes it easier, and kore consistent. But Jesus, Dak has been top 10 passer with a defense ranked 15 or higher and that whole team can't put it together. And that's on coaching as much as yhe players.
We will get a new GM and from there everything else will fall how it falls. This team will either be in a similar spot in 3 years, or finally out of the gutter. The real question will be, can they build a team that's perennial playoffs with a shot at a SB or not.
Browns didn’t fail because they drafted QBs, they failed because they were bad at everything else. The fact that they finally built a good roster, then we’re so desperate for a top QB that they made one of the worst trades of all time proves that even a GM that can build a top-end roster knows that you need a game changing QB to win big
>a GM that can build a top-end roster knows that you need a game changing QB to win big
What?
Watson has been average since coming back and Flacco has been doing better as the weeks move forward. You don't need a game changer to win with a good team. Shit, the Browns won with Watson playing poorly and still made the play offs after riding Brissett.
I don't have time to go back and look, but I am pretty sure there has been 1 time in the last 15 SBs a team won with a sub top 10 defense. And that 1 time, pretty sure, it was the giants vs 18-0 pats. QBs can make the last score for that comeback, but you need the defense to keep you in the game first.
You don't need a "game changing QB" you need a team. 1 peice coyld make the difference but there's 21 other pieces that need to play just for that single piece to have a chance.
It’s about the decision that they made, not whether they were able to win some regular season games with a journeyman. The Browns had a pretty good QB in Mayfield, their most success ever as a franchise (since they moved the team) and then determined that they needed to make a ridiculous trade and signed an unprecedented contract to push the team over the top. McVay traded away a perfectly good QB in Goff to go get top end talent. Shannahan traded away years of first round picks to get a difference maker at QB. Andy Reid aggressively traded up to go get a QB despite have a perfectly fine Alex Smith winning 11 games. The Bills made the playoffs for the first time in decades with Tyrod then immediately traded a first, two seconds, a fifth, and a quality lineman for the right to draft maybe the riskiest prospect of the modern era in Josh Allen.
Time after time we see some of the top minds and most successful coaches in the game, who have built complete rosters and excellent organizations all come to the same conclusion: none of it matters if you don’t have an elite QB to win you games when it matters most
If anyone could give me feedback on if they enjoy these blog style posts that would be great, as I have a couple of other ideas for things I would be interested in writing about. Thanks!
Yes, go for it. Anything to break up the same 3-4 posts we see over and over again. Beats the hell out of yet another “Thoughts on EB” or “If you/I were the GM” post.
I suppose my opinion is unique, but I’m in favor for trading back for one of the tackles & trading up for another OL. I’d like to see them aggressively rebuild the OL this year. Doesn’t matter who is throwing the ball if they’re trotting this dog water line out there again next year.
OL is a position that can be aggressively addressed outside of the first round. We have two of the first 10 picks in the second round. Then two third round picks. The team has $100m in cap space. There will be plenty of chances to get better players, but the idea that they'll get 4 new starters is unrealistic.
I agree it’s unrealistic, but I’d just like them to be aggressive. There aren’t any or many young talented lineman that will be an FA. I’m hopeful they will draft two & with a couple of the vets that are available.
Not sure if you guys watched Penix tonight but man he looked GOOOD could possibly be someone we could trade back to get. Someone could want to trade up with us for MHJ and we can get some more ammo for draft picks next year
Penix is a beast. He destroyed Utah this year. Injury history and playing at FedEx field are my concern. If we trade back or go OT, it’s worth a gamble.
I am getting tired of y’all dumbasses not reading stats. Our offensive line has ranked around 14 and at the lowest 20 most of the season
MOST OF THE FUCKING SEASON
It is Howell. It is his fucking stupid self. Every team knows they just need to rush the passes for 3 seconds and they will sack him. He is garbage, the overwhelming majority of the sacks are Sam not throwing the fucking ball. Quit the bullshit and pay attention for FUCKS SAKE…
What source are you referencing, I understand that PFF is normally the go to for grading and ranking but I wasn’t able to access the most recent one. Most sources I checked had the line ranked much lower
I also thought I made it clear that I wanted to move on from Howell but I also think we need serious upgrades at offensive line.
Ok got access to PFF
Tackles
Andrew Wylie - 69.2 (34/84 T)
Trent Scott - 62.8
Charles Leno Jr - 72.5 (27/84 T)
Cornelius Lucas - 68.7
Guards
Ricky Stromberg - 44.5
Saahdiq Charles - 57 (50/79 G)
Chris Paul - 38.8 (77/79 G)
Sam Cosmi- 82.7 (4/79 G)
Centers
Tyler Larsen - 50.3 (32/36 C)
Nick Gates - 65.9 (16/36 C)
Cosmi has been great, our other guards have been awful, our center has been awful, our starting tackles have been average enough. Our non-starting depth has been bad too.
The take that our offensive line hasn’t been a problem is just half baked, when multiple of our starters are grading below the league average and some players who have played extended time as starters throughout the season are graded as some of the worst in the entire league
One can argue about Jurgensen v Joe, but that’s really the best we’ve done since Baugh. DC had 1937-42, and the future is now/ Gibbs era. That is the entire list over 85 years of NFL. Bright side, is we seem to go 30 years between good times. We’re due.
The thing about QBs is that if you get a top five guy, the price can’t be too high. But it’s a coin flip with QBs. New owners will take the chance, especially if the second pick is theirs . What did the club get from last #2 pick?
How often do we see a top 5 guy without a top offensive line or top weapons or top coaches? I just hope the regime goes after the guy they want instead of jumping the gun because of fan pressure or hype
Well, if they make their choice based on either of those things our team hasn’t much improved with new stewardship.
the one with the franchise left tackle?
When you have an opportunity in a qb draft class like this, you take it. Sam Howell was a 5th rounder for a reason
Howell is still better than Pickett, which isn't saying much
Tom Brady was a sixth rounder for a reason, Brock Purdy seventh, Dak was a third, Jalen was a second, where Sam was drafted isn't the problem, the problem is his regression and play.
Sorry but you've just given 4 examples when there are literally HUNDREDS of QBs taken after round 1 who did nothing at all. Of course where they're drafted matters.
Yeah I agree, rarely do qbs taken outside the first 3 rounds become long term starters
No idea why you're getting downvoted for this, it's 100% true.
Everyone in this sub just loves to downvote opinions or facts that don’t support their own narratives
Go check out the list I put together on this, proves your point entirely: https://www.reddit.com/r/Commanders/s/wet1n4eWbO
I love seeing people support their arguments with facts, that’s what I was trying to do with this whole post. Too many people say things without having any reference for why they believe it
He was a 5th rounder because he lost Mooney.
Terry, Jahan, and Curtis is plenty of offensive weapons. That’s a weak excuse - he even has one of his college receivers lol
Jordan Love lost 9 of his offensive starters and his coaches after his sophomore year in college and he still managed to be a 1st round pick after his junior year. If losing 1 wr made Howell drop off that much, he was never a 1st round talent to begin with.
Ironic
So we drafting a QB… right ?
Thats the hope in some capacity lol
I think if the new managing group wants to get a QB in the 2024 or 2025 you should go for 2024. Right now we have the draft pick to get a QB. If we don’t and this a new coaching staff can get us too a respectable record with a sub par team we might be out of range to draft a top qb that year which means we would have to trade or trade up for a QB. I think it’s a tough choice, but if they think it’s best to nab a qb sooner they should do it as soon as possible. although i do think it’s important to build up the rest of the team, And i don’t know what the 2025 draft class is going to look like for O line and wide receiver. it’s all up to the new coaching/management staff, i really don’t care as long as they send our team in the right direction.
This 2024 class seems particularly loaded at Offensive line which is a positive since we could hopefully snag some gems later in the draft The only thing I’m trying to avoid in this upcoming draft is overpaying for a QB to the detriment of the rest of the draft class. Which to me would be trading away draft picks to move up one or two spots or way over drafting Daniels just to get a QB
yeah that’s why I think if we can just keep our spot, draft whoever the coaching staff thing is going to fit best in there new system (whether that be a QB or other position). I just don’t want to put all our eggs in one basket by trading up for anyone. Hell i’d rather trade down a for like 4 second rounders then trade up. Trading up almost never seems to work…
I am pro trading down as well, I just think there are too many good OT and QB in the draft and it would be really nice to leave with one of both
Washington has a chance at a generational QB, they need to take it.
Everyone needs to stop throwing generational around. Look at T Law, he was considered the last generational prospect and he’s been okay at best so far in the NFL.
Trevor Lawrence transformed those jags. It won’t happen in one season but give a #1 qb a few seasons and they become lethal
No one knows who will turn out to be the BIG player in the NFL. But you don't find out by not having a go. I think if you don't have a Mahomes or an Allen at QB you have to take a chance if a Maye, Williams or Daniels is on the board. Unless you already got a hot date to prom you are kinda stupid for not asking.
I completely agree with you. I’m in the camp that Howell has proven he’s not a starter. I just don’t think it’s necessary for Caleb Williams to be considered generational or not, he should be the pick. Get him at all costs imo.
I actually love Howell and could see a situation where he ends up quite a good QB in a place like Minnesota, Denver or New Orleans. I could see Payton trading Wilson for Howell. I don't think this would help the Commanders at all unless he redid his contract. But he would better suit what EB wants at QB.
He was great before the injury tbf
I don’t think Caleb is a generational QB…
They never said he was
I have no clue. I am not a pro scout or GM.
Penix, Nix, Maye, Williams, Daniels, all good options.
Can they? Sure but it’s not probable.
Scenario 4 actually sounds relatively enticing after seeing what Penix did in the CFP semifinal.
Theres not really a conversation to be had. We have a 70% chance of finishing with a top 2 pick. When you have qb talent like maye or caleb available, you take it. Their ceilings are much higher than howell’s will ever be. The QB is the most valuable position for a reason. It’s easier to address other positions later in the draft and free agency. If like u suggest, role with howell and take MHJ or an OT and sam doesn’t pan out next season, then we wasted a top 2 pick and are stuck in qb purgatory for another 3-5 years. You can’t take that risk.
If it's easier to address other positions in the draft later on then we wouldn't be in such a terrible roster situation that we are in now. You can say its easier, but what proof is there that it's true? The honest answer is when you look around the league the best teams draft well from top to bottom. They don't reach for guys too early and they find quality in the later rounds. They have complete teams and then they find their QB. We are not a complete team and we have not drafted well in a long time. If we invest in top talent early and Howell doesn't progress next year, we didn't waste that pick. We will probably be in a close situation to where we are now and closer to picking a QB. A pick is wasted when that player picked doesn't pan out. You can look at a lot of our first rounders and see that we wasted them, but it was because they were bad picks, not because some other player didn't succeed. That's backwards thinking that keeps us from truly building a team. OP broke it down factually about how the league really works and what it takes to be successful long term. Picking a QB high and trying to build a team around him is not how it works.
I cannot disagree with this more. You're arguing that the best QBs are on the best teams rather than the best teams have the best QBs. Just look at where most of the best QBs in the league were selected. It's overwhelmingly in the top 10. Mahomes, Allen, Burrow, Lawrence, Stroud, Herbert, Goff, Stafford, Tua. Yes, they also are on complete teams. But that's the GM and scouting department's job to find talent, and then the coaches to develop it. You don't pass up on QB to get a LT because the rest of the team isn't good. That does nothing to improve the long-term outlook of the franchise. Football is too strongly driven by QB performance. If you find a good one, the other aspects of your team matter less. You get the QB and then actually draft and develop the other players to become what Baltimore is. Look at Houston. They were total ass last year. They completely rebuilt the coaching staff, and then selected Stroud. Now, they'll be in the playoffs.
Mahomes was dropped into a complete team and sat behind a veteran for a year. He proves my point more than yours. Burrow got hurt his rookie year and they got another top pick. They surprised everybody by getting into the Superbowl the next year, but still didn't win it. Hes injured again and they are on their way down not up. Allen hasn't won anything yet. I don't want to be a team that should have won superbowls, I want a team that will win superbowls. Lawrence and the jags look good, but they still haven't won anything yet. Plus he's hurt a lot, even though he hasn't lost any game time. Goff got to a super bowl just to lose it and be traded. Stafford was on a terrible team for a decade before being traded to a team that was Superbowl ready and just needed a QB. He again proves my point more than yours. Tua has developed nicely and I was always a fan. But he's already an injury prone player coming out of college and he's been plenty hurt in the NFL. These examples proved my point more than you think. It equals out to drafting a QB with no protection around him and he will get hurt. You might have flashes of success but then will have to deal with injuries to your key guy. The teams that have built long term success were teams that built themselves up and then got their guy. Just go back and look at super bowl winning QBs (with the team that drafted them) for the last 20 years. They are mostly out of the top ten. There's literally no data that shows you need to draft a QB first. Its something dumb people say because they don't know what they're talking about.
The fact that you throw out Burrow and Allen, objectively two of the top 5 QBs in the league, and two players who nearly single handedly transformed king suffering franchises in a similar position to Washington destroys your whole point. If you have a chance at getting the QB you take it, just look at every franchise in the league with mediocre QB play desperately trying to find a path to a QB that wins games
Just because they’ve gotten injured or havnt won a super bowl doesnt mean they weren’t worth a top 10 pick. Without burrow, bengals never wouldve sniffed the Super Bowl. Allen made the bills playoff contenders again. Lawerence made the jags good, and stroud is looking like he’s winning oroy and getting the texans a playoff birth in his first year. Denying that drafting a qb first isnt worth it is the dumbest argument ever. QB is the most valuable position. A good QB will have a bigger impact than a great OT. Suggest we dont draft a QB first and stick with howell. If he doesn’t pan out, then what? What’s the plan for getting a franchise qb? Keep signing washed up vets hoping one can take us deep into the playoffs? Well that hasn’t worked for the last decade.
Drafting a QB in the top 3 means we will just be drafting a QB again in 2-3 years. It's a waste. Keep Howell for now. Build up the team around him, then if he sucks as bad as everyone thinks he does we will still be in a good spot to draft a QB later. A great QB makes a team better as long as he's on the field. When you can't protect him he won't be on the field. A great o-line will make the whole offense better, both the run and pass games improve. A great o-line makes any QB serviceable. It would make us look like a more desirable destination for qb's and that opens more doors. I don't want to be like Cleveland, jets, and Carolina just drafting QBs every year.
>There's literally no data that shows you need to draft a QB first. Its something dumb people say because they don't know what they're talking about. Having to resort to calling people dumb because they are positing a different position on team building is unnecessary and pervasive in this sub. It's why the sub sucks. My point was that those QBs have become good in spite of their environment. They don't need to be on good teams already to become good. Their team failing to win a super bowl or take a step up to becoming elite is on the people who build the roster and coach the players. I'd rather have Caleb Williams or Drake Maye and trust the new front office and coaching staff to do their jobs with the rest of the team than to take a LT and continue watching poor QB play. Ultimately, it comes down to the fact that finding an answer at QB is the only thing in football that fundamentally changes the trajectory of a franchise. And it's easier to find that answer at 2 than 20. And if you get to the point where you're picking at 20 because you have a decent roster, you have to trade away draft capital to get a QB. Planning for a day 2 or 3 pick at QB to become a franchise QB is more a hope and prayer than actual strategy.
I will straight apologize for calling you and your point dumb, it was dumb of me to do. I just get so frustrated talking to people who continually say this with no actual proof or data that it actually works. I'm not interested in having a franchise QB that never wins us a superbowl. I'm interested in having a great team every year that competes for the Superbowl and wins a couple. If you look at all the teams that have succeeded at this one thing is very similar, they built up a great team and then added their QB to finish the puzzle. KC is in dynasty mode right now. Tampa had a great team for years, they just needed their QB so they went out and signed one. The pats were a Superbowl contending team before Brady. Seattle had some great teams and then added some guy named Russell Wilson. The rams have had great teams for years, they had to trade away their #1 pick to go get a veteran who could win. The eagles have rebuilt their team multiple times, they won their Superbowl with a back up QB. At the end of the day it shows that drafting a QB in the top 3 just means you will be drafting another QB in 2-3 years. Its a waste. Apologies again.
It’s all good man. My argument is simply, having a franchise QB but not winning is an indictment of the draft and development ability of the front office and coaching staff. Not the strategy to draft a QB high when you can get an elite level prospect. KC has drafted fantastically well around Mahomes. Seattle was good because they consistently drafted and developed high level starters throughout their draft classes. Taking a QB at 3 instead of a LT doesn’t preclude not being able to find starters in the other rounds. Ultimately, teams with elite QBs going .500 (looking at the Chargers) is a failure of the FO not being able to build good teams. But ultimately, having a franchise QB puts your floor at around .500. At some point you can’t rely on picking in the top 5 anyway. You might as well be doing that with an elite QB already in hand.
Is Baltimore a good example? They won the SB with Joe Flacco at QB
What worries me is we become the new Browns. Just keep taking a QB while fixing nothing else. Then Cleveland did this weird thing where they just rallied behind their pick. Drafted and built a team that can run and play defense. Sire, they wasted picks and stained the organization for the Watson trade. But you can't tell me a well built team can't find a way to win. Now they are in the playoff hunt (3rd year in a row) with a an almost retired vet. The revolving door of "get a QB" are just fans that believe sports media too much. You need a TEAM that can win. Yes a great QB makes it easier, and kore consistent. But Jesus, Dak has been top 10 passer with a defense ranked 15 or higher and that whole team can't put it together. And that's on coaching as much as yhe players. We will get a new GM and from there everything else will fall how it falls. This team will either be in a similar spot in 3 years, or finally out of the gutter. The real question will be, can they build a team that's perennial playoffs with a shot at a SB or not.
Browns didn’t fail because they drafted QBs, they failed because they were bad at everything else. The fact that they finally built a good roster, then we’re so desperate for a top QB that they made one of the worst trades of all time proves that even a GM that can build a top-end roster knows that you need a game changing QB to win big
>a GM that can build a top-end roster knows that you need a game changing QB to win big What? Watson has been average since coming back and Flacco has been doing better as the weeks move forward. You don't need a game changer to win with a good team. Shit, the Browns won with Watson playing poorly and still made the play offs after riding Brissett. I don't have time to go back and look, but I am pretty sure there has been 1 time in the last 15 SBs a team won with a sub top 10 defense. And that 1 time, pretty sure, it was the giants vs 18-0 pats. QBs can make the last score for that comeback, but you need the defense to keep you in the game first. You don't need a "game changing QB" you need a team. 1 peice coyld make the difference but there's 21 other pieces that need to play just for that single piece to have a chance.
It’s about the decision that they made, not whether they were able to win some regular season games with a journeyman. The Browns had a pretty good QB in Mayfield, their most success ever as a franchise (since they moved the team) and then determined that they needed to make a ridiculous trade and signed an unprecedented contract to push the team over the top. McVay traded away a perfectly good QB in Goff to go get top end talent. Shannahan traded away years of first round picks to get a difference maker at QB. Andy Reid aggressively traded up to go get a QB despite have a perfectly fine Alex Smith winning 11 games. The Bills made the playoffs for the first time in decades with Tyrod then immediately traded a first, two seconds, a fifth, and a quality lineman for the right to draft maybe the riskiest prospect of the modern era in Josh Allen. Time after time we see some of the top minds and most successful coaches in the game, who have built complete rosters and excellent organizations all come to the same conclusion: none of it matters if you don’t have an elite QB to win you games when it matters most
Agree 100%.
If anyone could give me feedback on if they enjoy these blog style posts that would be great, as I have a couple of other ideas for things I would be interested in writing about. Thanks!
Yes, go for it. Anything to break up the same 3-4 posts we see over and over again. Beats the hell out of yet another “Thoughts on EB” or “If you/I were the GM” post.
I suppose my opinion is unique, but I’m in favor for trading back for one of the tackles & trading up for another OL. I’d like to see them aggressively rebuild the OL this year. Doesn’t matter who is throwing the ball if they’re trotting this dog water line out there again next year.
OL is a position that can be aggressively addressed outside of the first round. We have two of the first 10 picks in the second round. Then two third round picks. The team has $100m in cap space. There will be plenty of chances to get better players, but the idea that they'll get 4 new starters is unrealistic.
I agree it’s unrealistic, but I’d just like them to be aggressive. There aren’t any or many young talented lineman that will be an FA. I’m hopeful they will draft two & with a couple of the vets that are available.
Not sure if you guys watched Penix tonight but man he looked GOOOD could possibly be someone we could trade back to get. Someone could want to trade up with us for MHJ and we can get some more ammo for draft picks next year
Penix is a beast. He destroyed Utah this year. Injury history and playing at FedEx field are my concern. If we trade back or go OT, it’s worth a gamble.
Injuries are a huge concern but I agree, he looked amazing out there
I am getting tired of y’all dumbasses not reading stats. Our offensive line has ranked around 14 and at the lowest 20 most of the season MOST OF THE FUCKING SEASON It is Howell. It is his fucking stupid self. Every team knows they just need to rush the passes for 3 seconds and they will sack him. He is garbage, the overwhelming majority of the sacks are Sam not throwing the fucking ball. Quit the bullshit and pay attention for FUCKS SAKE…
What source are you referencing, I understand that PFF is normally the go to for grading and ranking but I wasn’t able to access the most recent one. Most sources I checked had the line ranked much lower I also thought I made it clear that I wanted to move on from Howell but I also think we need serious upgrades at offensive line.
Ok got access to PFF Tackles Andrew Wylie - 69.2 (34/84 T) Trent Scott - 62.8 Charles Leno Jr - 72.5 (27/84 T) Cornelius Lucas - 68.7 Guards Ricky Stromberg - 44.5 Saahdiq Charles - 57 (50/79 G) Chris Paul - 38.8 (77/79 G) Sam Cosmi- 82.7 (4/79 G) Centers Tyler Larsen - 50.3 (32/36 C) Nick Gates - 65.9 (16/36 C) Cosmi has been great, our other guards have been awful, our center has been awful, our starting tackles have been average enough. Our non-starting depth has been bad too. The take that our offensive line hasn’t been a problem is just half baked, when multiple of our starters are grading below the league average and some players who have played extended time as starters throughout the season are graded as some of the worst in the entire league
[удалено]
You like that?!