Taylor Heinicke Discussion

[Neophyte]

I guess you didn't see where I was called a "troll" this morning.

With all due respect, I see a little hypocrisy going on here.

Troll - An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion. - as defined by the Urban Dictionary

You have been engaging in this behavior directly almost since you arrived but have ramped it up in the last couple of weeks.

It is possible that you are not a troll but it does not change the fact that nearly everything you post has the appearance of trolling.

This place was founded on the premise of polite and intelligent discourse about a football we all care way too much about. You have set about trying to make your point in a manner that nearly anyone clued into social norms recognizes as inflammatory and, honestly, that is the best thing I can say about it. Half the time I am left to wonder if you are actively trying to get banned from the site.

So when you are called a troll I don't consider it hypocrisy or rudeness. I consider it a dose of the cold, hard truth and something that a reasonable person would take as an indication that perhaps they need to change how they go about doing things.

 

[Bulldog]

I don't know all about physiological studies of quarterback makeup and the dynamics of strong arm vs. processing speed in making plays on the field, but one thing I can tell you from experience is quarterbacks that turn the ball over on picks in the red zone and strip sacks so their teams lose the turnover battle tend not to be successful starters for long in the NFL.

Wentz is at times irresponsible with the football, both in throwing into coverage and not protecting the ball when setting up in the pocket.

Knowing that and acknowledging his limitations (and capabilities) the coaches should have shortened up the playbook like Gibbs did with Jay Schroeder and Mark Rypien to keep them away from certain throws and formations where their weaknesses were exposed.

That said, there DOES seem to be a lack of confidence from Rivera and the front office to move into position to draft a quarterback and build from within.

Teams that want to trade for Jimmy G. or other such quarterbacks like Wentz are saying 'we want a veteran' who can at least get on the field and throw the ball in the NFL, even given their blemishes and flaws.

That shows they are not trusting their scouts and their own decision making to go into the draft and find a passer with better upside than these retreads and because they are afraid of failing and ending up with a Darnold or RGIII.

 

[Chris]

Could it be because QB is the most important position on the team and it's obvious that Wentz is the biggest problem on the team??

Nah...it couldn't possibly be that!

"Hundreds of posts?" You mean like 199 posts since the beginning of August? An average of 2 - 3 posts per day? That's "trolling"?

My bad. I was short by 2 of hundreds at the time. But…now that is irrelevant.

I would like to humbly apologize for characterizing you as a troll. That was wrong of me. I should have used ’trolling behavior’ as I am unsure if you identify as a troll or not and wouldn’t want to assume.

200+ posts since August. None on the owner. None on the administration. None on the front office. None on the coaching staff. None on any individual player or performance outside of 2 QBs. None on the uniforms. None on any other topic that draws attention and opinion from fans. Only shitting on Carson Wentz and championing Taylor Heinicke. Ad nauseum.

Understandable if you are Taylor’s agent, Taylor’s family, or if you have a crush or suffer from OCD.
Otherwise? Extraordinarily odd behavior.

 

[Neophyte]

The bottom line is this -- If Heinicke's "weak arm" was such a liability, then he wouldn't have outplayed Wentz. But it's obvious that he has.



And how many INTs did Heinicke throw in the 7 games that they won? Very few.

Most of the INTs that Heinicke threw were in blowout losses. With the possible exception of the game against the Saints, Washington wasn't going to win any of those games anyway. Washington's defense played too poorly for Washington to possibly win more than 8 or 9 games last year.

That does matter. Heinicke usually plays extremely well when the game is on the line.

If you don't believe me, do your own research.

This post is a great example of what I am talking about. The first two sentences.

You are using something you believe to be true as evidence of fact. However, your belief doesn't make it evidence at all. It is still just your opinion. Then you double down with the use of the word "obvious" in the second sentence. That implies again that your belief is fact and is designed to silently call Henry an idiot if he doesn't believe the same thing you do.

Then you attack Henry's statement about INTs claiming he threw very few of those in games the team won. No offense, but it is something of accepted wisdom in the NFL that if you don't turn the ball over you are more likely to win.

Then you go on to say that most of Heinicke's INTs were in blowout losses without really getting into specifics which leads me to believe that you are talking off the top of your head rather than through research. So I did some research. Heinicke had 15 INTs last year. 7 of the 15 came in games the team lost by 7 points or less so as close to a 50/50 split as you can get with an odd number. Hardly "most", but you used that word anyway to make your argument. You also made it without really paying attention to when the INTs happened in the game. For example, the first one against Buffalo happen in the 2nd quarter when Washington was only down 2 scores and the first two against Dallas happened in the first quarter, one at 0-0 on the first play of the game. Both those INTs directly lead to Dallas TDs and after the second one, Washington was on the wrong end of a 21-0 hiding.

And those are just the first two games I looked at. Took me 3 minutes.

If you had done your homework you would have known these things. If you had been paying attention to what happens on this board you would have known that many of us will go look these things up.

 

[Theismann To HOF]

This post is a great example of what I am talking about. The first two sentences.

You are using something you believe to be true as evidence of fact. However, your belief doesn't make it evidence at all. It is still just your opinion. Then you double down with the use of the word "obvious" in the second sentence. That implies again that your belief is fact and is designed to silently call Henry an idiot if he doesn't believe the same thing you do.

Then you attack Henry's statement about INTs claiming he threw very few of those in games the team won. No offense, but it something of accepted wisdom in the NFL that if you don't turn the ball over you are more likely to win.

As I explained in my previous post to Henry, Heinicke threw the majority of his INTs in games that Washington was not going to win anyway -- against Dallas (twice), San Diego, Buffalo, and Kansas City. The Washington defense was horrible in all of those games. Washington was not going to win any of those games, anyway. Heinicke tried to do too much in those games, because he knew they weren't going to win without heroics on offense.

The only game that Heinicke threw an INT that actually mattered was against the Saints. Washington had a chance to win that game if Heinicke played a little better.

His INTs against Denver and Green Bay were on Hail Mary passes or in garbage time in the 4th quarter when the game was already over (against Green Bay). Again, not all INTs are equal. It matters if the games are actually winnable. I don't care if a QB throws 10 INTs in garbage time....the game is already over.

Then you go on to say that most of Heinicke's INTs were in blowout losses without really getting into specifics which leads me to believe that you are talking off the top of your head rather than through research. So I did some research. Heinicke had 15 INTs last year. 7 of the 15 came in games the team lost by 7 points or less so as close to a 50/50 split as you can get with an odd number. Hardly "most", but you used that word anyway to make your argument. You also made it without really paying attention to when the INTs happened in the game. For example, the first one against Buffalo happen in the 2nd quarter when Washington was only down 2 scores and the first two against Dallas happened in the first quarter, one at 0-0 on the first play of the game. Both those INTs directly lead to scores.

All you have to do is ask me to elaborate. And I just did.

There is no way that Washington was going to win that game against Buffalo. That is just dreaming. Washington's defense was already getting crushed in the 2nd quarter.

Washington lost to Dallas 56 - 14. Dallas scored 35 points on their first 5 offensive drives!! There is no way in hell that ANYTHING that Heinicke did was going to matter.

And those are just the first two games I looked at. Took me 3 minutes.

Washington lost the first game to Dallas by 7, but that game was not close. That was the game that Prescott threw that stupid pick 6 INT late in the 4th quarter. That score is very misleading.

Same with the San Diego game. The Chargers dominated that game. The score is very misleading. I remember that Herbert got completely screwed when the referees called a touchback on a "fumble" out of the Washington end zone. It was not a fumble. It was obviously an incomplete pass. That cost the Chargers at least 3 points, probably 7 points.

So you spent 3 minutes analyzing this, but you don't have the details that I have.

If you had done your homework you would have known these things. If you had been paying attention to what happens on this board you would have known that many of us will go look these things up.

I didn't believe you so I did do my own research.

I did do my homework. And I just explained why I think you're wrong.

I don't think you did enough research.

 

[Neophyte]

Ah...I see. So if, in your view, a game is "not winnable" even before it starts then a couple of first-quarter INTs don't matter and shouldn't count against Heinicke?

And you have the wrong Dallas game in mind. You are thinking of the second one where Holcomb picked off Dak for a TD late.

I'm talking about the first one that ended 56-14. Heinicke threw an INT on the FIRST play of the game. Dallas drove to make it 7-0. That one play set the tone for the day. Two drives later, Heinicke threw a pick-6 that made the score 21-0.

He had an INT in the second Dallas game too, btw. Again, first half with the score Dallas 3, Washington 0 and Washington with the ball at mid-field he threw an INT that Dallas returned to the 41 and scored 5 plays later to make the score 11-0. The Washington defense was holding their own fairly well until Heinicke gave Dallas a short field to work with.

I'm sorry but you can't discount these INTs because you assume Washington will lose these games. Games like that are exactly where you have minimize mistakes like these. Lesser teams beat better teams in the NFL all the time by doing just that - playing mistake-free football and getting a lucky bounce every once in a while.

We won the second week of the season on a Hopkins second attempt FG at the whistle but we only got that FG because of a phantom call against the NY D on the first FG attempt and we only needed that FG at all because of Heinicke INT leading to a go-ahead FG by the Giants just before that. Heinicke got lucky.

We agree that where things happen in the game matter but you are excusing away one player's negative plays simply because you like that player. You are also spinning the game narrative prior to the snap of the ball to build in those excuses for your guy.

Unbiased analysis doesn't work that way.

 

[Theismann To HOF]

Ah...I see. So if, in your view, a game is "not winnable" even before it starts then a couple of first-quarter INTs don't matter and shouldn't count against Heinicke?

And you have the wrong Dallas game in mind. You are thinking of the second one where Holcomb picked off Dak for a TD late.

I'm talking about the first one that ended 56-14. Heinicke threw an INT on the FIRST play of the game. Dallas drove to make it 7-0. That one play set the tone for the day. Two drives later, Heinicke threw a pick-6 that made the score 21-0.

So Washington has a chance to win a game when the defense gives up 35 points on the first 5 drives of the game? Seriously?? What kind of argument is that??

No...the 56 -14 blowout was the second Dallas game. Look it up. That was the game after Heinicke returned from Covid.

He had an INT in the second Dallas game too, btw. Again, first half with the score Dallas 3, Washington 0 and Washington with the ball at mid-field he threw an INT that Dallas returned to the 41 and scored 5 plays later to make the score 11-0. The Washington defense was holding their own fairly well until Heinicke gave Dallas a short field to work with.

I'm sorry but you can't discount these INTs because you assume Washington will lose these games. Games like that are exactly where you have minimize mistakes like these. Lesser teams beat better teams in the NFL all the time by doing just that - playing mistake-free football and getting a lucky bounce every once in a while.

This just doesn't fly. It was obvious that the Washington defense was no match for the Dallas offense last year. Neither game was close.

If you believe that Heinicke cost Washington a victory in that first Dallas game.....well, you're entitled to your opinion. I just don't see it that way. Dallas completely dominated both games, both offensively and defensively.

It doesn't matter if Joe Montana was QB in those 5 games that I mentioned. Washington was not going to win. And Heinicke's 3 INTs against Denver and Green Bay were completely meaningless, as I already explained.

We won the second week of the season on a Hopkins second attempt FG at the whistle but we only got that FG because of a phantom call against the NY D on the first FG attempt and we only needed that FG at all because of Heinicke INT leading to a go-ahead FG by the Giants just before that. Heinicke got lucky.

Look, the Giants defensive back jumped the route and he made a great play. The other team gets paid, too.

I don't blame Wentz for that INT at the end of the Titans game, either. I even said so a couple of weeks ago.

And Wentz would NEVER have even been in a position to win that Giants game. Not even close.

We agree that where things happen in the game matter but you are excusing away one player's negative plays simply because you like that player. You are also spinning the game narrative prior to the snap of the ball to build in those excuses for your guy.

Unbiased analysis doesn't work that way.

You're actually being more biased than I am. I provided more details about why Washington had no chance of winning those 5 games.

 

[SkinsOrlando]

Look we banned long term contributors and people we personally knew over what I can say is less than this bullshit. my opinion of course. Lock the thread, let's all move on. and see if this individual actually posts anything again we care to entertain. It's clogging up real discussion, kinda what we do.

 

[Theismann To HOF]

Look we banned long term contributors and people we personally knew over what I can say is less than this bullshit. my opinion of course. Lock the thread, let's all move on. and see if this individual actually posts anything again we care to entertain. It's clogging up real discussion, kinda what we do.

Exactly. Your opinion.

And I'm entitled to mine, even if you don't like it.

If you don't like what I'm saying, then explain how I'm wrong. Based on Wentz's woeful performance this year, I don't think you can.

 

[Neophyte]

We can and we have. You don't agree. We get it.

We also get that you are a last-word kind of guy, and as long as you are polite about it, we will let you have it.

 

[Lovin Cousins]

Lock the thread, let's all move on. and see if this individual actually posts anything again we care to entertain. It's clogging up real discussion, kinda what we do.

Seems like the whole reason this thread was started was to keep from clogging other threads. A mod advised the users to start this thread actually, for that reason.
It seems to serve its purpose well, by letting the user know what its about, and whether they would want to choose to enter it.
So if you lock this thread, and also ban the subject from other threads, then essentially that would be banning all discussion of the player who is now our starting QB

 

[Boone]

Creating a new thread doesn’t negate the expectation members treat others civilly.

 

[Om]

This troll, disguising itself as a Washington fan, is running a SNL like game on you guys for it’s own amusement.

Hundreds of posts in a very short time with less than 2% that don’t include Heinicke and/or Wentz.

I am shocked (shocked I tell you) that you all haven’t realized it yet.

Oh I realized it. Been preaching that for a month now.

 

[burgold]

It'll be interesting to see what Heinicke does this Sunday. My expectations aren't high even though I do think he's a legit (low end) NFL starter. One thing bobbing at the back of my head was that Heinicke didn't have a strong preseason and didn't seem to have a lot of fight to prove everyone wrong. He was basically, "Well, this guy got paid a lot. Guess I'm a back up. Cool." Not that I expected trade demands, but usually the players show a bit more fight or at least say, "In my mind, I'm a starter and am going out there every day to prove it."

 

[MikefromOH]

He's going to have a hard time if he's not practicing like he plans on starting at any given time. These defenses are now excited to see him over Wentz.

 

[burgold]

That’s the biggest question. I think Heinike’s decline last year was due to two fact:

1) Way too many injuries especiallyon the online.
2) Defenses had enough tape on Heinike to develop a book on how to play him.

 

[Bulldog]

Still, I think Heinicke's smarts and mobility are qualities that are sorely needed right now given the state of the offensive line and the critical mistakes Wentz has made in crunch time with his decision-making.

Both quarterbacks have limitations and flaws but Wentz's strengths are negated by the current circumstances with injuries and inability to consistently run the football.

The downer for fans is that a $28M quarterback can't overcome some of the adversity and 'do the necessary' in games like the ending with Tennessee to keep the team relevant. That ball should never have been thrown for the INT, the receiver was covered AND it was not fourth down, so it was not an all or nothing play to make.

 

[Henry]

I think Heinicke could be a shot in the arm for this offense. His mobility and pocket awareness are sorely needed with this OL.

Green Bay is limping into town this week. Of course last year around this time KC was limping into town, and their defense, which had been bombed for 29+ points over the first five games, held the Heinicke-led Washingtons to 13. Hopefully the team can do better than that this year.

 

[Bulldog]

Folks, Wentz was on pace to throw a lot of picks this season. This isn't a situation where Wentz protected the ball well and Taylor doesn't.

Both have flaws. They are different players.

Right now, with the OL injuries a mobile quarterback that can throw the short and intermediate routes accurately is MORE important than a guy like Wentz who basically was down to throwing screens and then heaving the ball 30-40 yards downfield.

Wentz simply can't read coverages and live in that 10-25 yard range of intermediate throws that quarterbacks like Mahomes and Allen thrive on.

Brian Mitchell said he was anticipating plays as the team is that predictable and I was thinking the same thing, based on down and distance.

This offense with Wentz had little fluidity to it.

The fact Terry McLaurin has the low stats he does after 6 weeks is an indictment on Turner and Wentz that they cannot get the football to the team's best offensive player.

Obviously defenses scheme to take Hill away from the Dolphins and Kelce away from the Chiefs, but so far Tua and Mahomes have still been able to get them the ball to make plays.

Wentz is only 29 years old but he is SO far away from the younger more athletic player he was in 2017 it's amazing.

I remember Wentz passing and running circles around Washington in 2017 and that player that had the Eagles at 13-2 is gone.

Hard to believe that today an ACL injury caused him to lose that much off his game given how well most players rebound from the surgery, but there it is.

 

[Henry]

Wentz has been a disaster. How many times is this team going to trade young for old and see it blow up in their face?