Mr. Scot

He wasn't blaming the defense. That idea got stirred up because of a hilariously bad take by a numbskull on Twitter.

My answer would probably be Gil Haskell. Nobody remembers him because he was only here for a short time, but the offense was fantastic while he was. After that, Henning.

What's especially funny about it is that's pure Ron Rivera thinking. "Forget building an offensive line. Just get a quarterback who can run around and everything will be fine"

And your response pretty clearly indicates you didn't understand the contradiction in your own statements. That, plus your arguing that it would be better to get a new quarterback rather than actually building an o-line is kind of

And I said that regardless of your experience level, automatically blaming everything on the quarterback is shallow analysis. And sorry, but I will take Steve Smith's opinion over yours.

I was gonna comment on something like that earlier but that was before this thread went way off the rails.

You just indicated that "playing at a higher level" gave you more authority. But when it was pointed out to you that someone who played at a much higher level than you disagreed with you, you threw out your own appeal. Not exactly sound debate technique... I believe the kids refer to that as having "just played yourself"

I chuckle because I remember seeing you complain for years that Cam Newton didn't have a good offensive line. Now you're wanting us to put a quarterback behind a bad offensive line and expect him to compensate. It's amusing

Sure you did Question though if you want to throw that card: Did you play at a higher level than Steve Smith? I ask because if you look in the other thread you'll see he disagrees with your analysis.

Or we could...you know...build a good offensive line, and in doing so help out the quarterback, the runningbacks and the receiving corps lal at once. I realize that's a radical concept, but hey...

That's...really poor analysis. First off, If you think Diggs didn't show up until he played us, you haven't been paying attention. And it's not like nobody heard of Darius Slay before either As to Darnold, he looked pretty good in the Jets game minus a play or two. Ditto the Saints game. But where the vast majority of us were most impressed was with his performance against Houston because he played well in the second half even with the team down it's best weapon (McCaffrey). Since then, yeah he's had two rough games, but people who know what they're talking about (including Olsen) have universally said there are multiple factors. What you're posting here is typical of stuff people say when they don't understand football beyond a surface level.

Assuming he doesn't get a GM job, next year's braintrust features Dan Morgan working the pro personnel side of things and Fitterer concentrating on college scouting. I'm up for that.

Fitterer is a college scout. Dan Morgan is a pro personnel guy. I'm looking forward to seeing the two of them work together next off season. (while also praying Morgan doesn't get a GM job just yet)

The same GM who led the Redskins to four Super Bowls traded multiple picks to move up and draft Ryan Leaf (Bobby Beathard). Likewise, Ozzie Newsome was one of the best GMs ever but was far from perfect. Nobody's perfect, or even close to it.

My feelings as well...