Do the Redskins have to take a quarterback at #4?
by mmford10 on Jan 20, 2010 1:52 PM EST
in NFL Draft
198 comments
When the Redskins are on the clock with the fourth overall pick in April's draft, they will have a lot of options.
Perhaps they will try to take a quarterback to be the future face of the franchise. Maybe there will be an elite offensive lineman like Russell Okung there for the taking. Maybe they simply go for best player available and end up with someone like Eric Berry, who many fans would probably like to see play for the Redskins. Maybe they trade down and stockpile picks.
Drafting fourth overall, the Redskins obviously will be looking for a player who will start for many years. On a team with so many holes in personnel, that should not be hard to find. Right?
Of course, much depends on what happens in the three picks preceding the Redskins'. I'm going to play out two scenarios. Obviously, it is absurdly early to be making these kinds of predictions, but that's why it's fun.
Scenario #1: The Rams draft Ndamukong Suh with the first pick
In this scenario, the Rams take Suh, the Nebraska DT that is the clear-cut best player in the draft. To my knowledge, the Rams are basically looking at either taking the best player -- Suh -- or the best quarterback, given that Marc Bulger is pretty much done and the Rams are extremely thin at the position. Keep in mind, the Rams have drafted 2 DL in the last three drafts -- Adam Carriker in '07, Chris Long in '08 -- and neither are particularly dominant despite the heavy investment. But Suh has greatness written all over him, so let's say the Rams take him.
The next two teams in the draft -- the Lions and the Buccaneers -- both picked QB's in the first round last year (Matthew Stafford and Josh Freeman). That means there is no chance they move on a QB. For now, the odds are these two teams will choose from the following players: Russell Okung, Eric Berry, Gerald McCoy, Joe Haden. (Look 'em up if you don't know them. All are non-QB's).
That means the Redskins, at #4 overall, will be looking at every single quarterback in the draft.
Here's the situation we all fear in the Redskins front office: what if Okung and Jimmy Clausen/Sam Bradford are still on the board at #4?
Gulp.
In my mind, the Redskins will have three choices if this scenario unfolds. First, they draft Okung. Second, they draft Clausen/Bradford. Third, they trade down.
With Okung, the Redskins have their next franchise left tackle. Left tackle is arguably the second-most important position on the offense, behind quarterback. With a strong anchor at left tackle, the Redskins' offensive line improves tremendously, and they can pick at any other position in the second round.
Or, the Redskins could take Jimmy Clausen/Bradford at #4. Now, I have to tell you, I cringe at the thought of drafting a QB this year. It seems as though common sense would say that you have a bigger need on the offensive line than you do at QB, and if the line doesn't improve, who cares who the quarterback is?
But there is other logic that has to be factored in. If the Redskins truly believe Clausen or Bradford is a franchise quarterback, they may have to take him. Think about it -- a quality left tackle comes around in every draft, and often, one can be obtained in later rounds. The opportunity to draft a franchise, top-of-the-draft quarterback and mold him from day one is extremely rare. The Redskins would have their choice of any QB in the draft in this situation -- could they pass on one?
Three of the four teams in the conference championships are led by outstanding, nearly peerless quarterbacks: Peyton Manning with the Colts, Drew Brees with the Saints, and Brett Favre with the Packers Vikings. Although only Manning was selected in the first round of the three, they are unquestionably the key reason why their teams have advanced thus far. The Colts have the league's worst running game (1200 rushing yards); the Saints have the highest-scoring offense led by their passing attack; Adrian Peterson hasn't had a 100-yard game since Week 10.
They are led by elite QB's in their prime. They are more valuable than any other players in football, left tackles be damned. Just check out the MVP voting: all QB's.
If you're a bad team, and you have the chance to get one of those players, you simply must do it. Yes, the Dolphins became a lot better after they led off by drafting Jake Long two years ago, but it was the arrival of Chad Pennington and a defensive resurgence (along with a nice schedule and Tom Brady's injury) that led them to the playoffs just a year after being 1-15. And Ben Roethlisberger and Aaron Rodgers still shined this season, despite being sacked more than any other quarterbacks in the NFL.
If the Redskins believe Clausen or Bradford is a future All-Pro, it can be argued they have to pull the trigger. The logic is with them. It won't make the Redskins a better team right away, and I still think Campbell should be the starter next season. But Campbell will likely only be around on a 1-year contract if he is signed as a restricted free agent because of the uncapped season. Let him play it out -- we won't be a playoff team anyway -- and let Clausen hold the clipboard and get in some reps in practice.
Remember, the Bengals drafted Carson Palmer when they had Jon Kitna, the Chargers drafted Phillip Rivers when they had Drew Brees, and the Packers drafted Aaron Rodgers when they had Brett freaking Favre. It can be done, and if one slides to the Redskins at fourth overall and he REALLY is good enough to be an All-Pro (not saying Clausen or Bradford is yet), it's the right thing to do. Jason Campbell is a good quarterback. He is capable of being a starter, no questions asked. But is he the kind of quarterback you simply must have in the NFL today to compete at the highest level? Mark Sanchez and perhaps Joe Flacco excluded, every team that made the NFL Playoffs has a quarterback that is capable of playing at a level higher than Campbell has ever shown. Campbell will still have another year to prove himself, but at some point, the Redskins will have to cut their losses if he doesn't become a better quarterback in more than the statistical sense.
Of course, the Redskins could also get a huge, HUGE draft-day deal and trade this pick with a team that is willing to overpay for the top QB in the draft. I could see a Buffalo, Seattle or Cleveland making a deal to trade up with us. Honestly, this could be ideal. We could end up with a top LT and an obscene amount of future draft picks, which we always would welcome. Remember, it was the Ricky Williams trade deal with Mike Ditka that gave us LaVar Arrington and Chris Samuels -- and we still got Champ Bailey.
All three of the teams mentioned pick in the top 10 -- and all three have a much larger need at QB than the Redskins do. Personally, this would be my favorite option. We could still pick in the top 10, have a shot at the 2nd best LT (Okung would likely be gone), and may end up with picks we could use on more OL, a running back, or even a QB later in the draft.
That's probably what all Campbell fans should pray for -- a trade down that results in two more good O-linemen.
Scenario #2: The Rams pick a QB
If the Rams don't take Suh and invest in the QB position, the Redskins' choices become a lot easier.
If Suh isn't gone at #1, he's gone at #2 to the Lions, leaving the Bucs to pick either Okung, Berry, McCoy, Haden, or whoever else strikes their fancy.
Now, let's say Okung is on the board at #4. Here, the Redskins obviously have to take him, given LT is a huge position of need, Okung is the best player, and there is no other pick we could make that would pay off nearly as much. Okung in the fold, second round ahead.
But let's say the Bucs do draft Okung and the Redskins are looking at both the top QB (for argument's sake, Clausen) and the top LT out of the draft.
What do they do here?
Eric Berry is still on the board, and if we picked him, it would give us something close to the Taylor/Landry backfield we all wished we could see. We could make a reach for a different OT like Trent Williams (although his stock could change), grab someone like RB CJ Spiller or top-flight CB Joe Haden...
... Or we could trade down.
This option is always popular. You're giving away a chance at an elite player, but getting the chance to fill more holes with quality players.
If they trade down, possible trade partners include the Patriots (who have 3 second-rounders and the 22nd overall), or Seattle, who have two first-rounders. There are a litany of scenarios, but the Trade Value Chart says we could get Seattle's 14th overall, plus their second rounder and be even, but I doubt that would happen unless there was a marquee player they were really interested in drafting.
Frankly, if the Rams take a QB, the Redskins' pick means a lot less. Today, odds are that Okung will be on the board at #4 regardless of the Rams' pick, but if he isn't, the Redskins' pick collapses in value if there is no sexy QB another team would be willing to trade up for and they can't draft a position of need themselves. If there are no trade partners at #4 and Okung and the top QB are gone, perhaps a player available could help the Redskins transition to the 3-4. My knowledge doesn't point to one player in particular, although perhaps Joe Haden would be a good fit if Carlos Rogers were to hit the road.
So -- what do you hope for? Do you think the Redskins would be right to draft a QB if they thought one was destined to be an elite NFL QB despite other glaring needs? Should they trade down if Clausen and Okung are still on the board? Should they just take an o-lineman, no questions asked?
Let's hear it.
0 recs |
198 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Apologies
I posted a much less thought-out and completely redundant fan post right as you were putting this up.
A couple of thoughts, though-
Suh is obviously an extremely worthy first pick in the draft. The rams have a lot of needs, and DT isn’t near the top of their list. If you were the rams, wouldn’t you be shopping the first pick?
I think what he's saying is
St. Louis trades the #1 to Seattle for picks 6 and 14. Then when Bradford is still available at 4, they give us 6, 14, and a 3rd for the 4 and a second rounder next year. Then the Raiders get excited at the prospect of drafting Eric Berry, so they give us the 8 pick, a 4th this year, and a 2nd next year (to recoup the one we lost in the first deal) Then we draft Anthony Davis and Bruce Campbell in the 1st round, then Joe Pike in the 2nd. Or some other outstanding combination of young talent that will keep us going to NFC and league championship games for years to come.
Put LeFoueveriererier in there
The guy from Central Michigan. Get the tackles… Though avoid Campbell… I don’t like him… take DAvis and Bulaga…
by bigredsnapper on Jan 20, 2010 4:43 PM EST up reply actions
won't don't you like about Campbell?
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
let's wait for about 23 years on that
I’m wanted to send my kid to UMD so he could be a Redskin!
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
It means that no one is taking Claussen or Bradford with pick 1.
by sofutomygaha on Jan 20, 2010 4:26 PM EST up reply actions
I am praying
that St. Louis takes. Bradford. If we’re gonna get a QB at 4, I’d rather take Claussen. (Can’t believe I’m saying this). Bradford just scares me. Way too brittle.
Personally, I’m not excited about taking a QB this year. But I am starting to at least warm to the argument. Hopefully this is the last time we pick top 10 20 in a LONG time. So I just hope we make the pick count. This is the 1st time in a VERY LONG time I can honestly say that I have faith that management will make the right decision, whether I like the player or not. Unless, of course, they draft Bradford.
Of course, trading down would be ideal. We could still end up with a good QB, PLUS an O-tackle. This seems to be one of those years where there’s not much dropoff between the top QB’s and the next tier.
There is no need AT ALL, CJ
to use a draft pick on a QB this year. We have way too many holes to fill and QB is not one at all – or at least not a glaring one. We will do just fine to wait until next year to get a QB. With an improved line, we will better know where we stand with Jason. If he improves and Colt doesn’t seem to be the guy who can be a solid backup, we can draft a journeyman to be backup next year. If we really need a new face of the future, then we can go after Jake Locker and have him compete with JC until he succeeds in outperforming him. Nuff said
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
With an improved line and Campbell we probably win 7 to 9 games.
Nuff said.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
I only meant that we'll probably still be mediocre as long as Campbell is at the helm.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
I know what you meant
but why?
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
He's not that good man.
We don’t know for sure but up until this point he’s simply been serviceable. I’m not convinced you can win a superbowl with him unless you’re the Ravens/NYJ which we are not nor will we ever be.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
I understand that
but what makes you think that ANY of these guys will come in and do better?
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
Do you think Peyton Manning would win only 4 games on this year's Redskins?
Do you think Phillip Rivers, Drew Brees, Tom Brady, or even Eli Manning would win only 4 games on this year’s Redskins? Once again, if you think Clausen or Bradford will be an elite QB 3 years down the line, you take him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
I'm not sure
but that’s 4 (maybe 5, I’m not completely sold on Eli) out of 32 NFL quarterbacks. Everybody’s not going to have an elite QB like those you just named, and like someone stated before – we don’t have an unlimited number of picks.
You wanna take the guy you like, fine. Pick one that has a higher chance of being a “Plug and Play,” like Spiller or Berry. Not a QB, not when this year we have WAY too many other things that need to be taken care of first.
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
And that's why there are 4, maybe 5 superbowl contenders each year.
Oh wait, I forgot about Kurt Warner, Aaron Rogers, Ben Roethlisburger and a couple others.
Aaron Rogers is a great example though. His offensive line was arguably as bad as ours and look at the season he had.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
Let's look at a couple of those
Kurt Warner has arguably the best Receiver corp in the league, not too hard to look good. Also has a VERY good O-Line. And has a 2 headed monster for a running game (Beanie Wells and Hightower are nice.)
Aaron Rogers is a G, and he’ll be good for years to come in my opinion. He also had the fortune of studying behind one of the best to play the game. The dude is legit.
We saw what happened to Big Ben this year when the star of the defense was gone. This year gave me pause as to whether or not it was Ben, or his entire team that was the reason for them being contenders.
Because based on what I’m reading in your replies, which I could be taking the wrong way, the QB’s you named take it all on their backs, and while a supporting cast is nice, they make do with what they have. And out of all the QB’s in the playoffs right now, the only one that I can see that doesn’t have a VERY good supporting cast is Peyton Manning.
When I say “VERY good” supporting cast, I mean run game as well as defense.
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
Kurt has pin point accuracy and a lightning release.
Plus the wisdom of the game. Look at Leinart. He has the same weapons, and is a tool. You have to be great AND fit the system.
good point
would you also agree that a system can make a QB better than he is? or what people thought he was?
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
thank you Brett
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
by hibachi on Jan 20, 2010 9:11 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
They ALL would win only 4 games
with that line. Give me a break…
alot of AR's sacks
came from holding the ball too long not from getting hit before reaching the end of a 3 step drop, same with big ben
Okay, so what was Peyton Manning's record in his
first year, with NO LINE? You know nothing about football if you THINK that we need a QB as high as the #4 pick, wihout ANYONE to block for him.
Period.
In peyton manning’s rookie season, he passed for 3,739 yards with 26 touchdowns, set five different NFL rookie records, including most touchdown passes in a season, and still finshed 3-13, so I’d say a supporting cast is important.
Thanks for the stats
Especially the 3-13 one.
I'm only saying that
we don’t HAVE to take a QB this year. Even if that guy were there – BIG IF – it will still take years to develop him and Jason is serviceable enough – to say the least – to help the team if the D get’s it act together completely. We have far more pressing needs than finding an elite QB and with this field that is a crap shoot beyond all belief. So le’s fix our most pressing problems (the most obvious will help JC get even better) and go from there.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
QB is the most valuable position today.
We have more pressing needs but if you like a guy, you take him
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
why not take Berry or Spiller then?
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
UGH
NO BERRY!!! PLEASE no more 1st round safeties. Like I said, if it were up to me, we would not take a QB. Frankly, I think the only reason the QB’s will go so high this year is because they are the best of the lot. That doesn’t necessarily mean they’re top 10 material though. Seems like a thin class to me. Funny though, what happened to Colt McKoy? I don’t see him in any projections. I know he got hurt, but so did Bradford, only more.
Anyway, I do NOT want to take another safety top 10. It just isn’t worth it. Taylor was the exception, but Landry is the rule.
No RB’s either. No need to go into this though, cuz Shanny won’t take one there anyway.
Yeah, what happened to McKoy???
For all the talk about QB’s in the first round, not many are mentioning McKoy who, in my opinion, is better and more physically ready for the NFL than Bradford. Trust me, you’ll see Bradford’s “light in the ass” self broken up if he’s forced to go somewhere and start, which is what many would want if he was drafted #4 to Washington.
I’d be more convinced if you spelt McCoy correctly…
Berry looks really good. I’d rather get a real FS on this team then waste a pick on a QB who’s gonna get killed.
Ummm...
I’m the last person who thinks that we need to get a QB with the #4 pick. Please read my other post.
And yes, I spelled McCoy incorrectly. But guess what; he’s not that relevant to even care that I did.
And that very commodity does not lie in this draft
IMHO – unless it’s one of those already slated for late rounders who turn out to be a Brady.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
With an improved kicker
we win 6-7 games last year. Think what an offense with a real coach and game plan and game management and O-line and 2TE sets could do.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
One positive for Claussen
Shany is using a version of the West Coast offense and Claussen is experienced with it as well as taking snaps directly from the center. Bradford’s experience is mainly in the spread. K Shany’s background in Houston was with the spread which is sort of a paradox since the head coach has used the other system.
Matt McGuire mock draft and scouting report – http://dcprosportsreport.com/MockDraft.htm – has the Redskins picking Claussen as the 4th. Ken’s notion of letting the quarterback sit on the bench while learning has merit when a team does not have so much of a need for the prime left tackle. McGuire also says Trent Williams is not left tackle material so slipping to the 2nd round is not too cool. The tackle prospects for left tackle: Russell Okung, Anthony Davis, Bruce Campbell, and Bryan Bulaga are likely to be by the Skins next chance given no trade down.
The Skins 2011 season win-loss record is likely to be close to the 2008 record which would mean a draft pick like 11th-15th.
by Jefferson1935 on Jan 20, 2010 6:34 PM EST up reply actions
Omitted "gone"
likely to be “gone” by the Skins next chance given no trade down.
by Jefferson1935 on Jan 20, 2010 6:37 PM EST up reply actions
Trade down,pick up extra picks,Draft RB Spiller,Draft McCoy or Tebow in 2nd round
We could trade Campbell(RFA) for 1st and 3rd or 2nd whatever we can get for him.With Allen as GM we can get trading partners that we could not of had in past.Trade down and pick up extra draft picks,we need to get as many draft picks as we can get.Draft RB Spiller-could be next C.Johnson or Cribbs,Draft either C. McCoy or Tebow in 2nd round,either would be a steal.We can get O-LINE in free agency,Shanahan knows how to draft RBs and QBs thats his job now.
I love how people who disparage Campbell
turn right around and believe that he will pull in 1st and 3rd round picks as a restricted free agent. If he is so bad, why would anyone do that or anything close?
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Not in this year's draft I wouldn't.
It’s almost like the entire first round is made up of 2nd rounders.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
For the first time I ever...
I can say the people making the draft picks in 2010 are a lot smarter than me (not the case with Danny and Vinny). If they take a QB, I won’t necessarily like it, but I have faith they are doing the right thing and will approve of it. Shanahan squared knows best. Okung is not a lock to be a Chris Samuels…we have to take that in consideration. Does anyone know Okung’s personal background, etc in regards to pulling a Jamarcus/Andre Smith on us?
It’s more likely than not…I’m just saying everything is not as cut and dry.
"It was one of those things where everyone in the building was suddenly excited again," Cerrato said. "And all the women in the building were the most excited. They couldn't believe we were getting the guy from "Dancing With the Stars."
It's crazy
first time we get a high 1st rounder in awhile and the dearth of top 10 worthy talent is amazing compared to most years. And we have Mr. Dan’s deep pockets to make something work. Aaaack!
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
+1
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
I have faith they are doing the right thing
Don’t forget that no matter how much you might like a football executive, they are all capable of being wrong about QBs. A lot of “can’t miss” QBs do not have success in the NFL. Some “can’t miss” offensive linemen also flunk out of the NFL, but usually that’s due to character issues. Left tackle is a safer pick, in addition to being an area of extreme need.
plagiarizer
your statement sounds suspiciously like my statement.
This is the 1st time in a VERY LONG time I can honestly say that I have faith that management will make the right decision, whether I like the player or not.
If you get paid for it, I want royalties.
If Okung is gone and there is no QB Shanahan likes, we need to take Eric Berry.
I’ve said this before on this blog somewhere, but Eric Berry would be the best thing for our defense. Berry is the second most talented player and a true Free Safety, which would allow Landry to play what he is good at, Strong Safety. There he can be a pro-bowler and allow our D to force turnovers. Our D has the talent to be the best in the League, but discipline and bad coaching has really hurt them.
If we do switch to a 3-4 D, a great strong safety is vital. He needs to stop the run and cover underneath(not covering deep where Landry is horrible.) Look at what Polomalu means to the Steelers D, that could be Landry.
Orakpo!!! Russel Okung next year!
Great post.
Finally someone here recognizes that this is a quarterback’s league. I don’t mean to insult anyone’s football intelligence and I think it’s mostly nostalgically motivated, but people who are clamoring for us to be a “smash mouth” team are crazy. You simply don’t win in this league anymore without an elite quarterback (Jets aside). Look at the # of 4000 yard passers this season – 10! 12 QBs had a rating higher than 90 and all of their teams had winning records.
Listen, I’m not saying JC can’t be great. He obviously hasn’t been given a fair shake. That being said, I trust Shanahan’s judgment much more than mine and if he believes Clausen or Bradford has a better chance of leading us to a superbowl, then I’m all for it. Let a QB sit for a year while you rebuild the line. Imagine if we drafted Okung and wound up drafting in the mid round? What’s our QB situation then?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
I agree...
The days of a team winning 3 Super Bowls with 3 different qb’s are behind us… If the right guy is there at the top, I kind of think we have to take him. We got Jon Jansen at the top of the 2nd, we can get a solid lineman there as well this season and start the building process. If you have a guy you think is the real deal at QB, it’s tough to pass on him.
Nice points,
but they are obviated by the fact that in all likelihood, history will show that there were no elite QBs to be taken in this draft. Don’t waste a draft pick, especially a high one, on a theory that does not apply to this draft.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
I'll post this again.
http://walterfootball.com/mattblog091229.php
The stats don’t lie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
Here are some other stats
2009 vs:
Michigan – Loss
USC – Loss
Navy – Loss
Pitt – Loss
UConn – Loss
Stanford – Loss
2008 vs:
Mich. State – Loss
N. Carolina – Loss
Pitt – Loss
Boston Coll. – Loss
Syracuse – Loss
USC – Loss
2007 vs:
Georgia Tech – Loss
Penn State – Loss
Michigan – Loss
Mich. State – Loss
Purdue – Loss
Boston Coll. – Loss
USC – Loss
Navy – Loss
Air Force – Loss
That is: 21 losing games in three years when Notre Dame’s strength of schedule was in the lower tier of Div I/BCS eligible teams. I see padded stats and a whole lot of losses. Only a Notre Dame QB could average losing 7 (SEVEN) games a year for three years and have the luck of being considered an elite QB. What a travesty…a travesty of a mockery…no – a travesty of a mockery of a sham – or shamrock I guess. HAHAHAHAHAAH! Give me a break.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Look at Clausen's stats in those games.
It’s not his fault their defense absolutely blows.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
but according to everyone's logic
he should be able to overcome all and lead his team to victory. That’s what Peyton Manning does.
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
Last thing...
He played with a toe injury all year. Yeah, I guess he’s a real big weiner.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
Minor injury, nothing like shoulder surgery.
Still, it’s painful to play on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
You're both idiots.
In those 6 losses for the 2009 season, Notre Dame gave up an average of 33 points per game. When they held opponents below 30 points the great Clausen was 6-2. Is it so much to ask for your defense to hold a team below 30 points?
I’m done arguing with people that ignore something right in front of them
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
idiots though?
I thought we were having a civilized conversation?
You’re a meanie!!!
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
We may have touched a nerve there, Rekka
Hibachi-san is normally one of the saner posters around. Just don’t get the inordinate amount of man-love for Clausen. The stats lie – many of the wins were against really crappy teams.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
I guess
I don’t see what would be so wrong with taking a later round qb to groom/serve as the backup instead of playing Craps with out 1st pick.
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
it is
until you’ve gotta go back home to the wife and tell her you lost your whole paycheck.
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
*walk back home
don’t forget you had the keys to your a car when you started gambling
i get the feeling
that there’s a story you want to share skins…..
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
Here's the real gaaaag...
We finally get Dan to back off (that’s what I’m seeing from a distance at least), we get a real GM and a real coach, who hires a bunch of other real coaches, right? You with me? And the best they can come up with…I mean seriously….the best they can come up with is Clausen or Bradford or Pike or LeFevour or ANY of these QBs in the first round. PUHLEEEZE!!
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Only way I sign off on a QB is if
(1) We take a tackle before him
(2) We have finagled extra picks in 1st or 2nd rounds
(3) Its LeFevour in 2nd round to be groomed for 2 or 3 years while our line matures.
Well
Colt Mccoy never loses so by your logic he should be the pick then, yeah?
Colt McCoy is a weak armed QB that played in a spread offense.
Clausen on the other hand played in a pro style offense under Charlie Weiss, put up unprecedented stats for a junior QB, and won some games despite playing with an awful offensive line and an awful defense. I’m fucking tired of people trying to twist my points when they know exactly what I mean.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
Seattle, it's all about Seattle
If the Redskins believe Clausen or Bradford is a future All-Pro, it can be argued they have to pull the trigger.
I’ve advocated the same and certainly agree. If Shanahan doesn’t fall in love with either Bradford or Claussen, provided they’re on the board, the Skins will be in great shape to move back, as you stated.
IMHO, I don’t think Seattle has to fall in love with a QB to take a QB. They have two first-round picks and a dire need at the future position of QB. If one QB is off the board at #4, I would argue that Seattle becomes more desperate to make the move, knowing that the Skins could potentially take the same position if they don’t swap.
It’s VERY unlikely that Seattle will find themselves in such a favorable position in the next decade. They have a need for QB and have two 1’s to move up and get one.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
I say we get the other #1 from Seattle
and hope they pick Clausen. Then we are at square one with the Bradford dilemma, which should not even be an issue – NO QBs this year. Worst case, bring in a veteran to test JC and be backup if Colt isn’t the guy.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
We may know way ahead of time.
All of this will probably be a moot point if Shanny Jr. brings Sexy Rexy with him to push Campbell/play backup.
Hate to say this with LJP about, but
it could (now I’m just sayin) could be the battle of the two best mediocre QBs to have EVER lived. Or not.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
I AM SO SICK
with you fake football fans that know nothing about the sport, but think you have all the answers, especially when you start talking about QB’s! Someone tell me, how many rings does Peyton Manning have? How many rings does Brett Favre have?
Now tell me how many rings does Trent Dilfer have? How many rings does Mark Rypkin have? Have many rings does Doug Williams have?
You kill me when you associate your wins with having a “great” QB, and spit on Jason Campbell in the process. Warren Moon, Dan Marino, Jim Kelly, don’t have rings, and they’re argueably some of the best QB’s since the late 80’s, early 90’s. Miss me with you Brittle Bradford, Immature Clausen talk!
Late 80's and early 90's.
I think I mentioned fans like you above. Read up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
I think you're stuck
on how great a quarterback can make your Madden team. This is real football with real teams. Its not all about QBs.
I'll say it again,
look at the playoff teams this year. Besides the NYJ, all have QBs that can be dominant. The Minnesota Vikings were a playoff team with an average QB last year and then they added Brett Favre. Look where they are now?
If you think Bradford or Clausen can be Brett Favre you take him. If you think Bradford or Clausen can be Eli Manning, you taking him. Then, you worry about the offensive line later because for the next 10+ years, you have fucking Brett Favre.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
Without getting heated...
look at Minnesota’s Offensive Line. Stacked. Look at the Saints O-Line. Stacked…Look at Arizona’s, Baltimore’s, San Diego’s…
The same principle applies. We can argue who’s the “better QB” all day. It wouldn’t make for wins unless you have an offensive line. This is simple fundamentals. A one plus one equals two equation. You cannot worry about the offensive line later, even with a good QB back there. Hello??? Vinny and Snyder haven’t addressed the O-line through the draft in TEN YEARS. To believe in what you’re saying, means you believe in THEIR logic, and everyone knows that they were clueless because of the point I just made.
Peyton doesn’t play on his ass all game. Neither do any of the QB’s that are in the playoffs this year, the year before that, and the year before that. Just like you can’t compare Jason Campbell’s play to Ryan, and Flacco. Why? Because BEFORE those two got there, they had an OFFENSIVE LINE and a DOMINATE run game.
It’s as simple as that.
very well said!
I’d like to see someone name a team that won the Super Bowl with a bad OL unit.
Beuller….Beuller…
that's just this year
did you forget that last year, Kerry Collins posted a QB rating of 80.2, completed fewer than 60% of his passes, and led his team to a 13-3 record? they were then beaten in the divisional round by the Ravens, led by rookie Joe Flacco who had a QB rating of 80.3 and completed exactly 60% of his passes, throwing 14 TDs and 12 INTs.
what else? you have Jake Delhomme, QB rating 84.3 during the regular season, <60% completion percentage, and obviously he wasn’t that great in the playoffs either. the Vikings? they had Gus Frerotte start 11 of their games…
now it’s true, a majority of playoff bound teams will have good quarterbacks. but I think there’s a logical fallacy at work here. people seem to be saying that “if a team makes the playoffs, then they must have had a good QB”. I think you’ve got it in reverse. I think “if a team has a good QB, then they are more likely to make the playoffs” is the true statement here. that doesn’t discount the possibility, obviously, of a really good team making the playoffs without a good QB. there are of course plenty of examples of teams making the Super Bowl without a good QB, most recently the Bears with Rex Grossman at the helm.
in addition
it’s a fallacy to say that every QB who has won a Super Bowl is a great QB.
And it’s also a fallacy to say every great QB has won a Super Bowl.
I think it’s important to realize there are great QBs and good QBs too, just like any other job in the world.
The better your QB the better your chances are at winning the Super Bowl but finding a top tier / elite / great QB is very difficult. There are many years where non eof the college QBs are top tier / elite / great.
You seriously can't make an arguement
with Kerry Collins and Flacco. The rating is similar, but I watched that game, and when Chris Johnson went down, they had to rely on Collins who has not one receiver. Flacco didn’t do all that well either. It’s not like he had the game of his career either, yet he was their first pick a year ago…a “promising guy” as they said in the papers.
There’s no equation on finding the next “great” QB. It’s all speculation, based on what we see on Saturdays. That, as history has shown, has not translated to what we see on Sunday’s. Titans…Run team, offensive line. Baltimore…Run team, offensive line. So even in your arguement, you make my point.
Rex Grossman was complete ass the year the Bears made the Super Bowl. Had a great defense that went against Peyton Manning, who, has a great offensive line and barely gets sacked. Not taking anything away from Peyton, but this is the same principlpe when arguing Barry Sanders versus Emmitt Smith. One had a line, the other was just a freak of nature. Does that make Emmitt better than Barry? Statistically, yes. But realistically, no. In fact, most would argue that Barry was better, but guess what? He had no line, no QB, and most importantly, no rings.
Sidenote Don’t fall for the “soap opera QB” hype. The NFL wants people to believe that it’s all about the QB because it makes for a good storyline and sells tickets. They’ve even come with BS rules to “protect” the position. Give me break people. Wake up…
Fans like you are who I'm talking about NOW!
Learn the game before you comment, kid.
Isn't it time for your nap gramps?
booyah! two can play at that game.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
Pfft!!!
Listen, I’ll stick to addressing football issues only, because I doubt you want to go there with me on the name calling. When you grow some football smarts, come talk to me. Until then, you have nothing to say to me, and I don’t have the time to school you.
It's called a reply button.
See the red word “reply” between the words up and action? You take your mouse, click it and then type. This allows everyone to know who you’re talking to.
Hope that wasn’t too much information for you in one day gramps.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
Oh, people know exactly who I'm talking to.
The only one in here that sounds like an ass. Need more help figuring out who that is? Find a mirror. Hibachi…more like “Hi B*tch A$$”…
I told you, KID, you really don’t want to go there. You made your weak point on Claussen, now let it go.
Now that I think about it...
If we look at Seattle as our likely trading partner, then our pick becomes more valuable if the Rams DO in fact take Claussen.
The only spot between our #4 pick and Seattle’s #6 pick is KC. And they are absolutely not in the market for a QB, so if both Claussen and Bradford are there at #4, then worst case scenario for Seattle is that they would get whatever QB we don’t pick.
But, if the Rams took Claussen at #1, and Seattle fears we will take Bradford, or that KC will trade its pick to a team looking to take him, then they’ll be more inclined to make a move.
The trades could look something like this:
I find it unlikely that they would trade their 14th overall pick to move up, because that would have them paying two top-six rookie salaries. However, if they did, the trade would likely be their #14, the 6th pick in the 2nd round, and next year’s 3rd rounder for our #6.
The more likely scenario would be for them to move up two spots to the #4 to take the remaining QB. We would also give them our 3rd round pick next year and they would give us their 2nd rounder this year.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
No QB in Round 1!
Taking a QB in the first round can turn a struggling organization into a sure-fire loser. We absolutely can not afford to miss with this pick and, the best way to avoid that is to take the best LT on the board.
We’d be best served going after a LT in round one (preferrably Okung and Bruce Campbell if he’s already gone) and maybe using our 2nd rounder on a guy like Tony Pike as a QB to groom. If our line could actually protect someone, maybe our receivers would have time to get into their routes and we’d also be dealing with much more manageable 2nd and 3rd downs b/c the running game would be more effective.
There are not any sure-fire, franchise-type QBs this year… every QB has major question marks surrounding them. The guy who wrote this article seems to forget that the last three QBs we tried to draft in the first round (Campbell, Pat Ramsey and Heath Shuler) were awful. The last tackle we drafted in the first round (Samuels) turned out to be a pretty good player until injuries took their toll.
Football is won in the trenches and I really hope that we finally have a brain trust that understands that.
by Bring Back The Hogs! on Jan 20, 2010 4:22 PM EST reply actions
The Lions took their QB at #1 last year
and now they’re picking #2 this year. They had a huge turnaround.
yea
but the Lions’ offensive line wasn’t ba…….hmm
they did have good receiv….hmm
the running ga…hmm
This doesn’t make sense, they drafted a 1st rd qb! These things aren’t supposed to matter when you draft a 1st rd QB…
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
You could even ague
that they had a better running back and WR than we have going into this season. The fans over there have what they’ve probably been asking for: A first overall pick of a QB in Mathew Stafford, the big play reciever in Megatron, and a very good 2nd year running back that’s shown flashes of brilliance even in a Lions uniform.
And yet, the flashy new QB couldn’t help the team win more than two games. Of course part of that may have to do with the fact that he got injured twice because the fuckin team drafted a QB before a they secured a decent line to potect their investment.
Maybe this year they’ll draft another flashy TE.
There’s a reason the Lions draft top five every year. It’s because they’re stupid and undisciplined drafters. Always going after ‘the playmakers’. This should be a bedtime tale for all those looking to draft a QB instead of focusing on the trenches.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
This years Lions beat us didn't they?
Matt Stafford was great and I’m convinced he’ll be a stud in a couple years. Detroit had no problem putting points up – it was their awful defense that lost them games. The reason Detroit has been awful for so many years is because they whiffed on QBs and drafted WRs so many years in a row. I’m not asking for a WR. All I’m saying is, if the coaching staff thinks Clausen can be great, you don’t pass up on him just because your offensive line is bad.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
you also don't Carr him
by putting him in and watch him be demolished. If you’re going to take that risk then protect the investment and let someone else play QB, taking all the hits, while the new QB learns.
I can’t speak for others but I don’t see any of this years QBs being great and that’s why I wouldn’t take a QB with the #4 pick. However, as someone else pointed out elsewhere, identifying great QBs based on their college performance is very difficult.
None of us are true NFL quality scouts (or if we are we’re stupid for giving away the fruits of our labor for free) so all of this is just amatuer opinions.
Exactly.
None of us are scouts. That’s what I’ve been trying to say this whole time. If Shanahan likes a QB, then I have no problem with us picking one because I trust him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
We're actually not that far apart
I too have repeatedly stated that if Shanny really falls in love with one of these guys, he’s not going to pass on the pick out of fear. So I agree that it is possible.
On the other hand, and without factoring in what Shanahan might think of these QB’s (because we have no way of knowing), there is a very real and ongoing team-building trend as of late that I believe we can learn from.
The Vikings secured dominate lines, an elite running back and more than capable receivers before they brought in Farve. The same could be said for Baltimore and Flacco, although they’ve got less threat at WR. The same can be said for the Jets and Sanchez, although again they’ve got less talent at WR. All of these teams were hyper-successful in this team building approach.
Then you look at the Lions who attempted to bring in playmakers at WR, RB, TE, then at QB. They paid a King’s randsom to bring in Stafford before securing the trenches, developing a dominate run game, or being able to defend either the run or the pass. They couldn’t protect the QB and had to ask him to do too much as a result. He’s been taken out twice due to injury… due to the backwards team building. This approach won two games and was not successful by any stretch of the imagination.
So as I said, Shanny will pull the trigger if he concludes that one of these guys is a ’can’t miss’ or the next Peyton Manning. Otherwise, he uses all resources he has to build the team the right way.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
Do you think Shanny will want his guy at QB?
Being you have followed Shanny for a while, do you think that he will want to get his qb in there? If so, wouldn’t he need to draft him this year in order to see the results in 2-3 years? Shanny has a 5 year contract and around here he will need to see results in year 3-4…same for Bruce Allen. Assuming a rookie qb is going to take 2-3 years to develop, Shanny may need to get one this year. Or would he rather use vets at qb? I saw your fanpost on JC, and in response I would say that most people at HH think JC can win if surrounded by a good OL and a strong defense, but he will not ‘lead’ them to wins.
are all rookie QBs equal
your response seems like you assume there’s a QB worth taking every year and I think that is a false assumption. Maybe I read your post wrong but what if there’s isn’t a QB in the draft who can become “your guy”?
my question is regarding the amount
of risk that Shanny is willing to take. First round qbs are pretty risky and it will take a few years to know what you got being we dont have the OL/running game to hide a rookie qb if he goes that route. Shanny drafted Cutler, but also signed vet Jake Plummer, so some insight from a Denver fan would be nice being both approaches were tried. As far as always having a draftable qb out there, I would say that there are typically a few each year that have the physical tools needed to make all of the throws (like Boller or Ramsey), but there is no way to judge the mental side of things, like reading complex defenses…that is difficult to measure being college D’s stick to the basics and you only see the physical talent of a qb. Drafting OL is much less risky to draft given that you can judge their physical talent pretty well with the mental side being less critical.
Infinitely better in the win department
technically.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Well, technically 0 doesn't multiply....
Technically, its really undefined how much better they are…. 2/0=undefined, not infinity…
Oh yeah - they were unimaginably better = undefined?
nerd ass. LOL Can I interest you in a Higgs-Bosun particle with left spin? Fresh from the particle accelerator?
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Nah.
I’m an NMR Spectroscopist. My interest in quantum mechanics isn’t about splitting sub-atomic particles… ha
NMR?
Just one of the few acronyms I’m unfamiliar with?
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Sounds interesting...
more so in a science journal, though.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
The future creation of the Higgs Boson
has sent ripples back in time to disrupt the functioning of the big particle accelerators. The particle is too destructive to the fabric of reality, and thus is stopping itself from being created.
Hows that for some heavy shit.
At least you didn't mention
strings or anti-matter or time travel. So I’m good with it. :)
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Sometimes it's arguable to take a QB
But not us, not this year. We’re in crisis mode at OL. We’re beyond crisis mode.
Without Chris Samuels, we are looking at one of the worst OLs in the league. And it’s not like we’ve got youth coming up through the ranks. Heyer? Rinehart? Ugh.
If we don’t take immediate steps with every resource available, we will be staring a top 4 pick in the face for at LEAST the next two years.
JC could get us through this year. Chad Pennigton or someone like him could get us through the next two.
The left tackle trash heap won’t get us anywhere.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
I don't think
Danny would like it too much if Pennington’s arm were to fall off after he got hit too hard on tv. It wouldn’t be good for sales.
I say bring in Garcia if need be.
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
But if we got to see it
in Double 3D on the new Jumbotron, I’d take that chance.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
any publicity is good publicity!
Danny would like it too much if Pennington’s arm were to fall off after he got hit too hard on tv. It wouldn’t be good for sales.
I say bring in Garcia if need be.
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
I just wonder!!!!!!!
Do yall watch the same Redskins I watch….cuz I think Campbell is a hell of a QB and if the line is strong u will see Campbell has been under like what 5 different systems since High school …maybe more and he has got better each year….so I hope they Draft a linemen or trade back for more picks but it would be hard to pass up on Berry …But skins need linemen!
Draft Position
For those that want to use Jansen as an example of a tackle selection in the 2nd round, remember that he was a right tackle and not necessarily requiring the skills of a left tackle for a right handed QB.
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/nfl-draft/2006/draft-position
“With that said, I believe there are some draft strategy guidelines that can be gleaned from the data:
1) Address your needs at “Top-Heavy” positions first and foremost, particularly QB, DT, and T1.
2) Look for value at the “Normal Distribution” spots. Many of the best value picks come from guys at these positions who slide into rounds two through four.
3) Immensely talented safeties are rare, but you won’t have trouble finding a quality safety in rounds two through five. A talented RB like DeAngelo Williams is probably a better use of resources than someone like Donte Whitner if you’ve got a need for both.
4) Wait until at least the end of round one to fill a need at center. Nick Mangold is awfully talented, but not worth a top pick if you’ve got needs elsewhere.
5) Spend late-round picks and undrafted free agent bonuses to collect prospects on offensive line, one dimensional defensive tackles, fullbacks, and special teams. A few of these will work out, and allow you to use your more valuable resources elsewhere.
At the end of the day, every team has pretty much the same arsenal of resources with which to build their roster (although some may have a little more cash for signing bonuses than others). The teams which can manage to use those resources most economically will ultimately field the most talented teams. It’s not just about player evaluation; it’s also about knowing how and when to address your specific needs."
This epitomizes the failure of 10 years of Snyder
THIS is what he just. doesn’t. get.
At the end of the day, every team has pretty much the same arsenal of resources with which to build
their roster (although some may have a little more cash for signing bonuses than others). The teams which can manage to use those resources most economically will ultimately field the most talented teams. It’s not just about player evaluation; it’s also about knowing how and when to address your specific needs."
"By far the worst performers on the team are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
I wish I had the time to fully respond to the flawed logic of this post,
but I don’t. So instead I will simply offer a few brief points:
1. I encourage everyone to read the first 8 paragraphs of this article (PLEASE do it), written by Malcolm Gladwell, which puts to rest forever the notion that a QB’s play in college is a reliable predictor of his NFL success. An excerpt for the lazy/busy: “This is the quarterback problem. There are certain jobs where almost nothing you can learn about candidates before they start predicts how they’ll do once they’re hired.” Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/12/15/081215fa_fact_gladwell
2. Contrary to what the post states, logic is in fact NOT on the side of an argument that the Redskins have to pull the trigger on a QB at No. 4 if they think he is a future all-Pro. In fact, logic suggests that they should not pull the trigger. Here’s a list of QBs drafted in the first round from 1997-2009: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/draft/draft_query.cgi?pos=QB&round_1=1&round_2=1&tm=all&year_1=1997&year_2=2009&conference=any&type=
How many of these guys were “future all-Pros” in a team evaluation/war room prior to the draft? How many have actually been “future all-Pros”? The answer is at most 7 out of 34 (with the jury still out on guys like Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco & Matt Stafford). In other words, the odds are against it.
3. It’s not at all clear that trading down will be a viable option. I don’t think that it will be as easy or as lucrative as it sounds. Picking fourth is not such an enviable position these days when rookies make what they do.
+1
The whole QB argument is based on the flawed assumption that you can actually evaluate 1st round QBs with real accuracy. Yes, there are great QBs out there who were selected with high picks but there are also numerous busts whereas there aren’t so many busts at highly selected at LT. Picking a highly touted QB at number 1 is not the same as just picking Brees or Manning or whoever. They’re known quantities now in the NFL whereas no one knows where the careers of these college players will go in the NFL.
by SkinsOsTerps on Jan 20, 2010 7:40 PM EST up reply actions
What's being overlooked in looking toward the draft.............
There are many scenarios posed that make a lot of sense of how the Redskins may be affected at #4. One thing is for certain, it is still high pick and Tampa as well as Detroit won’t be drafting QBs. I’ve thought about it so much already that it is time to surrender my obseesive ponderance of what the Redskins will do and just wait and see. That doesn’t mean I won’t keep thinking about it, but I will temper trying to make the true prediction. Ultimately the execs are empowered so the onus is on them. What’s being overlooked though is what happens prior to the draft- the opening of free agency. This year may not have as many lucrative options, but there will be some. Redskins history in free agency is an agressive one that for as good and we fans know many times as bad or more- at least they’ll be in the mix front and center. There’ll definitely be a better idea of who the Redskins are targeting once that mini dust bowl settles.
Bradford will not dissapoint--I don't believe you've seen him play much
I’ve been watching every game he’s played since a youngster, and he has that “it” factor that is immeasurable, but for success on the football field. Sure, he has the basic physical tools necessary, which you can find plenty of in just about any year’s draft (though he’ll be the most accurate QB in the draft, which is a little harder to say with most QBs); but, that’s not what I’m talking about.
What I’m talking about is football intelligence. To me, that’s the factor that separates the great QBs from the unsuccessful ones, and that’s the reason why it’s harder to nail the good ones from the not-so-good-ones. Sam has demonstrated this intelligence since his redshirt freshman year (as he broke NCAA freshman QB records on several levels). If the Redskins draft him, I don’t believe you’ll be disappointed. I’m hoping they will, because I think it’s a good franchise to be a part of.
I don’t think it’s quite fair to call him “brittle” after just one play’s worth, ending in a shoulder injury. It isn’t as if that was the only game or season he played in. One injury does not constitute being “injury prone”.
As an OU fan, there is only one other player I was this confident in, from watching every game played: Adrian Peterson. It still baffles the mind why he was bypassed by others, and his success was a guarantee in my mind—it was just a matter of time. Sam’s the AD of QBs. Most folks who have not watched him play but for maybe a game or two will disagree, because it’s the safe thing to do. But if you’ve watched him play as many games as I have, it became comical how predictably brilliant his football play was. He’s very very smart—that’s why he’s so good—and, he made a HUGE difference in our team performance.
good point
“What I’m talking about is football intelligence. To me, that’s the factor that separates the great QBs from the unsuccessful ones, and that’s the reason why it’s harder to nail the good ones from the not-so-good-ones.”
But there are some physical skills needed too. I would agree that the physical aspects are over emphaized because they are easier to evaluate (than the intellectual skills).
Quite frankly I don’t know anything about Bradford but the only way I’d spend a #4 pick on a QB is if I was convinced the QB would be an elite (Peyton Manning, Montanna, Marino) QB.
well I guess it's all a matter of what theory you subscribe to....
my take on the QB @ #4 issue….
a) Claussen couldn’t win enough at ND, despite their recruiting “advantages”, running a pro style offense and not playing the most difficult of schedules. Not saying the guy can’t pass, he just doesn’t raise the level of play of his teammates enough to matter when facing quality competition. He’s a #1 recruit of a QB who gave them .500 results.
b) Bradford – two shoulder thingies in the same year. A fluke? but that’s playing in the big boy big 12, what happens when you put his fanny behind our current OL against the pass rushes we see in the NFC East? A signing bonus of how much? for the most likely outcome parallel see Stafford, Matthew – Lions. Outside of Vince Young how many succesful Big 12 QB’s are there right now in the pros?
the other QB’s listed have not graded out as top 5 level QB’s (and tbh I’m not sure why Bradford or Claussen do either, I think a lot of that stuff is hype) worthy of a selection in the top 5 much less the first round.
I have heard it said that Parcells (yeah I know, but imho the guy knows his football) preferred his QB’s to have at least three years of starting performance in the college ranks and to see steady improvements in their games over that time period. One, so he could have enough tape to evaluate him and two to see how he addressed the mistakes that he made while developing. That makes me a LeFevour fan.
While I am okay with the drafting of a QB, I just would like to see someone address the line that the poor guy has to play behind first before you throw anyone else back there. I don’t know how Shanahan intends to address the line, but it’s hard for any QB to perform if he can’t even execute a three step drop without being pressured.
As for other needs, I could see Haden the CB at #4 if there are no takers, I could see Berry there as well (although I am not as convinced as others that he’s the answer to our secondary woes). If we have to take less value with our pick at #4 to trade down, fine so be it, but we have too many holes to think that they can all be addressed this year but to get as many pieces as possible to do so sure shouldn’t be neglected if the chance presents itself.
As for trading partners, I’m hoping that the ’Skins have plans A thru G ready to be enacted on a moments notice. They could easily go the BPA, with OL, OLB, CB, QB, RB or S. You could state a legitimate need for any and/or all of them. The picks can be for this year or next years or both, essentially… we need the dudes.
I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused....
smells like heath schuler all over again..
we have to draft okung or berry all these qb,s have bust written all over it why are the rumors the rams are going to draft a d linemen instead of what they need is a qb of the future because they are scared as well as other teams to draft these guys who could be another ryan leaf enough said draft okung or if he is gone the next good linemen that is there because it does not matter who the redskins qb is next year he is not going to do anything if he is lying flat on his back ..
what a flashbak
Shuler….ugh! But it does smell like that all right.
How about
Skins trade #4 to Seattle for #6 and a 3rd so they can get QB
Then ship #6 to either Browns or Raiders so they can get Berry for another 3rd.
From here we could draft OT #2 (whoever that is), Dez Bryant, Joe Haden, Spiller or trade down again.
With our extra 3rds we can now get a QB, RB, OT in the first 3 rounds and still have 1 more for best player of OL, S, CB, LB
I doubt that berry will stay on that long
and the last person we need to draft in the 1st is Dez Bryant
by Nobetterthenbob on Jan 21, 2010 6:45 AM EST up reply actions
Great Article
I want the Skins to draft Okung, but I also trust Shanahan. If Shanahan feels that Clausen or Bradford is a potential all-pro QB, I have no problem drafting one. QB is far and away the most important possiition, and you can’t pass up an opportunity to draft one.
by RedskinDanny on Jan 21, 2010 7:13 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
You just said exactly what I've been trying to in a few short sentences.
Awesome.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
With the minor exception that
there are no All-Pro prospects in this draft. Believe me.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Because you know more than Shanahan and the Redskins scouts right?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
Well I did turn down a job working for Mr. Snyder
errhh….Sanitation Engineer, 2nd Floor, at Redskins Park.
That should count for something….:)
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
QB??
Wow… you want to fix this team with a Michael F’n Vick don’t you? Flashy ain’t gonna win us more games… only logical decisions.
If your boat has a hole in it… plug the hole; stop trying to throw out the water!
JJ Fe
I MUST
remember that one…
If your boat has a hole in it… plug the hole; stop trying to throw out the water!
I thought you would know all those old sayings
considering you’re probably like 100.
!!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laydODN6xVk
Better watch it
Hibachi-san, or JCash will challenge you to a Walker Jousting Dual.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
I remember being that
so it’s all good with me. of course that was a few decades ago.
Trade back and fill more needs!
Redskins potential draft moves.
1. Trade back in the draft with Seattle Seahawks or San Francisco Forty Niners.
a. Trade the 1st round pick of the Redskins # 4 pick for Seahawks # 9 pick (1st rd.) or with San Francisco for the 13th pick (1st rd.) and either of those two teams 2nd and 3rd. rd. picks.
Then in the first round draft:
C.J. Spiller RB 5’11" 190 Clemson
Or
Brian Bulaga* OT 6’6" 312 Iowa
Then in the second round draft:
Toby Gerhart RB 6’1" 235 Stanford
And/or
Kyle Calloway OT 6’7" 318 Iowa
Then with our new 3rd pick draft:
Dan LeFevour QB 6’3" 226 Central Michigan
Or
Tony Pike QB 6’6" 225 Cincinnati
Then in the fourth round pick draft:
Sergio Render OG 6’3" 320 Virginia Tech
Or
J.D. Walton OC 6’3" 305 Baylor
or
Chris Hall OC 6’4" 296 Texas
Then in the fifth round draft:
Eric Olsen OG 6’5" 300 Notre Dame
Or
John Estes OC 6’2" 295 Hawaii
Or
Seattle Brian Jackson CB 6’1" 202 Oklahoma
Or
Justin Woodall S 6’2" 220 Alabama
Then in the seventh round pick:
Cody Grimm ILB 5’11" 210 Virginia Tech
Someone in another post suggested drafting the punter from Nebraska but I don’t think he is a senior. This is just something to show what the possibilities could be if we trade back?
Good ideas
And while Cody Grimm is a tackling machine, and I can appreciate the nostalgia, we already have two smaller inside linebackers. Don’t think we need another.
The strategy
for getting more picks is good if the Skins could get the other teams to go along with them.
Given the instability of mock drafts, I suppose your picks were only hypothetical. There aren’t that many 7 round rankings for players that are published, but the CBS Sports rankings are quite different than what you have listed. When the draft rolls around the Team will need to have their plan(s) mapped out and adjust as the various draft picks occur.
by Jefferson1935 on Jan 23, 2010 11:57 AM EST up reply actions
i’d like bradford with the 4 pick. I love lineman but I don’t see why we can’t get a tackle in the second round
the problem
is that we need more than 1 tackle, we need 3-4 offensive linemen because VC ignored the positions for a decade. You can’t make up a decade of ignoring the OL with 1 pick.
No QB please
Washington’s pick at 4 all comes down to two things. First being if the is an agreement with players and owners.If there is not one Redskins will retain Campbell or at least one year. Draft a QB next year it seems to be a better QB class than this one. The second thing that will affect the draft is the combine…Now I know we all want and need linemen…First round might be where we get one but one player could change everything the skins are doing….CJ spiller..Yes a RB…Now go with me on this ….If CJ runs a 4.12 to a 4.20 in the forty his stock will rise really fast…I believe he will ace the combine since he ran track for Clemson. I just can’t see Redskins passing that type of speed. We all talk about Campbell and the Line but one of our biggest problems has been where we started on the field…Spiller would change all that. He has great hands so we could use him in the slot at times and change of pace RB to go with Portis..Spiller has great vision….Trust me a first round lineman always fall out of the first round. I also understand you can get a RB in third round and be ok but not one of Spiller’s talents, or even close.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
