Early Look At The Redskins Offseason Strategy
by Steve Shoup on Nov 23, 2011 10:49 AM EST
Email
PrintHey Guys,
As we begin to turn our eyes towards next season, I wanted to share an article I wrote on Fanspeak about what the Redskins offseason plan should be, that you can find here! I broke down cuts/trades I would make, which players I'd resign, top free agent targets and my strategy for next year's draft.
Here are some of the highlights, for more in-depth coverage on my reasoning, read the whole article:
-I'd look to Trade Jabar Gafney
-Mike Sellers, Jamaal Brown, and Ryan Torain should be off the team
-I'd look to resign London Fletcher, LaRon Landry, and Fred Davis
-I'd probably resign Tim Hightower and Kory Lichtensteiger
-I'd probably let Will Montgomery walk
-I'd look to sign QB Matt Flynn, OG Ben Grubbs, and C Chris Myers (among others) to rebuild the offense
-I'd make a big splash and sign DE Calais Campbell on defense
-With a viable quarterback in place i'd look to trade back in the draft and stockpile early round picks
-I'd Draft OT Mike Adams, QB Ryan Tannehill, WR Dwight Jones, CB Jonathan Banks and RB David Wilson among my first two day selections.
In the end my depth chart would look something like this:
QB: Matt Flynn, Ryan Tannehill, UDFA QB
RB: Roy Helu, Peyton Hillis, David Wilson, Tim Hightower
FB: Darryl Young
WR: Santana Moss, Leonard Hankerson, Dwight Jones, Niles Paul, Ryan Broyles, Austin/Robinson/other
TE: Fred Davis, Chris Cooley, Paulsen/other
OL: (first 5 starters): Trent Williams, Ben Grubbs, Chris Myers, Lichtensteiger, Mike Adams, Chris Chester, Lucas Nix, Willie Smith, Anthony Collins
DL: Calais Campbell, Barry Cofield, Stephen Bowen, Jarvis Jenkins, Golston, Neild, Late round/UDFA guy
LB: Kerrigan, Orakpo, Fletcher, Riley, Dan Conner, Rob Jackson, White, Alexander
CB: Hall, Wilson, Jonathan Banks, Leonard Johnson, Barnes/Thompson/other
S: Landry, Atogwe, Gomes, Aaron Henry (maybe Doughty)
Tell me what you guys think, I'd love to get your feedback!
160 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Like what you did with the exception of the QB position.
Editor at Hogs Haven - Redskins Blog
Twitter: @RVAparks Check it out for the latest Redskins news and opinions
hey just be glad i didn't go with Caleb Hanie
Curious, is it that you really think Barkley is a great QB or that you aren’t a fan of Flynn/Tannehill?
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Nov 23, 2011 11:22 AM EST up reply actions
I'm glad we get to see what your boy Hanie can do now.
I’m just not a Flynn fan.
Editor at Hogs Haven - Redskins Blog
Twitter: @RVAparks Check it out for the latest Redskins news and opinions
by Parks Smith on Nov 23, 2011 11:25 AM EST up reply actions
so if it was another QB option to play in front of Tannehill you'd be fine with it
Yeah I’m hoping Orton doesn’t make it to Chicago so we can see Hanie get a shot for the rest of the year.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Nov 23, 2011 11:37 AM EST up reply actions
To be honest I'd also be more fine with Rex than Flynn
Editor at Hogs Haven - Redskins Blog
Twitter: @RVAparks Check it out for the latest Redskins news and opinions
by Parks Smith on Nov 23, 2011 11:41 AM EST up reply actions
haha really?
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Nov 23, 2011 11:54 AM EST up reply actions
Who is Caleb Hanie? The Bears strategy in signing two UDFA QBs a few seasons back. The Bears signed
Collins to give them an experienced backup, but that tactic was not a winner.
http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Who-is-Caleb-Hanie.html
This was a good article to read given Steve’s previous support for Hanie. If Hanie can get three wins the Bears strategy will definitely be a success.
Would bringing Orton on board to learn the system while cutting Beck be a good approach for the expected 2012 rookie QB? Orton will not be likely to get past the waiver wire. He will be a UFA next season without a contract extension and his remaining 2011 salary of $3 million would have to be paid. Some details maybe missing. Rex would not need to be on the Team in the 2012 preseason.
by Jefferson1935 on Nov 23, 2011 1:38 PM EST up reply actions
good article!
I believe it is under $1.5 million that another team would have to assume, that is what the media is talking about from what I’ve read.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I agree with Parks...
I’d be more than satisfied with your strategy, with exception to the QB situation. I haven’t been impressed with Tannehill at all this year. Flynn scares me…what has he really done? He’s kinda like Kolb and Whitehurst, backups who got starter money and haven’t really shown anything spectacular. I’d rather bring in a veteran with more game experience if we’re going to have to pay someone (orton or even garrard). We all know that the second our QB starts to struggle, the drafted rookie is going to be in the game and will obtain the starting job.
I’d love to have Hillis too, but i’m not sure he falls into the high charachter category from the recent contract dispute
Nice job Steveo
Thanks!
As for Tannehill, i understand there are some inconsistencies there, but remember he is relearning the position, and has a lot of upside. I do think he needs to sit, but in a couple years I could really see him being something special.
Flynn worries me some, as I don’t like committing that kinda money to a guy (and while there is a rookie cap you are still committing a lot of money and resources to a rookie who you have even less tape on). But unlike most of these cases he’s going to be an unrestricted free agent. So even if he does bust like Whitehurst, Kolb or Rob Johnson, is in between like Matt Cassel or Aaron Brooks, or has a productive career like Brunell or Hasselbeck, all you are losing is money (where as all those guys were traded for something).
I don’t mind Orton, but i’m not big into Garrard, he’s pretty up there right now and I don’t see him being a real viable option
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
The addage is
that the only thing that conclusively correlated with NFL success is number of college games played. That really turns me off to Tannehill.
by sofutomygaha on Nov 23, 2011 4:52 PM EST up reply actions
How about W-L record
when your team is ranked in the preseason top 10.
again, not good for Tannehill
Crying Lion
W-L record has got to be one of the lower determining stats
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I used Locker's accuracy against him
I only used win-loss record as an aside. Like if someone brought up how Win-Loss was important and they were a fan of Locker.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
So
I use W-L record against Tannehill. When you enter the season with a host of offensive talent around you(most importantly the offensive line – who by the way is very good), and the play of your team rides on the shoulders of the QB…………., then that QB can’t produce, I view it as a problem. The regression from last season?, I also view as a major problem. Funny how you told me in a post 2 weeks ago, that you wanted/expected to see more from Landry Jones this season, and up until now, he’s disappointed you, yet you have no problem with the play of Tannehill, eventhough it’s clear he has not improved from last year.
Major Red Flag!
Crying Lion
Tannehill isn't in the mix for a top 5 pick
also i’ve seen far more dropped balls from his receivers (Jeff Fuller has looked awful this year) than I have from Jones or any other top QB.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
You have yet to address his lack of improvement
which you told me was important from your QB. I’m curious(besides drops from WR’s – which are just excuses)as to what your thoughts are on his regression.
Crying Lion
I don't think there is a real regression
Look not every game is great, and he has a ways to go, but let’s be honest this is his ‘Sophomore’ year. I think you let him sit and grow and in two years he’s roaring to go.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
The problem I have with him
is taking on yet another project at QB. We all knew Campbell was going to be a project, and look how that turned out. Ramsey was raw when he was drafted, and he never developed. This is not the time for us to draft another project, nor is it the time to draft a guy who won’t be ready for two years.
As for the regression, you seem to have no problem in your feelings that landry Jones had not progressed like you’d have liked(although I don’t know what more the kid can do really), yet your prasing Tannehill, who’s year by any standards of college greatness, has been poor. I just don’t get your mentality.
Crying Lion
I agree there's a risk
but part of the issue with both Campbell and Ramsey was self inflicted with the Skins. Spurrier started Ramsey before he was ready, and gave him zero protection. Campbell got the time, but they kept changing offenses so the extra time was meaningless.
Let’s say the Skins trade back like i mention, and they have a shot at Jones at 25 (ish) of course I’d take him. But if I’m drafting a QB in the top 5 I don’t want there to be any regression. Tannehill I also feel can’t be graded the same since he wasn’t even practicing as a QB for his freshman and sophomore years. Cam Newton might have less career starts, but at least he got to play QB his entire college career.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Man, lets just get down to the nuts and bolts here.
Tannehill had yet another aweful performance last night against another average defense. I don’t know if you watched any of the game at all, but he looked terrible, completing less than half his passes, throwing 3 int’s, and looking completely shell-shocked.
If you still advocate drafting him in the second, and letting him sit for a few years, I really think it would be a huge mistake. One that will set our franchise back.
I feel you are willing to do whatever it takes to NOT have to draft a QB in the first round. I can’t figure out if you are gun shy, or just don’t view QB in all that high reguard. Maybe you were an offensive linemen when you played, and just have a love for that part of the game……………….who knows.
Right about now, you are about the last Redskin fan on the Tannehill bandwagon, and I urge you to jump before it crashes and burns.
Time to face the music………………..kid is not good. This last month has probh jumped him out of the 2nd round.
Crying Lion
i'll admit he's sliding, but we have a long way togo including the Senior Bowl
I see the potential and want a guy who has star upside, and at a reasonable draft position.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Why not just stay put
and get the guy(Jones or Barkley – or maybe even RG3)in the first. Why are you so against that.
If you want the trade back so bad, can’t it happen in the 2nd?
I just can’t see why anyone would want to ignore talent like we will see at the QB spot in the early part of the draft in 2012, for a team who is STARVING for a good QB.
Crying Lion
here's my central points
1. No one can say who the 2nd best QB is in this draft class. (and if someone trades up we might not even have that choice).
2. The success rate of 1st round QB’s (esp. the 2nd, 3rd or 4th best) is a crap shoot at best.
3. Whether teams do it or not, starting a rookie QB (esp. a junior or RS Junior), significantly hurts his chances to be successful. Like you said QB has been a need for years, so why force a guy into a bad situation.
4. Like it or not the secondary quarterback market (i.e. trading or signing back-ups for starting roles) has had a good bit of success over the years.Not to mention plenty of other mid-late round (and UDFA’s) developed by their own team. (note I don’t want to make a trade and think there are some interesting names to sign (Flynn, Stanton, Hanie)
4. Finally, we aren’t 1 or even 4 players away from being a playoff team, and our depth is absolutely pathetic. By trading back you can acquire a bunch of young cheap talent, which is needed b/c of how bad Vinny’s years were and Shanny’s first year. Had we had a full complement of picks the last few years, I probably wouldn’t be looking to move back.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Nov 26, 2011 12:06 PM EST up reply actions
well a lot can still change between now and the draft
and i wouldn’t hate a QB under certain situations (a. starts less than 1/4 of the games…hopefully none, b. they add at least 3 OL, c. they add pieces to the ground game), but I’d don’t see all of that happening. And until a QB separates himself, I’m not going to say it is a lock that we need to draft one.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Nov 26, 2011 11:07 PM EST up reply actions
, I’m not going to say it is a lock that we need to draft one.
You realize this team has no future at QB. I can’t understand why you want linemen, linemen, linemen all the time. You know we have other needs too.
Look, as long as your off that damn Tannehill train, that’s a start.
Crying Lion
i'm def. not off the Tannehill train
my point is we don’t necessarily need to draft a 1st round QB. A Flynn and Tannehill/Foles option does give us two bites at the apple and strengthens our team in multiple ways.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Put Foles there if you want
but please, get Tannehill out of the conversation. And Mike Adams while your at it too(he had another horrible game against Mich).
Crying Lion
Mike Adams was far from horrible against Michigan
he had the bad holding call, and one or two other missed blocks, but a number of other plays he stonewalled the guy.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
He should be stonewalling his guy
if he’s as good as you are saying. Fact is, he as inconsistant as they come. The mich defense has one NFL calibur D-Linemen, and that is Mike Martin. The rest are average at best, and yet again, Adams looked very pedestrian.
Crying Lion
He's sliding........ok, finally we got that
are you still sold on him as our future. And, no two year plan,. Our QB will be a starter either next year of in 2013.
Crying Lion
Grading College Level QBs
As far as performance. The best indicator is their statistics against top ranked opponents. QBs in college that had a career completion percentage above 60% against top ranked competition tend to have a much higher rate of success at the NFL level. Combine a good wonderlic score with a college QB who had greater than 60% completion percentage against top 10 opponents, and threw more TDs than INTs against top 10 opponents in college and you have yourself a gem.
well he's a Shanny boy
and will come cheap as well (compared to his asking price before the season). He’s also really good in the pass protection role (and as a receiver) so he could see a good chunk of playing time.
My guess is other big backs like Tolbert or Michael Bush will cost too much, and Brandon Jacobs is one dimensional and getting old.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Nov 23, 2011 11:54 AM EST up reply actions
I guess if he comes cheap, then I'm okay with it. I was under the impression he wanted a BIG payday
by StephanHart on Nov 23, 2011 11:59 AM EST up reply actions
It won't be pennies
but it shouldn’t be even moderate money. Maybe something like a $3.5 million average over 3 years.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Nov 23, 2011 12:14 PM EST up reply actions
Meh
RB – not there most realistic option. Hightower and Hillis would both expect to start.
QB – not a Flynn fan, think RGIII gas more to love and wielded even consider trading up for Luck if possible.
Would probably go WR higher in the draft and OL lower.
Redskins @Robert Griffin III - 2012
by Copious 1 on Nov 23, 2011 12:00 PM EST via mobile reply actions
*has more to love and would
Redskins @Robert Griffin III - 2012
by Copious 1 on Nov 23, 2011 12:01 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
appreciate the feedback
Hightower has no business expecting to start, he’s not exactly earned that job. Hillis might have some expectation but after this year it can’t be too high.
I like Griffin if he comes out, but he needs to sit as well and there should be no trading up for QB’s
The O-line is a far greater need that WR, but i do have a WR in the mid 2nd so i’m not ignoring it.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Nov 23, 2011 12:14 PM EST up reply actions
Trading up.
If we get the 5th pick (hypothetical-indulge me a bit), we have 2 – 4th, 5th and 6th round picks, throw in maybe a 2nd next year and clearly swapping 1st. Trading up this year wouldn’t hurt too bad. Obviously we would only be talking about Luck.
Redskins @Robert Griffin III - 2012
by Copious 1 on Nov 23, 2011 12:27 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
we don't have two 5th's, that is next season from the Haynesworth trade
to trade up from 5 to 1, you will at least need to give up our 1st and 2nd this year and next year, bare minimum. Those 4th-7th rounders don’t have a ton of trade value, especially for a mega deal like this.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Nov 23, 2011 12:46 PM EST up reply actions
Cool
We shall see what happens. A lot depends on who declares. If Flynn was not an option, what would change about your strategy?
Redskins @Robert Griffin III - 2012
by Copious 1 on Nov 23, 2011 12:55 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
If Flynn wasn't an option
I’d look at 3 primary fallback options:
Kyle Orton
Caleb Hanie
Drew Stanton
I believe all three guys could offer the same advantages as Flynn, though maybe not with as much of an upside (though I do really like Hanie).
Beyond them I’d go with the two man approach: I’d bring in a guy like Brady Quinn, Chad Henne, Shaun Hill, or Dennis Dixon, to go along with Rex Grossman. If I had to go with the 2nd grouping of guys I’d be more inclined to draft a Barkley type, but again under no circumstances play him as a rookie. d
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
there's no chance that a Barkley or RG3 wouldnt play at all in year1
Those days are long gone, nobody sits on a top5 qb selection for a season. Not to mention both RG3 and Barkley will be 22yrs old in week1 of next season so it’s not like they are too young to handle playing.
Brady Quinn cant beat out Tim Tebow but he’s going to play better than Barkley? Honestly I would be very worried if that happened, a qb taken that high shouldnt have much trouble outshining the likes of Dennis Dixon in preseason.
which would again significantly increase his chances of failing
Look at the Titans they signed Hasselbeck b/c the last thing they want is Jake Locker starting…Vikings tried the same thing just McNabb is that awful.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
titans and vikes were trying to win now not just protect their rookies
and neither hasselbeck nor Mcnabb are journeyman qb’s, they are (or were for mcnabb) established, pro-bowl players…..that’s nothing like signing Dennis Dixon and making Barkley can sit an entire year.
but again, do you think it would be normal that Rex Grossman would cleanly beat out our top5 qb pick and that it shouldnt be cause for concern? The guy we draft that high is not yet as good as Rex Grossman? Why draft him?
it's not about beating him out
it is about protecting the rookie QB. And no one thought Hasselbeck or McNabb were at a Pro Bowl level (except obviously Shanny).
And we can obviously do better than Dennis Dixon so I don’t see the point.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Protecting the rookie is not the way of the NFL anymore
I understand your concern, and I see why it could be a concern of yours(Heath Schuler), but in the NFL now, if a guy can play, he plays, and he plays early. That’s it. There is no “protecting rookies” anymore. Do GM’s and owners “protect coaches”. No, absolutely not. So the coach is forced to play the rookie to protect their own job.
Crying Lion
and there really isn't a great track record and when it fails it doesn't protect the coach
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
But when it succeeds
it gets that coach an extension. And an extension, as we all know, is more time, which is what every coach needs to be able to get his team to the big one.
A good rookie QB is like an ace in the hole for a coach. You got one, now you better know just how to play it.
Some coaches may choose to fold that ace to a lesser hand, but you need to be aggressive, and come out firing. There is always time to back off, there is never a 2nd chance to start out of the gate.
Crying Lion
yes but it is less likely to succeed with an offense in transition
our ground game is a joke right now and that is the best friend for a rookie QB (see ATL and BAL)
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Nov 23, 2011 5:46 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
And it's even less likely to succeed
when you take on another project at QB for the future.
Crying Lion
huh?
You are saying that the QB is the determining factor I’m saying it’s the team.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
umm Uncle Rico thought that all you had to do was throw the ball 'over mountains' and you'd win
great teams win games, and superbowls, usually they have great QB’s, but not always.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Is the jury still out on Sam Bradford? He was fairly impressive in his rookie season,
but has managed to become the sack leader in his second year. I don’t know that Bradford had the injury problems that kept Stafford’s playing time down.
by Jefferson1935 on Nov 25, 2011 12:00 AM EST up reply actions
facepalm
Would probably go WR higher in the draft and OL lower.
Editor at Hogs Haven - Redskins Blog
Twitter: @RVAparks Check it out for the latest Redskins news and opinions
D!
We need THE GUY. Not a question mark.
Why do we need more DL? Am I missing something? don’t we have Bowen, Carriker, Jenkins?
I agree we do need "The Guy"
which is why I have us developing that guy in Ryan Tannehill.
Maybe Matt Barkley, Landry Jones or Robert Griffin is ‘THE GUY", but it’s also just as likely they are one of the dozens of failed first round QB busts from the last 25 years.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
if you read the article I talk about bringing in Campbell
first he replaces Carricker who is a free agent next year, 2nd he gives us another star player. We have a lot of good defensive players but the only stars are Fletch (who might have 1 more year at this level) and hopefully Kerrigan. Campbell adds another one so our D can join the elites.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Carriker is a free agent.
It will be interesting to see how much money he gets.
by sofutomygaha on Nov 23, 2011 4:53 PM EST up reply actions
we need a diaper, we can't risk shitting the bed again next year.
Counting cards isn't illegal. It's frowned upon, like masturbating on an airplane.
by jbh1190 on Nov 23, 2011 1:56 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Hate the QB plan. Ryan Tannehill is not a franchise QB
I would go with RGIII or Matt Barkley in the first round. This franchise needs to stop getting butthurt every time they think of drafting a QB in the first round. For God’s sake it happened almost TWO decades ago.
Dear Passionate fan, I know you are passionate, but please reply with a logical answer or I will ignore you.
by TerpsAllTheWay on Nov 23, 2011 2:21 PM EST via mobile reply actions 1 recs
The Heath Shuler thing happened almost Two decades ago*
Dear Passionate fan, I know you are passionate, but please reply with a logical answer or I will ignore you.
by TerpsAllTheWay on Nov 23, 2011 2:22 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I think the Heath Shuler thing is why many Skins fans aren't jumping at the idea of drafting a "franchise" rookie QB.
by The Agent C 83 on Nov 23, 2011 3:35 PM EST up reply actions
i think it is the fact that all around the league their have been dozens of heath Schuler busts
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
And then of course there was campbell
who was mediocre at best
--MR. AWESOME
by Mister Awesome on Nov 26, 2011 4:40 PM EST up reply actions
Many thought Gibbs was reaching by selecting Campbell in the 1st round (They did not see him as
better than a 2nd round potential.) Campbell played up to that potential.
by Jefferson1935 on Nov 26, 2011 7:16 PM EST up reply actions
Serious question
What is a Franchise QB?
Because that term gets thrown around alot, but I don’t really see it clearly defined. To me a franchise QB is a top 10 QB. And those aren’t drafted as much as you might think. In fact one hasn’t been selected since Aaron Rodgers in 2005 and he got to sit for 3 years. Matt Ryan puts up good numbers, but they aren’t great and they aren’t elite.
If you just are looking for good numbers why not resign Jason Campbell (won’t happen) or Kyle Orton, b/c the difference between their production and Ryan’s is pretty small.
Also what makes Barkley and RGIII franchise guys, but not Tannehill?
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Two vital things: Experience and Decision Making.
A Franchise QB in my definition is a QB who is able to lead you to the Lombardi trophy, plays smart football (20+ TDs and low Ints) , and is clutch/consistent. Championships are greater than gaudy stats ask Peyton Manning.
Dear Passionate fan, I know you are passionate, but please reply with a logical answer or I will ignore you.
by TerpsAllTheWay on Nov 23, 2011 3:44 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
For the record, Ryan tends to lock onto receivers far more than the previous two and he tends get pressured easily and doesn’t follow his progressions. I’ve noticed it with Landry Jones too.
Dear Passionate fan, I know you are passionate, but please reply with a logical answer or I will ignore you.
by TerpsAllTheWay on Nov 23, 2011 3:47 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
well there are some differences in the offenses
but the point is Tannehill is looking far better than Barkley did in years past. Give the kid some time and he can be special.
Barkley is probably going to be a good QB, but I doubt ever great (or a Franchise guy)
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
This isn't the NBA where guys are drafted on raw Upside
In the NFL talent is just one of the things you look for in a Guy, I think we’re ready to take our Guy. Even if Barkley is just good if he wins us an SB I will be happy. It goes back to the Eli Manning vs. P. Rivers debate.
Dear Passionate fan, I know you are passionate, but please reply with a logical answer or I will ignore you.
by TerpsAllTheWay on Nov 23, 2011 5:31 PM EST via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
winning championships is more than a QB
I agree I’d rather have Eli than Rivers b/c he’s a better leader, but he’s hardly the reason they were even in the SB.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
So are you tell us
that Tannehill will be great, and surpass what Barkley will ever do in the NFL?
Crying Lion
if given the time to develop yes I think he has a higher ceiling
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
So
a 2 year starter, with less accuracy, less Football IQ, less leadership, and a weaker arm will be the better pro because you THINK he has a “higher celing”.
I didn’t realize we now have to base the future of our team on a kids celing……………….Why not just go with the better overall prospect, which is pretty obvious, it’s not Tannehill.
Crying Lion
b/c it's not an either or scenario
you are ignoring what else the Redskins could get with their top pick (or by trading back getting multiple picks). I’m not saying take Tannehill at 4 or 5.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Nov 23, 2011 5:50 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
In my scenerio
you get the 2nd or 3rd best QB in the draft, who just so happenes to be having a eye-opening true junior year on a very young USC team, and had actually take steps towards becomming a much better QB, and you add a true RT, who is very athletic(he started off college as a TE), and is probably a solid 2nd round guy with some upside(he is just in his 2nd year as a starter at Ok St).
Crying Lion
Okay but that still isn't the even scenario
Yes I’m saying Mike Adams and Tannehill with our top two picks vs Barkley and Adcock, but I also picked up 4 extra picks by trading back.
So it is Adams, Tannehill, WR Dwight Jones, CB J. Banks, OG Lucas Nix, S Aaron Henry
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Nov 23, 2011 7:05 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Your still missing the big picture
by trading back, you went from stud QB to dud QB. You also made a HUGE REACH on your first round selection, so no matter how many extra picks you got, it doesn’t matter when you pick as poorly as you did.
The only decent player on your list is Jones.
Lucas Nix???? seriously?, and a safety? I thought in your plan you resigned Landry. Why a safety?
Crying Lion
Lucas Nix is considered a top 75 player on every scouting service out there
Adams is widely considered a 1st or early 2nd, Jonathan Banks is a stud CB, he might end up being better than Kirkpatrick or Claiborne down the line because he is so physical. And i went with safety as a value pick, also we don’t have a lot of depth behind Landry/Atogwe and both have been injured.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
If Adams ends up in the 1st round
I’ll buy you and your family a gift cert to your favorite steak rest. If he goes in the 2nd part of the 2nd round(where I project him), you simply owe me a frostie. OK?
The Nix pick I’ll just let go until after bowls/combines etc. I don’t think I’ll need to say more after you wittness that.
Crying Lion
Couple of points
Both Cutler (2006) and Matt Ryan (2008) are top 10 QB’s this year according to ESPN TQBR. And 2008 is about as recent as you can look for a top 10 guy, as it takes a couple of years normally for a guy to develop into a franchise guy. There are certainly several people on track to be franchise QB’s who have been drafted recently, with Sam Bradford, Cam Newton, and Andy Dalton off the top of my head.
QB is far and away the biggest weakness on the team and they’ll have a top 5 (and I think top 3) pick, so they won’t have to trade up. They should absolutely draft a QB with their number 1 pick. In 2008 Miami was in a similar position, and took Jake Long over Matt Ryan. Want to know what they wish they had done now? Bill Parcells will tell you that he made a big mistake.
Formerly KS and CS
by ThrowItDownBigManThrowItDown on Nov 23, 2011 3:45 PM EST up reply actions
QBTR is a really good stat but it isn't perfect
I feel like it is a useful tool, but it is important to look at other metrics as well.
Matt Ryan is surrounded by pro bowl level talent, yet his numbers are about middle of the pack. Honestly If I saw another viable option at QB (Flynn and Tannehill) I’d do that and take the star OT.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
How about
Value over Replacement? Which improves the team more – taking a first round QB to replace Rex and a second round Olineman to replace Brown, or doing the reverse? I’d say that the improvement from the first round QB is vastly more important than the improvement from Brown to a first round tackle. Tackles can be helped by providing a double team.
The QB touches the ball on every play. Good one’s impact both the passing game and running game by making the proper adjustments at the line before the play. I saw a run last week where the play was called a run to the right. The QB read the defense and adjusted to run to the left. Result was a long TD run. They have to draft a first round QB this year, and continue doing so until they get one that is good.
Formerly KS and CS
by ThrowItDownBigManThrowItDown on Nov 23, 2011 5:13 PM EST up reply actions
there might be 4 QB's in the league (5 if Peyton is healthy) that make true adjustments at the line
An offensive lineman plays on every single snap, a QB when he hands the ball off has very little impact after completing the handoff.
Again part of the difference is the fact that a RT is a plug and play position, while a QB will need to develop.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Almost all of them audible at the line
only the very worst one’s aren’t allowed to audible at the line. Manning is in a class by himself because he calls his own plays, but almost all of them make adjustments. Most of them also call out the blocking assignments on every single play. Ever hear the QB yelling “56 is the Mike”? That’s him telling every player there who to block on the play.
With the rules changes, especially the one’s the Colt’s got implemented after the Patriots first super bowl with Brady, the QB is far and away the most important position on the field. The colts were in the super bowl last year.
Formerly KS and CS
by ThrowItDownBigManThrowItDown on Nov 23, 2011 5:23 PM EST up reply actions
there is a difference between set audibles (something you don't really see rookies or young guys do)
and really making adjustments. What you are talking about are the basics and things that Rex Grossman does.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
You can't win a super bowl without one of the elite QB's
Since Washington won their last super bowl in 1992, only one team has won a super bowl without an elite QB. The Ravens in 2001, and only a handful have even gotten to a super bowl without an elite QB.
The Packers won just last year with an elite QB and a below average oline. Things change. It isn’t the 80’s anymore. The QB is the most important position.
Formerly KS and CS
by ThrowItDownBigManThrowItDown on Nov 23, 2011 5:33 PM EST up reply actions
are they great QB's at the time though?
Brady’s first two rings he was just good, not great. Hell they don’t win that first one if not for Vinitari’s leg. Roethlisberger wasn’t that great in 2005, and Eli wasn’t much better in 2007. These guys all had the potential and they were growing into their talent, but to say the best QB wins is a fallacy.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I didn't say the best QB always wins
I said you can’t win without one of the elite guys. The only team to have done it in 20 years did so by having one of the best defenses in the history of the game, an elite running back, and an elite offensive line. It’s not all on one guy, but one guy is more important to the rest. Put Brady on this team this year, and it’s a playoff team.
Formerly KS and CS
by ThrowItDownBigManThrowItDown on Nov 23, 2011 5:53 PM EST up reply actions
we are a playoff team only if we dont' have a single injury
and we’d be like the 6th seed. Also no rookie is Brady, or remotely close to him.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
You have to start somewhere
Arguing against a rookie because he won’t be as good as one of the best ever in his prime is silly.
And this team, with Brady and the current level of injuries would be in the playoffs. Next years team, with another season of roster improvements and competent QB play could very well be in the playoffs.
Formerly KS and CS
by ThrowItDownBigManThrowItDown on Nov 23, 2011 5:58 PM EST up reply actions
In fairness
Steveo isn’t the one that brought up Brady.
At least I'm not a whiny, little bitch.
i'm not arguing for Brady
I’m saying that the hypotheticals of “if we had Brady” or “If we had Rodgers”. The real comparison is “if we had Newton/Gabbert/Locker/Ponder”, where would we be.
And I didn’t say Andy Dalton for a distinct reason, why b/c no team was going to use a top 10 or even 15 pick on him. He compares closer to Tannehill than the so called ‘top prospects’
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
when we are a playoff team we can focus on whether or not we have a great QB
but until that point it really doesn’t matter, if we have a good, really good, great or elite QB.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
As I said above
Put an elite QB on this team, and it’s a playoff team right now. As currently constructed.
Formerly KS and CS
by ThrowItDownBigManThrowItDown on Nov 23, 2011 5:54 PM EST up reply actions
Or not. Ignore the part about the colts super bowl!
Formerly KS and CS
by ThrowItDownBigManThrowItDown on Nov 23, 2011 5:26 PM EST up reply actions
There is no such thing as a franchise QB
but RGIII and Barkley have both thrown more than a thousand passes in college. Below that fact on their resumes will be that both have a good list of tools, skills, and physical attributes that are considered desirable.
The top line on Tannehill’s resume will not look nearly as good.
by sofutomygaha on Nov 23, 2011 5:01 PM EST up reply actions
true but the bottom line is all that matters
and that is potential vs draft position
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Tannehill
is an average college QB, who has a poor W-L record his senior season, and hasn’t lived up to the hype. He’s an ok athlete, but his accuracy, arm strength, and decision making are all over the board.
I don’t know where you see all this upside.
Crying Lion
b/c i don't see a weak arm, or poor accuracy at all?
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Tannehill is ridiculously smart, talented, and has v good accuracy.
Don’t underrate him.
by sofutomygaha on Nov 23, 2011 5:19 PM EST up reply actions
haha trust me I don't
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
He rates no where near the top guys in this class
There are the top 3……….then RG3………………….then a HUGE dropoff.
Crying Lion
Steveo is the ONLY one
on this foreum who rates him high. No one else wants anything to do with him as our QB of the future. Most paople realize he’s just like all he other average QB’s we have had here in DC, and people now expect much better.
Crying Lion
we mostly agree
Tannehill would be a great second round pick for a team that needs a QB.
I disagree that there is a drop off between Luck-Jones-Barkley and Griffin. I think Griffin will go ahead of Jones in the draft.
by sofutomygaha on Nov 24, 2011 7:32 AM EST up reply actions
haha
I’ll take that bet
I think Griffin will go ahead of Jones in the draft.
name your wager………..anything you like. My suggestion is a flat screen TV. I’ve been wanting a 60"
Crying Lion
Actually, I assume your kidding about Griffin going ahead of Jones
but if you weren’t, and really want that bet, I’ll do it.
And I do pay my bets……..ask Parks.
Crying Lion
Maybe you should watch a game or two then......
care to explain what went on during the Oklahoma game. Like, why he couldn’t drive the ball downfield into those 30mph winds?? Funny, the other QB didn’t seem to have a problem.
Crying Lion
I'm not sure I agree with you
if you’re talking about potential in the upside sense. In the past, I think that Okung vs. Williams, Watt vs. Kerrigan, and Devin Thomas vs. Eddie Royal were great examples of recent times where the Redskins had to decide between potential and proven performance with a high draft pick. Much more often than not when I look back on those choices, I really want the more proven guy.
by sofutomygaha on Nov 23, 2011 5:17 PM EST up reply actions
Peyton Manning
As a Colts fan, it is slowly sinking in that 2010 was very likely Peyton’s last season in a Colts uniform. If he can play next season, it seems a high probability that he will not do so in the blue and white. Thinking of potential landing spots for Peyton, the Redskins were the first team that came to mind. (Actually, I would love to see him in SF because they could win a couple Super Bowls with him.) That aside, my question is, what would you give up for the G.QB.O.A.T? Assuming he has 3-4 years left to take your team to the promised land?
Nothing.....
He isn’t going to be cut! That means if he is avaible….it will be for trade. I don’t want to get rid of any picks or any young players for a 36 YO QB coming off his 3rd neck surgery….which was a fusion. For this trade to even make sense for the Colts….we would have to assume that we are taking on his 28 MILLION dollar bonus due oe start of the 2012 league year. That means we cant resign Landry, Davis, Fletcher, etc. There is no value to us in this trade….just to the franchise…because while they sink this team deeper into it’s 20 year shithole……they will make a killing on jersey and ticket sales….for the first six games anyway!
At least "WE ARE" not Penn State!!!
There has been a fair amount of talk here about just that subject
I think most people’s answer is not much. Donovan McNabb has us gunshy, and three neck injuries is bad news. Washington is bad enough this year to also be in position to draft a top QB. I do agree that Manning has played his last game for the colts, along with just about anyone on the colts over 30.
Formerly KS and CS
by ThrowItDownBigManThrowItDown on Nov 23, 2011 4:08 PM EST up reply actions
We'd probably give you guys a 4th round pick at best.
He’s not really worth much, an aging once great QB in the twilight of his career. We’ve all heard that one before, let’s face it he has no value anymore.
Dear Passionate fan, I know you are passionate, but please reply with a logical answer or I will ignore you.
by TerpsAllTheWay on Nov 23, 2011 4:13 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
He can't be traded contractually according to John Clayton.
Peyton would have to be cut.
At least I'm not a whiny, little bitch.
He can be traded
He is due a large roster bonus before the start of the league year. To be traded he would either have to agree to defer that bonus a few days or the colts would have to pay it then trade him. The Colts can hold the threat of cutting him over his head as leverage to get him to agree to the delay. The only way Peyton isn’t traded is if the colts can’t find anyone willing to pay that bonus.
Formerly KS and CS
by ThrowItDownBigManThrowItDown on Nov 23, 2011 5:17 PM EST up reply actions
Drafting scared is not a good way to draft
If your scared your next LT is going to be a disappointment like some consider TW to be, maybe we shouldn’t ever draft a linemen in the top 10 ever again.
Same goes for QB. Being afraid to pull the trigger on a highly rated guy, just because you fear he may turn out to be the next Heath Schuler is not the way successful teams draft.
Successful teams do not trade back out of a top 5 draft position, and then take Ryan Tannehill. But hey, maybe that’s excactly why we are not a successful team.
Crying Lion
by Tiller56 on Nov 23, 2011 4:33 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
I agree....
you do your homework, watch all the film, watch and grade all the workouts, and after that…..you make the best educated decision you can. The rest is fate…..you can’t be scared. Should you learn from the past….yes……but you can’t let it take anything off the board.
At least "WE ARE" not Penn State!!!
+1
You took the words right out of my mind. You have to evaluate the prospect in every aspect: mechanics, height, frame, accuracy, athleticism, mobility, and intangibles (work habits, motivation, attitude, and leadership). You have to take a chance at some point it’s the way successful organizations run a franchise. Anyways, happy Thanksgiving to you and your family Tiller.
Dear Passionate fan, I know you are passionate, but please reply with a logical answer or I will ignore you.
by TerpsAllTheWay on Nov 23, 2011 5:02 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
It has nothing to do with fear
I just don’t believe in the lemming mentality. QB’s are FAR OVERVALUED and then starting them from day 1 is a HORRIBLE idea, yet teams still do them b/c they believe everyone will be Manning or Roethlisberger
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
or turn into a Flacco or Ryan
or Bradford…………………….hum, I’ll take my chances.
BTW, I’d much rather loose with Barkley throwing the ball to Hankerson and Paul, than to loose with Grossman throwing the ball to Gaffney and Stallworth.
Crying Lion
Flacco is looking to be more above average at this point
Ryan is just good, and Bradford is running for his life. Hell A.J. Feeley put up better numbers than him (not saying he’s better, but what is your basis for his success in starting from day 1)
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Sam Bradford was ROY
Matt Ryan and Flacco are definitly considered top young QB’s in this league, and both are better than any QB we have had here in 30 years.
Oh, by the way, Ryan and Flacco have both been to the playoffs.
Crying Lion
you mean the Falcons and Ravens have both been to the playoffs and they probably would have been playoff teams if Jason Campbell was there
is Ryan better than Campbell yes, but it’s not a huge gap.
Awesome he was rookie of the year, that only means his numbers were roughly the same as McNabbs, not exactly great. Don’t get me wrong it was good for a rookie, but his numbers have regressed some this year, and his extra year of playing time isn’t really helping him.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
not very well if you look at his numbers
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
well which is it?
Is he really ready? or was he forced into a situation b/c that is the current myth in the NFL?
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
look if he was put on a quality young team like say the 1998 Colts
or something like that I’m with you, but right now he’s just a punching bag for opposing defenses and the only thing he’s learning is duck and cover.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Bro
IDK where to start with the Mike Adams pick. Have you watched him play the last 3 weeks? He looked aweful, especially against PSU, and their D-Ends are the weak spot on that defense. Keep in mind, he was also protecting a running QB in Braxton Miller(a true freshmen). Imagine if it was a pocket passer back there?
If you have doubts about Adcock in the 2nd, I can’t even beging to imagine what your thinking with a guy like Adams IN THE FIRST! Damn, thats a helluva reach, and in doing so, your giving up on the idea of us getting a good QB for the future.
So, your willing to trade back 20 spots, and get a RT who should go in the late 2nd to 3rd, and THEN willing to get Ryan Tannehill, who everyone knows will have no shot of playing for at least 2 years. But, in your depth chart, you have Adams starting at RT from day one………….this is a guy who’s been having a hard time blocking average college D-ends this year in the big 10, yet your fine having him start against guys like Ware?
Man, not very good picks. Sorry, just not good.
Crying Lion
I don't know what games you are watching but Adams has looked really good
sure sometimes it breaks down b/c their is a rushing QB. But Adams has been better than Adcock by far this year.
Since Barkley shouldn’t be playing this year the only question is what QB is better in 2013, 2014 and 2015.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I specifically said
Penn State…………………….he looked aweful. Adams will not sniff the first round in 2012…………………thats a promise.
The guy is unathletic, stiff, weak, dumb etc……….oh, by the way, he has character issues too.
Crying Lion
okay
I know he got beat that game, but he’s been playing really well in the other games back. Right now most reports have his character concerns on the backburner as people say he’s changed his work ethic and demeanor. And I will guarantee you that barring an injury Adams will get drafted ahead of Adcock.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I said he wont sniff the 1st
I don’t know what that has to do with him vs Adcock.
And no, he has played poorly in more games than just PSU. He looked like shit against Wisc, Nebraska and Perdue too. I know he hadn’t been back that long, but still, he looked shitty non the less.
Crying Lion
Just saying, but if he went against Kerrigan
I don’t think he wins many of those one on one battles.
Dear Passionate fan, I know you are passionate, but please reply with a logical answer or I will ignore you.
by TerpsAllTheWay on Nov 23, 2011 5:40 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
fine barring an injury he is a top 40 pick that i would say is sniffing the first
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
a top 40 pick means you went no further than the top 8 picks of the 2nd round
also, I said trading back to 25+, so we could easily be at 28 or 29.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
we'll see again I believe he will be in that range
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Usually for guys to be considered 1st round material
they will easily handle average competition, not have average competition make them look poor.
Crying Lion
Beat.........is that what they call that these days
He was abused by very average D-ends. Crawford, Lattimore and Stanley are all average at best. Not speed, not power, something kind of in between, yet they tee’d off on Adams like he was a Bobo doll. You think when NFL scouts put that tape on, and see that type of performance from a Senior at home, that it will sit too well?
Perdue, and Wisc we just as bad, and Nebraska was almost a nightmare as well? What Mike Adams have YOU been watching this year? Clearly not the one form Ohio St.
Crying Lion
If were drafting a RT
He needs to be an elite pass blocker and a good run blocker. I really am tired of giving up sacks off of the edges. The interior pocket tends to collapse so I do like the FA guard signing.
Dear Passionate fan, I know you are passionate, but please reply with a logical answer or I will ignore you.
by TerpsAllTheWay on Nov 23, 2011 5:06 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
If were drafting a RT He needs to be an elite pass blocker and a good run blocker.
Well, this certainly not Adams. In no way is he elite, and in no way is he 1st round material.
I’ve seen this guy play for years, and my opinion on him has not changed. He has a poor attitude, a sense of entitlemen, and he’s lazy.
Crying Lion
Yeah he's 2nd round talent at best.
I’ve noticed he’s a little slow to set his feet and edge crushers give him fits, I mean the Big 10 isn’t really known for speed. Besides you of all people know the Big 10 haha. The only problem with your mock was Adcock because of his mixed results at Pass Pro, but I’m not sure if there is any better value at that position.
Dear Passionate fan, I know you are passionate, but please reply with a logical answer or I will ignore you.
by TerpsAllTheWay on Nov 23, 2011 5:38 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Yeah, his feet are not good at all
which is why he’ll have to move to RT in the NFL, but even there he worries me. He is more of a true RULE blocker, than a zone blocker.
Crying Lion
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Hogs Haven
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Detroit Lions DT Nick Fairley arrested again; now has more NFL arrests than NFL sacks
- Former high-school star Brian Banks does serious time on trumped-up charge, now hopes for an NFL shot
- Former ‘idiot kicker’ Mike Vanderjagt in trouble after accosting junior-high heckler
- Adrian Peterson blows teammates away in footraces; appears to be on the mend
- UPDATE: Charlie Sheen didn’t buy Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring
