Have The Redskins had the Worst QB's in the Last 20 Years???
by Highspeed30 on Jan 13, 2012 4:41 PM EST
Email
Print
The Washington Redskins have not been competitive in the last 20 years, and the biggest reason is because of having played some of the worst QB's in football. The Redskins have not had stability at the most important position in football in that time span and the results speak for themselves with a record of 145-175-1, 1 division title, and 4 trips to the playoffs and never going beyond the divisional round of the playoffs in that span. You don't have to look no further than Who the skins had behind center. lets take a look.
Washington Redskins QB's 1992-2011
Mark Rypien, Cary Conklin, Rich Gannon, Heath Shuler, John Friez, Gus Frerotte, Jeff Hostetler(36 years old), Trent Green, Brad Johnson, Jeff George, Tony Banks, Kent Graham, Shane Matthews, Danny Wuerffel, Rodney Pete, Patrick Ramsey, Tim Hasslebeck, Mark Brunell(34-37years old), Jason Campbell, Todd Collins(36 years old), Donovan McNabb (33years old), Rex Grossman, and John Beck.
there was only two other Franchises that had equally bad or worst QB 's in that span The Detroit Lions and The Cleveland Browns. you decide who had the worst Qb's but one thing that all 3 of these Franchises have in common losing.
Detroit Lions QB's 1992-2011
Matthew Stafford, Shaun Hill, Drew Stanton, Daunte Culpepper, Dan Orlovsky, Jon Kitna, Jeff Garcia, Joey Harrington, Mike McMahon, Charlie Batch, Ty Detmer, Gus Frerotte, Frank Reich(37 years old), Scott Mitchell, Don Majkowski, Dave Krieg(36 years old ), Rodney Pete, Erik Kramer, and Andre Ware.
Cleveland Browns 1992-1995, 1999-2011
Bernie Kosar, Vinny Testaverde, Mike Tomczak, Eric Zeier, Tim Couch, Ty Detmer, Doug Pederson, Spergon Wynn, Kelly Holcomb, Jeff Garcia, Luke McCown, Trent Dilfer(33 years old), Chralie Frye, Derek Anderson, Brady Quinn, Ken Dorsey, Colt McCoy, Jake Delhomme( 35 years old), and Seneca Wallace.
Until the Redskins get stability at QB you can expect the same type of results as the last 2 decades. The only way you can get away with having average to below average QB play is if you have a all time great type of defense 85 Bears or 00 Ravens, which the Redskins do not have, so the solution is to get a Franchise QB and this year they finally have a chance to get that done by trading up to get either Andrew Luck or Robert Griffin III. I dont think the Colts are gonna trade their pick but it is worth making a offer to see how much it will cost you. So if you think it is too much to get Luck take a chance to get that Franchise QB and trade for Robert Griffin III. The deal could look something like this 2012 1st, 2nd and 2013 1st, and 3rd or a 4th not too much to give up to end 20 years of bad QB play. Essentially you are giving up 1 player in 2012 2nd rd pick, and 2 players in 2013 1st rd, and 3rd or 4th pick for a chance to finally get stability at QB
245 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Cleveland hand a one year pro bowler in Derek Anderson, so... they're eliminated.
Detroit has Stafford, but had Hill who wasn’t the worst and Kitna who won games with the Lions. He started every game and threw for 4K yards two season in a row.
Redskins @RGIII - 2012
Anderson had 1 fluke year and then sucked
I would take Rypien in his best year over any of the Cleveland QBs in their best year. Kosar and garcia were both better QBs than Anderson.
Cleveland has had the worst set of QBs but we’re not far behind.
Detroit isn’t even in contention with Stafford on their roster – he’s a true franchise QB.
93 was Rypien's last year with Redskins
Rypien’s last two years with the Redskins was as Steve Spurrier put it “not very good” in 92 he trew 13 tds and 17 ints 56% completion, and in 93 he threw 4 td’s and 10 ints 52% completion, he was on the down slide by then so the super bowl year dont count in the last 20 years
I didn't know that the magic man played for Detroit
Stafford, Culpepper and John Kitna round out four pretty good quarterbacks, so Detroit is out.
I think Cleveland has had the worst run of quarterbacks, and the Redskins are second worst.
I also think you need to include the Bears in the conversation.
So why couldn’t we just build an elite defense and ride our two young running backs into the playoffs? It seems to work pretty well for the ravens, 49ers and Broncos
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
not really
of those teams only the Ravens have won 1 SB (when they were using that strategy).
There is no doubt about it
The Redskins have had the worst QB situation in the NFLover this span of 20+ years. It’s really sad too, when we take other teams leftovers, who are well past their prime.
Part of the reason I say dod what we need to do to get a good QB, and also part of the reason I’m not willing(as a fan)to settle anymore on guys like Matt Flynn, or college prospects like Tannehill, Foles(even though I dod like him), Cousins and Weeden.
For one, I pray, go get a guy who can be the MAN here for 12+ years.
Crying Lion
I agree with you
You cant keep getting other teams rejects, and plugging in 2nd rate guys at QB. Most of the guys the Redskins had playing QB was backup type guys not 1 real perennial Pro Bowl type QB in the bunch
THIS IS WHAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG
This is why i say screw flynn , screw manning , take this only 1 big chance and do whatever it takes to get RG3 because this will be our really best chance at getting a franchise QB and have some stability at QB for the next 12-15 years hopefully instead of having another 23 QBs like the last 20 years . The 2 most important things this team needs is a QB and the same coach for a good long time if we wanna have any success at all . So screw manning and flynn and get a real QB in here to last more than a year and we will have a good team .
My question is why so many fans are against trading up?
If you have seen these garbage QB’s for 20 years why would you not want to get your own Franchise QB when you have a chance to??? It is time to make a move, everyone keep saying this team is not just a QB away but i say having a franchise QB goes a very long way to being succesful. Just look at the Colts this season no Manning 2-14 with Manning 9-7 min record. A good QB can mask your deficiencies
Well, I guess everyone knows where I stand...
I want Luck, would be happy for RG3.
Interesting that we do not see any Steve, Stephan, Tuck, and the other posse, who are against this strategy, believing we are going to get lucky with lesser talented guys, despite all the evidence presented.
I am also hoping to get "Luck"y, just one of another kind.
I honestly would be happy for either one.
Just tired of the backup QB’s we have had and keep taking chances on the 2nd tier QB hoping the pan out to be Tom Brady or Kurt Warner, having said that I just dont think Luck is up for sell they aint trading the pick but I would make a offer
What if Mannings Dr give the thumbs up
and Manning tells the Colts straight up, that he’s good to go, and feels like he has a least 3 more good years. 1.) The Colts(Irsay especially, is loyal to Manning) 2.) Both Manning and Archie are loyal, and love, Irsay. I know people will say this is a business decision, but I believe with these two, it runs a little deeper. 3 more good years of Manning, could possibly equate to another Super Bowl. If the Colts are smart, which I believe they are, they will sell the fact they are going to take Luck, and at the same time, listen to trade offers. Imagine what they could put around Peyton, with a later first(say the #6 pick, lol), two seconds, a third, 2 fourths, and, to top it all off, 2 firsts a second and 2 thirds next season. That along, could take an aging team, to a youthful one in two seasons………………and by the way, they still have the best QB in the game while doing so.
OR
They could sit on the pick, and have 2 good QB(one of whom won’t play), continue to have an aging roster, that they will try and patch, but can’t quite stop the bleeding, and esentially have a draft pick who would sit the bench for two years.
Which is smarter?
Crying Lion
i just dont think anbody is gonna give all of that for Luck
there aint gonna be any more Herschel Walker deals out there, the closest thing to that was the Ricky Williams deal. But the Walker deal was insane.
by Highspeed30 on Jan 14, 2012 11:15 AM EST up reply actions
people are against trading up because
we have a slew of needs . look i wont jump off a bridge if we trade up for RG3 however we risk being the sam bradford and the rams if we end up gutting 2 drafts to get him
i can read a draft chart but the market indicates that it could cost us a minimum of 2 st and 2 2nds , which means we enter the next 2 drafts with us starting in round 3 . the 2014 draft would be the 1st draft we could have a full compliment of picks
now i know some wave that FA banner and say we can address needs there
. well tell me how do you cut guys you want to cut (browns , hall’s etc ) and live with the dead cap space in addition to signing young free agents who can fill needs ?
you also had better hit on them or you will have a bunch of overpaid free agents you cant afford to cut ties with
also how do you justify keeping a LBF as a stopgap ILB without having a replacement there ? to get a LBF you most likely will need some high draft picks
remember you will be stuck with brown’s , smith’s lictensteigers , montgomery’s on the o/line .
i am sorry but i dont see many 3rd round picks being 1st year starters and would you want to have to "count " on that ?
lastly i think you can win with an avg qb as long as he reduces turnovers and makes plays that are there , i dont buy the espn BS that you NEED an elite FRANCHISE qb to win
now let me retsate this so you all "get it " . if we trade up to secure RG3 i wont be angry and i will support getting him . i would be thrilled . i think he will fall to us and if he doesnt i would get as many playmakers as i could and go for the franchise guy in 2013
I just dont see that trade "Mortgaging the future"
There is a long way to go before the draft, and when FA starts some of the teams needing A QB will pick up someone, so there is not gonna be this big bidding war everyone is claiming. The Browns are in a great position cause they DO NOT have to move up to get RG3 cause Rams and Vikes not taking QB’s. Also the Browns still have the option to keep Colt for another season to see what they got maybe with a full offseason and some more weapons he will progress. they need playmakers and Blackmon or Richardson could still be there if a team jumps in front to take RG3. So like i said in the post for the Redskins to jump up to #2 it will cost 2012 1st, 2nd and 2013 1st and 3rd or 4th so you giving up 1 player in 2012 and 2 players in 2013. and that is not gutting your draft.
I really think a really good QB prospect can go a long way in improving this team.
You talk about gaps, and you are 100% correct; we do have some gaps – mostly on offense though. If our 1st, 2nd and 4th, and next years 1st and 3rd are gone, I still don’t believe we are screwed elsewhere on the roster. Let’s ignore Defense for a minute.
Offensively, we would get our QB, which is most important(let’s just say Luck or RG3 – RG3 would be a little cheaper however). We sign one very good FA wide receiver(Bowe, D Jackson, Colston, Johnson, or even Meachum). We sign one offensive G or C(Grubbs, Nicks or Myers). Then we re-sign our own players(Davis, Fletcher, Landry, Licht).
So, we sit out the second round, and watch happily, knowing we have our future set at QB. We enter the 3rd and 4th rounds with pleanty of quality options – we could use the 3rd on a C(Molk or Jones), or a CB(I like Gillmore from sCAR).
2013 see’s us without a 1st and 3rd, but hopefully, we have addressed most of our major concerns, and can take BPA in the 2nd and 4th.
We have now set ourselves up for the future, and we have a young team to boot.
QB- RG3 or Luck
RB – Helu, Hightower, Royster
FB – Young
WR – Bowe/Johnson/Jackson/Colston
WR – Hankerson/Paul
WR – Austin/Robinson
LT – TW
LG – Nicks/Grubbs
C – Rookie(or Myers)
RG – Chester/Licht
RT – Brown/Smith
This is definitly improvement across the board.
Crying Lion
this is precisely the list Steve said was not a playoff contending roster...
HARD TO BELIEVE! I share your thinking (I don’t know who came up with it first…), but these few additions, most importantly the QB, puts us in a great position to contend. Maybe not playoff next year, but very close (closer), and most definitely the next 5 years…
You first have to understand Steve's thinking
He is all about building the lines, and is ok with a developmental QB, or someone elses project in FA. I’m on the opposite side. I think what we have been lacking for 2 decades+ is a stud QB. Obviously this post goes to show this as well. I want a guy we can build around at QB, no matter what the price, where Steve feels like a great line, can overcome some of the shortcommings of an average QB.
Personally, if you were to poll Redskins Nation on the roster I listed above, I’d say 80% or higher would be damn happy, and would easliy say playoff in two years.
Crying Lion
and as we have said repeatedly...
these additions allows guys like Licht / Monty to improve our depth, which is necessary.
That is because if you look at the sorry list of QB's you can easily dissect why The Skins have been losers for 20 years
and to continue to trot out those quality of QB will get you the same results 5-11,6-10, 4-12, 7-9 and the occasional 9/10 win year but nothing over that and no real success, that is why they have not posted on this cause it is hard to argue that they have not had the worst or close to it.
by Highspeed30 on Jan 14, 2012 11:46 AM EST up reply actions
This right here
WR – Austin/Robinson
RG – Chester/Licht
RT – Brown/Smith
sounds awful.
We need a top talent at RT for this to work. And in the real world you can’t “ignore Defense for a minute”. We still need someone who can help to fill the massive hole Fletcher’s retirement will leave, a good Corner so we can finally get rid of DHall, and at least one safety to replace Atogwe. Another Defensive Lineman wouldn’t hurt either.
by TheDeepBall on Jan 14, 2012 11:12 AM EST up reply actions
Perry Riley is a baller @ ILB and Fletcher will probably play 2/3 more years, this is a deep draft for CB’s as well as WR so u can get some guy in the later rounds that may pan out( i rather gamble on a CB or WR in later rounds then keep gambling on QB in later rounds), Gomes is already in place to be a possible replacement for Atogwe which he still have some playing left he just was injured a lot. And DHall is not as bad as most think he is and would probably start for more than half the league. RT does have some competition with Smith and Brown, but you still would only be missing 2 draft picks in 2013.
by Highspeed30 on Jan 14, 2012 11:29 AM EST up reply actions
AHAHA
OH GOD. Thanks for the laugh there, I needed it.
Dhall is among the worst DBs in the league Every. Single. Year. This year he was 7th worst in completion percentage allowed (out of 66 CBs) and 4th worst in yards allowed. He is AWFUL, and needs to go.
http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/01/12/cornerbacks-a-glance-at-the-2011-numbers/
It seems like someone is always correcting the things you say here. It might be wise to actually check the facts before you say something for once.
Oh
and Jamaal Brown is absolutely horrible. You are literally choosing between a guy who sucks and a guy who could possibly be a good player down the line but will not be anywhere near ready this season.
Why will Smith not be ready
He played just as well as first round pick Carpenter for Seattle.
Crying Lion
It's not Moot at all
One is a first round pick, and the other went undrafted. The point is, you claiming Smith to “not be ready” for next season based on where he was drafted.
What if we were to draft a 1st round tackle like Reiff or Martin. Would you expect them to play right away……..and be NFL ready?
Crying Lion
If you draft a first round tackle
you must expect them to be ready. or at least very close. The first 32 picks are not the time to take developmental players.
Right now I would say that Carpenter is not living up to his draft position, not that Smith is playing at a first round level.
My point is
that a lot more goes in projecting Linemen to the NFL than most people think. OT’s in the 1st and 2nd round can just as easily bust(jason Smith as one example – there are many more). Actually, more o-linemen, than any other position, have a shot at making it as last round picks.
Crying Lion
Only after several years of development.
Even Clabo was on the bench for 3 years before he was allowed to start.
Some guys are ready some are not
Look at Andrea Smith(couldn’t handle the blind side). Jason Smith(wasted pick).
Maybe Smith was raw, because he only had two years in college playing OT. Maybe some team overlooked him because of this. But, maybe he was more ready than these other high round picks I mentioned.
Hell, he started over Locklear, who by PFF’s accounts, was a damn good pass blocker.
Crying Lion
and, Hail Mary...
teams do not always have the best talent at every position. ALL teams could improve certain areas, filling the holes they have.
Our contention is, the most important position has not been filled in 20 yrs. That individual makes an enormous difference on the team across the board, overcoming the deficiences in other areas.
The problem is
we don’t have the best talent at all the positions I didn’t mention. We have some decent talentmaybe even some good talent, but nobody is going to say that Barry Cofield is one of the best NTs in the league. Nobody will tell you that Stephen Bowen is one of the best DEs in the league .Nobody will tell you Josh Wilson is the one of the best CBs in the league, or that Laron Landry is one of the best Strong Safeties in the league. The only area I would say we have that is a top 5 group is our Linebacking corps, but when Fletcher is gone if we don’t have his replacement ready (and don’t say Perry, we need TWO ILBs, and Perry is already starting) we might not even have that.
On offense, we certainly don’t have the any of the best Offensive Linemen in the league. We don’t have one of the best WR or RB corps in the league, and we don’t have one of the best QBs in the league.
Some of the squads I mentioned are, for the most part, good. But to say that we have the best talent at any position, with the exception of Linebacker, is completely and utterly false. That is why we must fill the areas of weakness; the players at the other positions on this team are usually not good enough to make up for the shortcomings of the bad ones. Therefore we must make sure that they do not have to.
you dont have to have the best player or one of the best players at each position to win in this league, But for the most part if you want to compete year in and year out you better have a Quality starting QB, the proof is in the pudding the teams that have Good QB play win the teams that don’t lose Period
If this is the case, why did the 49ers stink last year?
They basically had the same players. They added Aldon Smith. Is he the reason for the extra wins? Maybe Carlos Rogers is?
Crying Lion
Their defense as a whole
has gotten better. Yes, the additions of Smith and Rogers helped that a bit.
They also did everything they could to prevent Smith from losing the game for them.
Be Honest
who do you think will win the game today the Saints or 49ers? the Saints are a 3.5 point favorite on the road, so do u honestly believe that San fran is gonna be able to keep up with NO
It is quite possible.
The Saints are not playing at home, or in a dome, or on Turf. Could the saints win this game? Of course. But to say that Drew Brees will be the sole reason for their victory is absolutely absurd.
If Drew Brees played for the 49ers and Alex Smith played for the Saints who would win the game??? Drew Brees is not the sole reason why they will probably will the game but he is the MAIN reason why they win.
The 49ers would certainly win
because with the exception of QB, WR, TE and OL they are the better team. Certainly if you filled the QB gap for them and added a gap at QB for the Saints they would dominate the Saints, but only because they are already about even with the Saints in terms of talent.
Look, the 49ers did not make it to 13-3 because their QB was good. All I’m saying.
To win a Super Bowl has to be the goal
To win a SB with your stradegy that mean you would have to have a all time great Defense like 85’ Bears or 00’ Ravens, the Redskins dont have anything close to all time great Defense and will not have that anytime soon, so the best way to winning is acquiring a Franchise QB, and side note they play in the worst divison in football, and nobody think realistically they are gonna win a championship this year
This
the Redskins dont have anything close to all time great Defense
is precisely the problem.
But if you want more proof of the validity of my strategy, look at the Packers. They are capable of starting their backup QB and still scoring 45+ points and winning a game against a team who was playing all of their starters. It does not matter who plays QB for the Packers. They are simply that good. Certainly they wouldn’t win as many games, but they would still make it to the playoffs and likely make a deep run.
I disagree
The Lions, who happen to have a poor secondary, had no film of Matt Flynn as a starter. Give teams two weeks with some film study, and they will eat Flynn alive.
Crying Lion
without Aaron Rodgers the Packers would win like 8 or 9 games or so, cause there defense is horrible. there team as a whole is not great at every position like you may think
Their defens is actually quite good.
But before I go on DO NOT THINK FOR A SECOND that Yards Allowed is a legitimate basis for argument.
There are 2 statistics that matter on defense: Points allowed, and turnovers forced. The Packers are NUMBER ONE in the league in turnovers forced, and 19th in the league in points allowed. This is a far cry from terrible, and I would in fact say it is quite good.
19th in points allowed that is really good, give me a break, and you cant rely on turnovers to say u gotta good defense. A good defense stop a team when they need to stop them, Green Bay wins cause they outscore you for the most part. when the Packers needed a stop against KC they could not keep them from running for a first down, being #1 in turnovers aint help their D there
They dont rely on their great defense to win the game
They rely on the offense putting up points
One example of a Defense’s failure does not mean that Defense is a bad defense.
I also think it’s hilarious you’d still call them awful because the Redskins had more points allowed than the Packers and forced fewer turnovers.
The Pack is aweful
but they are not good. They are about average, and without Rodgers, their entire footbll team would be average. Rodgers make them click – not the amazing Donald Driver, or the speed and hands of Jordy Nelson, or the break-away speed and power of Starks, or the pure size and athleticism of Lee.
Crying Lion
Either way, the Pack as an example wins this argument for me.
You see, if the rest of the team is simply average, that means Flynn is also an excellent QB and signing him would give us a top 10 QB.
If the team as a whole (but without Rodgers) is still very good, it makes my argument for having a complete team, not just a QB.
Pick your poison.
I am saying Matt Flynn is not the answer
The Redskins have had other teams backup QB, the last 20 years have been nothing but backups, and if Flynn was the QB this year they may not have made the playoffs winning 8 or 9 games, and winning 8/9 games is not good IMO
The Redskins have had other teams backup QB, the last 20 years have been nothing but backups,
Name some of them, I’ll wait.
They were never starters for us
they were backups for us who got playing time because our starters were injured. That is not a valid argument.
shane matthews, Danny wuerffel, Tony banks, Kent Graham, Jeff Hostetler, John Friez, Rex Grossman, John Beck. 90% of the Qb’s on that list are backup type QB’s that is the main point
Not all of those guys even started a full season for us.
I also want to know how the hell Jeff Hostetler can be on that list because he was a starter for 5 years before he came here.
As far as wikipedia seems to know, Friesz was never even on this team.
they were still other team's backups...
Now, if we only brought them in for depth, great.
But you are asking us to believe that some backup somewhere else, who practically has no experience, is going to be given the keys (along with the salary) of a starter, and he is our savior? I am confounded by the logic…
That same logic applies to literally every rookie.
Here, I’ll show you:
But you are asking us to believe that some rookie, who has absolutely no experience, is going to be given the keys (along with the salary) of a starter, and he is our savior? I am confounded by the logic…
The only difference is that one costs picks we could use in order to build the rest of the team. I am not calling Flynn the savior. I am calling him “Better than Rex” and I am saying he is “good enough to win”. There is no player that will single handedly fix this team, regardless of what position he plays.
that is absolutely redonkulous...
Luck has been a starter for a Div.1 college program for THREE years, that runs a pro-style offense, who has been trained by NFL coaches…
Please…
Give me more than two games to evaluate him(Flynn)
and then we will see. No one an be evaluated in two career starts. That’s the problem I have with Flynn.
As a fan of this team. I’d think you want to see more from a QB, than just 2 starts in 4 years, to decide someone is going to become our future.
You can usually go by college stats, to predict to some degree, how successful a prospect is likely to become, but with Flynn, we have just one average year as a starter on a great LSU team.
What are we truely judging him on?
I hav nothing against him, if he were proven commodity, but he’s not. Show me where he is, and I’ll be glad to re-evaluate my stance.
Crying Lion
I get that
but now the problem for you becomes either:
Flynn is bad, and the Packers are just so good that they were able to make up for his mistakes.
OR
Flynn is good, and we should try signing him.
Again, the first argument makes my case for a complete team, while the second makes my case for signing Flynn. There is no other logical outcome.
I don't see the second arguement though
He’s had one, let me repeat one great game.
I can easily say, from a coaches point of view, that the first arguement, can be attributed to the Lions not having seen tape on him.
In the NFL, this is huge.
Personally, I think the team makes Flynn look better than he is. He’s not one of those naturally gifted QB’s who can come in, and instantly make your team look better.
Until I see anything that tells me otherwise, that’s what I’m going with.
Crying Lion
Personally, I think the team makes Flynn look better than he is. He’s not one of those naturally gifted QB’s who can come in, and instantly make your team look better.
Therefore, a good team makes an average QB look good, thus making the argument for a complete team over a single QB.
But let’s be honest here, Flynn is not very mobile at all. He is, as you say, not a special QB. Why should you need a ton of tape on a guy like that? You could tell these things just from watching the Patriots game from last season.
Nobody is saying that a single QB is the WHOLE team, but that a top QB makes the rest of the team around him better, and that you dont have to have a pro bowlers at every position to win with a great QB.
no, you don't need pro bowlers
but you need above average talent at almost every position, and that is something we don’t have. The only exception this rule has EVER had is Peyton Manning.
because with the exception of QB, WR, TE and OL they are the better team
That’s a lot of exceptions
Crying Lion
yes
but some of them are only marginal differences, i.e. TE. But their entire Defense is better than that of the Saints.
I'll give you the defense
but still, some of the turnovers the 49ers had this year were luck.
Luck has more to do with going from poor to good than you think.
It’s the teams that are consistantly good, who are truely the elite teams(Pats, Ravens, Steelers, Saints, Giants, Colts, Packers, Eagles) These teams all have something in common – good, consistant QB play.
Crying Lion
You could also say
that the Pats are consistently in the top 5 in turnovers forced, the Ravens and Steelers are known for consistently having the best Defenses in the league, and the Packers and Eagles have an incredible wealth of talent on offense (but, the Eagles,consistently good? haha, good one.). The Colts have only made it out of the first round of the playoffs twice, in a weak division.
Also, since when is Flacco a good QB? Sure, he’s decent, but he isn’t lighting the world on fire or anything.
How many loosing seasons have the Eagles had in the last 10 years?
How about the Colts?
Flacco is a good QB. Not top 5, but prob top 10 or just outside it. He is very under-valued, because of that good running game, and defense. Look at the kids record since he’s been a starter. Can’t agrue against that.
And BTW, the Pats defense stinks, as has for the last two years.
Crying Lion
And you'll notice in the last 2 years they've not been to the Super bowl
and have been eliminated from the playoffs in the first round every year.
But when they were winning SBs, their Defense was among the best in the league.
This comment is looking pretty funny after this weekend
by StephanHart on Jan 17, 2012 12:10 PM EST up reply actions
It's a long way to scroll to see what you're replying to
so here it is again:
If Drew Brees played for the 49ers and Alex Smith played for the Saints who would win the game??? Drew Brees is not the sole reason why they will probably will the game but he is the MAIN reason why they win.
-Highspeed30
And yeah, it’s funny as hell.
Can we say that maybe luck was on their side a bit.
Rogers didn’t all of a sudden go to the 49ers and learn to catch. They also managed to stay pretty healthy this year.
Crying Lion
Maybe a little bit
but how far can luck really get you? At some point you must admit that their Defense is quite good, and that Frank Gore and their Kicker have done at least a decent job of carrying that Offense.
Well, you can se how far Luck can't get you
Remember the dropped pick six Rogers should have had in the playoff game vs. Seattle? Had he made that catch, we win that game.
Luck, can really help a team out, as you see Seattle got Lucky Rogers dropped the ball, and because of it, they won a damn playoff game.
Crying Lion
Do you honestly think it's a coincidence
that Rogers never caught more than 2 INTs when he was with us but is catching everything in San Fran? Someone coached him up in that aspect of his game.
they got his eyes checked
and now he can see better, he got some contacts
No way
we are an NFL team, not some run-of-the-mill pee wee organization. The kid used to spend a lot of time after practice when he was here working with the WR’s coach and the jugs machine. No one “taught” him how to catch in San Fran.
Crying Lion
Seems to me that we are also underestimating the
possibility of Alex Smith also making a difference…at the end of the day, he was picked #1…maybe all he needed was an offensive coach…he had mostly defensive head coaches, and that could have stunted his growth…
I am totally on board with doing whatever it takes to get a top QB
I am fine with giving up three 1sts & 2nds for Luck or two 1sts & 2nds for Griffin. When the Bears made the trade for Cutler they were roundly criticized for giving up to much but now it is easy to see how important an elite QB is to that team. Going with the 2nd teamers, like Caleb Hanie who was the FA flavor of the month a while back, is a recipe for being (remaining) in the bottom third of the league. The good news is that our FO must also realize that by now.
by ENsDad27 on Jan 13, 2012 10:42 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Actually...
…I’d say the Browns have had it worse. Look at that crop of crap, and realize that they achieved that with 4 years of non-existence during the past 20 years!
We are a close second, though. At least we can say we had some hope for a while with guys like Brad Johnson, who took us to a division title.
by The Agent C 83 on Jan 13, 2012 11:23 PM EST reply actions
I know right....
and Bernie is still considered to be royalty around that football community
"You can build a million bridges, suck one dick, you're not a bridgebuilder you are a cocksucker." - - Woody Harrelson
we all should get medals
for sticking with the redskins this long… and some us have said we will win the the superbowl each year despite those bad qbs…. this past year was the first time that i can remember that i didnt say we was gonna win it all.. with grossmen and beck as our only options at qb even i aint that crazy lol
I was the same way this year
I have never went into a season feeling like we couldn’t compete, until this year.
Crying Lion
Jets have had dreadful
Qb’s as well over the last 20 years, and the fins certainly since Marino retired.
When I was a kid, my father told me, "Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it." -Russell Ziskey
Hard to believe he was a 2nd rd pick
When I was a kid, my father told me, "Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it." -Russell Ziskey
i just made the argument against trading up
now dont come back next year or in 2014 bemoaning our lack of depth
as for those free agents what happens if we are out bid or they resign with their own teams
what if grubbs and nicks decide that being with a superbowl contender outweighs the money ? what if bowe is franchised
kinda tears down those great rosters we could have doesnt it
the good thing is free agency is before the draft and we should have a handle on whether we can trade up or not but understand you may have to live with guys you loath for a few years because of cap considerations
A QB can make everyone around them better!
the Colts this year would have won a min 9 games with manning without him 2-14, so the difference is Peyton Manning and his ability to make his team better from receivers to tight ends to lineman cause he gets rid of the football, and the running backs are better cause the defense is worried about the passing game thus opening up running lanes. which helps your defense cause the Colts are built to play with the lead so Freeney and Mathis can T off. so when people say the cliche’ " the Redskins are not just a QB away" they should think about the Colts this past season cause they was a Manning away from being good.
So the risk vs reward factor is worth the picks u have to give to secure a QB that can make your entire team better, with a guy like RG3 your line dont have to be elite cause of his mobility and the receivers dont have to be great cause he can extend the play, and defense will be a lil better cause he would extend drives and put up points so the Defense can attack more. and at the end of the day you are just giving up 1 2nd player this year and 2 players next a 1st and 3rd
by Highspeed30 on Jan 14, 2012 12:23 PM EST up reply actions
That is true.....
An elite QB will add about five wins to a teams record as opposed to the QBs that we & the Colts trotted out this season.
So your saying that is a lack of total team talent?
If so, wouldn’t the best idea for the Colts, be to keep Peyton, and trade the #1 pick to a QB starved team(like us), then use all those extra picks to re-build the team?
Crying Lion
Yes.
if I were the Colts GM, that is precisely what I would do. But as a Redskins fan I will say I hope that the team that gives up all those picks isn’t us.
That dont always work just look at the Redskins
They got the saints entire draft in 99 and 1st and 3rd pick in 2000, and The Skins still was horrible in the follwing seasons, in fact the same team the Saints that traded all those picks to the Redskins ended up getting to and winning a Super Bowl before the Redskins cause they managed to get Drew Brees a Franchise QB
Yeah
and we ended up with a LT and an OLB, neither of who caused us to have success. Samuels was great, but he didn’t win games for us.
Crying Lion
Yeah
because winning a super bowl in 2007 has everything to do with the 1999 NFL draft.
Are you really so stupid as to think that Drew Brees is the reason they won the Super Bowl? Their Offensive Line was among the best in the league. They were the 4th best team in Rushing. They have one of the best receiving corps in the league. Do we have ANY of that? No, we don’t, and until we do, we will not win a super bowl, Franchise QB or not.
Brees is 75% of the reason they won that Super Bowl
and is still the reason why they are so good today. He makes those WR’s better than they really are. He makes teams respect the pass so much, that it opens up running lanes.
Many of the linemen they have now, weren’t starting during that super bowl year.
You can’t sit here and say Brees wasn’t the MAIN reason they won the SB, and are so good now.
Crying Lion
They absolutely would have
He would be the best QB in the division by a long shot. He’d make AA, Moss, Cooley, Portis…………….and our entire line all look better.
Crying Lion
If I recall correctly
Last year you bemoaned that entire set of skill players, and used them as your basis for argument on drafting AJ Green or Julio Jones in the draft. Brees would not make them THAT good, and our OL would not be any better.
I absolutely did, your correct. I hated our skill players last year(2010)
but Brees would have made them all better- including our O-Line. That’s my point. A good QB can easily improve the play of those around him.
Colston was a 7th round draft pick from Hofstra. He had good size, but was not a burner by any means. Brees turned him into a pro bowler. Copper……good as a Saint, not so good as a Chief.
Another example – Welker sucked as a Dolphin, yet is a pro bowler with the Pats.
How good would Jordy Nelson have done on the Redskins this year?
The great QB’s can make average players look good.
Crying Lion
and a bad OL
can make good QBs look bad.
Just look at Tom Brady. Any time his OL fails him he starts making bad throws. You saw it in the game against the Redskins this season.
I disagree about Brady
His line went through a ton of changes this season(injuries, rookies starting, etc.) yet he had one of his best season as a pro, and did all this with nearly no existance of a running game, and two TE’s, as his top weapons.
Vullmer was a spot starter, but so was the rookie Solder at RT. Kopen went out for the year. Light was banged up on and off. Mankins was really their only steady linemen.
Crying Lion
Their line still came out
In the top 10 in pass blocking. Watching their games, he seemed to have all day to throw, and when he didn’t, he fell apart.
They are rated well in pass blocking
because Brady knows where to go with the ball, and does so quickly. Same can be said with Rogers and the Packers line.
Crying Lion
You and I have both seen
Brady sit in the pocket for 10 seconds before throwing the ball, it happens several times a game. You’re acting like Brady is constantly under duress like Rex was here, but he’s not.
The only one of the top 5 QB's
Brees, Brady, Manning, Rogers and Rivers to have a good O-Line is Brees and the Saints. The others are ok.
Crying Lion
I maintain
that the Pats have an excellent OLine.
And I would like you to prove me wrong with something other than your opinion of the players on it. The stats show definitively that their OL is quite good.
another reason why top QB’s have more time to throw is cause teams will not Blitz them as much, cause they know they might get burned so they only rush 4 and the top QB’s have more time in the pocket
by Highspeed30 on Jan 14, 2012 3:49 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
HE WAS THE MAIN REASON WHY THEY WON THE SUPER BOWL!!!!
they had a good receiving corp because of who they had throwing them the football, Brees make the O-line look better because he is decisive and gets rid of the football, and your defense all of a sudden gets better when you play with the lead and your offense is putting together drives giving the D rest so yes he was the MAIN reason why they won the Super Bowl, cause they was some trash just like the Skins have been for the most part before he came with a few decent seasons
Why?
We are the most QB starved team in the league, and have been for over 20 years. This is supposedly the best QB prospect since 1983. Doesn’t it make sense, if we are ever going to move up in a draft, to do so now, for a player of his calibur, who could happen to go to a team who has already had one of the greatest QB to ever play the game, on their team for the last 14 years?
Crying Lion
QB is the most important position to fill
and then you worry about filling in around your QB, and finding pieces that fit the style of that QB and the style of play that you want to implement. Not too many teams are gonna win the whole thing without Good QB play
If that QB is constantly under pressure
has no weapons to throw to, and is taking hits on almost every play, you run the risk of turning him into another Ramsey or Gabbert, regardless of that QB’s talent level.
the jury is still out on Gabbert
this is his rookie season, and most rookies struggle. Having said that I was not all that high on Gabbert coming into last year draft and was very happy The Redskins did not pick him and traded back(i thought they aint get enough for the pick though just a 3rd rd?) and you look at the Redskin O-line and you have some pieces in place they did get a little better and are leaps and bounds better than
all the QBs last year were...
the best their class had to offer. Why were they selected so high? Teams understand the importance of having a QB. So, even though the class stunk (HORRIBLY!), teams still went after QBs.
We now have an opportunity to get two guys who greatly outscore what last year had to offer, including whatever the last ten years offered. Yes, some scouts misdiagnose, but we are talking about the BEST prospects in decades.
But that comes at the expense
of building the rest of the team this year and next year. I am not saying that if one falls to us we should not taking him. I am saying we should not trade up to get one.
and if all positions were equal...
I would agree with you. But they are not. The QB position far outweighs any other position, which carries more importance.
Also, side note, nice to see you represent the other side. Either the other guys left you alone (ekkk!) or you were sent by them, on some kamakazi run. Kudos to you.
Maybe they're just not on
I don’t know.
Anyways, I’m going to go watch the Saints game, see you guys in a bit.
@ Deep
What is wrong with my proposed trade in this post??? you would still have plenty of picks this season and in 2013. To have a chance at getting a franchise QB so for the next 10-15 years QB will not be a need for you?
This trade?
The deal could look something like this 2012 1st, 2nd and 2013 1st, and 3rd or a 4th
The problem is that this low (yes I said low) a price for the #1 pick is absurd. In order to trade up for Luck the cost will be closer to 2012 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 2013 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 2014 1st. The price for Griffin will be something like 2012 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 2013 1st, 2nd. I promise you it will not be anywhere near as cheap as you think it will be.
you make the call to see how much for Luck
But i would guess for Luck it would be more but like i said i dont think he is for sell, as for the @ 2 spot the trade is more than fair the #2 pick is 2600 in value the 6 pick is 1600 in value so that is just 1000pts to make up for. throw in 2012 2nd rd pick value 520pts and u need 480pts to make up the difference. 2013 1st rd pick i assume min top 15 pick @ 1050 value and you throw in a 3rd or 4th rd pick for a depth it is more than fair. they would be getting 3400pts in value for 2600 pts a fair deal. That stuff you talking about is absurd and no team will be paying those type of prices to trade up
there aint no more Herschel Walker deals out there
There aint gonna be no bidding war either cause The Browns aint trading up to get RG3 they don’t have to, they can set back and wait cause if RG3 is not there most likely Blackmon will be there. and they need a playmaker @ receiver.
1. Luck 2.team trade RG3 3. Kalil 4. Browns take Blackmon, so tell me why would they trade up??? they will get one of there major needs met @ 4 and they can get another need met @ 22.
No bidding war?
there are more QB needy teams than the Browns out there, there will absolutely be a bidding war.
Even some amatures on HH
could see Gabbert didn’t have “it” just yet. Will he develop “it”?……………maybe, maybe not, but I give kudos to our scouting dept, and Shanny, for staying away from him.
Crying Lion
I did not think Cam Newton was a #1 overall talent
I thought that last years QB class was not that great, I thought Cam was a mid 1st rd type of talent, and Gabbert and the rest of the QB’s was 2nd and 3rd type of talent, i felt Jake Locker was maybe a late first rd type of talent
Andrew Luck and RG3 are rated higher than all of last years QB's
Luck would have been the 1st pick in the draft last year, and RG3 is rated higher this year than all of the Qb’s last year including Cam Newton.
Luck and RG3 are better prospects than last years QB's
and i would say they are gonna be better prospects than next years top prospects as well, so IMO you stop being timid and scared and you pull the trigger to get 1 of the 2 LUCK or RG3. Shanny and son cant trot out some backup type of QB again or they will not be here beyond 2012
There are the words
“timid” and “scared”.
And then there’s “a different philosophy” and “A conservative approach”. I could call you “brash” and “stupid” for thinking a trade up is a good idea, but I won’t.
conservative approach is why they have trotted out these Bums for 20 years now, not 1 consistent pro bowl QB in the last 20 years and you want to sign up for more give me a break
Vinny Cerrato
was far from conservative. We did not have the opportunity to take any sort of approach to the draft because Vinny was constantly trading our picks away for a single player.
And now you want to trade our picks away for a single player. Hell, might as well hire Vinny again.
RG3 is 21 years old
they was trading for other teams players that is a big difference
So what?
the point is, we did not even have the opportunity to argue about this stuff because we did not have the picks to do so. We have NEVER taken the conservative approach because we never had the picks with which to do it.
No, not me
because with the exception of QB, WR, TE and OL they are the better team
I was on the Newton Bandwagon. Never on the Gabbert one.
I was a Locker fan. Still am.
I also hated Ponder and Dalton.
Crying Lion
It's funny because
Dalton and Ponder have done relatively well for themselves while Locker is still on the bench and Newton is still on a losing team.
Newton added 4 wins to the Panthers
This is the first year they gonna go through some growing pains but the Panthers are headed in the right direction cause they got their Franchise Guy, and now they can build around what he do well. Newton broke the rookie yds record and rushing TD record, they lost a lot of games cause of the Defense
wow!
an amazing FOUR wins! Up from ZERO!
Too bad 4 more wins still wouldn’t get us into the playoffs, even in a down season for the NFC East.
that is a starting point and they won 2 games last season
If the Panthers make the playoffs next season the MAIN reason will be cause of Cam Newton and his development as a QB, and him making big plays
Then why didn't they win 10 games this season?
If the only reason they’ll win games next season is because of Cam, then they should have won just as many games this season.
Cam still made some rookie mistakes he threw 17 ints and they lost 5 games by 7 points or less, another year of development and they may win 3 or 4 of them games. But it all starts and end with QB play
Newton actually had 6 wins
so that’s a 6 game turnaround for one of the worst team talent wise in the NFL in 2010.
That was done by one player. Imagine what the team will look like with some talent around Newton.
Crying Lion
in 2010 they was 2-14
they went 6-10 this season a plus 4 in wins
What has Ponder done?????
And anyone who thinks Newton isn’t a star in the making needs their head examined.
Crying Lion
The point is
they have a star QB and still failed to make the playoffs. The reason? The team, as a whole, is awful.
But..........
they have a good Line, and the NFL’s best RB.
And who says Ponder is a star? He’s slightly above average at best.
Crying Lion
Better than Gabbert.
And he’s starting now. IMO that makes him better than Locker until further notice.
just cause he is starting dont make him better
Alex smith started while Rodgers was on the bench, and Smith was not better
I personally don't like Gabbert
so I would possily put Ponder ahead of him(although I don’t like Ponder either.
If he has an established O-Line, and has a good running game, how come the Vikes can’t win? I thought you contended a good line and running game, can make op for the shortcommings of average QB’s
Crying Lion
The Minnesota Vikings
have statistically one of the worst Offensive Lines in the league, if not the worst line in the league. They are ranked 32nd in pass protection and 18th in run blocking.
He is a rookie, they are building there team back up. So it may take 2 or 3 years but they will be better cause they got the Franchise QB. If the Redskins take RG3 or Andrew Luck i would not expect for them to go 11-5, they still have to work out the kinks and get a feel for each other as a coaching staff and QB
If the only thing you change
between this year and next year is an extra year of development time for Cam, the Panthers MAYBE go 7-9.
Think about this...
if you wait until you have good/very good players in other positions then you have probably elevated your team out of contention for an elite QB in the draft. You have also made it extremely expensive in terms of draft picks to get a highly regarded QB. If we are to get a top ten type of QB then we will need to be either very lucky & find one outside of the top of the draft or give up the picks that it will take to move up for one (or a 3rd option would be to lose 14 games next year but obviously no one is hoping for that). IMHO giving up the picks now to take either Luck or RGIII is worth the risk & is the best option for the long term .
It is the best option
you have to stop being scared and pull the trigger on getting a franchise QB, the Saints for instance had the balls to sign Drew Brees when he was coming off of shoulder surgery, and the Dolphins did not. Most Dolphin fans are kicking themselves that they did not go with Brees
they basically had the same team last year
And they went 10-6, and i am sure they woulda at least won 9 games or more. Cause Peyton makes that much of a difference, they was picking them to win the divison before the season when everyone assumed Manning would play.
good thing about that is
we will be able to tell who we got before the draft. so if we get a few good people in positions of need and and we dont get a FA QB. chances are we are trading up for rg3 or luck or rex is returning with us picking a 2nd round qb or a later qb
I would agree with your assessment...
there are numerous details that go into building a roster. It would be naive to think that FOs are not or will not begin discussions of trades soon, if not sooner. I heard Chris Mortensen say this is precisely what will take place. So, I am excited to see what the next two months expose.
As a Browns fan first, I can say definetly that Clevelands had the worst QB’s in the last 20 Years. You guys are next, and then the Lions, because Stafford actually was able to play this year instead of being the glass QB. So what will Bruce & Shanny offer to Holmgren and heckert to move up to #4 for Griffen? I think swapping #1’s , with an extra 2 this year, and next years #1 or next years #2 & #3.
"Excuse me while I ride my unicorn over to the gentleman’s club my wife doesn’t mind me visiting and doing coke off a hooker’s ass." - Henry Dawg , DBN - Dec 2011
I dont think they try and trade with the Browns, but i would make that deal with the Rams, I dont think the Browns are really in need of RG3 and most would rather have Blackmon
most browns fans
and I think they might go after Flynn cause of the Green Bay connection, and his experience in WCO. i just think the Browns need more playmakers to surrond Colt with he only had 21 starts and the receivers dropped a lot of balls this year and nobody made plays what you think being a Brown fan?
Colt has no arm
and makes horrible reads. He simply doesn’t have it.
If the Browns get the chance, they will take QB.
Case in point
The more complete team (the 49ers) beat the team with an elite QB (the saints).
And before you say anything, yes. I expected the 49ers to win. In fact i had a bet on it.
did you watch the game?
If you watched the game you would clearly have seen that in spite of 5 turnovers that Brees kept his team in the game and put them in position to win twice. and you have to tip your hat to Alex Smith cause he played a great game 103.2 QB rating and without his play the 49ers would not have won the game, no matter how great their defense is they could not stop Brees with 2:11 left in the game in fact the Saints scored in 34 seconds on “the great 49er defense”. But Smith made the plays to win the game for San Fran, but he did almost lose the game for them by scoring on that touchdown run cause he should have sled in bounds at the 1 yard line, so San fran can run the clock out and win with a field goal or touchdown and preventing Brees from getting the ball again.
by Highspeed30 on Jan 14, 2012 10:25 PM EST up reply actions
2 of those turnovers were the fault of Brees himself.
he didn’t keep his team in the game, the 49ers offense kept his team in the game. Smith is lucky the Saints’ defense is not very good because he had so many throws that floated out in the air forever. It was painful to watch some of them. Vernon Davis also made some incredible plays.Yes, Smith did well, but he is not Brees, and yet tha 49ers still won.
furthermore, the 49ers Defense has been forcing turnovers all season. It is not like the fumbles were a total fluke. The 49ers were the better team today and they showed it, even though the Saints have the better QB. You, or someone arguing your point, intimated earlier that the 49ers were going to get blown out by the Saints. I believe the question was “do you honestly believe the 49ers have a chance?” And the reasoning was that Brees is so good. This game has proven you wrong, and you are mad. Having an elite QB is not necessary to win games.
by TheDeepBall on Jan 14, 2012 10:49 PM EST up reply actions
Hey Deep
We have an interesting game today. Giants Vs Pack. Giants are the more complete team on offense and defense, but the Packers have the much better QB. Lets see how this plays out.
Crying Lion
setting aside the QB discussion
do you really believe the giants haave the more complete team? Outside of their front 4, the defense, especially the secondary, is dreadful. And God only knows if or when their RBs show will show up to play. With the exception of the Dline, I think GB is equal to, or better than the Giants in most areas.
When I was a kid, my father told me, "Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it." -Russell Ziskey
Giants, when healthy, have a more complete team
The giants don’t have a ton of stars(Nicks being their most high profile offensive guy), but they play well as a team, and have good chemistry. Their O-Line has been together for a while, and Snee, Diehl and McKenzie are pretty good. The skill positions on GB have the Giants beat, but not by much. The Giants defense, when healthy, is very good. Ross, Webster, Rolle and Philips make up a good secondary, and the rookie, Prince A, when healthy, and given time to adjust, should only make them better. No arguement on the D-Line. JPP is a freakin stud, and Tuck and OU, Joseph and Canty are all very good. The LB’s may be the weak spot, But the rookie Jones has stepped up his play, and looks to have a solid future.
So yes, as a team, I think the Giants are more complete. Obviously, Rogers is a better QB, which is what makes GB better.
Crying Lion
Tiller
the giants are not the more complete of the two at all. Their line is better than the Packers’ in Pass protection but worse by far in the run game. The Packers QB is better, the Pack has the better receivers, and the Packers defense is actually quite good. They are 19th in points allowed but they also lead the league in turnovers forced. The Giants’ defense actually clocks in at 25th in points allowed and 5th in turnovers forced.
This in mind, if the Giants win today it will be the very definition of an upset. The Giants are outclassed in every aspect of the offense and defense, with the exception of pass protection. I will not be surprised if the Packers win today because the Packers are the more complete team.
Giants have
the best pass rush in the biz. Their LBs and DBs are terrible. I find it hard to believe the difference between these 2 teams is Rodgers ability, especially given Manning Performance this year.
When I was a kid, my father told me, "Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it." -Russell Ziskey
You saw today who when Rogers doesn't play well, the team doesn't either
The 8 dropped passes hurt too.
Like I’ve maintained all along, the Pack are an average team, with a GREAT QB. One bad game by the offense today, and poof, they are gone.
Crying Lion
Tell me again how the Giants are not the more complete team?
when healthy – like they are now
Crying Lion
Dude
Your playing spin doctor. Both our predictions were wrong. The" elite QB wins games with average teams" was wrong, and my criticism of the giant Secondary sucking was wrong.
Also, as this pertains to the Redskins, I think its safe to say we don’t even have an “average team” (minus the QB situation)
When I was a kid, my father told me, "Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it." -Russell Ziskey
In the Playoffs for the most part all the QB's have played at a high level to get there.
Having a QB play at a high level is my main point and i am sorry Rex Grossman, and almost all of the QBs over the last 20 years for the Redskins have not. Alex Smith had to make the plays in order for the 49ers to win(they got the best Defense in league, but when they needed a stop, Saints scored in 34 seconds). Eli Manning played at a high level 330 yds, 63% 3td 1 int, and the one thing both teams did and most teams do is acquire the Franchise QB the 14 drafts QB was drafted with the 1st overall pick 11 times, so why do people keep tryna undervalue the importance of Good QB and good QB play??
by Highspeed30 on Jan 16, 2012 10:15 AM EST up reply actions
I dont under value the importance of a good QB
I agree that QB is the most important position, Rex is not the answer, and we need to upgrade the position the best we can. I just don’t agree that we should trade up this year to get Luck or Griffin, because to we don’t have a "complete team" or even an "average team", and if we trade up to get Luck/Griffin we won’t be able to start building a complete team or an average team until 2014 or 2015. Why not address the other positions such as CB, OL, WR, S, and ILB this year, and have the team in place then make a move for a Franchise QB next year. There could be some really good QBs coming out in 2013.
And for the record, I have no problem if we decide to take Griffin with the 6th pick if he is available, or drafting a QB in the 2nd round.
When I was a kid, my father told me, "Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it." -Russell Ziskey
Cause that is backwards, you get the Franchise QB first and then you build around them as the Giants have done with Eli Manning. And like i said 11 out of the last 14 drafts QB was the #1 overall pick, because you start with QB and then start filling in the holes. the Giants trade for Eli Manning would be similar to what the Redskins would have to give up to Acquire RG3 and i would say that it worked out for them.
by Highspeed30 on Jan 16, 2012 11:11 AM EST up reply actions
I dont think its backwards
The Giants had most of the pieces in place when they went out and got Manning. When the Texans got Carr and Cleveland got Couch, they did not have the pieces in place. Besides we would be giving up a hell of a lot more than the Giants gave up to get Manning. Correct me Im wrong, but the Gaints gave up a 3rd that year, a 1st and a 5th the following year. Luck and Griffin would cost more IMO.
When I was a kid, my father told me, "Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it." -Russell Ziskey
Yes, they did
RB: Barber
WR: Toomer, Hillard
TE: Shockey
OL: Seubert, Petitgout, Diehl, and then they drafted Snee the year they got Manning
When I was a kid, my father told me, "Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it." -Russell Ziskey
they went 4-12 so they was not that good, as Parcells said you are what you record says you are
Roy Helu, Royster
Hankerson, Austin, Paul
Davis, Cooley
OL: TWilliams, Chester, WSmith, Hurt
maybe Lichtensteiger, drafted lineman? FA lineman
Drafted WR?? FA receiver.
Sorry- Redskins group is not even close IMO
When I was a kid, my father told me, "Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it." -Russell Ziskey
they was not that good 4-12, and it is not head and shoulders type of talent gap between the 2 teams i think it is about even. The Redskins was 5-11 so they was 1 game better
OK, first of all
it’s “They were”.
second, the redskins OL you listed looks like absolute shit.
by TheDeepBall on Jan 16, 2012 10:25 PM EST up reply actions
I will still maintain that having elite QB play is what wins you games and championships, if Alex smith(a QB having his best year) do not make the plays he made to Vernon Davis(why they kept letting Jenkins get beat over and over by him is beyond me) they do not win period. It was a great game in the last 5 mins or so, but i never said the Saints would blow them out but i pointed out that they was a road favorite in the playoffs i thought it would be a closer game than most expected, but i truly did not have a routing interest, i enjoy good football and if the Redskins are out of it i could care less who wins or loses
Elite QB play is what wins championships
The last 19 Super Bowl winning QB
Super Bowl 27. Troy Aikman (MVP), 4 TDs
Super Bowl 28. Troy Aikman (Emmitt Smith), O TDs
Super Bowl 29. Steve Young (MVP), 6 TDs
Super Bowl 30. Troy Aikman (Larry Brown), 1 TD
Super Bowl 31. Brett Favre (Desmond Howard), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 32. John Elway (Terrell Davis), 0 TDs
Super Bowl 33. John Elway (MVP), 1 TD
Super Bowl 34. Kurt Warner (MVP), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 35. Trent Dilfer (Ray Lewis), 1 TD
Super Bowl 36. Tom Brady (MVP), 1 TD
Super Bowl 37. Brad Johnson (Dexter Jackson), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 38. Tom Brady (MVP), 3 TDs
Super Bowl 39. Tom Brady (Deion Branch), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 40. Ben Roethlisberger (Hines Ward), 0 TDs
Super Bowl 41. Peyton Manning (MVP), 1 TD
Super Bowl 42. Eli Manning (MVP), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 43: Ben Roethlisberger (Santonio Holmes), 1 TD
Super Bowl 44: Drew Brees (MVP), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 45: Aaron Rodgers (MVP) 3 TDs
only 2 QBs Trent Dilfer, and Brad Johnson on this list did not have Great QB play or lead their team to SB.
even the QB’s that played in super bowl was playing at a high level
We can play this game.
45 – Packers -5th in turnovers forced.
44 – Saints – 2nd in turnovers forced.
43 – Steelers – 7th in turnovers forced.
42 – Giants – 22nd in turnovers forced.
41 – Colts – 20th in turnovers forced.
40 – Steelers – 10th in turnovers forced
39 – Pats – 3rd in turnovers forced.
38 – Pats – 2nd in turnovers forced.
37 – Bucs – 2nd in turnovers forced.
36 – Pats – 6th in turnovers forced.
35 – Ravens – 1st in turnovers forced.
34 – Rams – 6th in turnovers forced.
33 – Broncos – 8th in turnovers forced
32 – Broncos – 8th in turnovers forced.
31 – Packers – 4th in turnovers forced.
30 – Cowboys – 22nd in turnovers forced.
With the exception of 3 teams, each super bowl winning team features a Defense in the top 10 (and often top 5) in turnovers forced. This is not a coincidence.
TO forced is a very misleading stat
Total yards allowed, and points scored is a better indicator of a good defense.
Crying Lion
I put no credence in total yards allowed
Points scored, however, I can agree with. I have already revealed to you the turnovers stat. Here is the stat for total points allowed. I think you will find that this stat also falls in well with my argument. For this stat, the lower the number the better the defense (as in, the best defense will be 1st in points allowed)
45 – Packers – 2nd in points allowed
44 – Saints – 20th in points allowed
43 – Steelers – 1st in points allowed
42 – Giants – 17th in points allowed
41 – Colts – 22nd in points allowed
40 – Steelers – 3rd in points allowed
39 – Pats – 2nd in points allowed
38 – Pats – 1st in points allowed
37 – Bucs – 1st in points allowed
36 – Pats – 6th in points allowed
35 – Ravens – 1st in points allowed
34 – Rams – 4th in points allowed
33 – Broncos – 7th in points allowed
32 – Broncos – 7th in points allowed
31 – Packers – 1st in points allowed
30 – Cowboys – 3rd in points allowed
so of the last 15 super bowl champions, a whopping NINE of them finished in the top 5 in points allowed, and TWELVE finished in the top 7. Only 3 teams in the last 15 years have won the super bowl with a defense outside the top 7 in points allowed. It is a fact. Defense. Wins. Championships. Not quarterbacks.
Don't think anybody is arguing that an elite QB
is key to being a SB team. The argument is really, who, how, and when to get him.
When I was a kid, my father told me, "Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it." -Russell Ziskey
Not syaing we should take the "never"
aprroach. Only thing I argue against is trading up this year.
When I was a kid, my father told me, "Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it." -Russell Ziskey
why do you think QBs more than any other position is judged by Rings?
Marino can have every passing record but when people talk about who is the greatest
QB of all time Super Bowl Championships is always in the equation, thus Joe Montana will always be ranked ahead of Marino despite the fact that Marino is a superior passer. If John Elway never won any chips than his legacy would not be as great, you can talk all you want about turnovers but at the end of the day every play starts when the QB say go
Just take a look @ the draft?
the last 14 drafts since 1998 there have been 11 QBs taken with the 1st overall pick in the draft.
2011 Cam Newton
2010 Sam Bradford
2009 Matthew Stafford
2007 Jamarcus Russell
2005 Alex Smith
2004 Eli Manning
2003 Carson Palmer
2002 David Carr
2001 Michael Vick
1999 Tim Couch
1998 Peyton Manning
With 3 of them being complete busts, but that is where you start when building a team you find your franchise QB
Your theory makes complete sense to me
but you are going against a lot of “build the O-Line first” types, who believe it makes no sense to put a young QB behind a average O-Line – average being what I believe our line is. Many people on HH believe we need a reincarnation of the HOGS to be successful, and are reluctant to admit the NFL has changed to a QB driven league over the last 10-12 years.
It’s this mentality(either by our front office, or our coaches) that has lefty us sitting at the bottom of the NFL east for the better part of 2 decades.
To me, it’s so obvious. We need a good QB to compete, but for whatever reason, we keep going out and getting these used-up has-beens, or over drafting on poor QB prospects like Ransey and Campbell. It’s almost like we have been scared for life by the Heath Schuler bust, and refuse to take another shot.
Poor team management IMO.
Crying Lion
I believe u have to be solid on both O-line and D-line
I do think you have to build up both lines and have quality depth there, but the first piece you have to have is a legit Franchise QB that can play at a high level at least a 2 to 1 touchdown to int ratio( elite QB’s are throwing 3 and 4 to 1). My personal philosphy is a dominating run game ( gotta hava a strong o-line), play action, chunk plays in the passing game. But i know in order to make that work you need a stud @ QB so teams wont start stacking the box, so u have to make plays in the passing game to acheive that. And the Redskins have been trotting out nothing but duds @ QB. Heath Shuler was over 15 years ago, we cant be gun shy cause of that
by Highspeed30 on Jan 15, 2012 10:54 AM EST up reply actions
and this is how people try and twist stats cause they dont always tell the whole story
In most cases the SB winning team was ahead in most of their games therefore the opponent they were facing had to throw the football, and the more you throw the ball the higher the chance for a turnover, and the QB’s for those teams for the most part was not throwing a lot of ints. Just Face the facts the teams that win have QB’s that play at a high level and teams that don’t win have QB’s that play poorly like the Redskins, Lions, and Browns
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- How Kyle Orton almost cost the Colts Andrew Luck
- 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
