The HOPE Theory!!!
by Highspeed30 on Jan 27, 2012 12:03 PM EST
Email
PrintLet's take a look into the trade back and pick up extra picks strategy in 2012. This is the way Shanahan and Allen did things in last years draft focusing on the defense instead of taking one of the QB's from last years mediocre draft class. The QB draft class in 2011 featured 4 QB's selected in the first 12 picks of the draft, however every QB that was picked was a reach, Cam Newton should have been a top 15 type of pick not 1st overall, Jake Locker should have been maybe a late 1st rd pick and the rest was 2nd/3rd rd talent, but a lot of teams needed QB's cause free agency was after the draft so teams panicked and reached for lesser talented QB's. Shanahan did not make the mistake of reaching for a lesser quality type QB and instead opted to trade back from the #10 spot to #16 and picked up a 2nd rd pick in the process. I would have drafted Robert Quinn from North Carolina cause i thought they needed a pass rusher in a bad way, but was ok with them trading back last season.
Now lets look at that same trade back strategy this season also known as the HOPE theory, last season Jacksonville traded up to #10 because they thought the Redskins wanted to pick Blaine Gabbert, so with the desperation on teams that needed or wanted a QB the Redskins seized the opportunity and traded back. This year the Redskins are not going to be in the same position with a player on the board that a lot of other teams got to have. So the Redskins could be stuck at the 6 spot or having to trade back with a team and not get the proper value for their pick. Let's see how this plays out
1 Luck, 2 Blackmon, 3 Kalil, 4 Griffin, 5 Claiborne 6 possible player team target Richardson
With Jacksonville, Miami, Carolina and Buffalo all not needing a RB and picking behind the Redskins that basically eliminates a trade partner looking to get Richardson cause they can trade with any of the 4 teams for a cheaper trade price. But there is still some HOPE that a team like Cincy lose their minds and offer you both their 1st rd pick this year #17 and #21 to move into the 6 spot i would say it is less than 5%
1 Luck, 2 Kalil, Blackmon, 4 Griffin, 5 Richardson, 6 possible player teams target Claiborne
I think there are 4 CB's besides Claiborne with 1st rd talent Dre Kirpatrick Alabama, Alfonso Dennard Nebraska, Janoris Jenkins North Alabama, and Chase Minnifield Virginia so i think that eliminates teams that may want to add a CB from moving all the way up to the #6 spot to get Claiborne, and paying the price in picks or future picks when there are other CB's with similar talent later in the Rd. But there is still some HOPE that a team offer you their 2nd rd pick this year to move up to 6 spot but you aint getting enough to validate a trade. i say the chance of you getting somebody's next years number 1 pick for the right to draft Claiborne is less than 3%.
1 Luck, 2 Kalil, 3 Claiborne, 4 Griffin, 5 Richardson 6 possible player teams target Blackmon
This is the least likely of scenarios I just dont think Blackmon will fall to the #6 spot cause even if he make it past Rams, Vikes and Browns, I think the Bucs will either take him or look to trade with Jacksonville or Carolina pick up a extra pick or 2 and still get a guy they like such as Kirkpatrick, but if Blackmon falls that would be your best chance to trade back in fact you may even be able to get a 2013 1st rd pick, But you HOPE that he make it past 4 teams that need a Wr and teams behind that might look to jump ahead like Jacksonville i think the chance of him still being there is less than 10%
OK now that we looked at all the HOPE scenarios let's continue to look at the other part of the trade back strategy. Most who want to trade back say that in 2013 it will give the Redskins the Ammo to make a bold move and trade up for a Top QB prospect, and with the extra 2nd rd pick this year take a flier on one of the 2nd tier QB's like Tannehill, Foles or Weeden. First of all there is a really slim chance that by trading back this season that the Redskins will get a 2013 1st rd pick, most likely they will get a 2012 2nd and 4th, so where is all this ammo is coming from in 2013??? Also you dont take fliers on 2nd rd picks, they are suppose to develop into starter in the 1st or 2nd year, so you would be throwing away a pick(that is what a flier is, HOPING he works out) on a QB, with the intent on taking a QB with a 1st rd pick in 2013, and trading up if need be with all the ammo that you got from this draft.
The Top 2 QB prospects in this years draft Andrew Luck and Robert Griffin III are better prospects than all of the guys coming out next year. Most talent evaluators say that Andrew Luck is the best QB prospects since Peyton Manning or John Elway, and RG3 is not far behind some would take Griffin III over Luck, any any other draft year Griffin III would be the #1 overall pick. Next years guy are NOT as good as either of this years top 2 QB that includes Barkley, Bray, Jones, Wilson or Murray. so why would be willing to trade up for a lesser talented prospect??? You HOPE that next years QB's are as good as Luck and Griffin III.
With all that HOPE you might as well give the Colts a Herschel Walker deal for Andrew Luck.
383 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
are these going to be weekly posts?
The answer is you take the best player available. If Richardson falls to us and we cannot trade out, then you take DeCastro or the best player that fills a need.
There is also the seldom used "stall strategy", where you let the clock run out and let the next team pic… you could interrupt the process at any point after to make your Pick (don’t know why the Redskins would employ this tactic, but you never know)
The draft Griffin posts are getting really old, changing the title doesn’t make it any more interesting or less repetitive.
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
Everyone know i would move up to draft a QB either Luck or Griffin
but the point of the post is to look at trading back and not Trade up for RG3. Just taking a closer look at trading back, cause that say that dont have a target trade back partner or what they will get in return
by Highspeed30 on Jan 27, 2012 12:49 PM EST up reply actions
Your polL would indicate otherwise
The second choice is completely out of context with what you wrote and what you intended to be the subject matter.
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
by Skins Fan '77 on Jan 27, 2012 2:11 PM EST up reply actions
I just put the poll up to see what most think is the right course of action in the 2012 draft
I have already made it known what i would do in this draft, I think every draft year is different and you have to adjust your strategy based on what the team need is and who is available to best fit that need.
Just as old as the trade back posts
by Bryan Black on Jan 27, 2012 8:48 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
Most of the people pushing for a trade back
don’t make fanposts about it. You’ll notice there are more posts for trading up and getting a QB by highspeed30 alone in the last month or so than there are total fanposts about trading back.
We are passionate about it trading up if need be
What can I say?
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 6:40 AM EST via Android app up reply actions
this is not a trade back post
it just look at the Hope theory which is trading back, i did not say we need to trade up in this post, but you already know that is what i think they should do. pointing out the the hope theory is not saying trade up. or pointing out the 2nd tier QB’s are a bunch of bums for the most part is not saying trade up
no, it's not a trade back post.
it’s poorly thought out and narrow sighted post attacking the idea of trading back, and it is obviously in favor of trading up. It’s a trade up post any way you look at it, really.
by TheDeepBall on Jan 28, 2012 10:50 AM EST up reply actions
What you dont realize is that i am not against trading back but it has to be in the right situation
if i am not going to get good value for moving back then I dont think it is the move to make. For instance i would probably trade back if Blackmon fell to 6th spot cause i know i could probably get a 1st in 2013 and maybe a 2nd or 3rd this year from a Chicago,Tennessee or maybe even Arizona. And trading back is not a bad strategy just not a good one every year IMO
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 11:02 AM EST up reply actions
Who cares? seriously
When did you become the post police?
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 11:05 AM EST via Android app up reply actions
as much as I enjoyed your recycled post...
and. I believe there will be many more to come, You and I are probably in the minority, in our proposal to trade up for Luck. This, sadly, labels us as insane, off our rocker, etc. I can live with it (I’m sure you can as well).
Do I think he is acquirable? NO. The only chance we have is trading up to #2 and hope the new GM in Indy falls for RG3, and convinces Irsay to select him. I put the chances of that at 1% (“so you’re saying there is a chance”). Most likely, RG3 showed be our target, and here is why – He would be our selection from his entry into the NFL. Not that I am against FA (Manning over Flynn), but this is a young team and I would enjoy to see them develop together. Yes, it is going to cost something to trade up, but we are in the best position possible to pull off a move like this this year (salary cap space, excellent draft last year).
If the team does not follow this path, and they trade down, O.K. I can live with it. But if I were running the show….
I say get Luck at ANY cost.
To have a franchise Qb for 10 years I would give up our entire draft this year and next and be happy about it. With that said I dont think Indy would trade him no matter how much we offer. But rg3 wold be a very good 2nd plan.
Am amazed
How many people just dont realize how important a guy like Luck could be. Yes he COULD bust but if he is close to what everyone thinks..People always say we should be like the Pats or the Steelers or Packers. Well they have that guy and can draft the best player every year because they dont have to worry about QB. And in the case of the Pats and Packers, havnt had to worry about that in a long time. But we can draft Weedon or go for Flynn. And can promise people that just like with Mnabb or Brunnell or Mcnabb and Campbell…we will be having these same talks in less than 5 years.
There is a lot of debate as to whether or not the Redskins should trade multiple draft picks to move up and take Robert Griffin III. To me, it’s not making one type of move (trading picks) or another (spending money) to solve a longstanding problem (lack
by Mad Russian on Jan 27, 2012 10:38 PM EST up reply actions
There is a lot of debate as to whether or not the Redskins should trade multiple draft picks to move up and take Robert Griffin III. To me, it’s not making one type of move (trading picks) or another (spending money) to solve a longstanding problem (lack of a franchise quarterback). It’s about making the smart move. The Giants usually hold on to their draft picks. But in 2004, the smart move was to trade away their 2005 first-round pick for as part of a deal for the rights to Eli Manning. That worked out for them. It is possible for the smart move to be trading away picks to get your man, especially if you need a quarterback. They saw the opportunity and grabbed it. Something similar may be the right move for the Redskins and it might not be, but being smart and not stuck in a rigid mode of thinking is the key.
by Mad Russian on Jan 27, 2012 10:38 PM EST up reply actions
Well the coaches don't agree with you about trading away the whole draft
They understand what they need. But Kyle Shanahan warned: “People make a lot of mistakes going and trying to trade their draft away or pay a lot of money to people who aren’t [worth it]. You have to make sure you get the best guy possible.”
1-26-12 from Senior Bowl practice.
by DudleyDoright on Jan 28, 2012 8:42 AM EST up reply actions
you believe what you see and not what you hear especially around draft time
Mike shanahan traded up for Jay Cutler without most even know he was interested never went to see a workout, it is so many smoke screens this time of year
that is very true, but he hardly 'traded away his draft' he had a ton of extra picks to work with (most from us)
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
It is simply just incorrect to keep saying
you will be trading away your draft by trading up, trading a net of 3 players is hardly trading the draft away. Even what Atlanta did was not trading away the farm they gave up basically a 2nd and 4th last year and 1st and and 4th this year, not gutting their draft they got 2,3,5,6,7 with some compensatory picks. here is a news flash you dont have to draft 12 players every year, that is 5 of 7 original picks left, and u can bring in UDFA’s as well cause the NFL use to have 12 rounds in which most of the orginal hogs would have been if it was only 7 rounds then.
look top round or premium picks are more valuable
not just in the players they produce, but their trade value. It’s not about the number of picks, but the quality of them. You could triple the Falcons 5th-7th round picks and it wouldn’t come close to making up for that 1st rounder.
And while you are right about the ‘net’, you can’t ignore the guy you would have gotten as well. Lets look at the Flacons deal since the Browns took Little with Atlanta’s 2nd round pick. So the Falcons trade should be compared Julio Jones vs Greg Little, Gabe Carimi (on the board for their 1st round pick and the teams biggest need), CB Rashad Carmicheal, and this year’s 1st (Whitney Mercilus/Jerel Worthy/Mark Barron all make sense) and this year’s 4th running back Vic Ballard is a possibility.
There is no way Jones is worth that much, and that is to a team that is pretty well set. For the Redskins a team that is rebuilding it makes even less sense.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 10:12 AM EST up reply actions
Juilo Jones was pretty productive
and he is there future #1 receiver, and they felt they need to be able to score points to keep up with New orleans and Green Bay. Roddy White will be 31 this year and they just got his replacement a guy that can grow with Matt Ryan. But my point is that you can find starter in the 2nd and 3rd rds and get good value in the late rds depth players and guy you can develop like perry riley 4th, Chris Nield 7th, Helu 4th, Hurt 6th, White 6th not saying they are 1st year starters but in 3 years they may develop into starters
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 10:27 AM EST up reply actions
again Jones is nice, but he's not worth all of that esp. when you factor how productive Little was in a far less talented offense.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 10:57 AM EST up reply actions
Who will be better in year 5 or 6???
Jones upside is way greater than Greg Little
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 11:08 AM EST up reply actions
I'm not as big a Jones fan as most
I don’t think he’d have had near that year on a weaker team. If he was on the Browns i would say his numbers would be essentially the same as Little’s.
Overall I think Jones is a little better, and has a higher upside, but not by much.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 11:14 AM EST up reply actions
enough, Steve, comparing Little to Jones...
I am tired of hearing the comparison. You, and everyone else, has NO IDEA what Little would have done on the Falcons. He could have blown his knee out in the first game.
There is a horrible falicy in try to cross compare players. It is not fair, due to the talent levels of each team, different systems, etc.
The point you are trying to make is, was it worth trading up for Jones. I don’t know, and neither do you. Could Atlanta kept their picks and select someone else, who MIGHT help their team? We won’t ever know. Their FO felt that Jones was WORTH it. That is the real point. They believed his talents were so much more superior to any other WR, and adding him to their already existing talent on offense, is the SOLE reason they traded up. That is the point. If a team feels that a player’s talent is so much better, worthy of trading for, then the team attacks. No one questions if there were other players who could have been selected later, of course there were. But they didn’t want the others.
Finally, did Jones cost them? That can be construed in many ways. They still made the playoffs, we don’t know what he will bring the team in the next 5 years. He could develop into the best WR in the NFL. It is too early to say. But since he did not tear it up, so this was a bad trade is ludicrous. What this team does going forward will determine how good a FO is, not the trade up for Jones.
Please feel free to contradict anything I have said. This just seems logical to me, and I am growing weary of all this hypothetical rating.
Jones had a pretty good rookie year as a number 2 receiever
he had 54 catches 959 and 8 touchdowns in 13 games
AJ Green had 65 catches for 1,057 and 7 touchdowns in 15 games.
Greg Little 61 catches 709 and 2 touchdowns in 16 games.
both Green and Little is their teams numer 1 receiver
yeah, not sure if this is what you were going with
but my point is what Little did as the number 1, with a worst QB, is more impressive than what Jones did as a number 2 or even 3 b/c of Tony Gonzalez. Not taking away from Jones, just saying the extra yards and TD’s aren’t all b/c he’s so much better.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
wait what??
How am I not being fair. People who say things like “well Jones is better b/c of stats” or ‘we should draft blackmon, look at what Jones did" are the ones not being fair. I am looking at both players and saying that one having better stats, on a far superior team isn’t really a good litmus test. Maybe Jones on the Browns would have been better than Little on the Browns or LIttle on the Falcons. We don’t know, but we also don’t know that Little wouldn’t have gotten the better end of the deal.
As for what it cost them? You are right to say we don’t know long term, but we do know that this team finished worse this year, and you could make a case that not having that extra premium pick could have made a difference. Had the Falcons taken an OT, maybe Matt Ryan wouldn’t have gotten pressured as much, and they win a couple more of those games.
And really i’m not knocking Jones, I’m just saying that trading 5 for 1, isn’t always a great idea, and that is for a playoff caliber team that doesn’t have too many holes.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
they really traded 2 starters for 1
and gave up 2 depth type of players. But you cant say if the trade was good or bad just off of 1 season, just cause they had a better record is not a indicator as to Jones impact on their offense. they made this move not for just one season but more like a 4-5 window
again, I am saying you are not being fair...
Your point about other people is true. We cannot compare anything previously done as a measuring stick for what will happen in the future. I know I have made this point before. Each case needs to be evaluated individually (and most of the time, 3-5 yrs. later). But, just because those “other people” are unfair, you are operating under the same tent, which qualifies you as being unfair. YOU CANNOT JUDGE SEPERATE PLAYERS ON SEPERATE TEAMS UNDER SEPERATE SITUATIONS EQUALLY!!!! You can’t do it. There is NO argument you can provide to justify such a position.
The Falcons win/loss record has nothing to do with trading up for Jones. Each years schedules are different, each team they play is different, injuries play a part. So, this is a cop-out, and YOU KNOW IT! Especially, since you have been around football as much as you have.
I have enjoyed debating on this site, and we have all promoted our ideas strongly. At some point though, BS has to stop. The only point I want to make, moving forward, is – we can all present our suggestions, and we can state why we feel the way we feel, but no more history lessons attempting to support the position, since it is completely irrelevant, as I have clearly pointed out.
where am i saying they should
I’m simply telling people to look at all angles here.
How is the Falcons win/loss record not a factor? You don’t know that they wouldn’t have gone further with actual draft picks. Neither do I, but I do know that they didn’t, and in part b/c they were thin in some areas.
Not sure what you clearly pointed out, but it sure isn’t that history lessons aren’t relevant. If we don’t look at history then what are we supposed to do?
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
For the last time
It will not take the entire draft to move up. What is so hard to understand about that? It’s going to be 3, max 4, picks scattered over 2 years….not the entire draft
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 11:08 AM EST via Android app up reply actions
2 firsts, a 2nd and a 3rd scattered over two years
is more than the 9 picks (including the extra 4th and 6th) in this years draft.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 11:13 AM EST up reply actions
Huh?
How is 4 more than 9? 4 picks scattered over 2 years, not 4 picks each year
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 11:18 AM EST via Android app up reply actions
are you serious??
by that logic why not offer the Rams our 5th-7th round picks over the next 5 years, 15 picks is more than they’d get from anyone else.
for a serious answer the 1st and 2nd round pick this year are the same. So now we have a 3rd, 2 4’s, 5th, 2 6th’s, and a 7th, try offering that to any other team in the league for their 1st next year and you will get laughed at. Even a team like the Pats who value mid round picks and know that their 1st next year will probably be at the very end of the round (something the Skins can’t claim) would turn that deal down. And now you have to make up the value of that 3rd rounder as well.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 11:22 AM EST up reply actions
ok who is offering those picks for a 1st??
But in a trade you will be getting the equal of a #1 overall pick in Robert Griffin III, if Luck the cant miss prospect was not in this draft RG3 would be #1 overall like Cam last year he was 1st cause Luck went back to school
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 11:28 AM EST up reply actions
I think the price to move up for Griffin would be at a minimum 1st, 2nd this year and 1st and 3rd next year
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 11:43 AM EST up reply actions
the value of a Franchise Qb justify the trade
finding the guy is so hard to find and if you have a chance to get him you do it. Every draft pick might not turn out the way you would like and bust but it is over a 60% chance that Luck and Griffin III will not bust.
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 11:56 AM EST up reply actions
There you go
That isn’t an entire draft
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 3:58 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
I tend to feel that is about rught
Minimum would be taking out the later pick next year
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 6:03 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
that is a significant portion of two drafts
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I think your confused
Someone said the entire draft would have to be given up and I was saying that it would be swapping 1sts this year along with a 2nd. Next year would be a 1st and possibly a 2nd or 3rd (and this may not even be needed in the end) That is not an entire draft.
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 3:57 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
or it could be more
the point is it is 4-6 for 1. Yes it is swapping draft picks, but you can’t just ignore the guy we gave up in the swap. Let’s say it is Reiff a potential All-pro tackle, that is a significant chip to ‘swap’ esp. when you are including another 1st, at least one 2nd and 3rd.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
you are getting a player in the swap
i am not looking at the gross in the trade but the net if they end up trading 2012 1st, and 2nd, they would be picking a player either way so the swap is not significant. and 2013 1st and 3rd or 4th. That is a 3 to 1.
True and your point is understood
The players given up could all turn out to be all pro or they could all end up not being any better than what we have. Each way has its pros and cons otherwise it wouldn’t be a debate
by Bryan Black on Jan 29, 2012 10:05 AM EST via Android app up reply actions
Your theory is entirely hope based as well.
Cleveland IS taking RG3. In fact, I will make that a guarantee. I guarantee Cleveland will do whatever it takes to get him, even if it means trading up.
Your entire premise is that if the Redskins try to trade up Cleveland won’t interfere. That is hope. You hope that Cleveland won’t interfere, and you also hope that if the Redskins don’t try to trade up that Cleveland doesn’t take RG3 at 4.
In fact, what you are hoping for is more ludicrous than hoping we trade back.
I think we should call your proposal “The HOPE theory trade up for Griffin”.
by TheDeepBall on Jan 27, 2012 12:34 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
My theory is being aggressive to get a player i feel is a Top QB prospect
and unlike the HOPE theory, the Rams is a trading partner, and the Vikings is a trading partner. Now as far as Cleveland is concerned it would be great if they did not take RG3 @ 4 but i would not leave that to chance cause I would trade up to ensure i get they player i want. I just dont believe that they will give up 2 1st rd picks and a 3rd to move up just two spots cause if i was the Redskins and in the 4 spot i would not trade all of that for 2 spots makes no sense
Cleveland has higher picks than we do.
So even if we offered a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd to move up, and they offer the exact same thing, they outbid us. We lose whether they offer their other 1st or not.
That is my point
they would have to pay a higher price even if they match the Redskins pick for pick. cause they only need to move up 2 spots, i just dont think that it makes a whole lot of sense for The Browns to move up 2 spots cause they still have other options at QB in Colt McCoy(only21 starts)when if the Redskins did move up to 2 spot that would mean they would get Justin Blackmon the playmaker Wr they gave up last yr in julio Jones with a additional 1st to get a LB or CB that they need.
but Deepball's point is they don't have to pay the same price pick for pick
and they have that extra 1st so if the price tag was 4th overall, 2nd round, and 1st next year (ours being the same, but obviously the 6th overall), Cleveland is risking far less b/c they have that extra first.
The Browns need for a QB is probably even greater than ours b/c they already are further along on the rest of their team.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
they play in a tougher division for starters
they are just a much younger and more upside team than us. I’m not saying they are a playoff team, but they have a really nice core.
The 49ers had a worse record than us the year before…
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I don't put much into the fact that they play in the AFC North.
That’s only six games, they lost twelve.
I see it as more cushion for the pushin'
i'm not saing they are a good team, just better than us
specifically from the upside perspective
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
The Browns have to pay a higher price cause they would only be moving up 2 spots
and they Browns are not further along, they have no receivers, no running backs, no tight ends, they need another CB, S, and LB. they have as many holes if not more than Redskins.
If you are the Browns why would you offer 2013 1st rd pick? when you have 2 1st rd picks in 2012 and to move up 2 spots i dont think Holmgren & Heckert will pay say pick #4, #22, and a 3rd pick to move up 2 spots when you can still get a guy like Blackmon the type of WR they wanted last year
What??
WR- Greg Little, he’d be the best receiver on our team young or old. They lack a lot behind him, but that is a hell of a start.
TE- Ben Watson, Evan Moore and James Cameron, Watson and Moore aren’t as dynamic as a healthy non suspended Davis Cooley, but they also won’t cost near as much (after Davis re-signs), and they are probably better blockers.
Their secondary is also insanely strong and deep. They need to resign Mike Adams, but he’s like only the 2nd even decent FA they need to worry about (D’Quell Jackson the other one).
The Browns def. still have some needs (RB, OLB, O-line depth, DE) but I think they are in a better place than us given their youth, cap position (I think they have at least as much if not more money than we do) and extra draft picks.
So why should the Redskins give up more picks than the Browns would to move up 4 spots when they could get a WR/OT/G/CB?
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Greg Little is Not a #1 Wr
they do need another pass rusher at DE they have questions at S, LB, WR, Right side of O-line, RB and TE watson is older like 32.
But my point is they have just as many hole if not more than Washington
the Skins front 7 is in place there is question about S and nickel CB
and on offense you got 2 TE’s , 2 young RB’s, LT, RG, FB,and Hankerson may be = Greg Little but he got hurt.
I am saying that the Browns are in a position where they dont have to give up any picks to get RG3 cause they pick before the Redskins if no trades happen they can just pick him and if the Redskins do jump in front of them that can get another one of their major needs filled with Blackmon a #1 Wr and the same can not be said for the Redskins if you dont trade up you will not get one of your MAJOR needs filled which is QB and WR in that order. so if you give up this year’s 2nd rd pick(most say use that on QB anyway) and 2013 1st(most say they gonna get a QB with it anyway) and 2013 3rd it just makes sense and guarantee you get 1 of your 2 most glaring needs filled
Here's the way I see it:
-Little is better than Hank, he was last year through the draft process and he was in the season as well. While his numbers weren’t as great as Julio Jones’s they weren’t far off and he didn’t have Matt Ryan throwing him the ball or White and Gonazlez drawing off the coverage.
-As for comparing offensive line’s it isn’t even close. Joe Thomas is arguably the best LT in the league and at worst top 3. TW even ignoring the suspension is barely in the top 15 (and just LT’s) and that is debatable. Alex Mack is on the same level as Thomas (top 3 or 5 at his position), the Redskins might be able to scratch out a starting caliber RG, but it’s bottom tier in the league. Beyond that Tony Pashos is under contract for another year and is a solid above average RT (obviously light years ahead of us, which is in the bottom 5 in the league). The Browns guards are kinda weak, but they are a 2nd year guy and a rookie both 5th rounders. I’d rather have young guys who are below average, than older vets who might be slightly better now, but cost more.
-TE: Yes Watson is older but he’s still a nice pass receiver (and cheaper than what Davis will be signing for). Moore just turned 27, is under control for 2 more years, and a real underrated player. Really nice blocker and signed for under $3 million a year. They also drafted Jordan Cameron in the 4th round last April. He’s another converted B-ball player, so he’s a bit raw, but I know they think highly of him. The Redskins on the other hand have Davis, who is streaky and doesn’t block well coming off a suspension (with a future one looming over him if he gets caught again) who’s a free agent. And Cooley who is coming off an injury and carries a pretty high cap tag (nearly as high as Watson and Moore combined). Sure if Davis resigns the Redskins will have the more dynamic group, but the Browns guys block better, are healthier, cheaper, and they have a nice young guy in place.
-Yes the Browns have some questions in their front 7, but they have 4 good starters if they can resign Jackson. And their secondary is pretty stacked (esp. if they resign Adams), I don’t know if I’d call it elite, but they are talented, fairly young, and deep.
-I think the Skins need more than what you are suggesting. As I think we only have one quality CB on our roster.
I understand what you are saying about the Browns might trade up when they don’t have to, but I think it is pretty clear if you want RGIII, you need to meet the Rams asking price.
Yes they could still land a top guy for a need at 4, but the same could be said for the redskins with a T, CB or G (or even WR). Here’s my problem with your line of thinking. Yes people are saying take a QB in the 2nd, or wait for next year, but baring an unlikely scenario where we end up with a top 5 pick, I don’t think many people are advocating doing both. If you draft Tannehill or Weeden, you aren’t really going for Barkley/Wilson/Bray. So basically what you are saying that in addition to using both of those picks on QB, you would use our top 6 pick this year and our 3rd next year (which honestly still might not be enough so I dont’ see the whole guarantee thing).
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 10:47 PM EST up reply actions
that is what most are saying if Foles/tannehill dont work
we will be in better position next year to grab a top QB, but i still say that you would probably have to trade up to get that done next year and i dont know what that could cost it may be 2014 1st rd pick, i just dont think it is correct to keep saying you will be mortgaging the future or it is gutting to drafts cause it wont
well I don't think Foles will be a 2nd round option so it is Tannehill or Weeden at this point
and I’d guess they’d give them a year unless they were in a Carolina Panthers situation, where they were already at number 1.
The trade you are suggested guts the heart out of two drafts, esp. since i think it will cost more than you are suggesting.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 10:14 AM EST up reply actions
why would you give up on a guy after 1 year
and thats assuming he plays the whole schedule. Blaine Gabbert didn’t exactly light the world on fire neither. I think he gets more than one year.
by davetrembling on Jan 28, 2012 11:11 AM EST up reply actions
Thats an insane comment.
The Browns have a young QB drafted in the 2nd round and we haev Rex. How in the world can yo say their need for a QB is greater than ours?
you have to realize that some people make insane comments when you suggest that
the Browns need a QB wost than the Redskins because they have more talent in his opinion, but like you said we got the turnover machine Rex Grossman
what exactly is Colt McCoy?
in addition to his 11 picks, he had 11 fumbles.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
one he was drafted in the 3rd round
two would Colt McCoy putting up Rexy numbers last year give you pause at nabbing RGIII?
three: The Browns have lost more games these last two years than the Skins have, so that is added pressure. They have just 1 Divisional win in the last two years. And they have a young promising team that they have been rebuilding. The Redskins are on a similar path, but we still rely on more veterans to make us relevant.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
TheDeepBall
And what do yo base your guarantee on?
First off, the browns have already expressed interest in RG3.
second, they need a QB very badly. Colt McCoy is not a good QB. It took him over 45 attempts to throw for over 300 yards in a game. He doesn’t have the arm to throw a bomb. He severely limits an offense.
Third, Cleveland has far more ammunition to get him should we try to move ahead of them.
They will leave the draft with RG3. Guaranteed.
The Browns front office already said theygot picks this years and intend on using their picks
They got more ammunition but they have a lot of holes as well, you not gonna pay what is needed to pay to move up just 2 spots when a guy like Blackmon will fall in your lap which is also a big need. I never said they aint interested in RG3 but i dont think they looking to move up to get him
TheDeepball
so your telling me that the Browns will take RG3 because they said so? We know teams always tell the truth and tell all other teams what they want before the draft. if anything that should make you think they are less likely to take him. Plus Holmgram has always liked older Qbs. Think its more of a show if the browns talk about RG3. But if you believe them I have a bridge to sell you.
how has Holmgren always liked older QB's? Favre was in his 2nd year, and Hasselbeck in his 3rd when
Colt McCoy started mid-way through his rookie year.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 10:51 PM EST up reply actions
ok rephrase it
Holmgren doesnt usually draft young Qbs. He tends to go after trades for guys already in the NFL. Minus McCoy. And if anything that makes it less likely they draft one high. If he lets McCoy go its admitting he was wrong and wasted a 2nd rounder. And if he did do that i think its more likely he goes for Flynn or trades for Yates. That fits the Favre and Hasselbeck mold. than get RG3.
by Mad Russian on Jan 27, 2012 11:01 PM EST up reply actions
it was a 3rd rounder,
but the reason Holmgren doesn’t draft QB’s high is b/c Favre and Hasselbeck worked. If they hadn’t do you really think he never would have taken a 1st rounder?
Flynn also fits shanny in going after Plummer…it works both ways.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 11:49 PM EST up reply actions
but it is still kinda early to say whether Colt is not going to work out
no offseason, no receivers the most drop passes in the league, no running game, no play makers.
I am just saying if the Redskins lost to Seattle or Gmen and they was sitting in the 4th spot i probably would not look to trade up cause i know if somebody did trade up i would either take Blackmon or trade Blackmon for more picks and that is without having a young QB on my roster who have not fully developed
Pro Football Focus has an accuracy number that doesn't penalize QB's for
drops, spikes, throw aways etc. and McCoy ends up with the same % as Grossman 66.6% which ranks 18th out of the 24 QB’s who took at least 50% of their teams snaps.
Why is Blackmon such a better option than say Reiff, Claiborne or some other top talent. Some scouts don’t even think Blackmon is the top WR in this draft.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 10:20 AM EST up reply actions
the need for a playmaker WR is greater than CB, or RT
and the trade value of Blackmon is greater than either of those 2, i would deal down if Blackmon was sitting there especially if the price was right i think he could get you a 2013 1st rd pick and a 2nd or 3rd this year
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 10:31 AM EST up reply actions
i won't deny that many teams favor WR
but i think it is far easier to fill your WR need later. Also with Gaffney/Moss and Hank we have at least a decent top 3 WR’s on our depth chart. CB is far worse as Hall is essentially replacement level at this point and we have nothing behind him (Wilson is ahead of him). RT we have nothing and it has a higher impact since they play every snap. And the effectiveness of a RT (and o-line in general actually impacts the ability for a WR to produce, the opposite isn’t true).
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 11:00 AM EST up reply actions
Hall isnt even replacement level
he’s among the worst in the league.
by TheDeepBall on Jan 28, 2012 11:04 AM EST up reply actions
haha i was trying to be nice
don’t worry Deepball i’m still in the cut Hall camp
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 11:11 AM EST up reply actions
I just dont think DHall is as bad as you make him to be
you have to put players in the best situations, him on Dez Bryant in all out blitz on 3 and 18 is not a good position for him to be in, he makes plays and he gives up plays but it is not a dying need. Remeber everyone drove C.Rogers out of town cause he could not see or catch. so you are left with the feast or famine style of Hall they signed him to the extension. And J.Brown can hold down RT when healthy and you got some pups in the pipeline that can get better and maybe earn a spot
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 11:13 AM EST up reply actions
cerratto signed dhall to an extension and jamaal brown is terrible
they need to go. they are killing their sides of the ball and need to be upgraded.
by davetrembling on Jan 28, 2012 11:16 AM EST up reply actions
all Jamaal Brown can do is hold, well and false start, fall down and just be awful
He was like the 3rd worst RT in the league (and by far the highest paid bad RT).
Hall just isn’t worth the $6.8 million we are scheduled to pay him. Spend that money on better players.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 11:17 AM EST up reply actions
I think you can get by on both
neither one is the worst in the league at their position, most are being overly critical on a 5-11 team, cause if that is the case just go and replace the whole team. I just dont see either spot as pressing needs this offseason, and I think both will be back this year.
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 11:22 AM EST up reply actions
Brown essentially is the worst in the league
he gave up 9 sacks and a ton of pressures last year and didn’t even play the full season.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 11:23 AM EST up reply actions
Rex and Beck was his QB
that makes a big difference, Rex cant get out of his own way and Beck was laying down in the Bills game
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 11:30 AM EST up reply actions
Rex actually saved this team sacks
and only 2 of Browns 9 sacks came in that Bills game, and both were in under 3 seconds so that is on Brown.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 11:44 AM EST up reply actions
saved sacks by severing up ints you mean??
so do you think both Hall and Brown are coming back??? I do
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 11:58 AM EST up reply actions
They will be back
Shanny has other holes to fix
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 3:59 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
The guys they draft aren't going to fix any holes
Next year anyway. We drafted 12 guys and even at this point many of them are depth guys. Helu and
Kerrigan are the only legit starters right now
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 6:06 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
Hankerson and Jenkins would have been starters
and if we trade back this year we are getting 2nd and 3rd rounders, not 5th, 6th and 7th last year (we got a 3rd and 4th, but it replaced what we already gave up).
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Would have been but they were not starters
Can’t ignore Jenkins injury because that’s part of the game and Hankerson wasnt even active for a chunk of the season. My point is that this guy is acting as if each and every rookie is an immediate need filled eight away. Most of these guys can’t be counted on until late year 2 or year 3
by Bryan Black on Jan 29, 2012 10:10 AM EST via Android app up reply actions
Most top two round picks are starters (depending on positions, for instance RGIII might not start for a couple of years since QB is harder)
and 3rd and 4th rounders are usually significant contributors (some are starters, some just backups, but a good average is significant contributors).
Yes injuries happen as do ineffectiveness, but that could happen for Griffin as well. So if you are saying all these guys aren’t going to start or be effective, why assume that for Griffin?
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
you realize cutting Hall saves us $6.2 million
we can sign a corner and still have a $1 or 2 to play around with.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
no saved sacks by throwing the ball away
Rex had among the highest throw aways in the league. It didn’t get us positive yards, but it prevented us from getting negative yards due to Brown.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/01/12/cornerbacks-a-glance-at-the-2011-numbers/
6th worst in completion percentage allowed
4th worst in yards allowed
He gives up big plays almost routinely. We need a guy who can stick with a receiver for more than 3 seconds.
by TheDeepBall on Jan 28, 2012 11:22 AM EST up reply actions
I would watch the guarantees
unless your first name is Mike and last is Holmgren. We don’t even know what our team will do, let alone another teams.
by Bryan Black on Jan 27, 2012 8:51 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
nice post explaining the different scenario's
but im against trading back if we have a chance at blackmon . we need playmakers we cant expect every draft pick to be a star. if blackmon is the best take the best dont settle for the 2nd tier guys and trade back. all of those trade back guys must not remember trading back from 1-21 passing on LT sam baker/ felix jones/ Rashard mendenhal/mike jenkins/ CHRIS JOHNSON/ and TE dustin keller so that we could aquire more pics to get …….devin thomas/malcom kelly / and fred davis so was that worth trading back ?
I would have to think about it, cause i like a lot of the sleeper receivers in this draft
if somebody would give me a 2013 1st pick and a mid round pick this year i would trade back if Blackmon is on the board
there are a lot of sleepers every year
truth be told until the combine were just guessing. let say a mlb emerges and runs a good 40 time then people will be saying let get him at 6 or maybe a wr runs a fast 40 time or richardson runs a 4.40 every year the combine boosts someone into the first round or moves there stock up by draft day the big board will look a lot diferent than it does now Im nervous in general about drafting wr because of our numerous busts. so if we were gonna get a 1st next year i would take it but not to move back and pick up an extra 2nd and 4th
I like a lot of guys at Wr in this draft
Brian Quick 6’3" 220, Marvin McNutt 6’2 215, Jeff Fuller 6’4" 220lbs, Juron Criner 6’3" 210, BJ Cunningham 6’2" 213. Most of these guy will be there in the 3rd rd, maybe Brian Quick will get picked in the late 2nd but everyone else should be there in the 3rd. Go take a look at these guys on tape or youtube. or Senior Bowl practices
Totally agree
Loving the depth at WR this year. Just don’t want a repeat of Dev Thomas & Malcolm Kelly!
by Ohio Redskins on Jan 27, 2012 1:36 PM EST up reply actions
Different regime
Can’t be scared because of the Kelly and Thomas errors. Just like you can’t be scared to draft a QB with a high pick….can’t believe folks are still mentioning Heath Shuler
by Bryan Black on Jan 27, 2012 9:10 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Was waiting for that to be the get Flynn and not RG3 arguement. lol
A big part in a player no being a bust is how the team and coaching develops them
i think it is a mix of picking the right guys, and coaching these youngs guys you draft and developing the talent. it seems that some teams seem to be better at developing talent, so i think that so far Shanny and staff have done a decent job of player development
How can you say what they should have been?
What do you know, other than the opinions of other analysts like Kiper and McShay?
Cam Newton’s season really justified his #1 overall.
The QB draft class in 2011 featured 4 QB’s selected in the first 12 picks of the draft, however every QB that was picked was a reach
After one season you cant say if a pick is justified or not. Good or Bad.
Newton started hot but as the season went on he made more mistakes. The big knock on his was intellect and being able to change. After DC’s got a look at him they were able to contain him much better. Kind of like Mike Vick in 2010. Couldnt be stopped the first half of the year. You have to wait several more years to say Newton justified the #1 pick. An average career would not justify it. You have to have Rings to "justify’ being the #1 pick.
Cam Newton had a great year however
There was a lot of big time questions about his ability to throw the football from the pocket, accuracy, taking snaps from center and reading defenses. This time last year Cam Newton was a late 1st rd at best, but he climbed up the draft boards. But was not a better prospect coming out than a Matthew Stafford or a Sam Bradford. so i feel like Carolina reached for him as did some of the other teams that took QB’s that was not 1st rd type guys
Cam a reach? Shut up
He broke records in his first year witg no offseason. He was a better prospect than stafford and bradford but media seems to take everything away from qbs with athleticism
by mr.snyderhireme on Jan 27, 2012 2:36 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Nobody would have guessed that he would have that type of year
but like i said Stafford and Bradford was better prospect coming out of College than Newton, and i like Newton but he was not a slam dunk 1st overall type of player coming out of college like a Andrew Luck, in fact if Luck had come out last year he would have been #1 overall.
He was a risk, if not a reach.
Biggest first pick risk in a while. It paid off for him, but it was risky nonetheless.
by tuckwell on Jan 27, 2012 4:34 PM EST via iPhone app up reply actions
He was a risk, if not a reach.
Biggest first pick risk in a while. It paid off for him, but it was risky nonetheless.
by tuckwell on Jan 27, 2012 4:34 PM EST via iPhone app up reply actions
it's about supply and demand
When you say Cam Newton should have been a top 15 pick you’re wrong – he was picked so high because there are so few very promising QB prospects. And it’s that way every year – the demand for QB is higher than the supply. So every year the very promising QB prospects will be picked early.
There are only 2 ways a team gets an exceptional QB prospect:
1) they totally suck and get one of the top 3 – 4 picks in the draft.
2) they trade up to get a top 3 – 4 pick in the draft and use it to draft the QB.
And then of course you’ve got a prospect, not a sure fire great QB meaning the guy is more likely to be great but there are no guarentees.
The other way to get a great QB is to have superior scouting and be able to find a great prospect in a later round. This is the blind luck plan as every team tries it and it rarely works. The only way I see this working is to try is repeatedly but then how many other positions are not upgraded because you’ve spent so many picks on QB?
how is the 'Hope' option not the one for trading up?
it’s far easier to trade back than up.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
yeah it is easier to trade back if you not gonna get the proper value
and it is easier when you got 2 teams inside the top 5 willing to trade down
i don't know why they wouldn't get proper value
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
What teams are looking to move up into the 6 spot???
and what kinda compensation do u think you will get?
i think any number of teams depending who is on the board
Blackmon, Claiborne, Reiff, Brockers, Richardson and Kuechly could all be prime trade up targets. Plus if some team values Ingram (which they should) Coples or Upshaw that high.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
And why trade up with the Skins?
If anyone on the front 7 or a rb is the move p target why would they trade up to 6 when there is zero chance the Redskins would take one of those players? Why not trade up to 7 where it will cost less?
sometimes trades work like that but not always
there was zero chance the Browns were going to take Sanchez in 2009, didn’t stop the Jets from jumping into that spot. Also for instance at 7 you have the Jags, if you want to trade up for Blackmon you def. need to get ahead of them for that pick. And if Blackmon is off the board Jacksonville could be the landing spot for Claiborne, Reiff or a pass rusher. Or for instance maybe a team talks to the Jags and they don’t want to trade back b/c they want Blackmon, and so now the Skins pick is the one to get infront of whomever you are afraid the Dolphins grab.
There are a lot of variables out there and most favor the Skins as a team to trade up with.
And it isn’t a zero chance for the Redskins (expect for maybe Richardson, Coples and Upshaw) the Skins could easily use anyone of those other guys.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 11:00 PM EST up reply actions
I agree
And didnt I say anyone in the front 7 or RB? And really dont knwo what yor trying to say in the last sentence.
And it isn’t a zero chance for the Redskins (expect for maybe Richardson, Coples and Upshaw) the Skins could easily use anyone of those other guys.
by Mad Russian on Jan 27, 2012 11:11 PM EST up reply actions
Yes and my point was that the Jags could be interested in a pass rusher
(depending if Blackmon is off the board) so the Skins pick could still be the selection to go for if you want Ingram, Coples or Upshaw.
My point in the last sentence is the Redskins could easily go after a number of those prospects so it isn’t a ‘zero percent chance the Skins wouldn’t take them’
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 11:40 PM EST up reply actions
why?
We need a RT (possibly a LT), We need a CB, We need a WR, we need a 3-4 DE, we need an ILB, maybe the QB need is more, but those are all needs.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 11:47 PM EST up reply actions
oh man that gets depressing
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
and some of those will be addressed in Free agency
so lets not act like the draft is the only means to fill the needs, five starters from FA last season and they were all pretty productive. And we get our 2nd pick from last year back in Jarvis Jenkins, i am just saying you can make the move work to move up without hurting the overall progress of the team
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 10:00 AM EST up reply actions
5?
I count Wilson, Cofield and Bowen.
No way Atogwe (injury) or Chester (mediocre) should be considered pretty productive.
I’m already counting Jenkins esp. since Carriker shouldn’t be re-signed.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 10:22 AM EST up reply actions
with exception of Atogwe but i expect him to contribute if he is healthy
and Chester was solid for the most part did not miss a snap so i would say producive, but my point is that some of those needs will be met in FA like a Grubbs or Nicks, or a FA WR like Bowe(i am undecided on getting a FA WR but i would be fine if they got a Bowe) a nickel CB maybe a S depending on the Landry situation so come draft time it iwll look a little different
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 10:35 AM EST up reply actions
If Chester's your 5th best o-linemen
you are fine, if he’s your 2nd best you are hurting. him being healthy is nice but hardly makes him ‘productive’ not with the level of pressures he was giving up.
Yes you can fill some of those needs via FA, but if we trade up and take away these premium picks, we have to be cautious in FA to spread out our money now. No way could we afford a Bowe or Nicks, and we can’t fill all those needs.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 11:04 AM EST up reply actions
I am not always in favor of the biggest name free agent to begin with
but i think you could get a G maybe Grubbs or Nicks and like i said not so sure about getting a wr just yet
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 11:16 AM EST up reply actions
i'm saying if you are trading away essentially 3 other significant starters or contributors (1st, 2nd 3rd round picks)
you can’t buy the top of the line, b/c now we need to spread our money out over 3 new positions.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 11:18 AM EST up reply actions
3 picks essentially could be
mike adams, ben jones, dwight benley. All major needs at their position
by davetrembling on Jan 28, 2012 11:22 AM EST up reply actions
they are needs but not major needs
Adams gonna be a 1st rd pick and we aint taking him @ 6. But the most glaring need is QB
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 11:24 AM EST up reply actions
they are MAJOR needs
and you don’t take adams at 6 you trade back. We are not a qb away from the super bowl.
by davetrembling on Jan 28, 2012 11:26 AM EST up reply actions
you dont need to be a QB away from SB to get a franchise QB
if you can settle who you got playing QB then you can draft, and put FA around him to make it to a SB like the Giants did with Eli. and if you say they are greater needs than QB then you simply dont know football 31 turnovers from the Qb’s is not gonna get it done
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 11:33 AM EST up reply actions
your plan
would require 3 to 4 more years while ours would require one or two.
by TheDeepBall on Jan 28, 2012 11:36 AM EST up reply actions
that is your opinion cause without a QB it is gonna take longer than 2 years
and if you get a guy next year at QB it will be more like 4/5 years from now
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 11:53 AM EST up reply actions
I will continue this below
to avoid these tiny reply boxes. Give me a few minutes.
by TheDeepBall on Jan 28, 2012 12:02 PM EST up reply actions
In your plan there won't even be a QB in 2 years
We won’t be picking this high next year so it will take more to move
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 4:01 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
Again assuming there is a trade back partner willing to jump
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 6:07 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
aren't you assuming that the Rams will take your deal??
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
All discussions we have are based off assumptions
People get carried away because I think they are looking at the Cleveland/Atlanta deal from last year and thinking that is the industry standard now. No, it was a team overpaying for a need that they felt would push them over the hump
by Bryan Black on Jan 29, 2012 10:19 AM EST via Android app up reply actions
teams have been overpaying forever
and the price tag for top picks will only go up with the rookie cap.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Ok lets just say Shanahan think that RG3 is his Franchise guy
and make the trade to secure him and gave up 1st,2nd 2012 and 1st and 4th to get him.
and you get in the draft
1st Robert Griffin III
2nd trade
3rd WR either McNutt, Fuller, Robinson,Criner, Quick.
4th OL Datko,Adcock, Mosley
4th CB either Norman, Fletcher, Bentley, Harris
5th BPA maybe Rainey, C Molk
i think i would be ok with that kinda draft cause next year you could just fill in some holes every team every year have holes but you wont have to draft a QB or WR,
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 11:52 AM EST up reply actions
But in reality any of those players can fill a need
but it wont be a priority #1 need like i said the top 2 needs is QB and playmaker WR in that order IMO, and i feel you should get one of your top 2 needs filled with your 1st pick.
I can trade for RG3 and get a nice sleeper receiver in the 3rd rd like McNutt,Fuller,Criner, or Quick( i think he might be gone, but wishful thinking) and get some O-line depth in the 4th, CB, or LB(perry riley was 4th rd pick)
yeah well, OT, G, C and possibly CB should be fixed before WR.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 10:23 AM EST up reply actions
I know you heard kyle say he felt they needed a playmaker WR
and i agree with that, you got some pieces to work with on the line and both may be solved before the draft but we will find out
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 10:37 AM EST up reply actions
and they also said you need a supporting cast, which includes the oline
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 11:05 AM EST up reply actions
Just curious - you don't mention safety as an area of need
Do you have a plan for that, or is it not important, or what? We could be in desperate shape there, having to go with Doughty and Gomes.
Safety is a concern
but i have to see what they plan on doing with Landry first, and i think Atogwe will be ok i know he missed a lot of time last year but i expect him to play this year, maybe pick a guy late but with another year of development maybe Gomes will be better, if you let Landry walk(i would not) then go get Raiders SS Tyvon Branch he is young and available i think he 25
I like Branch, but I'd guess the Raiders franchise him
i could be wrong, but until I hear otherwise I’m not really considering him.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I am hearing that the Silver and Black is interested in Landry
so they may let Branch walk
Wrong… are you actually reading over there?
They are looking for a strong safety so that they can move branch to free safety where he can use his ball skills more effectively
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
by Skins Fan '77 on Jan 29, 2012 10:16 AM EST up reply actions
I know people that live in the Oakland area,
and they do have interest in Landry but we will see if they let Branch test the Market or not, a lot of things will get resolved once free agency takes place.
by Highspeed30 on Jan 29, 2012 10:20 AM EST up reply actions
Doesn't really answer my question
And who have failed to support your statement that the Raiders "May let branch walk"
this is what I was calling you out on
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
by Skins Fan '77 on Jan 29, 2012 10:34 AM EST up reply actions
it is possible they let Branch walk
they aint resign him or put the franchise tag on him to it is not a absolute that they gonna keep him is the point
by Highspeed30 on Jan 29, 2012 10:49 AM EST up reply actions
teams can't put the tag on players until a certain period (i think like 2 weeks after the SB)
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
It is these kinds of expectations
That weaken your argument.
Go ahead, try and convince anyone here that OJ has a better chance of playing 16 games then not… good luck
he has never been that durable, is now older, and has a more significant injury…
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
by Skins Fan '77 on Jan 29, 2012 10:19 AM EST up reply actions
Injuries is a part of football
that is why there is a 53 man roster and 8 practice squad players, the signed OJ not for just 1 season they expected to get 3 or 4 seasons out of him
by Highspeed30 on Jan 29, 2012 10:22 AM EST up reply actions
Well that really convinced me
You’re right OJ will play all 16 games next year at a Pro bowl level.
I know they expected to get more out of him, but they did not… this is the point. Why do you EXPECT him to do better?
Do you also expect Kelly to make a comeback this year?
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
by Skins Fan '77 on Jan 29, 2012 10:36 AM EST up reply actions
It is possible that he come and play all 16 games
and play at a pro bowl level, you cant just say that cause he struggled with injuries last year he will do the same this year, last year is in the past. you cant just say he wont cause he was injured, like Cooley could have a really good year in 2012 but he was hurt all last year, or Jarvis Jenkins could have a strong year but he was injured so you saying cause he had injuries is weak.
by Highspeed30 on Jan 29, 2012 10:52 AM EST up reply actions
Your opposite argument is even weaker
My argument is the least based on the history of most NFL players… yours is based on unicorns and rainbows
I agree with you that anything is possible, but if you wish to make intelligent decisions, you have to go with what is probable
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
by Skins Fan '77 on Jan 29, 2012 10:58 AM EST up reply actions
Each year he's been injured
He has come back the next year and played a full season. 11 games missed in 7 years is not enough premise for you to suggest that he can’t come back and play a full season.
by Bryan Black on Jan 29, 2012 11:11 AM EST via Android app up reply actions
You are ignoring quite a few important factors
About how and when his injuries have occurred and also how many games he has Played the last two years injured and ineffective.
I’m starting to feel like all I write are injury posts, but I will do one on OJ in the next week or so.
All I am saying is if I had to bet $100 on a full season or not, I think the smart money is on "not"
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
by Skins Fan '77 on Jan 29, 2012 12:17 PM EST up reply actions
Doesn't matter when they happen
Reality is that 11 games in 7 years (with all 11 grouped in 3 years or so) doesn’t give you any substance to suggest that he will def miss time this year. Your right you do a lot of injury posts, would like to see one on OJ. I can’t believe we are debating this BTW..hahaha!
by Bryan Black on Jan 29, 2012 12:33 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
I can see it as a topic of debate
I feel that a majority of fans think OJ was ineffective and is most likely only going to get worse.
But that is not everybody, and I would like to hear what they have to say
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
by Skins Fan '77 on Jan 29, 2012 4:32 PM EST up reply actions
Ineffective due to injury only
Def an upgrade over Kareem Moore still
by Bryan Black on Jan 29, 2012 5:01 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
I would take that bet
on every player in the league that they wont play all 16 games. like i said before that is why there is 53 man roster. this aint the NBA
Which is why
Your arguments are so confusing, you flip-flop more than a politician and take either side of the fence when it suits you.
I’ll write a post this week on OJ and maybe one other player regarding injuries (again) and we can debate it more then… unless you’d like to do it?
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
by Skins Fan '77 on Jan 29, 2012 4:29 PM EST up reply actions
Injuries is a part of the game
that is why you have guys on the bench to replace a guy if somebody goes down, its the next man up if someone get hurt. But I am not going into the season saying one particular player is going to get hurt. but that is why they got Gomes as his back up in case he go down, like i said another year in the system and he should be a little better
That is why i call it the Hope theory cause you say any number of teams
and have no clue what type of compensation you will get, it is one thing to say lets trade down but it is another to have a trade down partner. And i give you the 2 teams that is looking to trade down in St Louis and Minnesota. Both would be foolish not to entertain trade offers if RG3 is still on the board
just as we'd be foolish not to entertain offers for whomever is still on the board
it is different teams per player, I’m not sure why that isn’t clear. Saying their is a market for a QB and the 2nd overall pick is easy, but the Redskins at 6 have a ton more variables.
I’ve gone into detail before the various teams that could be interested depending who is still on the board, and the compensation has more to do with who is trading with you. Is it the Eagles at 15? The Bears at 19? Broncos at 25? or someone else.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
the Jets mved up 12 spots to get Mark Sanchez and gave up just a 2nd rd pick and a bunch of bums or depth players
they went from 17 to 5 for a 2nd rd pick and bunch of bums = to say 5th/6th rd picks, and if that is the kinda trade you are looking to get then you might as well stay @ the 6 spot, cause you aint “stockpiling” future picks like the Browns did last year. there aint nobody that will be at 6 that will get you a 2013 1st rd pick
couple of problems with that
one it was for Mark Sanchez, there weren’t a ton of teams clamoring for QB’s that year so the price was down.
two teams knew that they would have to give Sanchez a mega deal the moment they drafted him, that is no longer the case.
three the Jets lucked out that Mangini was the head coach of the Browns. He was the one who drafted those 3 guys and he valued them for well more than they were worth.
four QB’s have tremendous trade value when there are multiple teams in need of one, but very little when most teams are set. That year most of the rest of the top 10-15 teams weren’t that interested in Sanchez, with the possible exceptions of Vinny and Jose McDaniels. Not exactly high level company.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 11:07 PM EST up reply actions
There will only be 2 teams interested in a QB this draft
cause out of the teams looking for QB, Redskins, Browns, Miami, and to a lesser degree Seattle 1 of them will be signing Matt Flynn( i hope it is not Redskins but a possibility). Miami may have the inside track with Philbin in place so then that leave just 2 real teams in need of a QB, just like when the Redskins was interested in Sanchez along with the Jets. so the absurd trade prices you hear just wont happen for the most part like i said there aint no more Herschel deals out there.
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 10:06 AM EST up reply actions
the difference is Sanchez was a one hit wonder, had attitude and maturity questions
and doesn’t have close to the talent that RGIII is coming out with.
Also the rookie cap GREATLY increases trade values.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 10:24 AM EST up reply actions
Are they likely to use the draft chart? If so, to move from 6 to 2
could cost 1000 pts, so our 2012 #6 and #38 and 2013 first round. Some say there are 6 really top prospects this year, so our #6 pick ought to be golden.
It will cost far more than the draft chart says
every trade up last year cost quite a bit more than its supposed value.
there is nobody at 6 that the Redskins that would fill a major need
some are just so afraid to trade up, but the reality is it aint gonna be a bidding war cause Free agency come before the draft and someone will sign Matt Flynn, so that mean it will only be 2 possible teams looking for a QB so the price will be about that with maybe a 2013 3rd or 4th
Okay lets say Flynn lands in Miami
that still leaves Cleveland, Seattle and us. But what if some other teams get involved. What if KC’s new coaching staff doesn’t want to go forward with Cassel or the Jets realize Sanchez is trash and try to get that guy? There are a lot of variables out there and they aren’t always set in stone. Personally I didn’t see the Jags moving up for a QB last year.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
We have a big edge (with our #6 pick) over everybody except Cleveland
St Louis can still stay in the top 6 with our pick. Of course, same applies with Cleveland, so we might just have to outbid them. As to whether we should trade up – that’s tricky, and depends on how much we want RG3. We could come out ahead trading down and taking Tannehill, Foles or Weeden, plus some other top prospect at something like 20.
It's going to be funny if RGIII was never in the plans at all for us or Cleveland
At which point he falls to us at 6 and we are all happy in the end. For those trade back folks…if RGIII fell (not suggesting that he will) would you still trade back?
by Bryan Black on Jan 29, 2012 12:36 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
most of them would cause they would say you could get 3-4 players
for RG3, but a lot has to play out before the draft, we will know a lot more after Free Agency, i just hate it when they say you are mortgaging the future by trading up. The Giants would take that trade 1000 x over and it did not set them back. it actually got them on track in 2004 they got Eli and won the SB in 2007, and they are back.
Eli was the 'Andrew Luck' of that draft class
and his price was way down b/c he refused to play for San Diego. Also the Chargers made getting Phillip Rivers key to trading back. What if the Rams do the same thing and say ‘we must get Matt Kalil back’?
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
It depends on the offer
if you’re offered, say, the 12th pick, that team’s 2nd, 3rd, and their 2013 first, 2nd and 3rd, then yeah. Otherwise, take RG3.
That chart is outdated
b/c it doesn’t take into account the new rookie scale. And by trading back to 6 the Rams risk missing out Kalil, Blackmon, Claiborne, their 3 biggest needs. Now obviously the Rams could go to the next guy down the list, or a DT like Brockers or Still, but to pass up on those top players they will want to be overly compensated.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
the Rams could have Reiff rated higher than Kalil or equal to Kalil
just like the Redskins went with Trent Williams over Russell Okung. And if KC is looking to move on from Cassel i am pretty sure it will be known before the draft, a lot of this stuff will be worked out in FA, so by the time the draft come around we all will have a better picture to who still in the market for a QB
I think that with Cleveland selecting Brad Childress as their OC
That the Browns will be trading up to take RGIII. Childress picked both Tarvaris Jackson & Joe Webb (tho it could be argued that Webb was drafted to become a WR) but IMO Griffin is the perfect fit for the offensive scheme that Childress runs. Both Jackson & Webb are very athletic QBs who are dual threats with their arm or their legs. The Browns have a lot more to offer than we do & have all of their own picks to fill their needs. Julio Jones for RGIII…. a pretty good deal.
And how did Web and Jackson work out for him?
And what makes you think the OC is going to be the deciding factor on who they take in the 1st round? Childress busted when he picked Qbs. Why would the Browns lean on him?
He also went and got Brett Favre out of retirement
Im sorry, Im missing your point
by Bryan Black on Jan 27, 2012 10:46 PM EST up reply actions
Brad childress aint even calling plays
so i dont think he would have much input in personnel decisions, Holmgren and Heckert have a record of getting a veteran QB,
so does Mike Shanahan....
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Look at Shanahan's track record
McNabb, Plummer and Elway, He likes working with vets. He went to Griese after his 2nd year and let Culter sit 11 weeks. And also you’re lone example is the QB that was at the helm when Shanny got fired.
If Holmgren has a ‘track record’ of Vet QB’s than Shanny def. does. Look at the level of experience of Holmgren’s starting QB’s Favre, Kitna, Hasselbeck, and Mccoy compared to Shanny’s.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 11:11 PM EST up reply actions
he still traded up for Cutler
while Plummer was still his starter, so that tell me that if he thinks a guy can be the franchise guy he will make it happen, I doubt a rookie was just gonna come in and start right away over plummer he did not have Train Rex
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 10:10 AM EST up reply actions
yes but he didn't trade away a ton of premium picks (and had more picks to work with).
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 10:25 AM EST up reply actions
I don't think that Childress will have any input on personnel decisions,
at least not on who their QB will be, that decision has already been made & Holmgren is getting the best OC he can for his new QB. It’s just my opinion & as you probably know, I have always been on the trade up for a franchise QB but I think that by hiring Childress it’s a pretty good indicater that they are going after Griffin
Why is this so hard to understand ??
The Browns hired Brad Childress to be their OC (whether Tarvaris Jackson was a bust or not is irrelevant)
The type of QB that Childress has had in the past are very similar to RGIII. If you as the GM had decided that Robert Griffin III was going to be your pick, wouldn’t it make sense to get an OC who could do the most with his talents ??
So Ponder and Griffin are the same?
And Favre was the same as Griffin? He has had more less mobile Qbs than mobile Qbs.
I think Tannehill is more like Jackson than RG3.
I think your basing your RG3 and Jackson are the same type QB based on race. Kinda sad.
lmao child.
So you get shown facts that go against what you say so you call names. thats not kinda sad…thats very sad.Feel sorry for your kid. He wont have a very good life with you as a model.
My son is at Duke.
Doubt your son will make community college. But wont waste any more time on ignorant foul mouthed children.
You call me a racist & then write that other garbage about my son
You are an idiot as I said above, attacking peoples children when shielded by the anonymity of the internet is the way of a coward
Told you
I am not gonna play your childish game. Good luck and I will pray for your child. And never called you racist. Think your guilty conscience just gave you away on that.. Only said you based you comparison based on race. Once again pray your child finds a true mentor.
Chill both of you
There is no need for all of that, really. Its just a football debate
by Bryan Black on Jan 27, 2012 11:00 PM EST up reply actions
you inferred he's a racist, if you didn't know that and it was an accident that is okay
but come on, it was a pretty clear statement. And for what it is worth you are the only one who talked about the color of their skin.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 11:20 PM EST up reply actions
No i didnt. He did.
I only said he claimed RG3 and Jackson are the same is based on race. Because they arent the same.
by Mad Russian on Jan 27, 2012 11:23 PM EST up reply actions
Are they the same?
Tavaris Jackson in college had 900yds rushing.%54 passing
RG3 in college had over 2000yds rushing %66 passing
Dont know what is the same other than the color of skin.
by Mad Russian on Jan 27, 2012 11:29 PM EST up reply actions
yeah not sure why you'd attempt to use numbers
no one is saying Jackson was a top QB prospect, and in fact many thought he was drafted far too high. But they are built the same and have similar skill sets.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 11:32 PM EST up reply actions
Mad Russian
You have destroyed your credibility on this site. Implying that someone is racist because they claim that 2 QBs of the same color are similar in style (which they are) is absurd, childish, and, as ENsDad put it, idiotic. Nobody has said anything about race here but you.
Furthermore, you insulted someone’s family. not only was it completely uncalled for, it was sick and wrong. You don’t know ENsDad. I’d say you owe him an apology.
how is making that claim not bringing up the color of their skin?
and I disagree with your assessment. Remember Childress was also tasked with developing McNabb in Philly (he was McNabb’s first QB coach) and has a long track record with being a QB ‘guru’.
He’s worked with athletic, strong arm QB’s at getting them ready for the NFL, so yes I do think you can say Cleveland is looking for a QB guy for a rookie with this hiring.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 11:31 PM EST up reply actions
what facts did you show??
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 11:18 PM EST up reply actions
Wait why is Tannehill more like Jackson? And RGIII not like Jackson?
Jackson was a similar QB (albeit not in a spread offense or with the supporting talent), he was fast and could scramble with a cannon for an arm. Tannehill is more of an intermediate guy, with better touch passing.
Not sure how race has to do with anything.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 11:18 PM EST up reply actions
How are RG3 and Jackson alike other than color of skin?
Tannehill is fast.Has played Wr. And has a very good arm.
by Mad Russian on Jan 27, 2012 11:20 PM EST up reply actions
their style of play was pretty similar, though Jackson ALOT more raw
Read Jackson’s scouting report from before the 2006 draft and you will hear a lot of the same qualities as Griffin http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/players/historical/1107218
Tannehill is a different kind of QB, yes he has speed and a good arm, but it’s not a top level arm like Jackson or Griffin.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 11:28 PM EST up reply actions
Tavaris Jackson in college had 900yds rushing.%54 passing RG3 in college had over 2000yds rushing %66 passing Dont know what is the same other than the color of skin.
by Mad Russian on Jan 27, 2012 11:29 PM EST up reply actions
Did Jackson play in Baylor's spread offense? is he nearly as refined as RGIII?
not sure what you are talking about here.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 11:33 PM EST up reply actions
How can yo say they are the same but not compare them?
Thats a total cop out. Either they are the same or they are not. If they are then you compare them. You cant cant compare them on the field.
by Mad Russian on Jan 27, 2012 11:37 PM EST up reply actions
Thats like me saying
McCoy is like Brady but dont compare them against each other.
by Mad Russian on Jan 27, 2012 11:39 PM EST up reply actions
actually that hurts your argument, b/c not only were there college numbers vastly different
but their skill sets as well. McCoy has a weaker arm, but nice mobility. Brady is a statue, but has a strong arm, pin point accuracy and a quick release.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 11:45 PM EST up reply actions
and
Strong arm, pinpoint accuracy and quick release was the book on Brady coming out? Must be why he lasted til the 6th round.
by Mad Russian on Jan 27, 2012 11:52 PM EST up reply actions
not the quick release, but the rest was
consistency was an issue with Brady as was of course the fact that he couldn’t win his starting job at michigan.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 12:03 AM EST up reply actions
you can compare them, they are just opposite ends of the spectrum
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 12:04 AM EST up reply actions
Was more talking about
how yo compare RG3 to Jackson but will only allow people to compare them in a very specific way.
by Mad Russian on Jan 28, 2012 12:05 AM EST up reply actions
all i'm saying is you should compare them in the context that Ensdad brought up
and that is their skill set. In both his original statement and his second one right before the race card was played, he made it clear he was talking about skill set not success level or talent level.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 12:13 AM EST up reply actions
The skill set isnt the same
The only thing that is the same is their size and color.RG3 has a bigger arm,more accurate,runs as a last resort and throws a great balls. Jackson was a run first QB with good intermediate passing and average accuracy. So please tell me how their skill set is similar?
RGIII runs as a last resort now, but earlier in his career that wasn't the case.
Jackson has a cannon for an arm as well, while he lacks RGIII’s touch, it is a valid comparison in terms of skill set not talent.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
two players could be extremely similar but with different additional factors
for instance Chris Rainey is extremely similar in terms of skill set to Dexter McCluster, but Rainey doesn’t have near the numbers to back up that claim.
It’s even a worse comparison trying to compare Jackson an admittedly raw FCS talent to the Heisman trophy winner in terms of stats. I would compare any quarterback with the similar size and speed/strength combo.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 11:44 PM EST up reply actions
And at least you back up what yo say.
What I dislike are peoples like ENsDad who treat speculation and their opinion as fact and show absolutely nothing to back it up He could have compared their size but couldnt. ALL he saw was 2 black QBs who can run so they must be alike. Nevermind rG3 doesnt like to run and is good in the pocket. and Jackson was a run first Qb.
by Mad Russian on Jan 28, 2012 12:01 AM EST up reply actions
I'm sorry but I don't think that is really fair
I think EnsDad was very fair to bring up Jackson/Webb and he clearly said tha they were dual threat QB’s similar to Griffin. It’s a valid point that Childress (also including McNabb) has a long history on that skill set at QB.
it’s a fine point and deserves to get talked about. I don’t think Ensdad or anyone else who brings up similar QB’s are doing so just based on skin color. Honestly it is far worse to compare Newton to Griffin than Jackson to Griffin.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 12:11 AM EST up reply actions
How are they the same?
Jackson has less than 521 yards rushing in 5 years. Thats 104 yards a season. 10 yards a game. Please explain how that is a dual threat QB?
wait above you are saying Jackson was a run first QB?
which is it?
Jackson was dual threat b/c he could run, though he didn’t always do so.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Mad russian called ENsDad a racist
for comparing griffin and Tavaris Jackson. Then proceeded to insult ENsDad’s family.
Also he just admitted he’s a troll below.
i dont even entertain that type of talk
We suppose to be men, discussing the Burgandy and Gold. I dont take nothing here personal we all want the same thing at the end of the day winning a Super Bowl, we just got different opinions about how to get it done. I respect everyones opinion even if i disagree
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 8:24 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
+1
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
There are definitely similarities between Ponder & Griffin
& Favre was brought in to be the last piece on a SB contending team (which he nearly was)
The type of QB that Childress has had in the past are very similar to RGIII. If you as the GM had decided that Robert Griffin III was going to be your pick, wouldn’t it make sense to get an OC who could do the most with his talents ??Look at it from their view instead of as a Skins fan who hopes to trade up & get RGIII
From their view I see them getting Richardson or Blackmon and drafting Tannehill as their future Qb.
He fit what you said the Browns want.
Most Browns fans hate the hire of Childress they wanted Sherman
i really dont think it has a major effect on who they intend on drafting, Childress is of the WCO tree and worked with Pat Shurmer in Philly
I think Shurmer was the Eagles QB coach when Childress was the OC
so it is more about him being familiar with Childress then some plan to get a guy in place to deal with RGIII
he also comes from the Holmgren coaching tree (Andy Reid)
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 11:34 PM EST up reply actions
maybe i missed it, what does Ponder have to do with anything?
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 11:15 PM EST up reply actions
ENsDad was talking about the type of QBs Childress likes and he drafted Ponder.
by Mad Russian on Jan 27, 2012 11:17 PM EST up reply actions
well Childress didn't draft Ponder, so that is what threw me
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 11:34 PM EST up reply actions
We should draft Mr. Coples, he is a beast can play at end...
You can never have to many pass rushers, we could be beast on defense. Let’s stack up on the line develop a formidable defense. I rather have him than a corner that high such as Claiborne. Food for thought
Its going to be funny when Cleveland picks up Flynn and all this debate was for not
Cleveland or Miami will pick him up. Most are betting on Miami, I’m going with Cleveland as a surprise. And Cleveland will draft at their spot and it wont be RGIII
1-IND-Luck
2-WAS-RGIII (Trade with St. Louis)
3-MIN-Blackmon
4-CLE-Richardson
5-TB-Claiborne
6-STL-Khalil (Trade with Washington)
so will it be funny when the Skins pick up Flynn as well?
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 27, 2012 11:35 PM EST up reply actions
No it won't be funny at all Steve
Jumping off a bridge comes to mind if that happens!
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 6:58 AM EST via Android app up reply actions
if done properly it has just as much chance if not more of turning around this team's fortunes
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I know it wasn't your main point, but I can't imagine Minn taking Blackmon over Kalil.
And even though Bucs have a good Left tackle, they would not pass on Kalil, not that it would matter anyways.
Skins rule
WR or DB are more pressing needs for them
That list is based a little on needs but more just gut feelings with the way I feel things will end up.
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 7:04 AM EST via Android app up reply actions
it could happen sure
but i think the chance of Kalil falling to the 6th spot is only slightly greater than Griffin. THe other factor is If the Vikings, Browns and Tampa all don’t want him, then they’d likely be willing to trade back to those who do.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
If Cleveland gets Flynn, we might not have to trade up
because the ones ahead of us don’t need a QB. The danger though could be that some team trades up to get ahead of us. If we had good relations with, say, St Louis, they might warn us and let us outbid the other team. We have an edge on other teams because we are at #6, and there are said to be 6 really top prospects. So St Louis (or any of the others) could stay in the top 6 by trading with us.
If Cleveland get Matt Flynn then the price to trade up just got a whole lot cheaper
cause there would not be the need to move up to the 2 spot, you could trade with the Browns and give up just a 2 and 4th to move up 2 spots.
Yes, but if Cleveland gets Flynn (great news), why bother trading up at all?
There would be no reason to trade with Cleveland, because other teams could still jump us (to 2 or 3) and grab RG3. The biggest threat (Cleveland) would probably be gone, but a couple of longshots would be left. And St Louis could fool everybody by taking RG3, planning to trade Bradford (unlikely, but possible).
yeah that is true but i am sure the FO will be on the phone with the Rams
or vikings in case somebody do look to jump up like Miami, but they could very well get Peyton Manning cause he will be a free agent. I am just hoping that the Redskins dont pick him up, but i would rather have him than Matt Flynn
really how?
why is it not Matt Schaub or Mark Brunell?
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I heard Kyle in a interview
say that "you dont just say we dont have a franchise QB lets do whatever we can and break the bank and pay whoever the top Free agent is, you got to see who is that guy, is he the top guy because he is the best guy that is available or is he the top guy cause he is like Drew Brees was when he was a free agent 5 years ago? there are not many guys like that, that come around and just available when they are that good. so you got to really make the right decision I really hope that we can get a Pro bowl QB in this draft. It dont sound like they think Matt Flynn is like Drew Brees was 5 years ago.
by Highspeed30 on Jan 29, 2012 10:47 AM EST up reply actions
Yes, it would be great if they were close to St Louis
I must admit, I don’t know how the draft works at a personal level. Is St Louis likely to tell us their plans, or be willing to give us heads up – a chance to compete – if they got an offer?
By the way, we’ve discussed how Flynn will go somewhere before the draft, thus removing one competitor for RG3. But Peyton Manning is likely to be going somewhere, too, and he could satisfy a competitor (although it wouldn’t help if he went to SF or the Jets).
The Redskins would probably be in contact with the Rams
i am sure if they had a better offer they would try and get the Redskins to match or exceed the offer, they would be trying to be the best deal possible. I would be great if the Browns signed Matt Flynn but i think he going to Miami.
by Highspeed30 on Jan 29, 2012 11:46 AM EST up reply actions
so what did you think of Bill Bentley the CB from Lafayette??
you still in Mobile? what rd you think he may go in ?
yeah i'm still here, i'll be blogging live from the game (I hope!)
Bentley really impressed me this week, hard to say exactly what round he’ll go in just yet, but I’d say 5th is likely, early 6th at the worst.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 11:07 AM EST up reply actions
@ steve and where do u see a guy like Chris Rainey fitting in with the Burgandy and Gold
he has great speed, good hands shifty and could take it to the house but i dont know if he could work out as a 3rd down back or maybe he can take Bbanks spot since he can do a little more on offense
I really like Rainey, and Shanahan has been highly complimentary of him down here
I think he’s a jack-of-all trades guy, which is fine b/c he should be in that 5th or 6th round range.
I think he’s still a RB first and foremost, but he can split out wide, and obvious help in the return game. He probably wouldn’t get more than 80 carries a season, but he could be really effective. And a real weapon. I agree I def. think he’d take Banks spot since he can help on offense. I’m thinking the Skins go with 4 RB’s this year, but having that 4th back as a guy who can split out wide and return is key.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 28, 2012 11:10 AM EST up reply actions
Do you think
Rainey is a 3,4 or 5 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 think 5th
he’s got the skill set for that utility role, but i wouldn’t be overdrafting him.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
You don't think reach in the 4th
Because of his utility type make up, with able to help out at a couple different positions. This Brandon Banks solely as a kick returner thing has to come to an end, we need the extra roster spot
by Bryan Black on Jan 29, 2012 10:26 AM EST via Android app up reply actions
it's possible and if he runs well at the combine his value is going up anyways
Also, with the 4th we do have the two picks. So if he’s sitting there at that mid-4th rounder it could make sense.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Not sure how you can
Be so sure that next years class won’t be as good as griffin. Just remember, this time last year griffin was projected as a 3rd or 4th round, so how next years class will rate is a little hard to judge
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 am saying Griffin and Luck are better to persue moving up to get than next years guys
I am a College Football guy so I seen Griffin play last year, nad he took it to another level this season he just progressed each year, did not know he was gonna come out earlier in the year but knew he had all the skills. i just think he was better than Barkley but that is just one man opinion
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 11:06 AM EST up reply actions
He did take to another level
I agree with, but who is to say that one of the abs coming out next year won’t as well. Newton and griffin both jumped, and its possible somebody else will next year. And by that time, hopefully we will have an loin and some wrs in place
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
yeah but time is worth making the move now IMO
cause if you wait til next year you dont know where your team will be, holes that you did not have you might have a year from now, and when drafting a QB you have to allow time to develop so the first year may be a litte rough as the QB learns so if you delay getting a guy you delay the progress of the team, cause it is hard to evaluate your Wr’s if the Qb is making the wrong reads, or throwing ints, or taking sacks, throwing behind guy, over throwing guys,etc.
Continued from above discussion
We need upgrades at 7 or 8 positions to be contenders right now. That means you need 7 or 8 new players.
We don’t have the cap space to sign more than 2 or 3 high profile players and we still have to be able to sign our rookies and extensions.
So that leaves 5 positions to be filled through the draft.
Now, the way we can fill ALL of those positions would be to:
Sign Matt flynn (QB)
Sign Carl Nicks (G)
Trade back in the draft (nets you an extra 2nd, possibly 2013 1st)
Draft David DeCastro (G)
Draft Levy Adcock (RT)
with the other 2nd round pick, draft a CB.
Wide Receiver in the 3rd.
depth from 4th onwards.
So the only positions you still have needs at are DE, WR and Safety, which you can fill out in next year’s draft (and if Flynn doesn’t work out, draft a QB in the first). From then on all you have to do is draft replacement players before our other guys get too old.
Total time to acquire players at most positions of need: 2 years
Your plan involves:
Sign Bowe (WR)
and sign Nicks (G) (you can switch those FAs with someone else if you like)
Trade up (costs you a second round pick, not to mention a 1st and 3rd next year)
Draft RG3
Draft a WR(?) in the 3rd
Depth from 4th onwards.
So that fills QB, WR and RG but you still need:
LG, RT, Safety, Corner, DE.
You won’t be able to fill all that out in next year’s draft because you don’t have the picks to do it (you traded away your 1st and 3rd), so you’re looking at not having these positions until 2014.
By then London will probably retire, opening up a new hole at ILB. Cofield will be 30 and it will be about time to replace him, but you still have all those other positions you need to fill. we’ll need even more WRs because Moss and Gaffney will be too old. Now you’re back to square 1 because once again you need to fill 7 or 8 positions on the team:
LG, RT, Safety, Corner, DE, NT, ILB, WR.
You have to assume we can’t fill all that in one draft.
It will take until 2015 to finish drafting those positions of need, and then you can FINALLY start drafting BEFORE a player gets too old/contact expires and needs to be replaced.
Total time to fill most positions of need : 4 years.
You lost me at
Sign Matt Flynn
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 4:04 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
And here I thought it was easy to understand
I’ll try to dumb it down a bit more for you in the future.
No I understand your theory but I'm afraid of your plan has a 7th round guy with only a couple of NFL starts under his belt
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 6:10 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
What single positions play has the most result on whether you win or lose a game?
Answer that question. I’m glad that you can improve the OL slightly, the defense slightly but if you have a scrub at QB you will not win consistently, period.
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 6:28 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
Let's put it this way
If you offered me an upgrade at center vs an upgrade at QB, I would take the QB without hesitation. But if you offered me an upgrade at LG, C, RG, RT and CB vs a QB I would take the OL and CB in a heartbeat.
I don’t get why that’s so hard to understand.
Slightly?
Our entire line with the exception of LT is made up of players who were either backups or unemployed before they came here. Our depth is practically non existent. The upgrades I am proposing are not “slight” upgrades these are MAJOR upgrades. As in, game changing upgrades. Upgrades that would make this team an .500+ team no matter who is at QB, even Rex Grossman.
that is not correct Rex is who he is, a turnover machine
he is what he is, but if that QB is a top 10 type of guy then i will take the uprgrade at QB because the upgrades across the line will be great but i think that it wont be greater than the offensive leader and face of the franchise. you can plug in OL and still have success cause lineman get hurt all the time but you cant just plug in some Bum QB and think you gonna win
Think of how well our RBs will do behind that line
it’ll open up all kinds of passing lanes for the QB, not to mention pass pro would be better. You’d see much better production from him.
think how big the running holes will be with RG3 at QB
he will make the defense stay at home for that extra second cause it could be a play fake. I am not against OL i just think i can fill in after i get the Franchise guy in place
the line was adequate towards the end of the season
they controlled the Giants in Dec with plenty to play for, and opened up holes for Royster. I have faith in Shanahan and the coaches to develop guys in the program, but you need a big time player at QB
rex had practically no time in the pocket.
He actually had to throw the ball away a lot to save the sack. it was kind of sad, actually.
no the line was not adequate? and since when is that enough
against the Giants our RB’s averaged under 3 yards a carry. We just had a ton of yards b/c we carried it so much.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
not very big? b/c the O-line determines the holes not the QB
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Because every drafted player is an upgrade?
The thing with a QB is that Rex is so bad that almost anyone can be an upgrade. And IMO RGIII would be a larger upgrade at QB than Flynn. Look, either way it plays out I am happy as I trust the personnel decisions of the team than I do you or myself. We are going to damn sure get there one way or another
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 8:48 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
Agreed
But doesn’t that say something about the team as a whole? Doesn’t that tell you a QB won’t fix our problems?
It won't fix everything but it will speed up the rebuild
I see it a lot where a team gets a franchise QB, a leader, and it seems as if they are perennial contenders year in and year out. I prob wouldn’t be so passionate about it but its a route that we have not explored and I feel we need to try it out while 2 guys are in the board that are as about can’t miss as you can get
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 9:04 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
yes and look how rare that happens through the top of the draft
most top QB’s weren’t top 10 picks, so we probably shouldn’t be on here saying that RGIII will turn us into a perennial contender.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Then we shouldn't say it about Luck either
Or Barkley next year. Of course you can say that if its the way that you feel based on your synopsis of the guy. Just the same as you all are free to feel as if every traded down pick, 1st makes the team and 2nd plays at a high level.You all may be wrong also
by Bryan Black on Jan 29, 2012 10:35 AM EST via Android app up reply actions
my problem is you are using one constant
“where a Franchise QB leads to perennial success’, but the fact of the matter is that no matter how ’can’t miss’ a guy is Franchise QB’s come from everywhere.
Honestly my belief is that team’s ‘ruin’ guys by rushing them, or not giving them that supporting cast. That is a big reason why I’m against trading up. B/c we can’t give RGIII that supporting cast and you know full well we will rush him.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
That is a weak argument
You dont draft a guy cause he dont have the supporting cast?? or will be rushed into action. Most Top rated QB’s that are drafted high will go to a bad team that had no QB. A bad team that have no QB = QB playing without all the pieces around him. Peyton Manning aint have great pieces to work with and he threw like 28 picks his rookie year but they put pieces in place. As much as a lot of people want to claim the Giants had such a great roster when they trade up for Eli but that team stunk and went 4-12 but they got Eli and then got more pieces.
Let's talk about our Special Teams instead....
It doesn’t have to get to this level guys…really. We can discuss opinions without insults
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 8:59 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
how does adding 3 new starters improve the OL 'slightly'
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
How is that so?
You do realize there is still free agency right? And guess you cant draft a starter after the 1st 2 rounds either.
You can't build a winning team through Free agency
we’ve seen that firsthand for the last 10 years.
And just like with QBs, it’s a lot easier to find starters in the early rounds. Otherwise, I could argue we should just take a couple of late round QBs because “hey you can find starters in later rounds too”.
we both know it is a lot easier finding starters in the later rounds for all other positions besides QB
Most of the orginal Hogs was late rd picks or undrafted Free agents in fact they would have been UDFA’s now cause it is only 7 rounds in the draft, you can find guys later and develop them into starters.
There really is not talking to him.
I wouldnt waste my time on him if I were you. He thinks he is right and everyone else is wrong. its his right but dont waste you time on him.
The same can be said of you.
The difference is i don’t have a superiority complex while you clearly do.
i think its the opposite.
But as i said in the last post in this thread I wont waste my time on you. So please just move on.
Why don't you?
obviously you must have the last word. Why don’t you just call me a racist and insult my family while you’re at it.
So funny
How easy it is to get to people with small minds.
so you are willing to listen to things like facts and informed debate?
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
that is a real good reason, but it is cause there is a huge talent gap between
the top QB prospects and everyone else. there are exceptions to every rule but you can find quality starters in later rounds, not 1st year starters but a year or 2 in your program and they can develop into starters. like a Antonio pierce was a special teams guy until he got his chance and turned into a starter too bad we let him walk, or a Perry Riley a 4th rd guy played Special teams and with some development is now a solid starter
You're right
my mistake.
But it took Perry 2 years to get on the field. And not all late rounders will turn out as good as Perry. We may have just gotten lucky.
like i said i believe in the player development Shanny have in place
Polumbus, Hurt, Smith all got some good time at the end of the year, he got Royster good time and Chris Nield a 7th rounder time, something the team have lacked in past years
they are NOT suppose to be starter quality right now
you cant expect them to come in and be pro bowl caliber right away, but another year in the system and with coaches developing them and they may be starters this year or next
Polumbus is not a rookie
Hurt and smith need quite a bit of refining, they won’t be ready for at least 2 more years. Remember, people are saying exactly the same thing now about Smith and Hurt that they were saying about Cook and Capers last year. These late round picks rarely work out.
by TheDeepBall on Jan 28, 2012 10:05 PM EST up reply actions
that is not correct late Round picks do work out just not with the old FO
they can develop in the next year or 2 like i said, but you can get by with them, when San fran drafted Davis and Lupati struggled in 2010 butthe learned from the experience and was a lot better this season
by Highspeed30 on Jan 28, 2012 10:17 PM EST up reply actions
okay b/c we don't have those guys
do you really think that if Bostic, Jacoby etc. didn’t work out that Gibbs would have said oh don’t worry we can keep spending 9th rounders and it will work.
By that logic the pats should never draft a QB higher than the 6th round.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
my point is that you can find starters in later rounds
player development is very important, and the hogs did not get to be good cause they were the most talented cause if they was they would have been picked in earlier rounds they had the opportunity to be coached up and develop into a solid unit, sometimes the difference between the top lineman and the other guys is minor things like technique, getting low, getting stronger in offseason weight program, learnig the system, and most are overlooking that aspect and think you have to run out and replace everything, you are not going to fix everything at one time or even fill all of your holes, even if you have a ton of picks like New England do every year but they still have a lot of holes no #1 Wr, or RB, pass rusher de, LB, CB, and they have more picks than anybody every year
by Highspeed30 on Jan 29, 2012 10:14 AM EST up reply actions
oh course you can find starters in the later rounds
but you can’t count on that. We need to significantly increase our top level talent, and anything we get from the later rounds is gravy.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
The Best teams in the NFL
find and develop talent in later rounds of the draft. The Redskins are starting to do that this past year. It is not just by accident or gravy if your scouting dept does it’s job and coaches do what they need to do, the Strength and conditioning program do its job and the player develops in your program that is how New England, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Giants, etc remain competitive every year.
Victor Cruz UDFA
Antonio Brown 6th rd
Ike Taylor 4th rd
James Harrison UDFA
Chris Kemoeatu 6th rd
Brett Keisel 6th rd
William Gay 5th rd
Jameel McClain UDFA
BenJarvus Green-Ellis UDFA
Dan Connolly UDFA
Tom Brady 6th rd
Danny Woodhead UDFA
Julian Edelman 7th rd
Aaron Hernandez 4th rd
Kyle Arrington UDFA
Kyle Love UDFA
Jake Ballard UDFA
Chase Blackburn UDFA
Brandon Jacobs 4th rd
Ahmad Bradshaw 7th rd
David Diehl 5th rd
Chris Canty 4th rd
all these are starters and big contributers for there respective teams and that is who you win consistently home grown talent and developing talent in late rds
so, according to your premise...
we are only signing 2 FAs. With $40-$60 million in cap space? I pretty sure we are going to sign a few more than that.
You make a valid proposal, it is well thought out and reasonable. But, your assumption of our proposal is limited (I’m sure weighted to help make YOUR point), some may say biased. Trading up for RG3, filling some of our positions with FA, drafting depth in the lower rounds is a VALID proposal. You may not subscribe to it, which is your perogative, but still a valid one. Very soon, we will see which proposal our FO will implement.
well it depends:
1. All that cap space is only if they cut/restucture a number of players, which does increase some holes (I think it is for the best long term of the team)
2. It depends on who gets re-signed: If you sign Fletch and Davis only then you have some more cash. But if you bring back Fletch, Davis, Landry, Monty, Hightower, Licht, Carriker your available money goes down.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
You are Not Correct on my plan of Action
First and foremost the needs list should be adjusted cause some needs are not as urgent as others needs are Urgent QB,WR other needs CB,G,T,S not in any orderto a lesser degree LB. DE is not a need just drafted Jarvis Jenkins and may resign Carriker as well.
Robert Griffin III takes car of QB need
3rd pick WR, coupled with Hankerson and Free Agent takes care of WR
LG Grubbs/Nicks takes care of LG need
RG is already in place Chester
FA nickel CB with developmental player drafted in 4th/5th
that leaves RT,S, and lesser degree ILB.
I will draft a later rd T, and ILB to develop but i am ok with going into 2012 season with J.Brown, Polumbus, Smith, and resigning London, Fox behind him and a devlopmental guy, and Safety Atogwe is good at free and have to see what they do with Landry but there are options at SS FA’s
I can get 2/3 guysin FA with the money its gonna take to pick up Matt Flynn
you must be delusional
First off
First and foremost the needs list should be adjusted cause some needs are not as urgent as others needs are Urgent QB,WR other needs CB,G,T,S not in any orderto a lesser degree LB. DE is not a need just drafted Jarvis Jenkins and may resign Carriker as well.
I don’t think you understand just how awful the players at these positions are. You want to talk about Rex grossman being a backup QB?
Chris Chester was a backup in Baltimore, and he has shown why. He’s terrible.
Kory Lichtensteiger was not even on a team when we signed him. We literally picked him up off the streets!
Will Montgomery is a career backup. He was released by the panthers and jets before coming here, and now he’s starting.
J. Brown was traded to us by the saints because they were having issues from him and he wasn’t playing at a high level because of his injury. He has not played at his previous level since his injury.
DeAngelo Hall is routinely among the bottom 5 CBs in the league. This is a DESPERATE need. How many plays against Hall lost or almost lost a game for us? I can think of at least 3.
I said ILB will be an issue when Fletcher retires, it is not an immediate need.
Robert Griffin III takes car of QB need
At the cost of at least 3 high draft picks. And that’s a low estimate.
3rd pick WR, coupled with Hankerson and Free Agent takes care of WR
You think a pair of 3rd round picks, one a rookie, and one a first year player coming off injury who had one good game this season coupled with a FA who’s new to the system will solve our WR needs? haha, good one. You should do standup comedy for a living.
LG Grubbs/Nicks takes care of LG needSo you still need a C, RG, and RT.
RG is already in place Chester
I think I’ve already expressed how disgusting this is.
FA nickel CB with developmental player drafted in 4th/5th
A nickel CB won’t fix the fact that Hall is appallingly bad.
I will draft a later rd T, and ILB to develop but i am ok with going into 2012 season with J.Brown, Polumbus, Smith, and resigning London, Fox behind him and a devlopmental guy, and Safety Atogwe is good at free and have to see what they do with Landry but there are options at SS FA’s
That last paragraph literally made me throw up in my mouth a little. Are you kidding me? You’re OK with an aging, awful RT and a bunch of guys who were brutally abused in his relief as his depth? That’s practically laying down a doormat at the RT that says “Free sacks!” Atogwe and Landry both appear to be injury prone, so how good your starters are doesn’t matter if they’re never on the field or never at 100%.
One last thing. You suggested a Free Agent to fill a major need FOUR times! Have the last 10 years taught you nothing? And you’re OK with using career backups at other positions of need, even though they are the very reason it’s a position of need in the first place! That is absurd!
Show me a team that doesn't have holes
Your always going to have holes. No one is arguing that the team has holes. Those in favor of trading up see the opportunity to improve the most important position on the field with as little picks as possible. You suggest trading down, compiling picks and getting a QB next year but your not understanding that even if you get extra picks your probably going to have to use them and additional to move up farther. So the net result is a worse situation than this year with maybe 3 less holes than this year…with the most important still in need.
by Bryan Black on Jan 28, 2012 6:17 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
Bryan your %100 right.
I think the most frustrating thing with all this talk is everyones inability to see ANYTHING that doesnt support them. Everyone is smarter than everyone and everyone is right. You could walk outside and say its sunny and (especially the flynn and trade back people) would say its raining. I will at least give the trade up people for listening instead of trying to twist and change everything anyone says to support them.
like this…That last paragraph literally made me throw up in my mouth a little. Are you kidding me? You’re OK with an aging, awful RT and a bunch of guys who were brutally abused in his relief as his depth? That’s practically laying down a doormat at the RT that says "Free sacks!" Atogwe and Landry both appear to be injury prone, so how good your starters are doesn’t matter if they’re never on the field or never at 100%.
One last thing. You suggested a Free Agent to fill a major need FOUR times! Have the last 10 years taught you nothing? And you’re OK with using career backups at other positions of need, even though they are the very reason it’s a position of need in the first place! That is absurd!
by TheDeepBall on Jan 28, 2012 1:12 PM PST up reply actions
The arrogance and lack of critical thinking is what makes me throw up in my mouth. And most of those people probably bet their lives last year we would draft a QB. Because they are great NFL GM. Just nobody will give them a shot. Discussion is good but the arrogance of some is sad. TheDeepBall no need to respond I will not respond further to you. I know..unless we trade back or get Flynn we will always suck. We will have no talent anywhere. I know I know. As i put up before from Rich Tandler…..There is a lot of debate as to whether or not the Redskins should trade multiple draft picks to move up and take Robert Griffin III. To me, it’s not making one type of move (trading picks) or another (spending money) to solve a longstanding problem (lack of a franchise quarterback). It’s about making the smart move. The Giants usually hold on to their draft picks. But in 2004, the smart move was to trade away their 2005 first-round pick for as part of a deal for the rights to Eli Manning. That worked out for them. It is possible for the smart move to be trading away picks to get your man, especially if you need a quarterback. They saw the opportunity and grabbed it. Something similar may be the right move for the Redskins and it might not be, but being smart and not stuck in a rigid mode of thinking is the key.
if you were GM of the Giants they would still be looking for a QB.
I don't think its worth talking to you anyway you fucking elitist prick.
by TheDeepBall on Jan 28, 2012 7:57 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Children amuse me.
Show them how they are wrong and they start cussing and calling names. As I said above…please just move on.
You want to talk about arrogance?
Children amuse me.
This shit right here is arrogance. You don’t fucking know me. And for that matter who the fuck are you to show up on this site and start insulting people? Fuck off.
by TheDeepBall on Jan 28, 2012 8:00 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I can tell how you talk(or type)
That you are a child. Or your an adult with such a limited vocabulary that you feel the need to cuss to try and get a point across. And I KNOW you are not very intelligent.
For the last time.
I am an adult and done playing with children
Deepball- Agree with what
you say, but I dont think we will see a replacement for Chester next year- may happen in 2013
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
D'Angelo Hall is not "appallingly bad"
I’d put him as a solid CB, fiery competitor and team leader. It makes no sense to worry about CB when you have Hall and Wilson on the team. Safety would be in appallingly bad shape if Landry and Atogwe
Safety would be in appallingly bad shape if Landry and Atogwe
don’t get healthy. I’d hate to see us try to get through the year with Doughty and Gomes (not that they are bad, just more like backups).
I encourage you to read this article
http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/01/12/cornerbacks-a-glance-at-the-2011-numbers/
Deangleo is routinely one of the worst CBs in the league.
Really how many times are you gonna reference that article?
Form your own opinions and don’t base them on stats all of the time because stats can lie or not tell the whole story. Part of his issue is that he is used as if he is a shutdown corner and he’s not. He’s a gambler and not a true concern on this team, at the current moment. His position can be improved later, there are more pressing needs. Next year its gonna be “we gotta replace Orakpo because he doesn’t get the sacks” due to an article that was written that says he doesn’t get a lot of sacks. Big freaking deal what the article says, there is more to what effect he has than just a “sack” or a stat. I’m a numbers guy more than the next person mainly because of past employment but I know when and where to use them and especially in football they can be misleading.
by Bryan Black on Jan 29, 2012 11:37 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
he's one of our most expensive players so it is an issue
we either cut him this year or next year. No way we account for $15 million in cap room for that level of production.
The difference with guys like Orakpo is he’s not an all or nothing player. Hall is a gambler, and when he gambles right, great, but when he doesn’t we are screwed. Orakpo might not always get sacks, but he gets hits, pressures and has improved in areas like playing the run. That is why advanced stats matter and looking at interceptions is woefully inadequate.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
This shows how silly and unwilling to change some people are.
The Redskins 2012 QB situation
by TheDeepBall on Oct 30, 2011 4:36 PM PDT on Hogs Haven
Hey guys. For the last few weeks I’ve been saying we should pass on a QB, trade back a few times and instead draft linemen, linebackers, corners, and wide receivers in this upcoming draft. But this week our offense scored no touchdowns. No points at all. John Beck even managed to fumble it once without being touched at all. And you know what?
I still stand by what I said.
Since you know me.
What do I think we should do?
I never said I know you.
But you get in here spewing your vitriol over the internet, you’ve already deeply insulted someone else and destroyed your credibility claiming they’re a racist because you had no rebuttal. then you told me you wouldn’t talk to me and then proceeded to insult me some more, thinking just because you told me not to reply you would have the last word.
You see, people like you make me lose faith in humanity. Someone who cannot have an intellectual discussion without blatantly insulting their opponent. You are wither a troll or a waste of a human being. Please remove yourself from the gene pool.
lmao...i think i am just gonna do all i can to annoy you every day. You see when you act like a child
people find amusement in how easy it is to get you upset. A bad temper is another indication of a lack of intelligence.
Consider this a warning. If this continues on another post bans will be issued. As another commenter mentioned, this is football. No reason for things to personal or vicious, especially with kids.
"Marge, it takes two to lie. One to lie and one to listen." --Homer Simpson
Follow @HogsHaven
by Kevin Ewoldt on Jan 29, 2012 10:18 AM EST up reply actions
Good work, Kevin
We don’t need the nasty stuff
Sorry for dragging you into this DB
& altho I am well able to fight my own fights, I want to thank you for your statements above. Altho we disagree on this whole trade up/trade down strategy I have to say that I have enormous respect for a man who is willing to take a stand & call out an A-hole when he sees one
Hey, no problem.
Whether we agree or disagree with each other, we’re all friends here so when someone comes in and starts spewing garbage like that it shouldn’t be tolerated.
by TheDeepBall on Jan 28, 2012 11:29 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Not really a surprise
It really only takes someone who is dedicated to the destruction of something to make things unbearable and push otherwise reasonable people over the edge… this was his intention the entire time
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
by Skins Fan '77 on Jan 29, 2012 10:31 AM EST up reply actions
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
- 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
