Are we Really Mortgaging the future with a trade up for RG3?
by Highspeed30 on Feb 13, 2012 6:55 PM EST
Email
Print
The one thing i keep hearing over and over again in reference to a trade up for Robert Griffin III is that if the Redskins trade up that they will not have any draft picks over the next 2 years or that pulling the trigger on a trade will mortgage the future and that this team is NOT in a position to make a trade for Robert Griffin III. It is debatable for what exactly it will cost in draft picks to trade up to the #2 spot with St. Louis but a lot will be uncovered after free agency. With Peyton Manning and Matt Flynn due to fill the needs at QB for a couple teams the market will surely change after free agency..
So just for this post I am going to use this trade scenario for acquiring Robert Griffin III and i think the trade will be close to this one. Redskins send 2012 1st rd, 2nd rd and 2013 1st rd, and 4th rd to St Louis in exchange for the 2nd pick in the draft. This move leave the Redskins with 2012 3rd, 4th,4th, 5th, 6th,7th. I think most of us would agree that Shanahan and Allen had a pretty good draft last year with getting 12 drafted players most of which contributed in some kinda way last season. The results of last years draft should ease any anxiety with trading up cause they have shown that they can find some nice players in the mid-later part of the draft. So this is what a draft could look like if they traded up for Robert Griffin III.
1st Rd QB Robert Griffin III 6'2" 220lbs Baylor
2nd rd traded pick to St. Louis
3rd rd WR Brian Quick 6'3" 222lbs Appalachian State: A big body with good hands, will fight for the ball in jump ball situations, good speed for size has a high ceiling could be a future #1 WR (Brandon Marshall)
4th rd T Andrew Datko 6'6" 310lbs Florida State: has good feet and is quick,able to get to the second level of the defense
4th rd WR T.Y. Hilton 5'10" 185 lbs Florida International : Has exceptional 4.3 speed, change of direction and elusiveness run after the catch type, good hands and great KR/PR ability (Steve Smith type)
5th rd CB Donnie Fletcher 6'0" 201 lbs Boston College:nice skill set with a combination of ideal size and quality speed, very good tackler in run support
6th rd C David Molk 6'2" 290lbs Michigan:a fast and mobile blocker who did a good job of opening up holes, fit the zone blocking Scheme undersized
7th rd ILB Adrien Cole 5'11" 250 lbs Louisiana Tech:is a physical, in-the-box defender who projects to an inside linebacker in a 3-4, could learn and play special teams
Now i realize that some of these guys might not be there when the Redskins pick but there are a couple guys i would target in each round
3rd/4th round targets : WR Marvin McNutt Iowa, TE Ladarius Green Lafayette, T Mitchell Schwarts Cal, WR Jeff Fuller Texas A&M, WR A.J. Jenkins Illinois, CB Josh Norman Coastal Carolina, CB Dwight Bentley Lafayette, CB Casey Hayward Vanderbilt, T Brandon Mosely Auburn, T Nate Potter Boise State, S Markelle Martin Oklahoma State,S Antonio Allen South Carolina, G Senio Kelemete Washington, G Lucas Nix Pitt, WR Juron Criner Arizona
So if the Redskins can get RG3 and some of these guys in the mid-late rounds i think it will make the overall team better without "Mortgaging the Future" I am sure Shanahan and Allen can find talent like they did last year. All of this is without filling some needs with Free Agency.
133 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
That sounds nice, but it assumes a ton
1. the price of RGIII pick could go up not down after Flynn/Manning sign. Theoretically that should decrease the suitors and consequently the price tag. But there are still more suitors than QB’s so there will still be competition. Even if you assume that secondary QB needy teams like the Chiefs and Jets fill their need with 2nd tier FA’s (lets say Orton and Campbell), Manning and Flynn only fill 2 of the 4 teams (Skins, Browns, Seahawks and Dolphins) need at QB.
This will mean that the two teams left without a QB, both could be desperate to get the last QB that most people associate with ‘filling the need’. So lets say the Dolphins and Skins are left without a QB. Miami could get desperate and be willing to give up a crazy haul of picks/players. Which would in turn raise the price for the Redskins.
2. Those players you initially propose aren’t really likely to be there. You might get 1 or maybe two of those picks. Now in the additional ones you mentioned there are some fall back options, but it limits what the Redskins could do.
3. The real impact of the trade will be in 2013. Like it or not the Redskins aren’t expected to be much of a contender. While it is impossible to fully predict, and stranger things have happened, the Redskins are likely headed to another poor season (in terms of record). Between a far tougher schedule and esp. in your scenario with a rookie QB starting, you have to be prepared that you are giving up a top 10 pick.
That is a lot to give up, esp. when i think it will be for more than you are assuming.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Miami do worry me more than the Browns
But I feel Miami will be one of the teams to fill their QB needs in FA, I just dont see KC, Jets, or Seattle as teams that are in a serious need for a QB. I just think at the end of the day the trade will not be as much as most on here are saying. I dont believe the Browns will move up from #4 and the biggest threat is the dolphins which I believe they will land one of the QB’s Manning or Flynn.
I def think Miami is going to make a splash b/c they seem desperate
so if they miss on Manning then they might go all-in on RGIII even with the Flynn connection.
A team like KC maybe isn’t in serious need of a QB, but i could see them upgrading. Jets def. need a QB as Sanchez is really even worse than Grossman, when you figure in the talent around him. The good news for the Skins when it comes to the Jets is that they have a couple needs, and not a lot of cap room so trading picks is pretty risky. As for Seattle I def. think they need a QB. Jackson is slightly better than Grossman, but it is fairly close
Because of this, and the fact that you can never count out some surprise team (maybe Tampa with the new regime) getting in the mix as well. That is why I don’t really see the price dropping for Griffin.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Feb 13, 2012 11:27 PM EST up reply actions
The Jets are gonna ride it out with Sanchez at least 1 more season they just traded up for him in 2009
I dont think they are going to get rid of him after just 3 seasons, when 2 of them the team was in the AFC Championship game. He has gotten slightly better every year, and not worse than Grossman he threw for almost 3,500 yarsds and 26 tds, he threw 18 ints and his completion % is not great at 56.7 but they not gonna get another QB this year.
I think Seattle will either get a free agent or ride it out with Jackson for another year. And I would be thrilled to have Josh Freeman as my QB but i dont see them looking to get a QB they need a lot of help besides QB.
Also I dont think the proposed trade is cheap or lowball by any means i have seen where the Redskins would only have to give up 2 1st and a 3rd rd pick. i think the trade will be real close to 2 1st, 2nd, and 4th.
Agree
I just don’t think the Jets will give up on Sanchez yet. They also have problems on the Line (not as bad as ours) and WR is a problem. I could see them bringing in a Weeden via the draft or a Campbell in FA.
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 could see that as well
but no one really saw the Jags trading up for a QB this year, and if the Jets mistakenly think that RGIII will put them over the top they could look to make a big move. I wouldn’t do it in their shoes, but hell at least they are a playoff contender.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Mark Sanchez has been awful every year
in fact you could argue that he got worse this year. Yes his completion percentage rose slightly and his TD’s were up. But his INT’s (and turnovers in general) and sack percentage were up, while his yards per attempt was down. This being his 3rd year there are no more excuses to be made for him.
Here’s the thing, why do people assume the Seahawks would consider sticking with Jackson? His numbers weren’t much better than Grossman, and he cost more money.
As for Tampa that is a dark horse, but new coaches do usually mean new QB’s, and if they fall in love with Griffin, they could go for him and look to flip Freeman.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I wouldn't assume anything.....
But it wouldn’t surprise me at all if Carrol has his eyes on his boy from USC.
"Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say."-Robert Hunter
he could, but if he believes Barkley will go first next year, he could be impossible to trade up for
I agree nothing should be assumed, which is why eliminating teams from the QB hunt this year is a bad idea
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I still think Manning is the wild card here.....
Seriously, how can you not look at this guy? I have no question that the Mannings, in general, understand how to take care of their bodies from the inside out. I believe this bodes well for his recovery. I do take stock in some of the explanations provided here regarding his injury. (much appreciation guys) and it doesn’t seem like the big hit is the concern, more the regeneration of the nerve……which of course affects everything from his arm strength to reaction time. But if he works out well I am more and more on board with Manning/Foles or Tannehill.
"Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say."-Robert Hunter
i agree you look, but for the Skins I'd say Manning is probably too risky
and i hate saying that b/c i’m a huge Peyton Manning fan
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I like it
Anything to get a QB it’s been to long we deserve a quality team here enough of the BS just get the job done Shannahan doesn’t have the future to look forward to.If griffin checks out Then go get our damn QB and then all the other chumps after. HTTR FOR ETERNITY
I hope he comes that cheap
I want Rg3 to be a redskin but not for some crazy deal. and honestly the fact that you can only sign rookies to 4 year deals should actually bring the price down.Who’s going to give up 3 first round picks for a player you can only sign for 4
two 1sts, a 2nd and a 4th isn't cheap
but then getting a QB isn’t going to be cheap no matter what we do.
Personally I just hope Shanahan and Allen find us a good QB and we don’t get stuck with another bust.
It is cheap
Compared to what the trade will actually cost.
by tuckwell on Feb 14, 2012 12:53 PM EST via iPhone app up reply actions
I appreciate your continued efforts to lay out how trading up will not torpedo our future...
and you’ve given a detailed forcast of some picks we may select.
Most important, though, is that we would still have 6 selections in this years draft. Who we pick is left for another debate. Simply put, trading up does not cost us our future. We still would possess picks, which we can trade up or down in day 3 of the draft this year.
What the FO determines to be those picks is where you determine if their scouting department is as good as we need. They did a great job last year; perhaps more hidden gems can be found in the later rounds.
A new week, and another rerun post with a different title
How about just putting up a poll every week with a yes or no choice?
Until the combine, and free agency, there really is nothing more to discuss on the subject
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
And yet....
We all keep coming back, hoping for something to discuss.
This is not a rerun post
this is for all of you people who say the Redskins are not in a position to make a trade or they will be mortgaging the future by making this trade. It show that you can add some talent and depth to this team this season and they wont have to wait til 2014 like some people have said. There is a lot of nice talented players to be had in the mid-late rounds.
You are 10 for 10 on posts having to do with drafting Robert Griffin
All in a little less than a month or so…
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
by Skins Fan '77 on Feb 14, 2012 2:13 PM EST up reply actions
go back and read them again then maybe you will get the point
but that is still not accurate
Okay, 10 out of 10 having to do with quarterbacks
And 7/10 about trading in the draft for a quarterback
I don’t think I’ve missed the point, what I’m trying to point out is how superfluous this is all getting
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
by Skins Fan '77 on Feb 14, 2012 5:15 PM EST up reply actions
I have not even had 10 post
but i have seen plenty of other post talking about similar talking points, and i have seen some posts talking about totally unrealistic solutions to the Redskins QB problem but at the end of the day everybody got their own opinion
The archives are there for anyone to use
It is 10 posts
and here is a comment of yours that I read in your post over at the St. Louis site…
"Ok how about this
2012 1st #6 pick, 2nd and 4th, and 2013 1st and 4th"
So that is four premium selections that you said was a fair deal and then in this post you say it won’t be that much… which is it?
I suspect that the premise of this post is not very realistic
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
by Skins Fan '77 on Feb 14, 2012 5:34 PM EST up reply actions
I was referring to post that i put up on HH
which is not 10 but 7, and as far as a comment that i made to someone on the Turf show times site, i was responding to a trade offer that he made, but if you read the original post it was a trade offer very close to the one i put in this post. I also wrote a couple post on DBN the Browns site to get more info about their team and what direction their fans would like the team to go, and according to a poll i put up most Browns fans are NOT in favor of trading up for Griffin but their are a few that would
does that give you any pause that a fanbase that has a longer track record of futility and has lost even more games the last two seasons, and wouldn't have to give up nearly as much is opposed to trading up?
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
there position is totally different from the Redskins position
I just think that their overall team position and draft position is different which make more sense to stay put at #4. they have so many more options than the Redskins do
yes they could 'risk' it but the Browns know that barring something extraordinary to get RGIII they'd need to trade up
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Feb 14, 2012 11:39 PM EST up reply actions
Can’t imagine Datko, Molk, and Fletcher lasting till the 4th, 5th, and 6th rds
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 gave a list of 15 other potential players that can be picked if they are not available but
Molk especially will most likely be there cause he is a undersized zone blocking Center, not a lot of teams run a ZB system, Donnie Fletcher is a 4-5 round projected pick the 22 best CB prospect. Datko is projected 4-6 rd projected pick because he did have som injuries this season but there is plenty of players to choose from that can help the Skins out cause i keep hearing about all these holes the team has.
Your plan assumes high success with mid & late round picks
that is the fatal flaw.
Shanny had a nice draft last year, but let’s not pretend any of the mid/late players seem on the fast track to being All Pros.
It doesn’t matter who is making your picks, 1st & 2nd round are way more valuable than late round picks. That is why trading two drafts worth of high picks for one player is so risky.
Atlanta did it last year, and it would cost us even more this year.
"By far the worst performers on the (R*dskins) are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
Nobody is saying that 1st and 2nd rd picks are not more valuable
but having a Franchise QB is more valuable than filling 2 or 3 positions on your team. And in this case you would still be getting a 1st rd pick in Robert Griffin III at the position with the most impact QB, but you will miss out on a 2nd rd pick this year but you still have plenty of picks to make moves and improve the team this year.
but next year it significantly impacts your draft, esp. if that 4th, becomes next year's 2nd or 3rd
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
but you still have to consider the FA signings this year and next
I am just pointing out the a trade up can be made without setting the team back, the young guys you got in this years draft plus 6/7 more drafted guys in this years draft will help to continue the development process. And if you add 4 or 5 quality Free Agents in each year that is more than enough to make up for 2 draft picks in 2013.
i am considering free agency.
If you are trading away those premium picks then you will need to spread your money out over more players. Not that the Skins can just get the pick of the FA liter as it stands, but it lessens the ability to sign any of the top guys.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
when has payroll ever prevented Danny from signing the guys he wants to?
the NFL Cap is largely fictional, there are always ways to sign whomever you want
Also Redskins fans have not learned their lesson on how to use FA properly
I personally dont want all the “top guys” cause most of the “top guys” the Redskins bring in do NOT work out, i am not going to list the countless FA Big names that did not do anything for the Redskins but everyone knows. And i said 4/5 FA per year that is not a lot of guys. Like I said at the end of the day it is still only 2 picks in 2013 even if one of them is a premium pick at least top 15 pick in 2013. but the difference can be made up in a couple of mid level type free agents, and by no means am i suggesting you build team through FA. But the pick wont be missed as much with knowing that you filled the QB position for possibly 10 plus years and every draft after that you wont have to focus on trying to acquire a QB or hoping somebody fall to you you can have some stability
its def. not ficitional, but there are ways to move cost around
but you end up paying at some point.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
THIS is the kind of logic that makes me shudder when discussing trading away our draft picks
Let’s just go back to the way of doing business that has put us in the cellar for 10+ years
by StephanHart on Feb 15, 2012 12:18 PM EST up reply actions
exactly
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
This is completely different.
It’s not like we’re throwing away picks for an aging pro-bowler. This man is a potential 10-15 year answer at the most important position in the game. I believe you can make that up over your supposed “10 year cellar”. Cerrato is no longer calling the shots. It’s time to quit being scared an do something that will most likely prove worthwhile?
Why would you want to maintain mediocre QB’s for the next 10 years. Because your too much of a coward to take a risk? Yes, there are a few teams that win the SB with a mediocre QB, but are those teams dynasties? NO. It’s one n done with another 5 years of doing nothing but making a possible playoff.
You equate bad decisions made in the past with the staff we have now. They are not all the same people. Especially the main decision makers.
In Stephan’s sarcastic remark, it would seem that you want to travel down the road of mediocrity for the next 10 seasons by having QB’s such as Grossman, Flynn, Orton, or an aging Manning that might give us a good playoff run but nothing more.
I dont care about winning immediately. I care about building a team for the future and that starts with a franchise QB. This is our best chance to get one. If we somehow have a decent record next year and we didn’t get RG3 what are we going to do? Who’s to say Barkley will be for sale or that the others won’t get injured or bust this year? Will you refuse to “mortgage the future” again next year? When will it be time?
There will always be holes on a team. None of them are perfect. You can fill some needs in the draft with 16 picks (if you had them) but not all of them will work out just because the majority did last year. Again, this is the best chance at a franchise QB that could be an elite in the NFL. Why pass up the opportunity? If it’s risky to sign RG3, it’s also risky to sign Claiborne, Reiff, Blackmon, or whoever else you had in mind.
why would not trading up maintain 'mediocre QB's for the next 10 years'?
Is RGIII the last great QB?
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
What i'm saying is that if you aren't willing to trade up now
when will you be willing to trade up? Trading up next season may be more expensive. When is the decisive time to strike? In two, three, four years? When all of our rookie class becomes stellar and demands contracts too big for us to pay for? Then the holes return once more.
I’m just saying there isn’t much difference in trading up now then next year. There will always be needs, but there won’t always be a QB that matches our scheme and it may not be as cheap next time.
why do they have to trade up?
plenty of great QB’s were found in the mid or late part of the first, or in other rounds.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Why are you so dead set against getting a talent
like RG3? He is 10x the prospects of any other QB in the draft. A QB like him is worth more than a Claiborne or Reiff or Blackmon. Who all three we could definitely find comparable talent in the later rounds. Unlike QB. There is no comparable talent in the 2-7th rounds.
really?
no comparable talent in round 2-7? that has to be joke. Sure no one is truly ‘comparable’, but no LT prospect is comparable to Reiff that you’d find in those rounds as well.
RGIII is not 10x the prospect of Tannehill or Weeden, and probably not Foles, Cousins or Osewelier either. He might be better, but the gap is not nearly what you make it out to be.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
When the Redskins have had several years worth of solid drafts in a row
when will you be willing to trade up?
having a Franchise QB is more valuable than filling 2 or 3 positions on your team. And in this case you would still be getting a 1st rd pick in Robert Griffin III at the position with the most impact QB, but you will miss out on a 2nd rd pick this year but you still have plenty of picks to make moves and improve the team this year.
You will also miss out on a 1st and 2nd round pick next year.
Whether a gamble on a franchise QB (all draft picks are gambles) is worth drafting 2-3 other players who are likely to start for a rebuilding team is the central question.
"By far the worst performers on the (R*dskins) are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
Well if the Giants had a choice to take JPP, Justin Tuck and Manningham or Eli Manning
i am guessing they would take Eli Manning and look to replace the others. Or the Packer would take Aaron Rodgers over Clay Matthews, Jordy Nelson, and BJ Raji.
But the point is that the Giants and the Packers had great players on their teams, were able to get their QB's, and still have plenty of amo to keep building with great players
The Redskins do not meet this same classification. I have a post I’m creating on this subject. Just getting my research together and writing it up, hopefully posting this weekend.
Stop making the Giants out to be full of great players when they acquired Eli
they was 4-12 with the 4th overall pick in the draft, so they did NOT have all these great players you talking about. But my point is if everyone keep saying that it is not worth it to give up 3 starters for 1 player i just beg to differ cause both the Giants and the Packers would choose their QB’s over those 3 players and that go for the Patriots, Saints, Lions, and any other team with a very good QB. cause it is easier to replace those other guys but the difference between a very good QB and a average QB is a huge difference not as huge for other positions
And they went 6-10 in 2004 when they got Eli Manning
so all that great talent they had still only produced 10-21 record in those 2 seasons. But like I said you not going to take 3 position players over A very Good QB.
Eli didn't start the first 9 or 10 games that season, why b/c the Giants wanted to develop him some
so are you prepared for the Skins to sit Griffin?
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I am just stating that the Giants did not have all this "Great talent"
already in place to justify a trade up for Eli, I know that Warner started the season for them.
i would agree that they didn't have 'great talent'
but i do think they had more than what the Redskins currently have. Now obviously free agency is an area where they could close that gap. But again the Giants got Eli at a reduced rate, that isn’t the case here for Griffin.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
The real problem is you aren't comparing 'A very Good QB' you are using the elite QB's as an example
Also you are using them after they have established that elite status. For Manning it really wasn’t until that first SB run that he took his game to that top 10 level. Rodgers sat on the bench for 3 years before he started putting up huge numbers.
So not only would Griffin have to be a top 10 if not top 5 QB, but we’d have to be willing to wait 4 years for us to see that payoff.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
As you know every QB dont wait to play.
That is not the only way to develop a QB and in this situation i would expect Griffin to play right away, there are plenty of QB’s that play right away Manning, Ryan, Dalton, Newton, Flacco so it can work out either way. I dont expect a great record in year 1 with Griffin but in year 2 i expect a big improvement and year 3 in the playoffs competing for a SB
yes but the majority of 1st round QB's don't succeed if they start right away
you basically named the only ones who did in the last 15 years with the exception of Big Ben.
Griffin might hold his own, but that doesn’t mean he should be playing or that he will definitely take his game to the next level.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
you mean in there first year they might not be sucessful
I am not expecting a Cam Newton or Peyton Manning type 1st year. I just want him to get the lumps out of the way and learn how Shanny want him to play QB
no i mean the majority of QB's that start day one (or early on) don't end up successful
Even someone like Stafford, who started day 1 has actually sat more than he played in the first two years due to injury. It might have been a blessing for him, b/c he looked light years better than he did the previous two seasons.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
But we’re not drafting a top-6 (or top 10) QB
We’re drafting an unknown rookie.
The risk of drafting is central why using so many picks on one player is so risky.
Well if the Giants had a choice to take JPP, Justin Tuck and Manningham or Eli Manning
i am guessing they would take Eli Manning and look to replace the others. Or the Packer would take Aaron Rodgers over Clay Matthews, Jordy Nelson, and BJ Raji.
"By far the worst performers on the (R*dskins) are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
that is not the point cause at one point those QB's was drafted as well
and they was picked cause of the potential that they had. nobody can realistically say they would take 3 very good position players over a very good QB. Also those 3 extra picks are on the same level of uncertainty as a Griffin III, they too are not a lock to turn out to be starters, but Griffin’s potential to be a very good QB is what justify a trade of 3 possible starters at other positions.
And we are also not drafting players that are pro bowlers like JPP,Tuck, Matthews or Raji. We dont know what these players will turn out to be 1 might pan out of the 3 picks or 2 or none
by Highspeed30 on Feb 16, 2012 10:24 AM EST up reply actions
Precisely why 3 draft picks is better than 1.
those 3 extra picks are on the same level of uncertainty as a Griffin III,
And btw, RGIII will probably cost 4 great picks (two firsts & two seconds)
"By far the worst performers on the (R*dskins) are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
The point is if after 5 years in the NFL and Griffin is a top 10 QB
whatever level those players reach will not exceed what he would be worth to the Redskins. even if all 3 guys was pro bowlers. But it is not likely that all 3 are pro bowlers but if they was to reach their max potential and RG3 reaches his max potential there is not a comparison to which you would take.
And it is not a higher level of certainty the Redskins have flat out missed on plenty of 1st and 2nd rd picks 1st rdBobby Wilson, 1st rd Desmond Howard, 2nd rd Shane Collins,2nd rd Reggie Brooks,1st rd Heath Shuler,1st rd Michael Westbrook,1st rd Andre Johnson,1st rd Kenard Lang, 2nd rd Greg Jones,2nd rd Stephen Alexander, 1st rd Rod Gardner, 1st Patrick Ramsey, 2nd rd Taylor Jacobs, 1st rd Jason Campbell, 2nd rd Devin Thomas, 2nd rd Malcolm Kelly
i would hardly call Kenard Lang a miss, but as to your point
yes their are busts no matter the position (though as you highlighted WR is even more of a risk than QB), but QB is one of the worst.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Lang did not live up to his draft spot
his best season he had 7 sacks, and only played 4 seasons for the team but my point is those picks you would use to get Griffin are not locks to be starters or fill any holes
Lang actually played 5 seasons
and he wasn’t brought into be a sack artist. He was a LE who’s top responsibility is run defense, where he excelled. The pressure that he generated was a bonus. I’m not trying to say he was great, but he was far from a bust.
and our point is Griffin is not the following: A lock to succeed, a lock to be a top 10 QB, or a lock to start early in his career.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
the same can be said for the guys that would be picked with the picks given up for Griffin
But if those picks do pan out and turn into pro bowlers and Griffin is just a top 10-15 type Qb it would be worth the investment
The point is if
Again, the fundamental flaw in your argument that using 3-4 picks on one players isn’t "mortgaging the future.
And it is not a higher level of certainty the Redskins have flat out missed on plenty of 1st and 2nd rd picks 1st rd
No, it actually is true. Objectively. Mathematically.
4 chances are better than 1 chance.
Sorry.
"By far the worst performers on the (R*dskins) are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
but when you look at the history in the last decade they have been right with all their high round picks
to me is more about quality than quantity, just cause you have more dont mean that it is better. 3 2nd round picks are not better than the 1st or 2nd overall pick.
What does who they drafted in 2004 or 2009 have to do with who Shanahan is drafting today?
Nothing.
You can argue a QB prospect is worth four picks, but you can’t argue that the chances are just as good to get good players if you draft 1 instead of 4.
"By far the worst performers on the (R*dskins) are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
smutsboy1, A link that is off topic, but inline with the theme of early round picks and NFL success -
http://pick256.wordpress.com/. Use “Beyond The Rookie Contract: The 2007 2nd Round Draftees” in the find feature.
by Jefferson1935 on Feb 20, 2012 12:46 PM EST up reply actions
Interesting commentary on the '07 draft
at some point I want to look at second round picks over the course of a decade.
"By far the worst performers on the (R*dskins) are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
this is another post
that makes the assumption that it will take only that to beat out the browns ? what happens if the brown add another 1st rounder to what you just proposed ? or a 2nd ?
now under your scenario i can see us jumping all over that but at this time i dont see your scenario as coming true
We need to use the Falcons trade from last year as a baseline
they gave up their entire draft to move up to 6th for a WR
We want to move up to 2 for a QB – it will cost us more.
"By far the worst performers on the (R*dskins) are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
not sure about that didn't they move up from like 28th?
28th to 6th would cost more in my opinion than 6th to 2.
Obviously it all depends on the demand and whether or not another team will be trying to get him. But one thing I’ll say about the browns is they have more firepower but they also have less need, I think they’re more willing to stick with McCoy than we are to stick with Rex. That said if RGIII drops to them I could see them taking him, but I don’t think they’d give up much of anything to move up for him.
say it with me:
A-one two three, a-one two three. Got a catchy rhythm yeah? That’s the beat we’ll have to dance to if we want to trade up. A one two three this year and another one two three next year. Rams want Kalil; if we don’t give them what they want, they’ll be happy to sit tight and make the pick.
by tuckwell on Feb 14, 2012 12:57 PM EST via iPhone app up reply actions
Nobody will pay a 1,2,3 in both 2012 and 2103
that trade is better than the Ricky Williams deal 6 high picks, the Redskins only got 4 high picks in that trade, NOT going to happen
yes but your premise is that a franchise QB is more valuable
I don’t think it will be 1st, 2nd, 3rd in both years, but possibly pretty close.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Knowledge of draft trends and NFL GM tendencies?
Yeah. I don’t have to read something in a paper or on a blog to make conclusions. That’s MY intellectual property. I think it’s going to take that much to move up to number two. Granted, it’s entirely possible it won’t be quite that severe, but I’m betting it will be much closer to my supposition than the one posted in this thread. The trade suggested (swap firsts in 2012, trade 2012 2nd and 2013 1st) is actually somewhat laughable. Any NFL GM that can’t get more than that for this pick for this player isn’t worthy of running a small-town pawn shop, much less a massive sports club.
If they try to get too much they wont get a trade.
The trade that i suggested is overvalue for the 2nd pick. But if the Rams do ask for that type of compensation then they will still be picking at number 2 cause the Browns wont be making that trade to move up 2 spots and Washington aint gonna make that trade or Miami cause anybody that would make that type of trade would not have a job very long, i think you are putting too much value on that pick. so that would mean the Vikings have the chance to make the deal that the Rams aint want to make
here's the thing though the Browns don't have to give near as much
If cleveland gives both firsts this year that basically has more value than our 1st and 2nd this year, and 1st and 4th next year. Esp. since the Rams will be guaranteed one of Kalil/Blackmon/Claiborne (actually two of them will be there).
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I am not arguing about if the Browns can offer more
I am just stating that nobody will pay 1,2,3 in both 2012 and 2013. Like I been saying i dont think the Browns are going to move up, and i dont agree that that would be a better trade or more value, i understand that a next year pick is supposed to be a round lower in value this year but at the end of the day the value will come whether it is this year or next year. The 22nd pick the browns have this year will not be better than the 1st rd pick the Redskins will have next year at least a top 15 pick. Yes the Rams will have to wait til next year but i am sure that Jeff Fisher will find value in having 2 1st round picks next year cause i am sure they are looking to build for the long haul. And that top 15 pick next year will be worth more in actual value than the 22nd pick this year. But i think it is all mute cause the Browns wont be trading up anyway.
by Highspeed30 on Feb 15, 2012 10:32 AM EST up reply actions
your missing my point
the Browns wouldn’t have to come close to offering that given them having two first rounders this year, including the 4th overall. Maybe they do sign Flynn or something, but if Cleveland gets involved then the Skins would have to pay quite a bit to beat our the Browns offer.
And yes the Browns 22nd pick is more valuable than the Skins 1st rounder next year. I get your logic looking at the long haul and overall I tend to agree, but even for waiting a year the Rams would want to be compensated. The Redskins could contact every team with a pick from 20-32 and offer them our first next year straight up and they’d probably be turned down every time (since the Pats have two picks and our well established they might bite), anyone else would ask for at least our 3rd rounder this year to make that swap.
And from the Rams perspective while they are building for the long haul they can add two pieces around Bradford now, as opposed to waiting another year. Also while I agree the pick is likely a top 15 or even top 10 pick, stranger things have happened, and the Rams wouldn’t want to risk the Skins going on some crazy Denver Broncos run and making the playoffs, at least without being compensated. Finally, the Rams also know exactly who is available this year, which is a very strong and deep draft. With a record 65 juniors declaring next year’s senior class could be a bit thin (note-right now i still project it to be pretty solid, but it will depend on what juniors declare). The Rams could take a risk that the player they get at 14 or 15 next year is no better than who they can take at 22 this year.
So our first rounders the next two years are well below the value of the 4th and 22nd picks
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Feb 15, 2012 11:28 AM EST up reply actions
Not likely.
If your predictions of another dismal season is true then our 1st round pick in 2013 makes them prime candidates for a better than 22 they would have this year.
Why do you assume that their GM would want everything now? A high 1st round pick next year would be much more valuable than a 22nd this year given that so many “more elite QB’s” than RG3 would be available. The trade down out of that pick would be immensely valuable supposing they want to keep Bradford. Or they could use that pick to draft another “elite QB” that isn’t RG3.
Or are you implying that the browns would give 2 1sts this year and a 1st next year? Doesnt seem very plausible to me.
I only assume that Fisher will try to make his mark on this team
and for him having two first rounders this year would be preferable. Most teams don’t want to wait, especially when they are rebuilding.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I just disagree with you saying
That this years draft is that much more valuable than next years. We won’t know that till the season starts. Anything else is conjecture at this point. Of course the GM’s need that speculation but I think you’re trying to devalue an entire 1st round of picks for 2013. I don’t think you have the qualifications to do that IMO.
we won't know how valuable next year's draft is until next year's draft
that’s my point. This is one of the strongest drafts in the past 10 years, so next year’s would have to be pretty special to out class it.
how am i trying to devalue the pick? The pick itself is valued at a 2nd round level now according to GM’s, I just explained the why.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I still dont think if the Browns just offer both their 1st #4, #22 that it would get that deal done for them if
The Redskins are offering 1st, 2nd 2012, and 2013 1st and 3rd or 4th. That is 2 more picks than what the Browns would offer and i get that it is a 1st rd pick this year, but picks are picks and if you get a better 1st next year in addition to 2 more picks i think the Browns would have to throw another pick maybe this years 2nd or 3rd
I think the Browns might need to throw in a 3rd pick, but I don't think it will need to be a 2nd or 3rd rounder this year
my guess is one of their 4th rounders or possibly their 3rd next year.
Lets say the Redskins offer is 6th overall, 39th overall and 1st and 3rd next year
While that is 4 picks to the Browns 2 (i’ll ignore the 4th rounder for now), Cleveland is giving up the 4th and 22nd picks. So according to the chart (which again I’m not a huge fan of b/c I feel it is outdated and not fully applicable here) the Browns are giving up 1,800pts + 780= 2,580 pts. The Skins two picks this year equal 2,110 pts, meaning there is a 470 point difference, That is equal to the 11th overall pick in the 2nd round. Yes the Redskins are adding their 1st and 3rd next year, but there is a tax on those picks given all the unknowns.
Now that is just speaking in generalities, in reality the value of the 4th pick over the 6th pick is higher than the 200pt difference between the two. Even if it wasn’t for a QB the Browns would laugh in our face if we only offered 200 pts worth of picks to swap spots with them. And the 270 point difference between 22 and 39 usually costs teams more than that. Traditionally of late for teams wanting to move into the 20’s range, the cost was either a 2nd and 1st the following year, or a 2nd, 3rd and 4th rounder.
On top of all that you have the fact that the Rams would be guaranteed their choice (or ability to use as trade bait) two of the following players: Matt Kalil, Justin Blackmon, Morris Claiborne.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I am saying that at the end of the day after all the picks have been made that
the Redskins offer would eventually be greater than the Browns offer of their 2 1st rd picks, and like i said i understand the value chart and I think Fisher know that he aint gonna be able to get things turned around all this season and it would be nice to have some additional picks in next years draft, cause in year 2 it is much more important to a new coach cause he got to truly evaluate first hand what he got in terms of talent. And i dont think being able to still pick Blackmon, Kalil is a huge factor cause i think they are going to go LT and Reiff will still be there at 6, in fact they may have Reiff rated higher than Kalil anyway just like Shanny had TW rated higher than Okung
maybe the Rams do have Reiff rated higher
as I think they are pretty close, but there isn’t a guarantee that he is there at 6. Even if the board goes Luck, Griffin, any two of the Vikes, Browns and Bucs could go OT. It’s not as dire for the Browns or Bucs, but Cleveland could figure they get their WR at 22, and grab a great bookend tackle to Thomas. As for the Bucs they have either the most or 2nd most amount of Cap room (projected over $60 million, and could fix their CB need via free agency. At that point they can move Donald Penn to RT (where he’s a better fit) and draft whomever is left from Reiff/Kalil. Also you would have the possibility of teams trading up to 4 or 5 to land one of those tackles. If the Rams are at 4 they are guaranteed a tackle.
I get the quantity argument and it is fair (though again I think the Browns will have to add a 3rd pick, likely a 4th rounder), but the quality argument is in Cleveland’s favor. And the Browns could offer a 6th rounder each of the next two years to ‘even out’ the number of picks.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
no chance that a team is trading up for a T
teams dont trade up for Tackles especially not in the top 10, and there is about a 99% chance that the Browns do not get a RT with the 4th pick even if Kalil was still on the board they would not take him over say blackmon/richardson, and a really good chance Tampa dont take a T either. The only way Reiff will be a top 5 pick is if Rams take Kalil and Minny take Reiff. or if either Minny or Rams rate him better than Kalil.
by Highspeed30 on Feb 16, 2012 10:18 AM EST up reply actions
teams have traded up for an OT
but not in the top 10 recently.
"By far the worst performers on the (R*dskins) are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
What team traded in the top 10 for a T???
it dont happen.
It does happen, though not often
Ironically, I believe the last time it happened was the 2000draft, where the Redskins traded the 16th and 24th overall picks, plus a 4th and 5th to move up to #3 overall and select Chris Samuels
haha exactly
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
over the last 20 years there might be 2 or 3 QB's traded up for in the top 10 than OT's
so if people don’t trade up for OT’s based on history, than they don’t trade up for QB’s
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
49ers did it 3 years ago. Another team did it in the early 00’s forget who, then a team called the Washington Redskins did it to get some dude named Chris Sameuls.
What team traded in the top 10 for a T???
it dont happen.
"By far the worst performers on the (R*dskins) are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
Tremendous Example. 6 Time All Pro Chris Samuels, possibly the greatest Redskin ever.
by Belly Kilmer on Feb 18, 2012 1:27 PM EST up reply actions
I def. wouldn't take a bet that no one trades up for a tackle
just about every team in the league needs help at one or both tackle spots, and Kalil and Reiff are both elite and look to be a cut above anyone else.
The Browns and Bucs could look at other needs, but tackle is a priority and since it is not likely to be fixed in FA, it should be on their draft short list. With the new rookie scale those guys will be more affordable, so that way neither the Browns nor Bucs will be paying too much for their tackle position.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Feb 16, 2012 11:37 AM EST up reply actions
Neither of them will take a T
with or without the Rookie scale they will NOT take a T.
Even if Kalil is on the board and he is the 2nd best rated player the Browns wont take him they would go Claiborne or RIchardson before they go Kalil.
why would the Browns go Claiborne? they had one of the top pass defenses last year and just drafted Joe Haden
and RB can be filled in the 2nd, 3rd or 4th round
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I have mentioned previously...
the friendship between Fisher and Shanahan. In NO WAY have I ever inferred that their relationship gives Shanny an advantage. BUT, I do believe it gives him the communication level where he could ask Fisher to let him know what is the best deal being offered, giving Shanny a chance to best it.
We’ll see if Cleveland is interested AFTER FA, which will make it clearer what St. Louis’ compensation will be.
if Rams sit tight and draft Kalil
that could be better for us. Viking might want to trade down to get Reiff, and we would need even less to move up from 6 to 3.
by orakpophobia on Feb 14, 2012 3:57 PM EST up reply actions
Probably the most ridiculous statement that I've read...
by Bryan Black on Feb 19, 2012 9:30 AM EST via Android app up reply actions
Not really about beating out the Browns or anybody else
I am just showing that even with a trade for RG3 that the Redskins will still be able to add talent and depth to this team with the 6 other draft picks that they got. I think there are some real quality players out there in the mid rounds
Based on the trade chart, that is over fair value for 2nd
It’s a couple hundred points over the fair value difference from 6th to 2nd. PRobably about what you have to do assuming there is competitive bidding for the 2nd.
BUT, not only do you need to think RG3 is the second best player, you have to beleive he is halfway to being the first best player. If you really beleive that, fine, pull the trigger. If not, then don’t.
Personally, I don’t think he is the second best player. If you gifted me the St. Louis pick, I would take Kalil (assuming Luck did not drop).
In the scenario envisioned, I’d almost rather throw in the second next year and see if I could get the Colts pick and take Luck.
Forget the trade chart.
It no longer applies.
I think Luck and RG3 are closer than most people think in terms of being a Top Prospect
I would try to trade up for either one of them but I dont think the Colts are trading Luck. But overall i dont see a huge difference in quality of player between the 2. Luck is better at running a pro style offense but Stanford ran the ball a lot and had a great offensive line Decastro and Martin will both be top 15 picks. Robert Griffin III is better at improvising and making throws on the run with accuracy completing 72.4% of his passes. Luck is ahead of griffin as far as reading defenses but i think Griffin had a stronger arm and more accurate deep ball. Luck is bigger physically 6’4" 240 lbs but Griffin is more agile and elusive 6’2" 220lbs. I personally think that if Griffin hit his potential he will be a better QB than Luck but both should have good to great careers and both are worthy of being the #1 overall pick. I know you think RG3 is not the 2nd best player in the draft but if Luck was not in the Draft he would be the 1st overall pick hands down
You are way off base there
Andrew Luck is an exponentially higher prospect then Griffin… there is a huge drop off there
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
by Skins Fan '77 on Feb 14, 2012 2:01 PM EST up reply actions
That is your opinion
that is the fun of all this everyone has a opinion, we will all see in the years to come. I thought Donavon McNabb was a way better prospect than Tim Couch but he was picked 2nd behind Couch. But it is not as big a difference as most people think or assume, most are just saying Luck is the greatest cause what they heard not what they actually saw in his play and most people knew his name and he had a pretty good season most had him taking the heisman before the season but it did not work out like that RG3’s body of work at least make people think that Griffin should be the pick. but most likely no GM in the league would take him over Luck not because they dont think he will be better but cause they want to go the safe route and can say if Luck busted everyone had him as the best but there are some GM’s now who think RG3 is better.
Luck has more proven
If you go just off of last year, sure they are equivalent. But Luck has more data points. Also played against better defenses. Also played pro set. Also has the more classic physique. None of this says that he won’t bust or that some scrub in the later rounds won’t be the next Tom Brady. But betting wise, it makes more sense to evaluate Luck better because of the more than one season proof of ability.
Griffin has put together 3 seasons of good play and he progressed each season he just did not have the hype behind him, and Luck has played in a little better defeses against the Pac 10 but he also has more talent on his team, Baylor is not as talented as Stanford is overall but it is all subjective right now it will all play out in a few seasons.
Real World Example, Using Current Super Bowl Champion Giants and All Pro QB Eli Manning
The Giants are a smart team. They just won the Super Bowl. Let’s review their trade for their franchise QB. In truth, the Giants’ trade for Eli was more like a typical Redskins’ trade than a smart move. It hurt the Giants’ future.
The trade not only resulted in the Giants giving away the better of the two quarterbacks, it also resulted in the Giants giving away the additional picks the Chargers used to draft 2 Pro Bowlers, namely Shawne Merriman and Nate Kaeding.
If you had to choose between Eli and Philip Rivers to be the Redskins’ starting QB, which would you choose?
Here’s a comparison:
Rookie season
Eli 7 starts, 55 rating
Rivers 0 starts
Yr 2
Eli:16 starts, 76 rating
Rivers: 0 starts
Yr 3
Eli: 16 starts, 77 rating
Rivers: 16 starts, 92 rating, Pro Bowler
Yr 4
Eli: 16 starts, 74 rating
Rivers: 16 starts, 82 rating
Yr 5
Eli: 16 starts, 85 rating, Pro Bowler
Rivers: 16 starts,106 rating
Yr 6
Eli: 16 starts, 93 rating
Rivers: 16 starts, 104 rating, Pro Bowler
Yr 7
Eli: 16 starts, 85 rating.
Rivers: 16 starts, 102 rating, Pro Bowler
Yr 8
Eli: 16 starts, 93 rating, Pro Bowler
Rivers: 16 starts, 89 rating, Pro Bowler
No one was calling Eli a Franchise QB last season when he was turning the ball over 30 times, and no one was calling Eli “franchise” just a few weeks back.
Giving away top draft picks often means you deprive your team of major building blocks. Projecting college QBs’ NFL performance is fraught with error and costly mistakes. Snyder’s and Vinnie’s approach doesn’t work.
I would have to argue that you're wrong about your Eli premise
Eli has long been considered a franchise guy. It was only debated whether he was elite. I guess that, up until this year, most people would have rather taken Rivers over Manning, but now Eli has clearly surpassed Rivers.
That is the dumbest thing i have heard as a argument for whether to trade up or not.
First of all that is not a Vinny/Snyder approach cause they NEVER traded away picks to acquire a top QB prospect or a Top prospect period out of the draft, the closest they did to that was trading back into the Firs round for Patrick Ramsey 32 pick not the same thing, they traded away picks for older established and over the hill players not the same.
And secondly you left out the biggest comparison between the 2.
Eli Manning 2 Super Bowl and 2 Super Bowl MVP’s 8-3 playoff record
Phillip Rivers 0 Super Bowl appearances 3-4 playoff record
So I would take Eli Manning
I agree completely.
I agree completely, the team has everything to do with it. I admit once you put QB evaluations into that perspective, almost all QB comparisons, including mine, become practically worthless.
I was just trying to make the point that it’s very difficult to project each college QB’s NFL performance, and asking if the Giants truly gained by trading away picks plus Rivers to acquire Eli. Was I reaching?
by Belly Kilmer on Feb 17, 2012 6:02 PM EST up reply actions
Re: The Biggest Comparison
I do like your idea of building through youth. But I just can’t see building a great team by trading away your multiple high round draft picks for one player. You build a great team by continuously using those picks to acquire multiple players like Kerrigan, Jenkins, Hankerson, Helu, Riley and Orakpo, and acquiring more picks from organizations who mistakenly piss them away "reaching" for the stars.
Great teams create great QBs. Not the other way around. Just ask Sam Bradford.
Tom Brady is protected by 6 time all-pro guard Brian Waters, 4 time all-pro guard Logan Mankins, 3 time all-pro tackle Matt Light, rookie 2nd round tackle Nate Solder, young, 6-4, 311 pound center Daniel Connolly and all-pro tight end Rob Gronkowski. Tom throws the ball to 4 time All-Pro Wes Welker, current Pro Bowler Matt Slater, current Pro Bowler Rob Gronkowski and Deion Branch.
Giving away multiple picks for a savior IS the Danny and Vinnie way. The fact it’s a rookie only makes it riskier, even when the fans "just know" he’s "The One."
BTW, when the Giants lost to the Redskins 23-10, in a must-win game for the Giants, who were 7-7, with Eli throwing 0 TDs and 3 picks, do you honestly recall yourself calling Eli "franchise?"
by Belly Kilmer on Feb 16, 2012 6:39 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Brain Waters was a free agent signing, and Wes Welker was traded for, and Branch was traded back to the team. there is more than one way to build a team.
Eli Manning was money in the bank in the 4th qt, and played best in the most important games single game elimination, stats dont mean nothing if you cant get the job done in the playoffs.
Vinny and Danny mainly went after other people free agent stars, this is NOT that type of stratedgy. this is getting a young stud that you can grow your team around, that dont qualify as the Vinny way. remember they also traded back and had 3 2nd rd picks in Thomas, Kelly and Davis how did that work out?
The point he was making wasn't how those players came to New England
It was the fact that they’re there. Replace NE’s line and WRs with ours and Brady would look more like Sanchez.
Now, we can certainly use FA to bolster the team. I’ve been a big proponent of signing a primo veteran receiver and guard this year. However, FA does not a complete team build. You HAVE to continue to bring in fresh young CHEAP talent in the draft. The kind of talent we dont have much of, in fact. Giving away multiple potentially productive picks for only one potentially productive pick is bordering on lunacy.
by tuckwell on Feb 17, 2012 2:24 PM EST via iPhone app up reply actions
First off if Brady was the QB for washington last year they would have won min 10 games
and the players he named was not all draft picks was my point. the bottom line is the Redskins have NOT had a QB to play at a consistent level in over 20 years so how can you effectively evaluate the WR’s , Rb’s or O-line?? you cant cause the Qb is not up to par to make those proper evaluations.
Re: Stats don't mean nothing.
Agreed, Highspeed, statistics are no substitute for judgement.
If we only look at victories your “single game elimination” evaluation of QBs means you credit Roethlisberger, rather than his team, for their ‘05-’06 Super Bowl victory. (Ben threw 0 TDs, 2 interceptions and only completed 9 passes all day in that victory.)
(Ben followed that Super Bowl winning performance by turning the ball over 28 times the very next season.)
By your logic would you consider Doug Williams’ Redskins career better than Sonny’s?
by Belly Kilmer on Feb 17, 2012 6:31 PM EST up reply actions
I'm really starting to like Russell Wilson
The only bad thing you can say about him is his height. I think he might be a steal in the middle rounds. I might have to back off this RG3 or no one business.
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
