Huge News: Redskins trade with Rams, will have #2 pick in draft

[PatsFan24]

Manning would not want to go the Redskins. He would have to face his brother twice a year and play for a team that is not very good. He wants to win now. Plus that NFC East has some NASTY pass rushers. Can you imagine how bad Manning would look in that Redskins jersey? It would be as awkward as when Jerry Rice played for the Seahawks. Some things just don't go together.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Actually I am the one looking at the big picture, you think that fan excitement over drafting an unproven rookie is the big picture?
How about building a winning team?
The team you described (which is overly exaggerated negatively btw) is devoid of players. Trading their next 3 #1 picks plus a 2 to get one guy is foolhardy.

I fully embrace the concept of team building but when you are in a division of playmaking QBs that are perennial playoff contenders, you need to be bold. I may have been a tad harsh in my evaluation of the 'Skins as their D is decent and they do have a few folks on offense that can make plays an a O-Line that is decent but by acquiring a playmaking QB instantaneously makes them competitive.

Last year the Browns were in the #6 slot.
For the picks the Rams will have they would have gotte
Julio Jones (the 6th pick)
Andrew Dalton (with their 2nd)
Jaball Sheard (Clevelands 2nd)
and couldpick Justin Blackmon with this years 1 in trade
and still have a 1 next year

All good players. No doubt.

Are you seriously telling me you would not trade Cam Newton for
Dalton, Jones AND Blackmon plus still have a 2nd round DL and next years 1 also?

THAT is the trade the Redskins just made using last years draft.
If you would rather have Newton than all those players there is no point discussing this further.

I embrace both approaches to team-building. I embrace the Pat's approach (stockpile picks and hope to hit on them) but I also embrace being bold and acquiring a franchise player that is an elite talent.

If Cam Newton and RGIII evolve into Pro-Bowlers that lead their teams to the playoffs annually and appear in the Super Bowl, I consider the cost worth it. I compare it to the 04 Rivers/Manning trade. Giants got Manning and the Chargers got Rivers, Merriman and Kaeding. From 2004-2006, Chargers win. 2007-Present, Giants win- easily.

Wait, you think there are 20 NFL teams that would trade their QB and their next 3 1s for Cam Newton? Can I get some of what you are smoking?

My bad. 11 on the high side but I think it's a solid 8 teams that would starve for RGIII/Newton

Here is my list
Browns
Raiders
Titans
JAX (maybe not actually)
Vikings
Bucs
Seahawks
Broncos
'Skins
Dolphins
Cards

 

[RobertWeathers]

Dude, its the Bleacher Report. The Bleacher Report is a bunch of fans writing articles.
And you first said it was a toss up, now you cite a fan writing an article about combine workouts to say there isnt a major gap? There is a gap as wide as the Grand Canyon. You could not find a single qualified NFL executive who would take Griffin over Luck. Luck is unanimously considered a once in a generation propsect, while Griffin wasn't even on the radar before having a good year.

Tossup, not a major gap..whatever. Luck is the more experienced prospect than RGIII but it does not unequivocally mean he will be the better pro. Don't agree on your assessment on the gap. I've read other reports besides this one that have a similar assessment. FYI RGIII was a semi-finalist for the Maxwell Award in 2010. Thats hardly coming out of nowhere. Heisman boosters and the NFL already knew who he was.

Leaf was closer to Manning and Mirer closer to Bledsoe that Griffin is to Luck in terms of the decision of who to draft. Hell Rodgers was closer to Smith and he dropped to 24th or so,

...and the Colts picked Manning because they liked his maturity and intangibles more than Leaf's physical superiority. Wheras Parcells liked Bledsoe's physical upside over Mirer's experience.

My point- Both schools of thought are successful.

 

[Ring 6]

Tossup, not a major gap..whatever. Luck is the more experienced prospect than RGIII but it does not unequivocally mean he will be the better pro.

Huh? When was the conversation about who will turn out better? Its possible neither will be the best QB of this draft. We were discussing who is considered a better prospect and more likely to be picked first.
I said it was no contest you said its almost a toss up.

Don't agree on your assessment on the gap. I've read other reports besides this one that have a similar assessment.

Please certainly show me one that isn't the Bleacher Report, so you can have any credibilty to there being a source that calls them equal. By the way, even that one didn't it was a fan article about how they did in combine workouts.

FYI RGIII was a semi-finalist for the Maxwell Award in 2010. Thats hardly coming out of nowhere. Heisman boosters and the NFL already knew who he was.

Here are 3 mocks I found from prior to the 2011 season. He was not a first rounder on any of them. One had 3 rounds and he was listed 91st. (and that was in Sept after a couple of games)

Mock Draft 2012 – Version 1.1 – May 22nd « Draft Watcher
2012 NFL mock draft | National Football Report
WalterFootball.com: 2012 NFL Mock Draft - Greg Cox

...and the Colts picked Manning because they liked his maturity and intangibles more than Leaf's physical superiority. Wheras Parcells liked Bledsoe's physical upside over Mirer's experience.

Those were 2 sets of QBs who weren't really very close, but the choice was much, much more difficult that Luck or Girffin. I think you missed the point.

My point- Both schools of thought are successful.

No, your point was that it is close to a toss up whether Luck or Griffin will be the first pick.

 

[Ring 6]

I fully embrace the concept of team building but when you are in a division of playmaking QBs that are perennial playoff contenders, you need to be bold.

That makes absolutely no sense. Since you are in a division with 3 other teams that have decent QBs you make bad decisions?

I may have been a tad harsh in my evaluation of the 'Skins as their D is decent and they do have a few folks on offense that can make plays an a O-Line that is decent but by acquiring a playmaking QB instantaneously makes them competitive.

Giving up 3 1s and a 2 to get a rookie QB doesn't instantly improve a team. Improving the TEAM improves the team.

All good players. No doubt.

Huh?
You didnt answer the question.
Do you choose Newton alone or all the other players.

I embrace both approaches to team-building. I embrace the Pat's approach (stockpile picks and hope to hit on them) but I also embrace being bold and acquiring a franchise player that is an elite talent.

That isn't the question.
The quesiton is would you rather have Newton or
Dalton, Jones, Blackmon, Sheard, and another first.
I think its obvious why you are avoiding the question.

If Cam Newton and RGIII evolve into Pro-Bowlers that lead their teams to the playoffs annually and appear in the Super Bowl, I consider the cost worth it.

If it works you agree?
The point isn't is it a good move if it works, the point is whether its more likely to succeed by having Cam Newton or Andy Dalton, Julio Jones, Blackmon, Sheard, and another #1 pick.
I could argue that the Patriots should trade Brady, Gronk, Welker, Mankins, Vollmer, Light, Ridley, Hernandez and Solder for 3 1s and a 2 and if you say its bad respond that if they make the playoffs every year and get to a SB its worth it, and what I've said adds up to nothing.

I compare it to the 04 Rivers/Manning trade. Giants got Manning and the Chargers got Rivers, Merriman and Kaeding. From 2004-2006, Chargers win. 2007-Present, Giants win- easily.

What does that have to do with this discussion? Are you saying the difference between Manning and Rivers is the difference between the Giants winning 2 SBs and the Chargers winning none? That if the trade didn't happen the Chargers would have won 2? Really?

My bad. 11 on the high side but I think it's a solid 8 teams that would starve for RGIII/Newton

Here is my list
Browns
Raiders
Titans
JAX (maybe not actually)
Vikings
Bucs
Seahawks
Broncos
'Skins
Dolphins
Cards

Only 2 of those teams made any attempt to get either.
I didn't say what teams have bad QBs, and Newton or Griffin are better than, I said what teams would trade , their QB3 1s and a 2 to get an unproven rookie.
You are a long, long way from 20.
By the way, 3 of your teams drafted a QB #1 last year, so now way they do that and another has Josh Freeman who they wouldn't trade straight up for an unproven rookie. If Griffin has a much better career than Freeman I will be mildly surprised.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Huh? When was the conversation about who will turn out better? Its possible neither will be the best QB of this draft. We were discussing who is considered a better prospect and more likely to be picked first.
I said it was no contest you said its almost a toss up.

Thats fine. I'll stick to what I stated earlier which based on articles other than the Bleacher Report and NFL Network that people really liked RGIIIs potential to impact a team Day 1.

Please certainly show me one that isn't the Bleacher Report, so you can have any credibilty to there being a source that calls them equal. By the way, even that one didn't it was a fan article about how they did in combine workouts.

Eye On Football - CBSSports.com Robert Griffin III will be better than Andrew Luck ... in 2012

I understand McShay and a few others say it's not close. Thats fine. Folks said Newton couldn't read defenses either and played in simple offense.

Here are 3 mocks I found from prior to the 2011 season. He was not a first rounder on any of them. One had 3 rounds and he was listed 91st. (and that was in Sept after a couple of games)

Mock Draft 2012 – Version 1.1 – May 22nd « Draft Watcher
2012 NFL mock draft | National Football Report
WalterFootball.com: 2012 NFL Mock Draft - Greg Cox

I acknowledge it. These things happen all the time, Andy. Players that are projected high in their Jr. year drop in their Sr. year (Dan Marino) and vice-versa.

Those were 2 sets of QBs who weren't really very close, but the choice was much, much more difficult that Luck or Girffin. I think you missed the point.


No, your point was that it is close to a toss up whether Luck or Griffin will be the first pick.

My point is that if a team gives up a bounty of picks for QB they think is a franchise player, then they can recover and build a SB team.

I say RGIII and Luck is a toss-up. Hold me to it.

 

[Ring 6]

Thats fine. I'll stick to what I stated earlier which based on articles other than the Bleacher Report and NFL Network that people really liked RGIIIs potential to impact a team Day 1.

So you have no examples of anyone saying picking Luck of Griffin #1 is a tossup?

Eye On Football - CBSSports.com Robert Griffin III will be better than Andrew Luck ... in 2012

Did you read the article? Hoiw about this part?
No, I'm not saying that Griffin will be better than Luck over the long haul. Luck's going to be fantastic and he's going to win a lot of games in a Colts uniform.
The article basically says he is going to a better team, it doesnt say he is or will be a better prospect or QB.

I understand McShay and a few others say it's not close. Thats fine. Folks said Newton couldn't read defenses either and played in simple offense.

Its not a few others, it is UNANIMOUS, or as close as it gets. And I'm not talking about sportswriters or draft analysts, I'm talking about the people in the NFL who's job it is to evaluate football players.

I acknowledge it. These things happen all the time, Andy. Players that are projected high in their Jr. year drop in their Sr. year (Dan Marino) and vice-versa.

OK, well you were arguing it a little while ago.

My point is that if a team gives up a bounty of picks for QB they think is a franchise player, then they can recover and build a SB team.

Based upon what? And even if I accept your statement all it says is your aren't necessarily destroyed by the bad decision, not that its a good one.

I say RGIII and Luck is a toss-up. Hold me to it.

How can I 'hold you to it' when I have explained to you that there is no one out there who thinks there is even a possibility of a thought that the team with the 1st pick would use it on Griffin over Luck.
What are you arguing? That if he plays well it proves your argument that teams are wringing their hands over the decision?

You do realize this discussion is about who is the better PROSPECT TODAY and how many NFL GMs and decision makers would choose Luck or Griffin if they had the first pick, not a prediction of who will end up with a better career, right?

 

[RobertWeathers]

That makes absolutely no sense. Since you are in a division with 3 other teams that have decent QBs you make bad decisions?

We disagree on what constitutes making a bad decision. I don't consider trading 3 1s and a 2nd rd pick for a franchise QB a bad decision.

Giving up 3 1s and a 2 to get a rookie QB doesn't instantly improve a team. Improving the TEAM improves the team.





Huh?
You didnt answer the question.
Do you choose Newton alone or all the other players.

I would take a franchise QB over the players you mention in a heartbeat. The draft is only one way of acquiring players. FA and trades are the two others.

That isn't the question.
The quesiton is would you rather have Newton or
Dalton, Jones, Blackmon, Sheard, and another first.
I think its obvious why you are avoiding the question.

Yes. Give me a QB who passes for 4k yds, 60% comp %, passes for 21td and runs for 14tds in his rookie year any day of the week. All he needs is a defense.

That makes absolutely no sense. Since you are in a division with 3 other teams that have decent QBs you make bad decisions?

We disagree on what constitutes making a bad decision. I don't consider trading 3 1s and a 2nd rd pick for a franchise QB a bad decision.

Giving up 3 1s and a 2 to get a rookie QB doesn't instantly improve a team. Improving the TEAM improves the team.





Huh?
You didnt answer the question.
Do you choose Newton alone or all the other players.

I would take a franchise QB over the players you mention in a heartbeat. The draft is only one way of acquiring players. FA and trades are the two others.

If it works you agree?
The point isn't is it a good move if it works, the point is whether its more likely to succeed by having Cam Newton or Andy Dalton, Julio Jones, Blackmon, Sheard, and another #1 pick.

I understand that you are saying a number of good players is better than a franchise QB. Thats fine. My point is that you can get good players a lot easier than franchise QBs so when the opportunity presents itself, you grab it with both hands.

That makes absolutely no sense. Since you are in a division with 3 other teams that have decent QBs you make bad decisions?

We disagree on what constitutes making a bad decision. I don't consider trading 3 1s and a 2nd rd pick for a franchise QB a bad decision.

Giving up 3 1s and a 2 to get a rookie QB doesn't instantly improve a team. Improving the TEAM improves the team.





Huh?
You didnt answer the question.
Do you choose Newton alone or all the other players.

I would take a franchise QB over the players you mention in a heartbeat. The draft is only one way of acquiring players. FA and trades are the two others.

That isn't the question.
The quesiton is would you rather have Newton or
Dalton, Jones, Blackmon, Sheard, and another first.
I think its obvious why you are avoiding the question.

Yes. Give me a QB who passes for 4k yds, 60% comp %, passes for 21td and runs for 14tds in his rookie year any day of the week. All he needs is a defense.

That makes absolutely no sense. Since you are in a division with 3 other teams that have decent QBs you make bad decisions?

We disagree on what constitutes making a bad decision. I don't consider trading 3 1s and a 2nd rd pick for a franchise QB a bad decision.

Giving up 3 1s and a 2 to get a rookie QB doesn't instantly improve a team. Improving the TEAM improves the team.





Huh?
You didnt answer the question.
Do you choose Newton alone or all the other players.

I would take a franchise QB over the players you mention in a heartbeat. The draft is only one way of acquiring players. FA and trades are the two others.

I could argue that the Patriots should trade Brady, Gronk, Welker, Mankins, Vollmer, Light, Ridley, Hernandez and Solder for 3 1s and a 2 and if you say its bad respond that if they make the playoffs every year and get to a SB its worth it, and what I've said adds up to nothing.

You need to explain your point a little more here as I'm not following. None of the players you mentioned earlier have the level of production the players you cite here.

What does that have to do with this discussion? Are you saying the difference between Manning and Rivers is the difference between the Giants winning 2 SBs and the Chargers winning none? That if the trade didn't happen the Chargers would have won 2? Really?

What I am trying to say is that Acorsi was killed for giving up too much for Manning and it worked out just fine for the Giants as they did a nice job of drafting, signed the right FAs and did a good job managing the cap.

I understand your points and I'm not philosophically against them. I just think that there are different ways of winning Super Bowls and being a perennial contender year in year out.

Only 2 of those teams made any attempt to get either.
I didn't say what teams have bad QBs, and Newton or Griffin are better than, I said what teams would trade , their QB3 1s and a 2 to get an unproven rookie.
You are a long, long way from 20.
By the way, 3 of your teams drafted a QB #1 last year, so now way they do that and another has Josh Freeman who they wouldn't trade straight up for an unproven rookie.

I think Josh Freeman is a good young QB who had a off year. My buddies in TB say JF has an attitude thats as big as the state of Florida.

Cross TB off the list then. I stand corrected on the 20 teams statement. I do think its around 8 or so teams that would strongly consider/do the deal for RGIII

If Griffin has a much better career than Freeman I will be mildly surprised.

From my view that is the crux of our discussion. I think RGIII is a potential franchise QB and you don't. That's fine. My question to you is that IF the 'Skins traded 3 1sts and 1 2nd for Luck, do you still think it's a bad deal? Based on your points, it seems that you don't?

 

[letekro]

I honestly can't think of any player I've ever seen in the draft worth that much to me. I wouldn't give up that much for a 24 year old Tom Brady.

Spoken like a fan of a team that hasn't had to worry about a quarterback for going on 20 years now. A franchise QB on the order of Brady is easily worth 3 ones and a two. RG III should be dynamite in Shanny's roll-out heavy offense.

 

[Ring 6]

We disagree on what constitutes making a bad decision. I don't consider trading 3 1s and a 2nd rd pick for a franchise QB a bad decision.

You don't know you got a franchise QB.

I would take a franchise QB over the players you mention in a heartbeat. The draft is only one way of acquiring players. FA and trades are the two others.

So you would trade
Dalton, Jones, Blackmon, Sheard and a first round draft pick for
Cam Newton and think you made your team better?

Yes. Give me a QB who passes for 4k yds, 60% comp %, passes for 21td and runs for 14tds in his rookie year any day of the week. All he needs is a defense.

Wow. I guess there is no point in us discussing football any longer.

From my view that is the crux of our discussion. I think RGIII is a potential franchise QB and you don't. That's fine. My question to you is that IF the 'Skins traded 3 1sts and 1 2nd for Luck, do you still think it's a bad deal? Based on your points, it seems that you don't?

The discussion has been back and forth over and over about your statement that it is a toss up whether Luck or Griffin would be the first pick.
My comments have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH HOW GOOD GRIFFIN MAY BE.
They are based on the COST of getting him instead of the next best alternative. For example, in the Newton example, the team trading away the pick, could pick Griffin this year, and would have gained all those other high quality players with the picks they got.
Secondly, it is that you have absolutley no certainlty that Griffin will even be an above average NFL QB. There is a tremendously long line of QBs who were graded just as highly that flopped. Its not a 90% chance, its probably more like 10%.
11 of the last 22 QBs to start a SB were drafted in the 6th round or later, undrafted or not drafted as a QB.
The flaw in your argument is that Griffin has to be a top 5 QB for the trade to even come close to being worth everything you gave up. Historically you have less than a 1 in 5 chance of that happening.
Its a bad trade for ANYONE, unless you can use hindsight and say you got Tom Brady.

 

[RobertWeathers]

So you have no examples of anyone saying picking Luck of Griffin #1 is a tossup?

Just helping you see that while Luck is the consensus choice, there are more than folks at the Bleacher Report that like RGIII just as much.

Robert Griffin III Leaps Over Andrew Luck For No. 1 Overall Player For 2012 NFL Draft - Barbecue Sauce - SB Nation Kansas City

Did you read the article? Hoiw about this part?
No, I'm not saying that Griffin will be better than Luck over the long haul. Luck's going to be fantastic and he's going to win a lot of games in a Colts uniform.
The article basically says he is going to a better team, it doesnt say he is or will be a better prospect or QB.

Its not a few others, it is UNANIMOUS, or as close as it gets. And I'm not talking about sportswriters or draft analysts, I'm talking about the people in the NFL who's job it is to evaluate football players.

Thats completely fair. My point is that those are also the same people who miss on projecting how well these players transition to the NFL. Thats why I NEVER beat up BB on this board on his draft record. Its a complete crap-shoot but as i've stated earlier I applaud the boldness of the 'Skins move.

Based upon what? And even if I accept your statement all it says is your aren't necessarily destroyed by the bad decision, not that its a good one.

Exactly. Thats my own personal belief anyway. Accepting status quo that has been historically lousy or being indecisive when decisions need to be made is a bad decision.

How can I 'hold you to it' when I have explained to you that there is no one out there who thinks there is even a possibility of a thought that the team with the 1st pick would use it on Griffin over Luck.
What are you arguing? That if he plays well it proves your argument that teams are wringing their hands over the decision?

I've provided a few articles but again it's my belief that RGII will be a franchise Qb and that the 'Skins did what they 1) believe RGIII is a franchise QB and 2) thought was right and in the best interest of their franchise as they believe in RGIIIs ability to produce and win in the NFL.

You do realize this discussion is about who is the better PROSPECT TODAY and how many NFL GMs and decision makers would choose Luck or Griffin if they had the first pick, not a prediction of who will end up with a better career, right?

Actually I thought that my original point was that the 'Skins made a bold decision by giving up a ton to acquire a potential franchise QB that they needed to be competitive in their division.

 

[RobertWeathers]

You don't know you got a franchise QB.

The 'Skins think that they did.

So you would trade
Dalton, Jones, Blackmon, Sheard and a first round draft pick for
Cam Newton and think you made your team better?

As it pertains to the 'Skins situation and that their defense is competitive, yes.

Wow. I guess there is no point in us discussing football any longer.

Ok. Feel free to disengage in the discussion.

The discussion has been back and forth over and over about your statement that it is a toss up whether Luck or Griffin would be the first pick.
My comments have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH HOW GOOD GRIFFIN MAY BE.
They are based on the COST of getting him instead of the next best alternative. For example, in the Newton example, the team trading away the pick, could pick Griffin this year, and would have gained all those other high quality players with the picks they got.
Secondly, it is that you have absolutley no certainlty that Griffin will even be an above average NFL QB. There is a tremendously long line of QBs who were graded just as highly that flopped. Its not a 90% chance, its probably more like 10%.
11 of the last 22 QBs to start a SB were drafted in the 6th round or later, undrafted or not drafted as a QB.
The flaw in your argument is that Griffin has to be a top 5 QB for the trade to even come close to being worth everything you gave up. Historically you have less than a 1 in 5 chance of that happening.
Its a bad trade for ANYONE, unless you can use hindsight and say you got Tom Brady.

Time will tell. Worked out for the Giants in 04.

 

[Ring 6]

Just helping you see that while Luck is the consensus choice, there are more than folks at the Bleacher Report that like RGIII just as much.

Robert Griffin III Leaps Over Andrew Luck For No. 1 Overall Player For 2012 NFL Draft - Barbecue Sauce - SB Nation Kansas City












Thats completely fair. My point is that those are also the same people who miss on projecting how well these players transition to the NFL. Thats why I NEVER beat up BB on this board on his draft record. Its a complete crap-shoot but as i've stated earlier I applaud the boldness of the 'Skins move.





Exactly. Thats my own personal belief anyway. Accepting status quo that has been historically lousy or being indecisive when decisions need to be made is a bad decision.





I've provided a few articles but again it's my belief that RGII will be a franchise Qb and that the 'Skins did what they 1) believe RGIII is a franchise QB and 2) thought was right and in the best interest of their franchise as they believe in RGIIIs ability to produce and win in the NFL.



Actually I thought that my original point was that the 'Skins made a bold decision by giving up a ton to acquire a potential franchise QB that they needed to be competitive in their division.

No. We have been discussing 2 things.
1) Your comment that the decision being made about who to pick 1st is a toss up
2) Whether the amount given up to trade for the #2 choice to pick a QB is too much

I don't know how you could think I was discussing how good a QB Griffin was going to be in the NFL when I made a grand total of zero comments about it. (The closest I came was pointing out that the uncertainty includes the fact that a year ago he wasn't even on the radar)

I guess this was just a big waste of time.
I would appreciate in the future that you actually look at the comment of yours that I quote and recognize that is what my comment applies to.

 

[RobertWeathers]

No. We have been discussing 2 things.
1) Your comment that the decision being made about who to pick 1st is a toss up
2) Whether the amount given up to trade for the #2 choice to pick a QB is too much

What is the issue? I've said that it is a toss up and the number of picks is appropriate for a franchise QB.

I don't know how you could think I was discussing how good a QB Griffin was going to be in the NFL when I made a grand total of zero comments about it. (The closest I came was pointing out that the uncertainty includes the fact that a year ago he wasn't even on the radar)

You said that you doubt he'll be any better than Josh Freeman. That pretty much sums up your assessment of RGIII.

I guess this was just a big waste of time.
I would appreciate in the future that you actually look at the comment of yours that I quote and recognize that is what my comment applies to.

If you can't read my original premise as why my opinion, coupled with the 'Skins rationale behind the move makes sense I don't know what to tell you.

 

[shmessy]

We disagree on what constitutes making a bad decision. I don't consider trading 3 1s and a 2nd rd pick for a franchise QB a bad decision.

They didn't just give up any 1st rounder. They gave up the 6th freaking pick. Let's remember, it's not like giving up a Patriots first rounder.

And the #2 is a 39th pick.

So, to move up from 6th to 2nd in this year's 1st round, they gave up the aggregated equivalent of at least 4 Patriots 1st rounders.

That's desperation.

 

[supafly]

They didn't just give up any 1st rounder. They gave up the 6th freaking pick. Let's remember, it's not like giving up a Patriots first rounder.

And the #2 is a 39th pick.

So, to move up from 6th to 2nd in this year's 1st round, they gave up the aggregated equivalent of at least 4 Patriots 1st rounders.

That's desperation.

It sure is desperation.

I was completely shocked when hearing what the Skins parted with to move up from #6 to #2...just shocked.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

I think we're looking at RGIII as the 'Skins pick. Great QB. Terrible deal (just my read.) But the kicker is, and I can't emphasize this enough, however bad the deal would be for anybody else, it's worse for the 'Skins. That's because that's what the 'Skins do: they make bad deals.

Okay I've done that shtick for too long now, but I just can't help but think "Hey look this is another fantabulous way to screw the longsuffering faithful hereabouts!!!!"

I hope he lasts long enough for the jerseys to at least get a little worn out around here. It's just so sad... I mean, it's cool when you have a royal blue #11 Bledsoe jersey, because we ended up doing better, and it's a tip of a hat to a stand-up guy that played some sort of football John the Baptist role, announcing one who is greater than him (organ music.) It's just pathetic to go out and see a 'Skins Haynesworth or Randel El jersey... guys that didn't do anything much while here, and certainly didn't win anything, and didn't lead to anything... so guys are out there wearing jerseys just because there's nobody they like better, nobody's led to anything to tip the balance, and there's no real hope. I saw a goddam Patrick Ramsey jersey on the Metro last week. You guys feelin' me?

Okay my pity for the 'Skins/predictions of doom for RGIII or whoever they pick is now done... You can now get back to well-informed opinions. Mine are just forebodings and a sense of inevitability really. They are not football based, other than to say that even Shanny has been reduced to a bumbling incompetent by the very act of working for Dan Snyder, we just don't recognize it yet.

I will, however, leave you all with this...

List of Washington Redskins starting quarterbacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Since 1993, the Patriots have had Bledoe, Brady, and for one season, Cassel.

Ready for the list of skins starting QBs...? Granted this includes injury fill-ins but, since 1993...

Mark Rypien, Rich Gannon, Cary Conklin, Heath Shuler, John Friesz, Gus Frerotte, Jeff Hotstetler, Trent Green, Brad Johnson, Jeff Freaking George, Tony Banks, Shane Matthews, Danny Wuerffel, Patrick Ramsey, Tim Hasselbeck, Mark Brunell, Jason Campbell, Todd Collins, Donovan McNabb, Rex Grossman, John Beck.

Also - we know Shanny's not responsible for this long strange trip. But Shanny has to thank Dan Reeves for John Elway. Prior to departing Denver, Shanny followed that up with (just counting first-stringers, not guys pressed into service...)

Brian Griese, Jake Plummer, Jay Cutler.

Okay. Elway wasn't mobile, right, but he didn't break his ankle tripping over his own dog. Nuff said about Griese, other than, Seriously, Bo? You went with Griese over Tom? For how long? Moving on. Jake the Snake. Now there was a guy that Shanny got a lot out of, going from an interception machine to a legit QB. Cutler? Acquired 11th pick in the 06 draft after Denver traded up with... wait for it... the St. Louis Rams. Only gave up a first and a third for that pick though... so if you want to arraign St. Louis for robbery for this season's deal, at least they're not a repeat offender. Denver got rid of Shanny, got rid of Cutler, got Kyle Orton next. Long time b/w the 99 Super Bowl and the 2008 season.

The point here, if there is one, is that if Shanny's supposed to be the "difference maker" in the Skins' talent acquisition here, well, he might get them from Danny Wuerffel to Jay Cutler level.

If not, well, then it's another ginormous splashy Redskins off-season move.

I predict, once again based on cursedness rather than football, a terrible, terrible waste of whichever talent is drafted. I feel terrible saying this because I like RGIII a lot.

Sad really.

Right, please continue w/more football based opinions now LOL... I just needed to non-substantiate my own somewhat unsupportable bias one last time.

 

[shmessy]

I think we're looking at RGIII as the 'Skins pick. Great QB. Terrible deal (just my read.) But the kicker is, and I can't emphasize this enough, however bad the deal would be for anybody else, it's worse for the 'Skins. That's because that's what the 'Skins do: they make bad deals.

Okay I've done that shtick for too long now, but I just can't help but think "Hey look this is another fantabulous way to screw the longsuffering faithful hereabouts!!!!"

I hope he lasts long enough for the jerseys to at least get a little worn out around here. It's just so sad... I mean, it's cool when you have a royal blue #11 Bledsoe jersey, because we ended up doing better, and it's a tip of a hat to a stand-up guy that played some sort of football John the Baptist role, announcing one who is greater than him (organ music.) It's just pathetic to go out and see a 'Skins Haynesworth or Randel El jersey... guys that didn't do anything much while here, and certainly didn't win anything, and didn't lead to anything... so guys are out there wearing jerseys just because there's nobody they like better, nobody's led to anything to tip the balance, and there's no real hope. I saw a goddam Patrick Ramsey jersey on the Metro last week. You guys feelin' me?

Okay my pity for the 'Skins/predictions of doom for RGIII or whoever they pick is now done... You can now get back to well-informed opinions. Mine are just forebodings and a sense of inevitability really. They are not football based, other than to say that even Shanny has been reduced to a bumbling incompetent by the very act of working for Dan Snyder, we just don't recognize it yet.

I will, however, leave you all with this...

List of Washington Redskins starting quarterbacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Since 1993, the Patriots have had Bledoe, Brady, and for one season, Cassel.

Ready for the list of skins starting QBs...? Granted this includes injury fill-ins but, since 1993...

Mark Rypien, Rich Gannon, Cary Conklin, Heath Shuler, John Friesz, Gus Frerotte, Jeff Hotstetler, Trent Green, Brad Johnson, Jeff Freaking George, Tony Banks, Shane Matthews, Danny Wuerffel, Patrick Ramsey, Tim Hasselbeck, Mark Brunell, Jason Campbell, Todd Collins, Donovan McNabb, Rex Grossman, John Beck.

Also - we know Shanny's not responsible for this long strange trip. But Shanny has to thank Dan Reeves for John Elway. Prior to departing Denver, Shanny followed that up with (just counting first-stringers, not guys pressed into service...)

Brian Griese, Jake Plummer, Jay Cutler.

Okay. Elway wasn't mobile, right, but he didn't break his ankle tripping over his own dog. Nuff said about Griese, other than, Seriously, Bo? You went with Griese over Tom? For how long? Moving on. Jake the Snake. Now there was a guy that Shanny got a lot out of, going from an interception machine to a legit QB. Cutler? Acquired 11th pick in the 06 draft after Denver traded up with... wait for it... the St. Louis Rams. Only gave up a first and a third for that pick though... so if you want to arraign St. Louis for robbery for this season's deal, at least they're not a repeat offender. Denver got rid of Shanny, got rid of Cutler, got Kyle Orton next. Long time b/w the 99 Super Bowl and the 2008 season.

The point here, if there is one, is that if Shanny's supposed to be the "difference maker" in the Skins' talent acquisition here, well, he might get them from Danny Wuerffel to Jay Cutler level.

If not, well, then it's another ginormous splashy Redskins off-season move.

I predict, once again based on cursedness rather than football, a terrible, terrible waste of whichever talent is drafted. I feel terrible saying this because I like RGIII a lot.

Sad really.

Right, please continue w/more football based opinions now LOL... I just needed to non-substantiate my own somewhat unsupportable bias one last time.

Great post, but No Bo. Lloyd Carr.

 

[shmessy]

Spoken like a fan of a team that hasn't had to worry about a quarterback for going on 20 years now. A franchise QB on the order of Brady is easily worth 3 ones and a two. RG III should be dynamite in Shanny's roll-out heavy offense.

If the 2nd best QB in the draft is, in your words, "easily worth 3 ones and a two.", why has that much never been given up in a trade in the history of the NFL?

 

[MoLewisrocks]

so far so good.



Double-plus untrue. They have a crystal clear identity: They are the guys who make the wrong moves every year in free agency and the draft, overpay at every turn, and pay first if you promise to play well for them later. They are the anti-Pats.



They always have a ton of pro-bowl talent two-to-five years removed from their pro bowl seasons. Now granted I don't know how they're going to pull that off w/RG-iiii...



Sometimes they are overshadowed by fans throwing around a nerf ball or their own cheerleaders....



This is why I hate the move: Because I like RG III. It just seems so unlikely that any move Washington makes -- especially such a flamboyant one -- will pan out.

It's not just politicians that move to Washington and become addle-minded spendthrifts out of touch with reality.



Ever watch "the Brady Six"? It is indeed a QB league. The draft, however, is what it's always been: a crap shoot. You really that sure about this year's big fat news headline, or is it just possible that having a bunch of available picks is the better strategy for such a situation, no matter how crying your need is?

SF making it to the NFCC and Texas and even Denver making it to the AFC divisional round would appear to underscore your point. What may save the day in DC is that Snyder finally has obscene cap room for the first time in a while, which can be used to lessen the blow of being absent first round picks (for now) for the next 2 drafts. Shanny has also been known as an astute draft day trader who can manufacture improved draft status. Unless Shanny blows that in an effort to make it all work out of the gate, because his clock is now ticking after two seasons of nothing tangible to show for his hire. I just don't have a lot of confidence in allowing a guy who never drafted a QB better than Cutler and couldn't develop him and traded a 2nd for a washed up McNabb and only won when he inherited a QB and got to keep him via cheating the cap is going to save my franchise by trading the farm and drafting the #2 QB in what was projected until recently to be a 1 QB draft in an otherwise deep draft.