Mark Sanchez to make a visit

spudstr04 · Post by **spudstr04** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 6:24 pm

But the biggest surprise is that Washington, who has Jason Campbell as their starter, is scheduled to evaluate Sanchez.

Campbell just completed the best season out of his four years as a Redskin, completing 62.3 percent of his throws for 3,245 yards, 13 touchdowns and just six interceptions during 16 starts. However, he's entering the final year of his original five-year contract with the Redskins, so the addition of Sanchez would certainly be a way for the team to prepare for the future while adding a rookie who could be capable of stepping in as a starter should Campbell falter.

Sanchez, who declared for the NFL Draft a year early following his junior year, played in 27 games for the Trojans. He completed 65.8 percent of his throws for 3,207 yards, 34 touchdowns and just ten interceptions.

http://profootball.scout.com/2/849360.html

jeremyroyce · Post by **jeremyroyce** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:39 pm

Wow. This is really interesting.

aswas71788 · Post by **aswas71788** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:20 pm

Never going to happen. Sanchez will be off of the board long before the Redskins get a choice.

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:39 pm

aswas71788 wrote:Never going to happen. Sanchez will be off of the board long before the Redskins get a choice.

Perhaps... but if he's still there... this "interest" is likely to foster a tremendous amount of interest from other teams in pursuing a trade up to 13 (or higher, which might preserve one of the other linemen that we are also interested in...)

It's just as likely that this is an attempt to stir such interest, and increase the likelihood of trading back in round 1, while picking up a 2nd round pick.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 9:09 pm

Nothing out of the ordinary here - most teams spend time with players before the draft that they might be interested in.

The only thing that is not surprising here is the over reaction of some here at THN to something that is just "routine" at this time of the year.

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:05 am

Countertrey wrote:
aswas71788 wrote:Never going to happen. Sanchez will be off of the board long before the Redskins get a choice.

Perhaps... but if he's still there... this "interest" is likely to foster a tremendous amount of interest from other teams in pursuing a trade up to 13 (or higher, which might preserve one of the other linemen that we are also interested in...)

It's just as likely that this is an attempt to stir such interest, and increase the likelihood of trading back in round 1, while picking up a 2nd round pick.

Exactly. That was my first thought when I read the story. It's actually a wise move on the Skins behalf.

fleetus · Post by **fleetus** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:09 am

aswas71788 wrote:Never going to happen. Sanchez will be off of the board long before the Redskins get a choice.

Not if Cutler gets traded to one of the teams with a top 10 pick. The dominos could fall so that Sanchez is there at 13. Plus, good chance Detroit doesn't select Stafford at #1. As a QB drafted #1, his agent likely will be demanding a huge contract. Stafford has never been graded as a top 3 player and is only being rumored #1 because he is a QB. I think Detroit will pass in favor of OL or Curry.

tribeofjudah · Post by **tribeofjudah** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:45 am

jeremyroyce wrote:Wow. This is really interesting.

We've got a diamond in the rough........here with Colt. Come on guys....!!!

funbunch65 · Post by **funbunch65** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:28 pm

I don't care who the QB is next year as long as it isn't Campbell. Campbell is coming off his best year with a whopping 13 td's in 16 games. What a joke.

NJ-SKINS-FAN · Post by **NJ-SKINS-FAN** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:11 pm

just posturing,

1) he will be long gone at 13
2) IF HE WERE TO DROP, this is for the skins to make the 13 pick more value to a team wanting him

Cappster · Post by **Cappster** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 3:18 pm

Hopefully its just part of posturing for the draft.

fleetus · Post by **fleetus** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 3:32 pm

tribeofjudah wrote:
jeremyroyce wrote:Wow. This is really interesting.

We've got a diamond in the rough........here with Colt. Come on guys....!!!

Way too much love for Colt. Until he does something besides look decent against 3rd team defenses in a couple of pre-season games, it is really kind of silly to keep mentioning his name as having any real NFL significance. What is the old adage? "The backup QB is always the most popular guy in town"?

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 3:37 pm

funbunch65 wrote:I don't care who the QB is next year as long as it isn't Campbell. Campbell is coming off his best year with a whopping 13 td's in 16 games. What a joke.

You are probably in for a VERY long autumn. Skipping right to the 2010 season may be your best option. :wink:

Kilmer72 · Post by **Kilmer72** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 6:16 pm

fleetus wrote:
tribeofjudah wrote:
jeremyroyce wrote:Wow. This is really interesting.

We've got a diamond in the rough........here with Colt. Come on guys....!!!

Way too much love for Colt. Until he does something besides look decent against 3rd team defenses in a couple of pre-season games, it is really kind of silly to keep mentioning his name as having any real NFL significance. What is the old adage? "The backup QB is always the most popular guy in town"?

well its either this http://www.redskins.com/gen/players/Colt_Brennan.jsp

or this

http://www.marksanchezonline.org/

lol... Personally I believe JC will do just fine but if he didn't I would want Colt to have a shot and not someone under suspicion of sexual assault. Also, what has Sanchez done in the NFL?

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 6:44 pm

If we're just bringing Sanchez in as a ploy, we clearly have nothing better to do with the offseason. The FO has proven time and again that good choices are the exception, and that there aren't any more clever maneuvers that the other teams haven't seen a hundred times already.

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 8:49 am

fleetus wrote:Until he does something besides look decent against 3rd team defenses in a couple of pre-season games

Um, with your attitude, when will that be?

Cappster · Post by **Cappster** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:39 am

fleetus wrote:
tribeofjudah wrote:
jeremyroyce wrote:Wow. This is really interesting.

We've got a diamond in the rough........here with Colt. Come on guys....!!!

Way too much love for Colt. Until he does something besides look decent against 3rd team defenses in a couple of pre-season games, it is really kind of silly to keep mentioning his name as having any real NFL significance. What is the old adage? "The backup QB is always the most popular guy in town"?

What else is supposed to do against 3rd team defenses? I would rather him show potential rather than none at all. I think as long as he is on an NFL team, shows prowess even against third stringers, he should have the benefit of the doubt that he has the ability to play in the league. You cannot knock a guy after his rookie season as a third string QB when two guys that have been in the league are in front of him. Let him get his reps in preseason and learn the game from the sidelines as he awaits his "right now moment."

PulpExposure · Post by **PulpExposure** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:14 am

Cappster wrote:
fleetus wrote:
tribeofjudah wrote:
jeremyroyce wrote:Wow. This is really interesting.

We've got a diamond in the rough........here with Colt. Come on guys....!!!

Way too much love for Colt. Until he does something besides look decent against 3rd team defenses in a couple of pre-season games, it is really kind of silly to keep mentioning his name as having any real NFL significance. What is the old adage? "The backup QB is always the most popular guy in town"?

What else is supposed to do against 3rd team defenses? I would rather him show potential rather than none at all. I think as long as he is on an NFL team, shows prowess even against third stringers, he should have the benefit of the doubt that he has the ability to play in the league. You cannot knock a guy after his rookie season as a third string QB when two guys that have been in the league are in front of him. Let him get his reps in preseason and learn the game from the sidelines as he awaits his "right now moment."

I understand what fleetus is saying here. Some posters have almost expressed that the Redskins would have done better with Colt at QB than Campbell last year, based only on the evidence of Colt's play in the Hall of Fame preseason game against Indy's 4th string defense. It's ludicrous.

He's not saying that Colt doesn't have potential, but that the overwhelming support for "Colt as Starting QB" is a bit premature.

fleetus · Post by **fleetus** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:34 am

Deadskins wrote:
fleetus wrote:Until he does something besides look decent against 3rd team defenses in a couple of pre-season games

Um, with your attitude, when will that be?

What's my attitude got to do with it? :hmm:

It is a fact, Colt has almost zero experience and has proven very little. Maybe this pre-season he'll get a chance to play against some 2nd team defenses? Maybe during the season, if there are injuries, he'll even get to throw a pass in a real NFL game. I hope he does well! But, until then, why falsely elevate expectations?

It's a little revealing, I think, when such obvious realities need to be pointed out. It shows just how fickle and impatient fans are. Some fans are ready to move on from a young guy like Campbell, who has shown class, work ethic and leadership. But yet, a guy like Colt, who hasn't shown anything meaningful is constantly mentioned as a possible answer to our QB question??? Then in 2 years when Colt hasn't made a pro-bowl, these same fans will be running him out of town too. Maybe by then, we'll have another new, unproven Qb on the roster and we can repeat the whole process again. :roll:

langleyparkjoe · Post by **langleyparkjoe** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:00 pm

fleetus wrote:
Deadskins wrote:
fleetus wrote:Until he does something besides look decent against 3rd team defenses in a couple of pre-season games

Um, with your attitude, when will that be?

What's my attitude got to do with it? It is a fact, Colt has almost zero experience and has proven very little. Maybe this pre-season he'll get a chance to play against some 2nd team defenses? Maybe during the season, if there are injuries, he'll even get to throw a pass in a real NFL game. I hope he does well! But, until then, why falsely elevate expectations?

It's a little revealing, I think, when such obvious realities need to be pointed out. It shows just how fickle and impatient fans are. Some fans are ready to move on from a young guy like Campbell, who has shown class, work ethic and leadership. But yet, a guy like Colt, who hasn't shown anything meaningful is constantly mentioned as a possible answer to our QB question??? Then in 2 years when Colt hasn't made a pro-bowl, these same fans will be running him out of town too. Maybe by then, we'll have another new, unproven Qb on the roster and we can repeat the whole process again.

So true Fleetus, so dag gone true...but in Hawaii though...*yadayadayada*.. :lol:

VetSkinsFan · Post by **VetSkinsFan** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:09 pm

PulpExposure wrote:
Cappster wrote:
fleetus wrote:
tribeofjudah wrote:
jeremyroyce wrote:Wow. This is really interesting.

We've got a diamond in the rough........here with Colt. Come on guys....!!!

Way too much love for Colt. Until he does something besides look decent against 3rd team defenses in a couple of pre-season games, it is really kind of silly to keep mentioning his name as having any real NFL significance. What is the old adage? "The backup QB is always the most popular guy in town"?

What else is supposed to do against 3rd team defenses? I would rather him show potential rather than none at all. I think as long as he is on an NFL team, shows prowess even against third stringers, he should have the benefit of the doubt that he has the ability to play in the league. You cannot knock a guy after his rookie season as a third string QB when two guys that have been in the league are in front of him. Let him get his reps in preseason and learn the game from the sidelines as he awaits his "right now moment."

I understand what fleetus is saying here. Some posters have almost expressed that the Redskins would have done better with Colt at QB than Campbell last year, based only on the evidence of Colt's play in the Hall of Fame preseason game against Indy's 4th string defense. It's ludicrous.

He's not saying that Colt doesn't have potential, but that the overwhelming support for "Colt as Starting QB" is a bit premature.

He's shown well with the chances he's gotten. That's all I think. We COULD HAVE done better with COlT at the helm based on his will to win and what he showed against 3rd and 4th string WITH 3rd and 4th string. It was still on even keel and he stood out is all some people are saying. I personally don't think he's the second coming of Montana, but isn't not guaranteed to be the next Timmy Chang as some like to argue, either...

And all of this is based on the fact that there's not a whole lot of faith in JC...how many "this is the year" chances is he really gonna get?

markshark84 · Post by **markshark84** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 6:44 pm

Countertrey wrote:
aswas71788 wrote:Never going to happen. Sanchez will be off of the board long before the Redskins get a choice.

Perhaps... but if he's still there... this "interest" is likely to foster a tremendous amount of interest from other teams in pursuing a trade up to 13 (or higher, which might preserve one of the other linemen that we are also interested in...)

It's just as likely that this is an attempt to stir such interest, and increase the likelihood of trading back in round 1, while picking up a 2nd round pick.

Nice spin. You should run for congress and help them address the stimulus bill.....

In reality, this doesn't happen. That would be a huge waste of time (and money) for the FO and Sanchez. I don't even think the FO is a dumb as you are implying here. Personally, I don't see us drafting Sanchez, BUT I don't think this is a chess move to spurn a draft-day trade.

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 7:59 pm

markshark84 wrote:
Countertrey wrote:
aswas71788 wrote:Never going to happen. Sanchez will be off of the board long before the Redskins get a choice.

Perhaps... but if he's still there... this "interest" is likely to foster a tremendous amount of interest from other teams in pursuing a trade up to 13 (or higher, which might preserve one of the other linemen that we are also interested in...)

It's just as likely that this is an attempt to stir such interest, and increase the likelihood of trading back in round 1, while picking up a 2nd round pick.

Nice spin. You should run for congress and help them address the stimulus bill.....

In reality, this doesn't happen. That would be a huge waste of time (and money) for the FO and Sanchez. I don't even think the FO is a dumb as you are implying here. Personally, I don't see us drafting Sanchez, BUT I don't think this is a chess move to spurn a draft-day trade.

This kind of maneuvering happens all the time... why? Because it costs a team next to nothing to posture, and occasionally you can influence someone. You might want to put the sarcasm away for a bit, and just discuss...

Your call.

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 8:38 pm

fleetus wrote:
Deadskins wrote:
fleetus wrote:Until he does something besides look decent against 3rd team defenses in a couple of pre-season games

Um, with your attitude, when will that be?

What's my attitude got to do with it? It is a fact, Colt has almost zero experience and has proven very little. Maybe this pre-season he'll get a chance to play against some 2nd team defenses? Maybe during the season, if there are injuries, he'll even get to throw a pass in a real NFL game. I hope he does well! But, until then, why falsely elevate expectations?

It's a little revealing, I think, when such obvious realities need to be pointed out. It shows just how fickle and impatient fans are. Some fans are ready to move on from a young guy like Campbell, who has shown class, work ethic and leadership. But yet, a guy like Colt, who hasn't shown anything meaningful is constantly mentioned as a possible answer to our QB question??? Then in 2 years when Colt hasn't made a pro-bowl, these same fans will be running him out of town too. Maybe by then, we'll have another new, unproven Qb on the roster and we can repeat the whole process again.

Well, you seemed to be asking him to show something without being given the opportunity to do that. I was just wondering how you expected him to prove his worth from the bench.

jeremyroyce · Post by **jeremyroyce** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:11 pm

tribeofjudah wrote:
jeremyroyce wrote:Wow. This is really interesting.

We've got a diamond in the rough........here with Colt. Come on guys....!!!

I only said that this article was interesting. I didn't say that we should draft him