why we should trade up for a franchise QB

[Countertrey]

Am I the only one that liked Mark Brunell?

No. But he was a has been when we got him. Even his prime was mostly forgettable. Not awful, but certainly not memorable. He made about 5-10 great plays in his time here; 2 that were AMAZING.

Those 2 plays were paired up to become the most embarassing loss in Cowboys history.

For that 1 pair of lightening strikes, the pairing of Santana and Brunell should be listed on the Ring of Fame.

[1niksder]

I would prefer it and it might be a bit more interesting to read these arguments if you guys put SCENARIOS under which you would agree to trade-up for one of the two top QBs.

Let me draw my line on the sand and avoid the aggravation of GENERIC and UNDEFINED positions on the Draft:

Ok I'll just look at your Scenario and see where we differ, I'm on record has wanting RGIII, Flynn, and a lower round pick used on a QB (hopefully Tanny falls to the 3rd).

1) If RB III is available by the THIRD pick in the first round, I would agree to trade-up to get him. I would not agree to move up to the 2nd spot which is TOO expensive.

2) IF RB III is NOT available by the Third pick anymore because Rams picked him or some other team did in the second spot (e.g., Cleveland moved up to 2nd spot to get him because they have far mor picks to trade than we do)

If he could be had at #3 I'd take a look at it and might still think it's too much... I hoped RGIII would fall to the #6 spot but that hope has faded. Trading up isn't the route I would want them to take but if they do decide that RGIII is the guy, they'll go get him. Moving from #6 to #2 isn't much more than moving from #6 to #3 so if they trade up to #2 I hope they don't do so due to a bidding war with another team. Also Cleveland has two first round picks in this draft. Is that second #1 really worth more than the Redskins 2013 #1 pick after so many kids went back for their senior year?

I would then check three options:

2.1) IF Blackmon is available by the 6th pick, I take him first.
2.2) IF Blackmon is NOT available, I take Claiborne with the 6th pick.
2.3) IF NONE of the two players above are available, I try to TRADE -DOWN for more picks and try to get my guy in FA.

Here I'd have to go with option 2.3... They drafted 3 WRs last year and need to give them time to grow. They did OK in FA last year with WRs and this year has a better crop so I could see a Marques Colston or Dwayne Bowe type being signed before the draft. The key is to get a guy like Flynn on day one of free agency or no receivers are going to want to come Washington.

These theories about whether "balance" is and how it is evaluated or whether "offense prevails" and defense is less important makes NO SENSE to me. All of you have BOTH examples of unbalanced teams and supposedly balanced teams winning and moving ahead or losing and out of the playoffs already. You can bring examples to support either view.

Instead, why would we not try to elevate the nature of the debate and put forward actual SCENARIOS under you would do or would not do certain trades???

Balance OK lets talk balnce

The Washington Redskins Offense was on the field on average 30 mins per game the Defense was out there the other 30 mins. The team had a -14 turnover ratio. Redskins QBs accounted for more 30 turnovers in 2011 if we want balance we need a QB that will cut that number in half

[emoses14]

Am I the only one that liked Mark Brunell?

No. But he was a has been when we got him. Even his prime was mostly forgettable. Not awful, but certainly not memorable. He made about 5-10 great plays in his time here; 2 that were AMAZING.

Those 2 plays were paired up to become the most embarassing loss in Cowboys history.

For that 1 pair of lightening strikes, the pairing of Santana and Brunell should be listed on the Ring of Fame.

I'm not gonna argue with that one bit.

[DarthMonk]

Am I the only one that liked Mark Brunell?

I liked him. Not an allstar when we had him, but good enough to get us to the playoffs. And very good at managing a game.

In my view, the ONLY problem with the Brunell signing was the price. No one was bidding againt us and we offered him the freakin' moon. We gave him $43M for 7 years with an $8.6M bonus when we probably could've gotten him for something like $10M for 4 years with a $3M bonus easily.

Brunell had one year left on his contract with the Jags and was due to count $10.5 million against the salary cap — including a $2 million bonus due in a month. The Jags were expected to cut him before paying the bonus, but the Redskins pre-empted the move by expressing interest in a trade.

Gibbs went nuts on that one. Was anyone else scratching his/her head when those terms were announced?

[cowboykillerzRGiii]

My point about brunell was as posted above too much money for a guy w the better days behind him not his play for the skins.
Flynn has less experience then Beck.. And while beck looked good at time in preseason we saw him fall flat on his face during the real season.
Flynn has less film but w an Elite offense. I don't think its a stretch to say Gus Ferotte sexy Rexy and Bexy all woulda had amazing stats vs a Detroit secondary w GB WR/TE s.

So I ask WHO is a viable answer at qb? Over pay Flynn? Horton? Some other over the hill FA?

I really dig that London Fletcher post. We need a face of the future.. Fills seats amps up the players and Ws happen more. RGIII or Luck w the 2nd pick is to me the only course we can take at this point. Owning the East basement is horrible and this franchise needs to make a big move.. Not on a FA like Mcnugget or someone but via draft.

[yajexyage]

Am I the only one that liked Mark Brunell?

No. But he was a has been when we got him. Even his prime was mostly forgettable. Not awful, but certainly not memorable. He made about 5-10 great plays in his time here; 2 that were AMAZING.

Those 2 plays were paired up to become the most embarassing loss in Cowboys history.

For that 1 pair of lightening strikes, the pairing of Santana and Brunell should be listed on the Ring of Fame. [/quot


Lets not forget the 22 completions in a row against the Texans.

[StorminMormon86]

I agree Grossman is more likely then Beck. But I don't agree Beck is not more likely then Crompton. Kyle has the history and Beck was playing at the worst time last year. If we don't re-sign Grossman and we do sign a rookie heir apparent, then I could see Beck. Though I don't think it's likely that would happen. But I wasn't including Beck because I thought it was likely, just possible and it was in response to the post which mentioned Grossman and Beck.

This is exactly what I think is going to happen next year. I know people will roll their eyes, but listening to Shanahn preach about Beck not having the benefit of OTAs all season long makes me think he's willing to give him another chance.

[langleyparkjoe]

For that 1 pair of lightening strikes, the pairing of Santana and Brunell should be listed on the Ring of Fame.

Dag CT, you ALSO been hanging around me to much I see friend!!

ONE OF THE GREATEST GAMES I'VE SEEN!!

*notice I said one of.. lol*

[The Hogster]

I expect the Skins to use one of this year's draft picks on a QB. I'm just not sold that it will be the first pick.

[StorminMormon86]

I expect the Skins to use one of this year's draft picks on a QB. I'm just not sold that it will be the first pick.

I agree. I keep hearing that Cleveland's 4th first round pick is (obviously) better trade bait than our 6th round pick to give up to St. Louis for the #2, so they might jump and take RGIII before we do.

[SkinsJock]

I expect the Skins to use one of this year's draft picks on a QB. I'm just not sold that it will be the first pick.

I agree. I keep hearing that Cleveland's 4th pick in the first round is (obviously) better trade bait than our 6th pick to give up to St. Louis for the #2 pick, so they might jump and take RGIII before we do.

OH NO! - do you really think that????

THAT"S a POTENTIAL DISASTER - what do you suggest we do?

we gotta get RGIII

it's a bloody shame is what it is


many here are considering giving up 2 first round picks AND 2 second round picks OR MORE to move up to the 2nd spot

are you suggesting it might happen for less than that

[DarthMonk]

Not sure if this has been asked but ...

Does anyone currently have a worse situation than we do at QB?

NFC

East? No.

North? No.

South? No.

West? No, not even Seattle.

AFC

East? No. Jets maybe but not yet.

North? No. Browns maybe but who would you rather have - Rex or Colt?

South? Maybe Indy. Maybe the Jags.

West? No.

I say the only teams that have a worse QB situation than we are maybe Indy and the Jags. Indy solves their problem with Luck. As the 2nd pick dangles in the wind we are the team with the worst QB situation in the league.

[SkinsJock]

The QB situation will be taken care of in the next few years

this year the FO will find a way to bring in a QB that will both give the offense a better opportunity to score some points
AND ... NOT turn the ball over
they will also begin the process of getting a future great QB ready to start here in the very near future

we have a lot of the other players in place, we just need to keep adding quality, young starters and quality depth

it's all good here - no worries - we now have guys in charge that know what they're doing

AND - we have the best HC in the NFC EAST

[Countertrey]

I expect the Skins to use one of this year's draft picks on a QB. I'm just not sold that it will be the first pick.

I agree. I keep hearing that Cleveland's 4th pick in the first round is (obviously) better trade bait than our 6th pick to give up to St. Louis for the #2 pick, so they might jump and take RGIII before we do.

OH NO! - do you really think that????

THAT"S a POTENTIAL DISASTER - what do you suggest we do?

we gotta get RGIII

it's a bloody shame is what it is


many here are considering giving up 2 first round picks AND 2 second round picks OR MORE to move up to the 2nd spot

are you suggesting it might happen for less than that

Here's the deal on this... Shanny will continue to encourage a belief that the Redskins want to move to 2 to get RG3...If the Browns want him (I'm not convinced that they do), they WILL out-bid us and make a trade with the Rams. If WE make that trade with the Rams, it means that the Browns did not want him, and coveted someone else.

It does not matter what we do... if the Browns want him, they will get him.

This DOES NOT mean that we can sit at 6 and get RGIII... There are other teams that would move to 2 for him... but, we are in a very strong position... IF we want to get him.

I'm just not certain that Shanahan and Allen are convinced that the end justifies the cost. We still need key players, and key depth, so, unless we see that covered in FA, I expect to see the Skins stay pat... or trade back, if they can find a partner.

If you see multiple deals in FA to cover OL, WR and DB quality and depth... expect to see the 'skins make a play for RGIII or Luck, whichever one the Colts DON'T take.

[cowboykillerzRGiii]

To the topic of why we SHOULD trade up.. I don't want to sound redundant. I post Darth posts.. and we get the same hum drum bs we need those valuable picks. We've traded picks before.... For over the hill FA NOT a franchise qb. Now is the time folks... I don't give an ish how old you are we've all waited long enough for THE GUY.
I'd trade a boatload picks players what ever, we are Snyder rich and can bring in FA that WANT to play here w a franchise qb (face of the team)
Who in the mfs is gonna be behind center if we draft a second tier qb? Rex? Who are you wanting trade down sayers? U think payton? Talk about pay day.. Oooo ooooo how bout we lure Breezy away from NO!

Facts are facts and number two over all is our BEST shot.

Unless we can get Bradford or even McCoy... Doubtful as that is... We are utterly screwed. I'm sick of this crap man B&G used to mean something. If we get another bandaid pos fa qb then shanny too has failed us.
Fingers crossed for the above photo come September.

Please reply w valid options that can open my usually optimistic mind.. ( I was a Becksy supporter in the offseason so it only takes a little fluffing) wth is gonna pass the ball bring in FAs sell tickets motivate the team and win the East?

[brad7686]

If I were St. Louis, I would draft RGIII. Thankfully they aren't me and believe that Bradford will overcome his staggering fragility and lack of mobility. I think we are probably already in negotiations with the Rams, as is Cleveland probably, trying to find out who is willing to give up the most.

[Deadskins]

many here are considering giving up 2 first round picks AND 2 second round picks OR MORE to move up to the 2nd spot.

Well worth it if RGIII turns out to be the franchise QB that I suspect he is.

[SkinsJock]

Man I hope that the FO does that deal and that RGIII turns out to be fantastic

IF they do the deal - I'm sure it will be because they KNOW he's a future great QB .... NOT because they "suspect" he might be

that's great

Giving up 4 to 5 really talented, YOUNG players, is NOT the choice I'd make

[cowboykillerzRGiii]

Count how man picks are still here from 2007? Ok ya giving up a few picks aint isht. We can make picks up w trades and FA. I drink I read I see you post.. And I puke.

Only puke fans want us to trade our sixth for a 25 and a 50th.... Real puke fans hope we don't make the smart move for the DUDE

[StorminMormon86]

many here are considering giving up 2 first round picks AND 2 second round picks OR MORE to move up to the 2nd spot.

Well worth it if RGIII turns out to be the franchise QB that I suspect he is.

That's a mighty big "if" to wager our future on.

[skinsfan#33]

I think the most interesting spot we could realistically move up to to get RGIII is at #4.

I know most will say, "no way that happens, because if he is there at #4 Cleveland will take him".

Here is my thought process on this.

If Cleveland decides that they don't want to give up on McCoy yet and want Trent Richardson. Why draft Richardson at #4 when they can trade down to #6 and pick up the Skins sencond and draft the player they want.

So why would the Skins move up to #4 if the Browns aren't taking RGIII? Simple! At #4 you take the risk of other teams that can't quite make the jump to #3 or #2 trading with Cleveland. So you would get RGIII and only need to give up a second on top of #6.

Now I know this scenario is not likely, but it isn't extremely unlikely.

On a side note. I heard RGIII on Mike and Mike say he first started watching football in the late 90’s and was a huge Elway/Broncos fan! So maybe he would like to be Shanny’s next Elway.

[GoSkins]

I think the most interesting spot we could realistically move up to to get RGIII is at #4.

I know most will say, "no way that happens, because if he is there at #4 Cleveland will take him".

Here is my thought process on this.

If Cleveland decides that they don't want to give up on McCoy yet and want Trent Richardson. Why draft Richardson at #4 when they can trade down to #6 and pick up the Skins sencond and draft the player they want.

So why would the Skins move up to #4 if the Browns aren't taking RGIII? Simple! At #4 you take the risk of other teams that can't quite make the jump to #3 or #2 trading with Cleveland. So you would get RGIII and only need to give up a second on top of #6.

Now I know this scenario is not likely, but it isn't extremely unlikely.

On a side note. I heard RGIII on Mike and Mike say he first started watching football in the late 90’s and was a huge Elway/Broncos fan! So maybe he would like to be Shanny’s next Elway.

Your scenario assumes the Skins are the only team interested in RGIII. I'm not comfortable with that assumption.

[KazooSkinsFan]

I think the most interesting spot we could realistically move up to to get RGIII is at #4.

I know most will say, "no way that happens, because if he is there at #4 Cleveland will take him".

Here is my thought process on this.

If Cleveland decides that they don't want to give up on McCoy yet and want Trent Richardson. Why draft Richardson at #4 when they can trade down to #6 and pick up the Skins sencond and draft the player they want.

So why would the Skins move up to #4 if the Browns aren't taking RGIII? Simple! At #4 you take the risk of other teams that can't quite make the jump to #3 or #2 trading with Cleveland. So you would get RGIII and only need to give up a second on top of #6.

Now I know this scenario is not likely, but it isn't extremely unlikely.

On a side note. I heard RGIII on Mike and Mike say he first started watching football in the late 90’s and was a huge Elway/Broncos fan! So maybe he would like to be Shanny’s next Elway.

Your scenario assumes the Skins are the only team interested in RGIII. I'm not comfortable with that assumption.

I agree. I don't think he's going to last to #4. Not a quarterback with his talent. Cleveland or us are going to have to trade up to get him. Personally I think Cleveland knows that and will trade their two #1's to get him. I'd love to get him but I don't think we can compete with two #1's this year, no payment plan.

[SkinsJock]

I'm not against trading up to get RGIII

My only concern is if it costs 4 or 5 talented players - especially young, VERY talented players - it's a loss of talent for a franchise that needs a lot


we'll get a FA QB in here .. PLUS we'll add a young QB that will be a good NFL QB in the near future

I don't see giving up a lot of players when we have so many needs and need to add young, talented players

[KazooSkinsFan]

I'm not against trading up to get RGIII

My only concern is if it costs 4 or 5 talented players - especially young, VERY talented players - it's a loss of talent for a franchise that needs a lot


we'll get a FA QB in here .. PLUS we'll add a young QB that will be a good NFL QB in the near future

I don't see giving up a lot of players when we have so many needs and need to add young, talented players

For a top quarterback? Of course we'd give that up. The only reason we wouldn't would be if the Shannahans aren't as sold on him as the rest of the NFL.