Your draft board at #5

[UK Skins Fan]

Oh, ok then, I'll add my opinion. My personal Redskins board would be:

1) Williams
2) Fowler
3) Beasley
4) Cooper

After a trade down, I'd be happy with Scherff or Ereck Flowers.

[DarthMonk]

I thought more about the risk factor and now have this as my top 5:

1 Kevin White WR
2 Ereck Flowers OL
3 Danny Shelton NT
4 Malcom Brown DT
5 Who cares?

Trade back and get two or three of these guys. They would all start for us for years.

[cowboykillerzRGiii]

Im hoping we can flip our pick into two first rounders via the brown stains (or similar) and acquire the top remaining OL lets say Flowers and land Collins... pipe dream I know, but thats what this is for right?

OR if we stay put-
1. Williams
2. White
3. Cooper
4. Shelton
5. Beasley

Not a fan of Winston (at all!) so if he IS available, although doubtful, Im HIGHLY in favor of trading back and getting as much picks for him as possible.. With that said I see Oakland taking either White or Cooper, and both qbs long gone, so we take the remaining of the two top WRs or go for the best available DL- doubful that Williams makes it past the Jags but possible I suppose.
Ready for draft day!!

[cowboykillerzRGiii]

*With Oakland signing Crabtree their board may have changed actually... in which case we take the highest reciever on our board between Cooper and White!

[sch1977]

I really think Vic Beasley is going to be a beast as a pass rusher. If we stay at #5, that's where I'd go.

[Prowl33]

*With Oakland signing Crabtree their board may have changed actually... in which case we take the highest reciever on our board between Cooper and White!

I dont think even Oakland is dumb enough to think crabtree is an answer. He hasnt had a good season in years. You can gamble on him as a #2/3 but white or cooper are still very much in play to be their future.

I read a good article on bleacher report matching fowler to us in terms of our new scheme. Seems he would be a great fit. Really if we arent getting him or Williams, I would prefer a trade down. I see us drafting 2 o linemen in rounds 1-4. More pics would make that easier

[SkinsJock]

with under 2 weeks to go I'm still holding out hope that this FO will stick by the BPA route - I understand draft gurus looking at areas of need and making their predictions for each franchise accordingly - I just hope that these guys pick the best player they have rated on their sheets regardless of what position he plays and I also hope they try and get as many picks as possible in this and the next draft

this franchise may rebound quickly but the long term solution is to focus on the draft and bring in free agents as a short term plan

we really need to be patient and build a good offensive line and a defense that can be a lot more effective especially on third downs

we also have 2 seasons to get a QB that can help the offense in 2017 - if he's not the long term solution at QB at least be able to help the offense while the long term solution is getting ready

[Irn-Bru]

In my opinion, here are the worst case scenarios for us.

Scenario 1
(1) TB - Winston
(2) Ten - Mariota
(3) Jax - Williams
(4) Oak - Cooper

I don't like this because we can't grab either Williams or Cooper and Mariota is off the board and therefore we're much less likely to fetch a trade. In this situation, I'd say draft Beasley. I'd actually be pretty happy with this result, but it does seem like our options are somewhat limited.

Scenario 2
(1) TB - Winston
(2) Ten - Williams
(3) Jax - Beasley
(4) Oak - Cooper
(5) No one makes a substantial offer to trade for this pick

I don't like this because picks 2-4 above are the top three on my board. Do we pick Fowler here? Gregory? Perhaps even White at WR? I'm not really a fan of any of these at 5, myself. Tough call.

[Deadskins]

In my opinion, here are the worst case scenarios for us.

Scenario 1
(1) TB - Winston
(2) Ten - Mariota
(3) Jax - Williams
(4) Oak - Cooper

I don't like this because we can't grab either Williams or Cooper and Mariota is off the board and therefore we're much less likely to fetch a trade. In this situation, I'd say draft Beasley. I'd actually be pretty happy with this result, but it does seem like our options are somewhat limited.

Scenario 2
(1) TB - Winston
(2) Ten - Williams
(3) Jax - Beasley
(4) Oak - Cooper
(5) No one makes a substantial offer to trade for this pick

I don't like this because picks 2-4 above are the top three on my board. Do we pick Fowler here? Gregory? Perhaps even White at WR? I'm not really a fan of any of these at 5, myself. Tough call.

Yeah, I don't like either of those scenarios.

[riggofan]

Scenario 2
(1) TB - Winston
(2) Ten - Williams
(3) Jax - Beasley
(4) Oak - Cooper
(5) No one makes a substantial offer to trade for this pick

I don't like this because picks 2-4 above are the top three on my board. Do we pick Fowler here? Gregory? Perhaps even White at WR? I'm not really a fan of any of these at 5, myself. Tough call.

Not a fan of Fowler, eh? I would be nervous about taking Gregory there at #5 though I guess I would trust McGloughan to have done his homework. Countertrey likes to remind us about Warren Sapp in that situation - which is a fair point.

Honestly if #2 played out like this, I would be really surprised if somebody didn't trade up to grab Mariota. Nobody can count on him getting past the Jets at #6.

Curious though how the draft boards are looking after today with this civil suit having been filed against Winston. Is he still Tampa's pick?

[Prowl33]

In my opinion, here are the worst case scenarios for us.

Scenario 1
(1) TB - Winston
(2) Ten - Mariota
(3) Jax - Williams
(4) Oak - Cooper

I don't like this because we can't grab either Williams or Cooper and Mariota is off the board and therefore we're much less likely to fetch a trade. In this situation, I'd say draft Beasley. I'd actually be pretty happy with this result, but it does seem like our options are somewhat limited.

Scenario 2
(1) TB - Winston
(2) Ten - Williams
(3) Jax - Beasley
(4) Oak - Cooper
(5) No one makes a substantial offer to trade for this pick

I don't like this because picks 2-4 above are the top three on my board. Do we pick Fowler here? Gregory? Perhaps even White at WR? I'm not really a fan of any of these at 5, myself. Tough call.

Yeah, I don't like either of those scenarios.

I do because I love Fowler for us at #5. What he can bring to our Gap attack defense is extremely valuable. Odds are he will line up all over, including both ilb and olb spots, and could be seen as DE in our 4-3 sets. Not allowing defenses to account for him will give us a huge advantage that othee players just cant create

[Countertrey]

I really don't think there's a concern here.. Unless McGloughan has a serious case of the brain farts, we will get a win here, one way or another. This isn't Mike Ditka doing our drafting.

[Prowl33]

with under 2 weeks to go I'm still holding out hope that this FO will stick by the BPA route - I understand draft gurus looking at areas of need and making their predictions for each franchise accordingly - I just hope that these guys pick the best player they have rated on their sheets regardless of what position he plays and I also hope they try and get as many picks as possible in this and the next draft

this franchise may rebound quickly but the long term solution is to focus on the draft and bring in free agents as a short term plan

we really need to be patient and build a good offensive line and a defense that can be a lot more effective especially on third downs

we also have 2 seasons to get a QB that can help the offense in 2017 - if he's not the long term solution at QB at least be able to help the offense while the long term solution is getting ready

I feel like Scot is pretty sure the likely scenario is the top guy on his board is a pass rusher. So he built up his d line to compliment that, and help his defensive backfield because we can get pressure with our front 3 plus just an olb rushing.

[SkinsJock]

I agree Prowl - I am just hopeful that unlike previous years this FO is looking at 2 and 3 years ahead rather than doing and paying whatever it takes to be the best in the NFC East this coming season like we have been doing here - that is just STUPID

I'm all in on seeing this franchise be decent again but I'm also tired of being disappointed because the guys in charge have ZERO knowledge of what it takes to put a TEAM together - there's been no plan

Scot IMO has a plan and hopefully Snyder gives him the 2 or 3 years it will take to finally have an O line and a defense that can get off the field when it's 3rd and long - we have not had either of those for a long time here


I'd love for this team to play "meaningful" games in December but everyone can do that - winning 5 of your first 12 most likely means you "could" make the playoffs - the important thing is to be there year in and year out not every now and then - I'm looking for improvement in both play and coaching - the wins and losses will come with that and maybe even as early as 2017, we can realistically expect to be contending for a playoff spot
if we get there this season, it's not because we're suddenly good, it's going to be that we got lucky like we did in 2012
we need to be there each year not at 10-6 one year and 6-10 the next

[Deadskins]

if we get there this season, it's not because we're suddenly good, it's going to be that we got lucky like we did in 2012

How, exactly, did we get "lucky" in 2012?

[SkinsJock]

if we get there this season, it's not because we're suddenly good, it's going to be that we got lucky like we did in 2012

How, exactly, did we get "lucky" in 2012?

exactly? - when a franchise wins 10 games (incl 7 in a row) & the next 2 seasons manages to look as inept as we did it seems to me that we were more lucky than good

[Deadskins]

if we get there this season, it's not because we're suddenly good, it's going to be that we got lucky like we did in 2012

How, exactly, did we get "lucky" in 2012?

exactly? - when a franchise wins 10 games (incl 7 in a row) & the next 2 seasons manages to look as inept as we did it seems to me that we were more lucky than good

Nah, we were pretty damn good. I guess we did get lucky in that, when RGIII got injured, we had the Browns for the game he missed.

[SkinsJock]

when a team is good they continue to be good - if they have a off season they find a way to be competitive pretty darn quick

the 2012 Redskins were more lucky than good and they proved it the following 2 years

I'm tired of waiting to get lucky, which is what a Snyder managed franchise gives you

Scot will show us what it's like to have a franchise that has a plan for success and while a little luck is important, having a plan and placing more attention on the draft will mean that we don't have up and down years like has been going on here since 1999

[OldSchool]

Skins have so many needs that I hope they get an opportunity trade down for multiple picks. If they decide to select someone with the #5 pick I hope they don't take chances with a guy that got in trouble in college like Gregory. I saw a few Nebraska games and he was a difference maker not quite as much as Watt at Wisconsin but very impactful because the offense I'd to plan around him.

[Bishop Hammer]

1) Vic Beasley
2) Leanord Williams
3) Amari Cooper
4) Dante Fowler
If trade Back
5) Brandon Schreff

[DarthMonk]

Why not ...

1 Winston QB
2 Gurley RB
3 Williams DL
4 White WR
5 Flowers OL/Shelton NT

2 Gurley RB? Seriously?

Not that I would be willing to pull that trigger at #2 but yeah.

Also, ESPN 980’s Kevin Sheehan reported the other day that if the Redskins had traded back with Atlanta (had Dante Fowler been available) and if Brandon Scherff was no longer there when they picked, they would have selected Georgia running back Todd Gurley.

Seems like that means Gurley was #4 on Scot's board since Scherff was #3.

[Irn-Bru]

I find that surprising. Nothing against Gurley (and good call on that one, DM), but it's a little like hearing Scot had a TE or MLB at the very top of his board. Not inconceivable, but typically you've got better players at other positions in the mix. RBs are kinda fungible and only rarely the kind of athlete that demands high first-round attention.

[DarthMonk]

I find that surprising. Nothing against Gurley (and good call on that one, DM), but it's a little like hearing Scot had a TE or MLB at the very top of his board. Not inconceivable, but typically you've got better players at other positions in the mix. RBs are kinda fungible and only rarely the kind of athlete that demands high first-round attention.

I do as well but for the fact that Scot has done "this kind of thing" before, e.g., drafted Davis (TE) with the 6th overall pick.

I like that Scot does not seem to care what other people think of his board.

I'll be watching Gurley closely.