The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:

The Hogster wrote:....I'd love to have RG3 in the B & G. But, the reality is we pick 6th and its no guarantee we will get the chance to draft him. You can't just tuck your tail in that case, so we may as well look at the other talent.

For the fourth or fifth round, maybe. We're talking about the NUMBER SIX pick in the draft. You darn well ought to be able to find an immediate starter and impact player at that spot. Some "project" QB is not who I want this team looking at with that pick.

Can you read, or do you just choose not to? I said if the Skins TRADE DOWN from the 6th pick. Which means, you wouldn't be picking a QB at 6.

The Hogster wrote:

GoSkins wrote:

The Hogster wrote:Again, I expect that a trade down scenario might be more feasible than trading up. I say that because the other team looking for a QB in the Top 5 is Cleveland, and they have more ammo to move than we do (2 1st round picks this year). Even if that is the case, I believe we have the chance to bring in a QB not named RG3 who could be a franchise qb.

And who are the likely candidates to be our franchise QB?

Like I said before, I believe that Tannenhill & Weeden will be quality starters in the NFL. A lot of fans act as if Luck & RG3 are the only guys in the draft who have a chance at that. I'd love to have RG3 in the B & G. But, the reality is we pick 6th and its no guarantee we will get the chance to draft him. You can't just tuck your tail in that case, so we may as well look at the other talent.

The main problem with this scenario is that you really lose any control that you have over selecting the qb that you want. If we don't sign Flynn and don't trade for RGIII, what happens if like last year some teams reach on Tannehill and Weeden and both are gone by the time that we pick in the second round? Sure, you have Foles and Cousins, but those are both 2-3 year development projects and would be reaches with our second round pick. It's a tough situation that we're in.

CanesSkins26 wrote:

The Hogster wrote:

GoSkins wrote:

The Hogster wrote:Again, I expect that a trade down scenario might be more feasible than trading up. I say that because the other team looking for a QB in the Top 5 is Cleveland, and they have more ammo to move than we do (2 1st round picks this year). Even if that is the case, I believe we have the chance to bring in a QB not named RG3 who could be a franchise qb.

And who are the likely candidates to be our franchise QB?

Like I said before, I believe that Tannenhill & Weeden will be quality starters in the NFL. A lot of fans act as if Luck & RG3 are the only guys in the draft who have a chance at that. I'd love to have RG3 in the B & G. But, the reality is we pick 6th and its no guarantee we will get the chance to draft him. You can't just tuck your tail in that case, so we may as well look at the other talent.

The main problem with this scenario is that you really lose any control that you have over selecting the qb that you want. If we don't sign Flynn and don't trade for RGIII, what happens if like last year some teams reach on Tannehill and Weeden and both are gone by the time that we pick in the second round? Sure, you have Foles and Cousins, but those are both 2-3 year development projects and would be reaches with our second round pick. It's a tough situation that we're in.

Yes. We are in a tough spot. But, you can't assume that trading into the 2 spot is a done deal when (i) Cleveland picks 4th, and (ii) Cleveland has a second 1st round pick. As a result, the Browns have the best package for the #2 pick. The Rams basically move down 2 spots and pick again in this year's 1st round.

It's easy to say trade up. But, we have to be able to trade up. It's a no brainer that RG3 is going to be phenomenal. But, only 1 team will be able to get him. If the Browns put together a better deal, then we have to look at other options. Maybe those other options involve staying put and bringing in a free agent. Who knows. But, you have to have more than 1 basket with eggs in it. That's just reality.

The Hogster wrote:Can you read, or do you just choose not to? I said if the Skins TRADE DOWN from the 6th pick. Which means, you wouldn't be picking a QB at 6.

I understand the scenario just fine. I also come from a very different viewpoint when looking at draft picks. If they're trading BACK, then they need to feel that we can still get #6 talent wherever they trade back to. It's not like they don't have other positions of need that could be filled there.... WR, TE, CB, S, etc... They have the #6 pick. That's one of the 10-15 worthwhile picks in the draft. It ought to be a sure-fire immediate impact player. Are you really going to get that with ANY player at #17 or 22?

IF this FO thinks that RGIII is going to be a great QB for 10-12 years, I can see them trading up
HOWEVER - That will mean, we have 1 QB that possibly could be great for 10-12 years
OR ... 4 (OR more ) players from the top 60 players available in the next 2 drafts

NOW - I agree that we are in a terrible situation due to the previous management AND the lack of quality QBs in the drafts recently
PLUS, this FO really dropped the ball with their evaluations of Beck & Grossman

I just don't think that we should trade up - we should keep adding better talented players - as many as we can
AND hope that other players also become better players than expected

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:

The Hogster wrote:Can you read, or do you just choose not to? I said if the Skins TRADE DOWN from the 6th pick. Which means, you wouldn't be picking a QB at 6.

I understand the scenario just fine. I also come from a very different viewpoint when looking at draft picks. If they're trading BACK, then they need to feel that we can still get #6 talent wherever they trade back to. It's not like they don't have other positions of need that could be filled there.... WR, TE, CB, S, etc... They have the #6 pick. That's one of the 10-15 worthwhile picks in the draft. It ought to be a sure-fire immediate impact player. Are you really going to get that with ANY player at #17 or 22?

Ryan Kerrigan played pretty well last year. And, he was acquired with the 16th pick. There are high quality players available between the mid first and mid second round. And, if you can pick 3 of those players, that is not reason to hang your head.

I'm looking at the reality of our situation. If Matt Barkley came out, then maybe we would have a chance to get a QB that everyone would be happy with at 6. But, he didn't. The bottom line is we currently pick 6th. We need a QB. There doesn't seem to be a guy on RG3 or Luck's level that will be there at 6. Accordingly, we have to face the fact that we may be (i) picking the BPA at 6 (like Blackmon or Claiborne) or moving down into the 1st and acquiring another 2nd round pick (like last year). If we do that, then the question will be whether (1) we take the BPA at a position of need with that mid-first, or (2) reach for a QB that will be there but probably gone by our 2nd round picks, or (3) whether we simply take the best talent and make a run at a Free Agent. Who knows. But, those are scenarios we should be looking at if a trade up is not feasible.

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:

riggofan wrote:I don't know. I know that's the way it seems right now, because RGIII and Luck are the only QBs anybody is talking about. I bet things look a little bit different after the combine.

The heck with the combine. Which other QB has any top-end college experience? I'm not interested in guys who played second tier ball in college. They have not proven they can win under the sort of pressure that Luck and RGIII have.

I don't know. Tannehill played at Texas A&M. Foles at Arizona. Tyler Wilson at Arkansas. Kirk Cousins at Michigan State. Weeden at Oklahoma State. I'm not sure how you're defining these as "second tier ball".

Either way, you could be entirely right. I'm just saying after the combine and team workouts, some of these guys other than just RGIII and Luck will start popping up as possible first round picks. QB is just too valuable a position.

Random thoughts based on several post:

- I hate the fact that the scouting combine and private work out dramatically impact a draft board. It is just insane that players can dramatically move up (or down) a draft board based on what they do in shorts. WTF.

- As much as I hate the idea, if we can't trade out of #6 (either up or down) we have to take the BPA. Now hopefully you use team needs as a tie breaker. Say your top two or three players are all gone and you have players #4 through #10 ranked about even, then I would hope you default to your team needs and not just take #4 because he is slightly ranked higher than #5 or #6.

- You can and should reach a little for a QB, but I want to stress a little. If you can't move up to get RG3 or Luck or move down you should consider taking your third ranked QB if you have him #10 through say #15'ish, but if you have him ranked as a low first or high second then you can't reach that far.

- If you have your third QB ranked as a second round QB, but you think he will go late in the first then try to move up out of the second to get him.

- WRs and RBs should almost never be taken in the top ten. The only reason I would consider a WR in the top ten is if he is dramatically better than the other players (of need) available and that is ONLY because we desperately need a "difference maker" at WR. For us a RB shouldn't even remotely be considered for two reasons (no not Helu and Royster, they are one reason) we have two quality RB already and RBs can be found at your local Quickie Mart. A dominate Center is more important to a running game than a RB, yet they are never taken high.

skinsfan#33 wrote:You can and should reach a little for a QB, but I want to stress a little. If you can't move up to get RG3 or Luck or move down you should consider taking your third ranked QB if you have him #10 through say #15'ish, but if you have him ranked as a low first or high second then you can't reach that far.

I agree with you, but I think you could still take your QB at #6 even if you do project him as a low first rounder. Why not?

The Hogster wrote:Ryan Kerrigan played pretty well last year. And, he was acquired with the 16th pick. There are high quality players available between the mid first and mid second round. And, if you can pick 3 of those players, that is not reason to hang your head.

Kerrigan did play well in his rookie season. I will always take ONE STUD PLAYER over two or three Potentially good players. I'll take the result I can come closer to guaranteeing works out over the chance that the other guys might be worth something.

The Hogster wrote:I'm looking at the reality of our situation. If Matt Barkley came out, then maybe we would have a chance to get a QB that everyone would be happy with at 6. But, he didn't. The bottom line is we currently pick 6th. We need a QB. There doesn't seem to be a guy on RG3 or Luck's level that will be there at 6. Accordingly, we have to face the fact that we may be (i) picking the BPA at 6 (like Blackmon or Claiborne) or moving down into the 1st and acquiring another 2nd round pick (like last year). If we do that, then the question will be whether (1) we take the BPA at a position of need with that mid-first, or (2) reach for a QB that will be there but probably gone by our 2nd round picks, or (3) whether we simply take the best talent and make a run at a Free Agent. Who knows. But, those are scenarios we should be looking at if a trade up is not feasible.

1. Only if it's at a POSITION OF NEED. I hate the BPA concept.
2. I hope not. It would simply be another guy in B&G that I couldn't root for.
3. Again, I do not believe in the BPA concept and never have.

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:

The Hogster wrote:Ryan Kerrigan played pretty well last year. And, he was acquired with the 16th pick. There are high quality players available between the mid first and mid second round. And, if you can pick 3 of those players, that is not reason to hang your head.

Kerrigan did play well in his rookie season. I will always take ONE STUD PLAYER over two or three Potentially good players. I'll take the result I can come closer to guaranteeing works out over the chance that the other guys might be worth something.

The Hogster wrote:I'm looking at the reality of our situation. If Matt Barkley came out, then maybe we would have a chance to get a QB that everyone would be happy with at 6. But, he didn't. The bottom line is we currently pick 6th. We need a QB. There doesn't seem to be a guy on RG3 or Luck's level that will be there at 6. Accordingly, we have to face the fact that we may be (i) picking the BPA at 6 (like Blackmon or Claiborne) or moving down into the 1st and acquiring another 2nd round pick (like last year). If we do that, then the question will be whether (1) we take the BPA at a position of need with that mid-first, or (2) reach for a QB that will be there but probably gone by our 2nd round picks, or (3) whether we simply take the best talent and make a run at a Free Agent. Who knows. But, those are scenarios we should be looking at if a trade up is not feasible.

1. Only if it's at a POSITION OF NEED. I hate the BPA concept.
2. I hope not. It would simply be another guy in B&G that I couldn't root for.
3. Again, I do not believe in the BPA concept and never have.

I think you're taking this "BPA concept" too literally and stretching beyond the bounds of reason. The concept of "Best Player Available" is based on a team's draft board. The team ranks draft eligible players, and that ranking will inherently build into it the consideration of what that team's roster needs are.

For example, while RG3 may be the #2 player overall on a mock draft site or according to Mike Mayock. He likely isn't atop the Rams draft board. Accordingly, if they have Matt Kalil ranked as the BPA at pick 2, but know that another team like the Skins or Browns have RG3 as the 1 or 2 player on their boards, then they can move out of the spot and still have the chance to get their BPA at a later pick and accumulate another pick or picks.

Every team's board is different. And, every team ranks players with the needs of their roster in mind. BPA is not based on mock drafts or Mel Kiper.

Assuming the QBs we all want are gone than I say

BEST PLAYER AVAILABLE!!!

You know why? Because we are so dag gone terrible at almost every position that it would be an AUTOMATIC upgrade!!! (exception of RB position IMO)

langleyparkjoe wrote:are so dag gone terrible at almost every position that it would be an AUTOMATIC upgrade!!! (exception of RB position IMO)

+1

riggofan wrote:I don't know. Tannehill played at Texas A&M. Foles at Arizona. Tyler Wilson at Arkansas. Kirk Cousins at Michigan State. Weeden at Oklahoma State. I'm not sure how you're defining these as "second tier ball".

I don't follow college football beyond the national headlines and never have. I will tell you that I couldn't have come up with any of the names you list, which makes me wonder if they were playing in top tier games or competing for a National Championship. If a guy cannot compete at the highest levels in COLLEGE, how can I expect that he'll be able to come in here and lead a 4th quarter comeback drive to win the game in Week One of his rookie year.... Which is what I would expect of ANY QB drafted at #6 in the first round. Is that expectations reasonable... probably not; but it is the expectation I have for QB's drafted that high.

riggofan wrote:Either way, you could be entirely right. I'm just saying after the combine and team workouts, some of these guys other than just RGIII and Luck will start popping up as possible first round picks. QB is just too valuable a position.

In shorts and tshirts. The combine is the second most worthless NFL event after the Pro Bowl. I don't care what 40 time a guy runs in shorts and a tshirt. I don't care what a QB can do when there's no line and no rush and no defense to read. Show me what he does ON THE FIELD and IN THE GAMES against THE BEST OPPONENTS AVAILABLE.

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:

riggofan wrote:I don't know. Tannehill played at Texas A&M. Foles at Arizona. Tyler Wilson at Arkansas. Kirk Cousins at Michigan State. Weeden at Oklahoma State. I'm not sure how you're defining these as "second tier ball".

I don't follow college football beyond the national headlines and never have. I will tell you that I couldn't have come up with any of the names you list, which makes me wonder if they were playing in top tier games or competing for a National Championship. If a guy cannot compete at the highest levels in COLLEGE, how can I expect that he'll be able to come in here and lead a 4th quarter comeback drive to win the game in Week One of his rookie year.... Which is what I would expect of ANY QB drafted at #6 in the first round. Is that expectations reasonable... probably not; but it is the expectation I have for QB's drafted that high.

So I think what you're saying is that you expect high draft picks to be guys that you have heard of for some reason. I don't think its a very good argument. Rex Grossman had a great college career, won an SEC championship and was runner up for the Heisman. Ben Roethlisberger played at freaking Miami of Ohio. Joe Flacco played for DELAWARE. Matt Leinart and Vince Young both played in the National Championship game. Not sure how many 4th guarter comeback drives either of them has led in the NFL.

riggofan wrote:So I think what you're saying is that you expect high draft picks to be guys that you have heard of for some reason. I don't think its a very good argument. Rex Grossman had a great college career, won an SEC championship and was runner up for the Heisman. Ben Roethlisberger played at freaking Miami of Ohio. Joe Flacco played for DELAWARE. Matt Leinart and Vince Young both played in the National Championship game. Not sure how many 4th guarter comeback drives either of them has led in the NFL.

What I'm saying is that if I haven't heard your name before, and you haven't played and had success at the highest echelons of the NCAA level, I don't want any team I root for even considering you as a first, second, or third round pick. If you cannot or have not competed at the highest level in the NCAA I don't know how you can be expected to come in and immediately contribute meaningfully in the NFL. This doesn't mean every National Championship team member should be a Top 10 pick, but it does mean that if you're racking up those monstrous numbers against the University of Buffalo and UCONN, then those numbers are HIGHLY SUSPECT in my mind, and you're not the guy I want my team looking at.

Why do people insist on feeding the troll? The idiocy of the posts means that no matter how well intended any response is going to be idiocy.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Why do people insist on feeding the troll? The idiocy of the posts means that no matter how well intended any response is going to be idiocy.

Sorry man, I wasn't looking at the username. Kind of forgot!

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Why do people insist on feeding the troll? The idiocy of the posts means that no matter how well intended any response is going to be idiocy.

AMEN

What a waste of time and bandwidth. I do not even read his posts or the responses to him anymore.

Redskin in Canada wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Why do people insist on feeding the troll? The idiocy of the posts means that no matter how well intended any response is going to be idiocy.

AMEN

What a waste of time and bandwidth. I do not even read his posts or the responses to him anymore.

^^ +1X2

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:

riggofan wrote:I don't know. I know that's the way it seems right now, because RGIII and Luck are the only QBs anybody is talking about. I bet things look a little bit different after the combine.

The heck with the combine. Which other QB has any top-end college experience? I'm not interested in guys who played second tier ball in college. They have not proven they can win under the sort of pressure that Luck and RGIII have.

I STRONGLY disagree. Look at how many "top tier" QBs in college are busts. Look at how many others that were overlooked make it. Flacco played at FCS Delaware and truly should have been in the Super Bowl if not for a dropped pass that was perfectly thrown (and I think the Ravens would have beat the Giants). Roethlissburger (sp?) played at a MAC school. Alex Smith was the man for the 49ers, but how many years was it until he finally had a great season this year? No, QB talent has far more to do with your fellow players and coaches than it does what competition you faced in college. That said, you can't teach 6'6", 240, with a 4.5 40, so raw talent is another issue.

My favorite player ever was Darell Green, out of Texas A&I. The Gibbs FO always found talent in later rounds much like the Patriots of this era. TO played for Chattanooga. Charles Haley and Gary Clark for James Madison. Rich Gannon was another Delaware QB who made it to the Super Bowl. Victor Cruz caught a TD tonight in the Super Bowl as a UFA from UMass. The lists, past and present, go on and on. Get me a real talent scout, not a hack who says, "Give me the best player from LSU, Michigan, Florida and USC..."

Nahhh, give me players with heart, with a chip on their shoulder, with something to prove. I don't want Matt Leinart, Ryan Leaf or any other college great that thinks they have it all. They have no clue. To succeed in the NFL, that hunger, that drive, ALWAYS comes first and will trump raw talent and experience.

Rant over.

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:

riggofan wrote:I don't know. I know that's the way it seems right now, because RGIII and Luck are the only QBs anybody is talking about. I bet things look a little bit different after the combine.

The heck with the combine. Which other QB has any top-end college experience? I'm not interested in guys who played second tier ball in college. They have not proven they can win under the sort of pressure that Luck and RGIII have.

I STRONGLY disagree. Look at how many "top tier" QBs in college are busts. Look at how many others that were overlooked make it. Flacco played at FCS Delaware and truly should have been in the Super Bowl if not for a dropped pass that was perfectly thrown (and I think the Ravens would have beat the Giants). Roethlissburger (sp?) played at a MAC school. Alex Smith was the man for the 49ers, but how many years was it until he finally had a great season this year? No, QB talent has far more to do with your fellow players and coaches than it does what competition you faced in college. That said, you can't teach 6'6", 240, with a 4.5 40, so raw talent is another issue.

My favorite player ever was Darell Green, out of Texas A&I. The Gibbs FO always found talent in later rounds much like the Patriots of this era. TO played for Chattanooga. Charles Haley and Gary Clark for James Madison. Rich Gannon was another Delaware QB who made it to the Super Bowl. Victor Cruz caught a TD tonight in the Super Bowl as a UFA from UMass. The lists, past and present, go on and on. Get me a real talent scout, not a hack who says, "Give me the best player from LSU, Michigan, Florida and USC..."

Nahhh, give me players with heart, with a chip on their shoulder, with something to prove. I don't want Matt Leinart, Ryan Leaf or any other college great that thinks they have it all. They have no clue. To succeed in the NFL, that hunger, that drive, ALWAYS comes first and will trump raw talent and experience.

Rant over.

Oh, and what about ey out of Utah State? That turned out ok...

As for this thread, I'd rather we trade for more picks. Another draft like last year and the Skins will be one more step towards being an established franchise with potential to compete for a championship. If a great QB falls to us a 6, ok, but let's not lose sleep over it. Fix the other holes in the damn and get a FA QB to patch things up until the team is ready.

I don't like any option we have right now. Good Rex/Bad Rex is not good for anyone's health or structure to their living room.

FanofallthatisGibbs wrote:As for this thread, I'd rather we trade for more picks. Another draft like last year and the Skins will be one more step towards being an established franchise with potential to compete for a championship. If a great QB falls to us a 6, ok, but let's not lose sleep over it. Fix the other holes in the damn and get a FA QB to patch things up until the team is ready.

"One more step towards...." GIVE ME A BREAK!!! It's been TWENTY YEARS since this team won a meaningful game. LITERALLY. The 20th anniversary of the last time the Redskins were in the Super Bowl went by about a week and a half ago. If this team doesn't find a Franchise QB, it'll be another two decades and we'll still be waiting for a trip back to the Super Bowl. You saw last night the difference between a FRANCHISE Quarterback and a SYSTEM Quarterback.

FanofallthatisGibbs wrote:

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:The heck with the combine. Which other QB has any top-end college experience? I'm not interested in guys who played second tier ball in college. They have not proven they can win under the sort of pressure that Luck and RGIII have.

I STRONGLY disagree

If you agreed with Fanatic, then you'd both be wrong. Dude, he likes to irritate people and he knows nothing about football. I wouldn't waste your time.