No Luck... so... Now What?

[Red_One43]

Did you see this article on Barkley.

So after making you read and look at all that, here's a quick bullet point summary on Matt Barkley's abilities:

•Accurate
•Mobile
•Makes good decisions (has a low amount of INT's)
•Plays in a pro-style offense. Gives him the mechanics and footwork to be ready to start in the NFL from day 1
•Poise under pressure, keeps calm and is constantly looking down-field looking for an open receiver
•He can read defense's, make adjustments and take advantage of mismatches. (Hard to show on film so I didn't).



http://www.mockingthedraft.com/2011/11/ ... tt-barkley

[Red_One43]

Have you seen this one on RGIII (Same author as the Barkley article)

The biggest difference for Griffin this season has been the types of throws he's making. In the past, he was more of a short game thrower, which made him a product of the spread Baylor uses. This season he's making much more difficult throws. One of the things I think people don't notice about Griffin is how tough he is. For better or worse, he's not a quarterback who is going to slide when he takes off and runs.

The downside that remains is that he's still learning the play calling and how to go through his progressions. He's not asked in the Baylor offense to make many complex reads, so he's behind the curve in that area. He also has some lapses where he'll pull the ball down too quickly and run with the ball. It hasn't hurt him as much in college, but that sort of thing doesn't translate particularly well to the pros.

I think that Barkley is more "pro ready" based on having played in a pro style offense, BUT RGIII is said to be along a lot further than Cam Newton and look what Cam has done. I think that RG III is special. He even has the pigeon toes like Elway and that honey badger and y'all know what the honey badger is about.

I have to take RGIII if available. Watch is stock soar as the draft approaches.

http://www.hogshaven.com/2011/10/27/251 ... uarterback

[CanesSkins26]

I am not an expert on college players, and my research is 80% YouTube videos and 20% articles I've read . . . but with all of that said, my own opinion is that we should draft Barkley.

I don't think we should trade to get Luck. The reality is that he's going to be very expensive if the Skins want him. The fit with the Colts is too perfect for them not to draft him, meaning they will have a much higher price for prospective traders, and besides that we might be bidding against other teams for the pick.

I think RGIII is an exciting player to watch, but seeing the throws Barkley made had me drooling. I can't remember the last Redskins QB that could make throws like that with any consistency.

+1

[1niksder]

I am not an expert on college players, and my research is 80% YouTube videos and 20% articles I've read . . . but with all of that said, my own opinion is that we should draft Barkley.

I don't think we should trade to get Luck. The reality is that he's going to be very expensive if the Skins want him. The fit with the Colts is too perfect for them not to draft him, meaning they will have a much higher price for prospective traders, and besides that we might be bidding against other teams for the pick.

I think RGIII is an exciting player to watch, but seeing the throws Barkley made had me drooling. I can't remember the last Redskins QB that could make throws like that with any consistency.

+1

+1 also...

I'm not sold on Barkley simple because I think Pete Carroll will go all in to get him before we pick. I don't think moving up for anyone should be a option.

I'd go with RGIII and trade for Matt Leinart (if healthy). The Texans won't want much now that T.J. Yates is getting playing time now, and Leinart has played in this system so he wouldn't have to learn the scheme as most veteran "caretakers" would have to do.

[frankcal20]

Should note, and didn't really consider this but there is a big chance that Indy will pass on luck and they could look very closely at Ryan Khalil (OL USC). If for any reason Indy passes on Luck, he will fall to us at 5 if that's where we're picking.

[CanesSkins26]

Should note, and didn't really consider this but there is a big chance that Indy will pass on luck and they could look very closely at Ryan Khalil (OL USC). If for any reason Indy passes on Luck, he will fall to us at 5 if that's where we're picking.

If Indy passes no way that he falls to #5. Someone else would certainly trade up to get him before he got that far down.

[StorminMormon86]

Short Term?????? What about this team makes you think we need any sort of short term solution??? Are you that crazy in you think we only need a QB to make us a SB contender???? And how do you think we will acquire Peyton Manning -- magically??? It will cost us draft picks -- which would further stunt the progress of this team.

And you think that Peyton Manning is going to go anywhere that considers him a short term solution??? The only reason he would leave would be to go to a franchise that is willing to invest in him and sign him to an astronomical 5 year (or longer) contract. And if he were going to go to a place that was grooming a young QB while he started, he would stay put in Indy. Besides, Peyton Manning is not about to mentor a young QB -- how did Painter do in his absence???

I swear. WTF???

Did you miss this part?

Again this is all hypothetical, I don't see Manning coming here.

You do know who our owner is, right? The same guy who got Haynesworth, Archuleta, etc. The talking heads on NFL Network are already talking about Manning possibly coming to the Redskins. When's the last time (even pre-Snyder) that the Skins had any success in grooming a long term QB? We've had success by acquiring FA's. I do not want to trade away crucial draft picks for him, BUT if you were to answer the basic question of who I would rather have as a QB next year, I'd take Manning over any of the rookies. BUT, I would much rather have a rookie QB and still maintain our draft picks to build depth around our entire roster. A QB is not the only position we need filled.

[Countertrey]

Should note, and didn't really consider this but there is a big chance that Indy will pass on luck and they could look very closely at Ryan Khalil (OL USC). If for any reason Indy passes on Luck, he will fall to us at 5 if that's where we're picking.

If Indy passes no way that he falls to #5. Someone else would certainly trade up to get him before he got that far down.

Yup... it would be a "no-brainer". Teams will be falling over each other to trade up... who ever owns the #2 pick will get a huge windfall... or may use it themselves on Luck... He is the kind of talent that will make a team that doesn't need a quarterback select a quarterback.

[Chris Luva Luva]

Yup... it would be a "no-brainer". Teams will be falling over each other to trade up... who ever owns the #2 pick will get a huge windfall... or may use it themselves on Luck... He is the kind of talent that will make a team that doesn't need a quarterback select a quarterback.

It's definitely going to be interesting....

[langleyparkjoe]

Now seeing that Peyton Manning was basically the OC of the Colts, I doubt that he'd want to have Kyle chirping in his ear. Ever.

I nominate this your best post for 2011 Hogster!!!

Peyton would say "get out of my ear lil man, I'm trying to run a no huddle here"

[frankcal20]

Should note, and didn't really consider this but there is a big chance that Indy will pass on luck and they could look very closely at Ryan Khalil (OL USC). If for any reason Indy passes on Luck, he will fall to us at 5 if that's where we're picking.

If Indy passes no way that he falls to #5. Someone else would certainly trade up to get him before he got that far down.

Yup... it would be a "no-brainer". Teams will be falling over each other to trade up... who ever owns the #2 pick will get a huge windfall... or may use it themselves on Luck... He is the kind of talent that will make a team that doesn't need a quarterback select a quarterback.

Not likely, and here's why:

1st Colts 0-12 - if Colts pass on Luck
2nd Vikings 2-10 - Drafted Ponder w/ #12 pick in '11
3rd Rams 2-10 - Drafted Sam Bradford 2 yrs ago and he's the real deal. Just need an offensive line.
4th Jags 3-8 - traded w/ us to get Gabbert in '11. Who knows but he's growing as a player.
5th Redskins 4-8

Of course you could say that anyone could trade up, etc but after chatting w/ Tim Ryan and Pat Kirwan yesterday, they said that even for us to move up to #1, they think it's going to take 2 1st Rd picks, 2 2nd Rd picks and another 1st.

They referenced the Atl trade for Julio Jones this past year. If you forgot what they gave up. Here you go:

The Atlanta Falcons have made a bold
draft-day trade to select Alabama wide receiver Julio Jones.
The Falcons acquired the No. 6 overall pick from Cleveland on
Thursday night for a package of five draft picks, including
Atlanta's No. 27 overall pick in the first round this year and the
team's first-round pick in 2012.
The Browns also acquired the Falcons' second- and fourth-round
picks this year and fourth-round pick in 2012.
The Falcons will pair the physical Jones with their Pro Bowl
receiver Roddy White, giving quarterback Matt Ryan another top
target.

This coming off a year in which GMs were not fully comfortable with the new CBA or terms of value for the picks.

Either way, it will be VERY interesting. My gutt say's force Indy to make the pick. My money is on them drafting a lineman and letting everything else shake out as it should. But if they do Draft Luck and keep him, we all know that Mannings career is practically over and there's no reason for us to gamble on him either.

[Irn-Bru]

Hmm . . .



If Luck fell to us like that, it could be the steal of the decade for the Skins.

[frankcal20]

Lots of folks are saying that we stole a guy w/ Karrigan this past year with the trade down w/ Helu and one other guy.

[1niksder]

Not likely, and here's why:

1st Colts 0-12 - if Colts pass on Luck
2nd Vikings 2-10 - Drafted Ponder w/ #12 pick in '11
3rd Rams 2-10 - Drafted Sam Bradford 2 yrs ago and he's the real deal. Just need an offensive line.
4th Jags 3-8 - traded w/ us to get Gabbert in '11. Who knows but he's growing as a player.
5th Redskins 4-8

Of course you could say that anyone could trade up, etc but after chatting w/ Tim Ryan and Pat Kirwan yesterday, they said that even for us to move up to #1, they think it's going to take 2 1st Rd picks, 2 2nd Rd picks and another 1st.

They referenced the Atl trade for Julio Jones this past year. If you forgot what they gave up. Here you go:

The Atlanta Falcons have made a bold
draft-day trade to select Alabama wide receiver Julio Jones.
The Falcons acquired the No. 6 overall pick from Cleveland on
Thursday night for a package of five draft picks, including
Atlanta's No. 27 overall pick in the first round this year and the
team's first-round pick in 2012.
The Browns also acquired the Falcons' second- and fourth-round
picks this year and fourth-round pick in 2012.
The Falcons will pair the physical Jones with their Pro Bowl
receiver Roddy White, giving quarterback Matt Ryan another top
target.

Tim Ryan and Pat Kirwan might want to rethink their reasoning...

Atlanta jumped from the 27th pick to the 6th pick, they gave up 5 picks worth 1377 pts. in trade value for one pick worth 1600 pts. In the end the Falcons moved up 21 spots and under paid the Browns on the way up.

Based on that trade, there is no way it would cost the Redskins 3 ones and 2 twos, to move up 4 spots. These picks would total about 175 pts more than the top pick is worth.

As I posted on a previous page

Under the current TVC the Redskins will have to come up with 1300 pts. to equal what the 1st pick in the 2012 draft pick is worth to swap spots. That would cost the Redskins this year's first and second plus next year's first, second and third.

I wouldn't do the trade, after looking at what th Falcons gave up last year, I would pull this year's second and next year's third off the table, and still would think it's too much for one player on a team with this many need.

With the new CBA and Rookie Salary Cap in place not only did the cost of signing these guys go down but it appears the cost of trading up in the draft actually went down.

[frankcal20]

The old TVC isn't even relevant anymore because the financial risk for signing a guy is much lower, which in turn makes the picks greater in value. The stated that this past draft was a great "unknown" because a lot of the GMs couldn't actually establish value. Just look at the Kerrigan trade. We actually got 600 points in the trade. Thats equal to gaining the 31st pick in the draft.

That's my point in that GMs didn't know how to manouver in the draft last year because the values don't work with the TVC w/ the rookie wage scale.

[The Hogster]

Now seeing that Peyton Manning was basically the OC of the Colts, I doubt that he'd want to have Kyle chirping in his ear. Ever.

I nominate this your best post for 2011 Hogster!!!

Peyton would say "get out of my ear lil man, I'm trying to run a no huddle here"

And, that would be epic since I haven't seen the Skins run No Huddle in like ever. Even our hurry up is slow.

[CanesSkins26]

Should note, and didn't really consider this but there is a big chance that Indy will pass on luck and they could look very closely at Ryan Khalil (OL USC). If for any reason Indy passes on Luck, he will fall to us at 5 if that's where we're picking.

If Indy passes no way that he falls to #5. Someone else would certainly trade up to get him before he got that far down.

Yup... it would be a "no-brainer". Teams will be falling over each other to trade up... who ever owns the #2 pick will get a huge windfall... or may use it themselves on Luck... He is the kind of talent that will make a team that doesn't need a quarterback select a quarterback.

Not likely, and here's why:

1st Colts 0-12 - if Colts pass on Luck
2nd Vikings 2-10 - Drafted Ponder w/ #12 pick in '11
3rd Rams 2-10 - Drafted Sam Bradford 2 yrs ago and he's the real deal. Just need an offensive line.
4th Jags 3-8 - traded w/ us to get Gabbert in '11. Who knows but he's growing as a player.
5th Redskins 4-8

Of course you could say that anyone could trade up, etc but after chatting w/ Tim Ryan and Pat Kirwan yesterday, they said that even for us to move up to #1, they think it's going to take 2 1st Rd picks, 2 2nd Rd picks and another 1st.

They referenced the Atl trade for Julio Jones this past year. If you forgot what they gave up. Here you go:

The Atlanta Falcons have made a bold
draft-day trade to select Alabama wide receiver Julio Jones.
The Falcons acquired the No. 6 overall pick from Cleveland on
Thursday night for a package of five draft picks, including
Atlanta's No. 27 overall pick in the first round this year and the
team's first-round pick in 2012.
The Browns also acquired the Falcons' second- and fourth-round
picks this year and fourth-round pick in 2012.
The Falcons will pair the physical Jones with their Pro Bowl
receiver Roddy White, giving quarterback Matt Ryan another top
target.

This coming off a year in which GMs were not fully comfortable with the new CBA or terms of value for the picks.

Either way, it will be VERY interesting. My gutt say's force Indy to make the pick. My money is on them drafting a lineman and letting everything else shake out as it should. But if they do Draft Luck and keep him, we all know that Mannings career is practically over and there's no reason for us to gamble on him either.

I also wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the idea of the Vikings or Jags picking Luck. Ponder and Gabbert have potential, but neither is Andrew Luck.

[1niksder]

The old TVC isn't even relevant anymore because the financial risk for signing a guy is much lower, which in turn makes the picks greater in value. The stated that this past draft was a great "unknown" because a lot of the GMs couldn't actually establish value. Just look at the Kerrigan trade. We actually got 600 points in the trade. Thats equal to gaining the 31st pick in the draft.

That's my point in that GMs didn't know how to manouver in the draft last year because the values don't work with the TVC w/ the rookie wage scale.

That makes no sense, before the RWS GMs had no idea what they would be paying draft picks, they only knew they'ed be paying more than what the guy drafted in that slot the year before had received. Now the GMs know what they will be paying the picks. They actually gained control over what they would be paying, which makes trading picks easier

The TVC is only a tool. Values were given to each pick, along with the knowledge that the top players go first, the chart was used to help determine a baseline for what it should cost to swap picks. Other things go into the value of every pick, like team needs, the number of offers a team gets for that pick also helps determine the value. GMs also adjust the value of picks based on who is available at that pick.

The Redskins sent the 10th overall pick to Jacksonville for their first- and second-round picks (Nos. 16 and 49). The Skins traded down with a team that wanted a particular QB, that gave the pick more value. (#10=1300 pts, #16=1000 pts, #49= 410 pts) The Redskins gained 110 pts. or the value of a 4th round pick about 79 picks after the 31st pick


Nothing changed other than the GMs now know exactly what they will be paying the picks The Atlanta traded up for a player that everyone knew they wanted and gained 223 pts. or the value of a 3rd round pick. Atlanta had the good fortune to be dealing with the Browns though.

[1niksder]

I also wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the idea of the Vikings or Jags picking Luck. Ponder and Gabbert have potential, but neither is Andrew Luck.

+1

[GoSkins]

I would be willing to give up a #1 in 2013 for Peyton and use our #1 in 2012 on a QB. Most of you think we need to get rid of both Grossman and Beck and get 2 QBs. This would be an ideal situation if we could pull it off.

Ok Vinny.

That would be ideal -- for Indy....

This post boarders on complete insanity. I am speechless.

You sure are opinionated. I suggested we draft a top flight QB in the 1st round of the 2012 draft and trade our 1st pick in 2013 for Peyton Manning; and if this could be done it would be ideal. And you say my post is borderline insane? Glad we're just posting on here.

[Countertrey]

Should note, and didn't really consider this but there is a big chance that Indy will pass on luck and they could look very closely at Ryan Khalil (OL USC). If for any reason Indy passes on Luck, he will fall to us at 5 if that's where we're picking.

If Indy passes no way that he falls to #5. Someone else would certainly trade up to get him before he got that far down.

Yup... it would be a "no-brainer". Teams will be falling over each other to trade up... who ever owns the #2 pick will get a huge windfall... or may use it themselves on Luck... He is the kind of talent that will make a team that doesn't need a quarterback select a quarterback.

Not likely, and here's why:

1st Colts 0-12 - if Colts pass on Luck
2nd Vikings 2-10 - Drafted Ponder w/ #12 pick in '11
3rd Rams 2-10 - Drafted Sam Bradford 2 yrs ago and he's the real deal. Just need an offensive line.
4th Jags 3-8 - traded w/ us to get Gabbert in '11. Who knows but he's growing as a player.
5th Redskins 4-8

Of course you could say that anyone could trade up, etc but after chatting w/ Tim Ryan and Pat Kirwan yesterday, they said that even for us to move up to #1, they think it's going to take 2 1st Rd picks, 2 2nd Rd picks and another 1st.

They referenced the Atl trade for Julio Jones this past year. If you forgot what they gave up. Here you go:

The Atlanta Falcons have made a bold
draft-day trade to select Alabama wide receiver Julio Jones.
The Falcons acquired the No. 6 overall pick from Cleveland on
Thursday night for a package of five draft picks, including
Atlanta's No. 27 overall pick in the first round this year and the
team's first-round pick in 2012.
The Browns also acquired the Falcons' second- and fourth-round
picks this year and fourth-round pick in 2012.
The Falcons will pair the physical Jones with their Pro Bowl
receiver Roddy White, giving quarterback Matt Ryan another top
target.

This coming off a year in which GMs were not fully comfortable with the new CBA or terms of value for the picks.

Either way, it will be VERY interesting. My gutt say's force Indy to make the pick. My money is on them drafting a lineman and letting everything else shake out as it should. But if they do Draft Luck and keep him, we all know that Mannings career is practically over and there's no reason for us to gamble on him either.

I also wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the idea of the Vikings or Jags picking Luck. Ponder and Gabbert have potential, but neither is Andrew Luck.

+1... this would be my point.

Let's see... I can have Blaine Gabbert... OR I could have Luck AND then trade Gabbert for a pick... Same with Ponder. Luck falling to us if we are at 5 is soooooooo unlikely... but then, I said the same thing a couple of years ago when I thought Orakpo was sure to be gone by the 3rd pick... I suppose stranger things have happened... but I will be the last person to hold my breath.

[markshark84]

Short Term?????? What about this team makes you think we need any sort of short term solution??? Are you that crazy in you think we only need a QB to make us a SB contender???? And how do you think we will acquire Peyton Manning -- magically??? It will cost us draft picks -- which would further stunt the progress of this team.

And you think that Peyton Manning is going to go anywhere that considers him a short term solution??? The only reason he would leave would be to go to a franchise that is willing to invest in him and sign him to an astronomical 5 year (or longer) contract. And if he were going to go to a place that was grooming a young QB while he started, he would stay put in Indy. Besides, Peyton Manning is not about to mentor a young QB -- how did Painter do in his absence???

I swear. WTF???

Did you miss this part?

Again this is all hypothetical, I don't see Manning coming here.

You do know who our owner is, right? The same guy who got Haynesworth, Archuleta, etc. The talking heads on NFL Network are already talking about Manning possibly coming to the Redskins. When's the last time (even pre-Snyder) that the Skins had any success in grooming a long term QB? We've had success by acquiring FA's. I do not want to trade away crucial draft picks for him, BUT if you were to answer the basic question of who I would rather have as a QB next year, I'd take Manning over any of the rookies. BUT, I would much rather have a rookie QB and still maintain our draft picks to build depth around our entire roster. A QB is not the only position we need filled.

No, I got that line, but didn't think it was any sort of disclaimer. I read the post as you saying that you wouldn't mind having Manning here next year. And in using logic, deducted that if you were cool with getting Manning, then you were cool with giving up draft picks for him -- since realistically, that is the way we would get him.

And just because the skins haven't "groomed" a QB (which I agree with), it doesn't mean it can't happen. That is the way we need to go -- regardless of history. I wouldn't take Manning over a rookie like Barkley because it would just be setting us back. Manning would not be the future -- we need to invest in the future -- not the present. And before you say we should get him to mentor our QB -- Manning is not the type that will do such a thing; so there is no reason to sign him unless it is to play as a 5 year answer -- which would be stupid. Manning is not a long term answer, therefore, I would prefer to have someone playing who potentially could be the long term answer -- even if he may not be as good in his initial year.

But I think the above paragraphs are all for not -- because I fully agree with your last two sentences -- so I think we are probably on the same page.

[markshark84]

I would be willing to give up a #1 in 2013 for Peyton and use our #1 in 2012 on a QB. Most of you think we need to get rid of both Grossman and Beck and get 2 QBs. This would be an ideal situation if we could pull it off.

Ok Vinny.

That would be ideal -- for Indy....

This post boarders on complete insanity. I am speechless.

You are sure are opinionated. I suggested we draft a top flight QB in the 1st round of the 2012 draft and trade our 1st pick in 2013 for Peyton Manning; and if this could be done it would be ideal. And you say my post is borderline insane? Glad we're just posting on here.

Sorry if I come across opinionated. I don't think most on this board would say that. It takes a lot for me to get fired up -- and your post is a lot.

Sorry, but giving up our 2013 first round pick for Manning would be insanity. You are basically saying that we should use a first round pick on at least one player that will not play -- either the rookie QB or Manning. That just doesn't make sense. First round picks should be used on players that can play/contribute immediately -- even QBs. If you have a project QB -- don't draft him in the first round. By using two consecutive 1st rounders on QBs, you would be doing the same thing (albeit different positions) that Matt Millen did with WRs in Detroit. It just isn't smart.

Addiitionally, it is not like the only needs we have are at the QB position. We desperately need OL -- as many as 4. That first rounder used for Manning would basically give us fixture OL for the next 7-10 years (since the majority of 1st round OL picks are successful). We don't have the luxury of dumping a 1st round pick down a toilet. We need players -- lots of players -- therefore we need draft picks.

I think why your post particularly got to me was that you are just looking at things in the short term --- and I hate that. That has been the premier problem plaguing this organization for decades. STOP TRADING FOR AGING MARQUEE VETERANS. It's stupid. It doesn't work. They don't perform. It has ruined this organization. The only reason that the NFL network and other agencies are even discussing the Skins picking up Manning IS BECAUSE THEY THINK WE ARE STUPID AND DELUSIONAL ENOUGH TO DO IT -- BASED ON PRIOR HISTORY. The Redskins have literally become a laughing stock as a result of the way we run player personnel -- yet it appears that people still haven't learned.

I apologize if you take this personally. I did not intend that. It's (i.e., trading high draft picks/signing for HUGE money for high profile franchise type players) just an escalating topic that I am passionate about -- and makes me crazy. It started with Stubbfield in 1998 and continued in 2000 with Deon, Smith, and Carrier. It got worse with Lloyd, ARE, Archuleta, and Carter. By the time we signed AH, I was going crazy. I just don't like it. You can sign free agents -- just sign contribution/role players. You draft your franchise players.

[GoSkins]

I would be willing to give up a #1 in 2013 for Peyton and use our #1 in 2012 on a QB. Most of you think we need to get rid of both Grossman and Beck and get 2 QBs. This would be an ideal situation if we could pull it off.

Ok Vinny.

That would be ideal -- for Indy....

This post boarders on complete insanity. I am speechless.

You are sure are opinionated. I suggested we draft a top flight QB in the 1st round of the 2012 draft and trade our 1st pick in 2013 for Peyton Manning; and if this could be done it would be ideal. And you say my post is borderline insane? Glad we're just posting on here.

Sorry if I come across opinionated. I don't think most on this board would say that. It takes a lot for me to get fired up -- and your post is a lot.

Sorry, but giving up our 2013 first round pick for Manning would be insanity. You are basically saying that we should use a first round pick on at least one player that will not play -- either the rookie QB or Manning. That just doesn't make sense. First round picks should be used on players that can play/contribute immediately -- even QBs. If you have a project QB -- don't draft him in the first round. By using two consecutive 1st rounders on QBs, you would be doing the same thing (albeit different positions) that Matt Millen did with WRs in Detroit. It just isn't smart.

Addiitionally, it is not like the only needs we have are at the QB position. We desperately need OL -- as many as 4. That first rounder used for Manning would basically give us fixture OL for the next 7-10 years (since the majority of 1st round OL picks are successful). We don't have the luxury of dumping a 1st round pick down a toilet. We need players -- lots of players -- therefore we need draft picks.

I think why your post particularly got to me was that you are just looking at things in the short term --- and I hate that. That has been the premier problem plaguing this organization for decades. STOP TRADING FOR AGING MARQUEE VETERANS. It's stupid. It doesn't work. They don't perform. It has ruined this organization. The only reason that the NFL network and other agencies are even discussing the Skins picking up Manning IS BECAUSE THEY THINK WE ARE STUPID AND DELUSIONAL ENOUGH TO DO IT -- BASED ON PRIOR HISTORY. The Redskins have literally become a laughing stock as a result of the way we run player personnel -- yet it appears that people still haven't learned.

I apologize if you take this personally. I did not intend that. It's (i.e., trading high draft picks/signing for HUGE money for high profile franchise type players) just an escalating topic that I am passionate about -- and makes me crazy. It started with Stubbfield in 1998 and continued in 2000 with Deon, Smith, and Carrier. It got worse with Lloyd, ARE, Archuleta, and Carter. By the time we signed AH, I was going crazy. I just don't like it. You can sign free agents -- just sign contribution/role players. You draft your franchise players.

No problem. I do however take issue with some of your points.

1. Getting 2 QBs with one not starting is smart because with very few exceptions 1st round QB picks don't start. Manning is one of the best QBs of all time; a unanimous first ballot HOF player. Your comparison of Manning to Redskins FA busts does not hold water. Manning would be a major upgrade and immediately make this team a playoff contender. We wouldn't have to rush our rookie QB and he would learn from a master. I can't think of a better scenario to fix our QB issue.

2. With the exception of LOT, most OL are drafted after the 1st round

3. I cannot think of a more significant upgrade to our franchise than with with this draft and trade scenario. This team needs a leader and a winner. His name is Peyton Manning.

[SkinsJock]

Andrew Luck WILL be the first QB taken and WILL BE the 1st or 2nd pick of the 2012 draft

We are NOT giving up any picks to move up in the draft
We have too many needs and need ALL the draft picks we can get in the next 2 drafts

We actually could be competitive by using all our picks (maybe even getting more) PLUS acquiring a few free agents one of which is hopefully a QB that can start here


THANKFULLY - these guys are NOT wasting draft picks - we have too many needs