Your Redskins Draft Grade

skinswin · Post by **skinswin** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 3:21 pm

D- and that is being nice. They need offensive help. No matter who they drated on D' made no sense as they had one of the top D's in the league but there O' stunk. Drafting a QB was a waste of time as if they give Ramsey a half of chance he could be a great one. Heck I said Trent Green should have been starting in Washington a few years back but they let him go, he has a decent career going in KC, what do my Skins have, a bunch of wasted draft picks.

kohlrums · Post by **kohlrums** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 3:28 pm

if we wanted another QB why not scout guys like orton, or lefors who could have been had in the 4th round..or a guy like mcpherson who arguabley has more talent than all the qb's in this draft and as fans we know it will be awhile before anything is expected out of him. Plus, how well does everyone think Campbell will handle to pressure of skin's fans when he faltures?

fleetus · Post by **fleetus** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 3:46 pm

Because Gibbs thinks the system Auburn ran last year was very similar to his offense. In that system, Campbell had BY FAR his best year and seem to come into his own. I'm sure there are more reasons (like character for one) but Gibbs has actually stated the above.

My grade would be C-. I like most of the players we drafted but when you give up a higher 1st rounder (next year) and a 3rd and 4th for the #25 pick and then use that pick on a 4th QB. Well, it means Campbell will have to be a star QB in the future to make that pick worth it. Plus, we didn't address DE, DT, OL, WR or TE. The good thing is, Gibbs hopefully is stripping away the undesireable elements on this team and replacing them with better charcter and intelligence. Time will tell.

Fios · Post by **Fios** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 4:46 pm

B minus with a potential A for extra credit, i.e. Campbell turns into the superstar I hope he will

kohlrums · Post by **kohlrums** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 5:14 pm

better intelligence from Campbell to Ramsey? Ramsey was a double major from Tulane who scored in the 30's on his wonderlic, and campbell got a 14.

skins81 · Post by **skins81** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 5:32 pm

BringThePain! wrote:the next QB taken wasn't until the 3 round.... I don't believe anybody even had an urge to jump ahead of us.... I'd say... the farthest we could have moved back was the #34 pick overall... because there could have been a chance for Cleveland to take him #35... so we jumped at #25... making sure we would get him... hopefully....

I think we could have waited until the draft started to consider moving up. San fran could have been enticed to trade their #33 if Campbell was still around. They would have wanted a #2, which we didn't have, but most likely would have settled for some package of current and future picks and maybe Gardner? Who knows.

I think that trade has to happen on draft day.

If people really believed the story of us moving up for Campbell they could have jumped in front of us.

Because of that, the skins can't get more than a passing grade.

I'm fine with all the other moves. I think Rogers was an excellent pick. I like the talent we picked up later, even if I thought DL would be better addressed. Even taking a QB in Campbell is fine, I just think the timing was way off. It could have saved us picks by doing it on Sat rather than Thurs. Even the Denver pick would have cost less on Sat.

Texas Hog · Post by **Texas Hog** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 7:04 pm

BringThePain! wrote:
curveball wrote:I'd give your draft a C-.

Rogers was a tremendous pick. Best defensive player in this draft.

Wow... the best defensive player in this draft... and we only get a C-.... after 8 teams pick in front of us... all of which had worst defenses than ours last year... and we still get the best defensive player in the draft in your opinion... and we still only get a C-....??? I mean... we atleast start with an A+ right there right?

we don't have a second, because used on a good player like ey... like you said... so we're still at an A+...

curveball wrote:The Campbell pick was THE worst of any pick by any team. How bad was it? Every team knew he was the Redskins choice at #25 (my money's on Sexton as the leak) and no one thought enough of Campbell to move in front of you. Throw in the price you paid for him in terms of picks and it looks even worse.

the next QB taken wasn't until the 3 round.... I don't believe anybody even had an urge to jump ahead of us.... I'd say... the farthest we could have moved back was the #34 pick overall... because there could have been a chance for Cleveland to take him #35... so we jumped at #25... making sure we would get him... hopefully.... yes I believe the story was found out about by Pastabelly.... and that was the SKINS fault.... so I can't give an excuse for that... but, the worst pick ever... I doubt it.... we gave up a 3rd this year for him... and a fourth next.... which I'm sure we'll get that 4th back some how... and we used our first next year... on this year.... because Gibbs decided he wanted someone to groom behind Ramsey... just incase Patty didn't pan out... I mean look at our depth... we had Brunell who lost it last year, and Hasselbeck who we all know is a career backup... I would atleast think we improved the QB situation.... don't you think?

I don't find that the worst pick ever.... I mean... don't you think Detroit... with it's 22nd ranked defense, and grabbing a WR who hadn't played in a year, who was basically being picked on potential... who had two WR picked before him... at a position...which probably was the least of their needs... wouldn't that qualify as the worst pick ever?

What about Green Bay, at 24... in a year where Farve may retire, and Mike Shermans in the last year of his contract...they draft for the future??

Matt Jones at #21?

Your second day picks were scattershot at best. McCune's a great athlete and story, but he's not much of a football player yet.

As for our second day picks... I think they'll all help out in the special teams department... which in my opinion... we needed help in.... and they should help fill there roles on goal-line carries,3rd & 1's... and for situational roles for our 2 LB's we picked up... could we have done better, could we have done worse.... it's all a crap shoot until a couple years from now...

Personally... I'm a defensive type of guy, so I love what Dallas did... I wish we did something along the same lines... but I'm not the GM or making picks... and I don't know... we might very well have gotten some quality depth at some weak positions.... on top of the best defensive player on the board in your opinion...

I would atleast think we ranked around the C+ to B- range... for the picks we had and the extra one, we picked up....

Wow...I feel better!

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 10:05 pm

As far as this draft is concerned I think a C+ to a B-.
This is really only based on how we think things will work out, but, as we know from the past, very few highly rated college players actually "make it" and there seem to be a lot of players who do well in the NFL, like Tom Brady and Jerry Rice, who are drafted on Sunday! I have a feeling that Joe got pretty close to what he thought he could and we have yet to see what might "fall our way" in the coming months. Next year's draft is a long way away and who knows what "trading" might bring?

As far as thinking that Joe and the front office either do not know what they are doing or did something "insane" on purpose is really beyond comment. I think that some of these people need to learn a little bit about both the NFL and who the people are that play, coach and are involved in the NFL. This is their livelihood and is something that most of them take very seriously.

To belittle their thinking and the grading of players is to show some of us how little you really know.

thaiphoon · Post by **thaiphoon** » Tue Apr 26, 2005 12:29 pm

C- ...

1.) Good move getting Rogers and on the second day getting the ST players and adding to ILB depth. Not sure we needed all those FB's given our problem with short yardage wasn't so much Betts, Cartwright or Portis not getting the tough yards, it was the OL's lack of push off the line.

2.) Essentially using 4 picks on a developmental QB by trading up to get him in a weak draft is not a smart move. This accounts for the low score IMHO. The only way this draft gets any better is if Campbell sits and gets prepared for the offense like Rypien did and Ramsey plays great next year or so so we can franchise him and then possibly trade him for a #1. Otherwise this was a stupid move when we could've gotten him in the second round ( I know we didn't have a 2nd rounder but trading up to get one doesn't cost as much as trading up to get a 1rst) or a 3rd round pick had we kept that one. I don't like the idea of giving away #1's for players who aren't goign to have immediate impact. Mysterious move here with this pick. And as such, since noone has a crystal ball, I'll discount the move and grade it poorly until shown otherwise that he's the next Peyton Manning