Order of Need

[Manchester_Redskin]

The way I see it, if the head coach feels that someone like Bradford has the potential to be a franchise QB then we should draft him. Why? well say we dont do that, we draft the OL instead (which is probably our greatest need). I would see us improving to around 8-8 or 9-7 next season. I have little confidence that our existing QB could take us to the playoffs, let alone win a superbowl, he is not a game-winner, I've seen no evidence of the last minute, game winning drive that sets great QBs apart.

Anyway, so next year with that kind of record (8-8) we would likely end up with a 15 or 16 pick, so how would we be able to improve with a pick that low, if it was decided that a QB was our greatest need? We would be stuffed unless we traded up.

If however we picked a QB this year we can still improve the OL through later drafts picks and FA, then next year even if we ended up with a mid-order draft pick we could draft for OL again.

basically it boils down to this, is there a potential Franchise QB in this years draft.

[SkinsJock]

basically most here need to realize that we are done with trying to make sure we are a playoff contender NOW  this franchise is in such bad shape that we at times looked like one of the worst teams in the NFL. Let's get real, our record was 4-12, we need major help!
The offensive line needs to be not only be completely replaced but we also need to get some decent backups - it is not possible to suddenly have a decent O line PLUS good backup linemen - it will take at least 2 drafts PLUS some good FA acquisitions - IT WILL TAKE TIME - patience is a virtue

C'mon people - Snyder and Cerrato are gone - we are not looking for the quick fix anymore 

This franchise will be better off because of a number of intangibles but we have to realize it will take time to be consistently competitive - we are not going to magically have a decent offensive line here - the offensive line is very important but we need a lot of other pieces to be in place too - just having a decent offensive line again in 2-3 years will only be helpful if the other parts are also in place as well, especially the QB - there is no way with even the best O line in history, we are going very far with Campbell

IF (and it's a big IF) the guys here think that they can get a future good QB with that #4 pick, I'm sure we'll bring him in -  no matter what, that pick had better be a very good NFL player in the future because we are almost certainly not picking this high in the draft for a few more years 

[chiefhog44]

just wondering how the prospect of a lockout in 2011 may effect the draft choices.

I think they will draft on the assumption that there will be a 2011 season. Why would you do otherwise?

We should sign all of our players to one year deals to account for 2011 and start tryouts for the scrubs so we get a headstart on the competition.

[MDSKINSFAN]

Our #1 individual need is quarterback.

I agree with CH here...

Of course... an uncapped season provides many options.


More thoughts on the subject...

What difference does it make having an O line that is blocking for a guy who can't get the job done?

What difference does it make if we have a good QB that can't get the ball off because of how bad our OL is?

Campbell may not be great but he would be the better option with a new OL, than a new QB with a terrible OL.

[KazooSkinsFan]

What difference does it make having an O line that is blocking for a guy who can't get the job done?

What difference does it make if we have a good QB that can't get the ball off because of how bad our OL is?

Campbell may not be great but he would be the better option with a new OL, than a new QB with a terrible OL.

I already addressed this on the previous page.

#1 - it takes longer to groom a quarterback

#2 - w/o a quarterback it's very, very difficult to win in this league. I'm not downplaying the other needs. I'm just saying that QB is the most important single position on the field and when you don't have one it's your #1 need.

[crazyhorse1]

Shanahan worth four wins "alone?" No way Shanahan wins eight games without bothering to rebuild the OL. No way. He has weaknesses. For one thing, inspite of being an excellent coach in many ways, he's a poor judge of talent. So is Allen.
I expect Allan and Shanahan to blow this draft. They'll probably take Bradford and may draft for other than the OL in the second. Maybe a running back to replace Portis. I'm holding my breath.

well that's the positive side of the fan base showing why his opinions here are held in such high regard

I think what Pulp meant (I'm not certain, but ... ) was that given the new management and that Shanahan is not only the Head Coach, he's basically in charge here now - we have a good chance of seeing a franchise with a lot of players on the same page - I'll agree that the results should at least be a bit better than 4 - 4 - predicting that we'll go 8-8 is not that much of a stretch given that (despite what CH thinks) we'll have a better group of players, there will be a lot more accountability, and, it certainly would seem like we'll have a lot better game planning on both offense and defense

I'm not sure that we will be a playoff contender at the end of 2011 (even if there is any NFL games) but I do think we'll be a lot more competitive - I also agree that we'll not be picking in the top 10 for a while here - sooo ... IF this FO group likes a QB I would not think it a stretch to take a QB - that's really not a big deal - we have a lot of players that we need here and it's going to take a couple of drafts and some skillful management to get there - of course IF CH is right and this FO is not a lot better than the stupidity that we've had managing for the past 10 years then we're just going to continue to suck, big time and it really doesn't matter who we pick - hell we should just hire CH and let him run things

Skinjock has gotten me right. I don't believe Danny's out of the picture, that Shanahan is a genius, or that Allan is qualified as a guy who can recognize talent well enough to have much say in the rebuilding of the team. In fact, I believe he was hired not to bother either Danny or Shanahan. The FO, in re. to team building, probably effectively now consists of two guys, neither of whom has a reputation for wise personnel decisions.

Still, Shanahan is far superior to Zorn in just about every area, so we should be better. Unfortunately, however, the chances are that Shanahan will just have to have his new quarterback at 4 and Danny will want a glamor guy in the second round, rationalizing that he can buy adequate FA's for the OL, only to find out later he can't.

If I had to guess now how many competent new OL folk will be starting for us this coming year, my guess would be 1. That guy will replace Heyer. Too bed. We could easily replace three. All it takes is the will to do it.

[crazyhorse1]

Shanahan worth four wins "alone?" No way Shanahan wins eight games without bothering to rebuild the OL. No way. He has weaknesses. For one thing, inspite of being an excellent coach in many ways, he's a poor judge of talent. So is Allen.
I expect Allan and Shanahan to blow this draft. They'll probably take Bradford and may draft for other than the OL in the second. Maybe a running back to replace Portis. I'm holding my breath.

well that's the positive side of the fan base showing why his opinions here are held in such high regard

I think what Pulp meant (I'm not certain, but ... ) was that given the new management and that Shanahan is not only the Head Coach, he's basically in charge here now - we have a good chance of seeing a franchise with a lot of players on the same page - I'll agree that the results should at least be a bit better than 4 - 4 - predicting that we'll go 8-8 is not that much of a stretch given that (despite what CH thinks) we'll have a better group of players, there will be a lot more accountability, and, it certainly would seem like we'll have a lot better game planning on both offense and defense

I'm not sure that we will be a playoff contender at the end of 2011 (even if there is any NFL games) but I do think we'll be a lot more competitive - I also agree that we'll not be picking in the top 10 for a while here - sooo ... IF this FO group likes a QB I would not think it a stretch to take a QB - that's really not a big deal - we have a lot of players that we need here and it's going to take a couple of drafts and some skillful management to get there - of course IF CH is right and this FO is not a lot better than the stupidity that we've had managing for the past 10 years then we're just going to continue to suck, big time and it really doesn't matter who we pick - hell we should just hire CH and let him run things

Skinjock has gotten me right. I don't believe Danny's out of the picture, that Shanahan is a genius, or that Allan is qualified as a guy who can recognize talent well enough to have much say in the rebuilding of the team. In fact, I believe he was hired not to bother either Danny or Shanahan. The FO, in re. to team building, probably effectively now consists of two guys, neither of whom has a reputation for wise personnel decisions.

Still, Shanahan is far superior to Zorn in just about every area, so we should be better. Unfortunately, however, the chances are that Shanahan will just have to have his new quarterback at 4 and Danny will want a glamor guy in the second round, rationalizing that he can buy adequate FA's for the OL, only to find out later he can't.

If I had to guess now how many competent new OL folk will be starting for us this coming year, my guess would be 1. That guy will replace Heyer. Too bed. We could easily replace three. All it takes is the will to do it.

[HEROHAMO]

Order of need,

OL-LT
OL-RT
NT
FS
LB

Even my grandma knows the Redskins need an offensive line. Right tackle, right guard and even center was a weakness last year. I thought Levi Jones did a solid job at left tackle but we still need to draft a future replacement. Dockery is solid at LG. Center I believe we should upgrade but not ahead of LT and RT.

With the switch to a 3-4 we will need a NT. I dont think Haynesworth wants to play the NT and Haynesworth has been injury prone. Playing NT is one of the more demanding positions on the Dline. A good NT is a must in a 3-4.

Both Chris Horton and Laron Landry are natural strong safties. It is clear that Landry would perform better at his natural position and it would help the team more for Landry to be closer to the line of schrimmage. Still leaves a large hole at FS. I think we must switch Laron back to SS. Even though I know he is capable of playing FS, his desire is to play SS.

[Deadskins]

Even my grandma knows the Redskins need an offensive line.

Yeah, but she plays right guard, so she might just be angling for a job.

[fredp45]

Hero... I agree with your order below:

Order of need,

OL-LT
OL-RT
NT
FS
LB

A new young quarterback with a bad line won't work and in fact, ruins a qb. If you think of rookie qbs that have done well year 1, they've been behind good lines with good running games. Two examples:

Ben R in Pitts
Mark S in NY

When you put a rookie qb behind a horrible line you get someone who is ruined for life, such as:

David Carr in Houston
Tim Couch in Cleveland

As others said, this is a 2 year (maybe 3 year) rebuilding effort. Pick offensive lineman this year and build our trenches, go with JC for a year or two. Next year, find more good Olineman and then pick a qb.

While I don't believe JC is Canton-bound, I do believe he's servicable for a couple more years as we build our team. Our other weaknesses are so glaring, we can't afford to pick a QB with either our 1st or 2nd rounders this year. I also agree NT, FS and LB are musts if we're switching to a 3-4 and we want to move LL to SS.

[brad7686]

Hero... I agree with your order below:

Order of need,

OL-LT
OL-RT
NT
FS
LB

A new young quarterback with a bad line won't work and in fact, ruins a qb. If you think of rookie qbs that have done well year 1, they've been behind good lines with good running games. Two examples:

Ben R in Pitts
Mark S in NY

When you put a rookie qb behind a horrible line you get someone who is ruined for life, such as:

David Carr in Houston
Tim Couch in Cleveland

As others said, this is a 2 year (maybe 3 year) rebuilding effort. Pick offensive lineman this year and build our trenches, go with JC for a year or two. Next year, find more good Olineman and then pick a qb.

While I don't believe JC is Canton-bound, I do believe he's servicable for a couple more years as we build our team. Our other weaknesses are so glaring, we can't afford to pick a QB with either our 1st or 2nd rounders this year. I also agree NT, FS and LB are musts if we're switching to a 3-4 and we want to move LL to SS.

I would agree with a lot of what you said but Mark Sanchez was not good whatsoever this year.

[HEROHAMO]

Even my grandma knows the Redskins need an offensive line.

Yeah, but she plays right guard, so she might just be angling for a job.

Tisk tisk

[fredp45]

Sanchez had a lot of bad games but played okay at times. He did win one playoff game - more than we've won in the past few years!

If I were a Jets fan I'd be excited about him and their team.

[crazyhorse1]

Sanchez had a lot of bad games but played okay at times. He did win one playoff game - more than we've won in the past few years!

If I were a Jets fan I'd be excited about him and their team.

Sanchez has "franchise QB" written all over him. He's going to a great one.

[brad7686]

Sanchez had a lot of bad games but played okay at times. He did win one playoff game - more than we've won in the past few years!

If I were a Jets fan I'd be excited about him and their team.

Sanchez has "franchise QB" written all over him. He's going to a great one.

I think it is WAYYYYYY to early to proclaim anything like that out of a guy that played that terrible. If he wasn't playing on a team with the best defense in the league and the best running attack, he probably wouldn't have won 3 games.

[PulpExposure]

Sanchez had a lot of bad games but played okay at times. He did win one playoff game - more than we've won in the past few years!

If I were a Jets fan I'd be excited about him and their team.

Sanchez has "franchise QB" written all over him. He's going to a great one.

Not according to this analysis

Sanchez is already the youngest quarterback since at least 1960 to win two games in a single postseason; he'll be the youngest to win three or four if the Jets' hot streak continues. His performance in San Diego, however, was historically inept. Sanchez threw for only 100 yards on 23 attempts, a woeful average of 4.4 yards per attempt. Since 1978, 119 quarterbacks have thrown at least 10 passes in a playoff game and averaged less than 5 yards per attempt; only 29 of them, including Sanchez, were lucky enough to win.

Greene, meanwhile, is only the fifth rookie to post two 100-yard games in the playoffs. Coincidentally, three of the other four men to pull this off -- Jamal Lewis, Curt Warner and Ickey Woods -- tore their ACLs the next season, and combined to play only three games in their sophomore seasons. The fourth, Duane Thomas, saw a promising career ruined by contract squabbles with the Dallas Cowboys and Washington Redskins.

Two games, though, is a small sample size. Looking at the 16-game regular season will give us a better idea of how Sanchez and Green have played. We can put their statistics into context by using Football Outsiders' similarity scores. Similarity scores were first invented by baseball expert Bill James and have since been used by countless analysts in multiple sports. At Football Outsiders, our methodology analyzes not just yards and touchdowns -- but also age and experience. We usually examine players in two- or three-year chunks, although we obviously can't do that for Sanchez and Greene.

For Sanchez, we're limiting our sample to players who were first-year starters. Now, regardless of which team each Football Outsiders writer cheers for, we are all football fans first; we want to see good young players succeed. So imagine our horror when the closest match for Sanchez turned out to be current Raiders punch line JaMarcus Russell.

In 2008, Russell completed 198 of 368 passes for 2,423 yards and 13 TDs (with 8 INTs). This season, Sanchez went 196-for-364 for 2,444 yards, 12 TDs and 20 INTs. Their completion percentages were identical (ahhh!): both at 53.8 percent.

Russell started 15 games at age 23 in 2008; Sanchez started 15 games at age 23 in 2009. The biggest difference is in interceptions, where Sanchez was significantly worse, throwing 20 interceptions to Russell's eight.

Other players similar to Sanchez give little reason for hope. The best of the bunch are Jim Everett and Neil Lomax. There are also former first-rounders like Byron Leftwich, Tim Couch and Matt Leinart -- and then you get guys like Tony Banks, Scott Campbell and Billy Joe Tolliver.

Obviously, this is one year, and Sanchez was drafted higher than most of these comparable players for a reason. He has more potential. But except for the wild-card win against Cincinnati, he really hasn't shown it.

Great company he's in...

[VetSkinsFan]

If I want to talk about great rookie QBs, I'll talk about Stafford. Even though the Lions were crap this year, Stafford will be good. Sanchez I'm not sold on yet.

[SkinsJock]

If I want to talk about great rookie QBs, I'll talk about Stafford. Even though the Lions were crap this year, Stafford will be good.
Sanchez I'm not sold on yet.

I think most had Bradford rated higher than both Stafford and Sanchez last year and that, combined with the upside of what he will be worth to the franchise in 4 years compared to what Okung might be worth is why I think that Allen and Shanahan take Bradford

If Okung is going to be a really good OT AND you are not convinced that Bradford or Claussen are going to be really good QBs then, and ONLY then, do you take the OT

I'm all for building a really good offensive line here but that is going to take time and we will need a QB because no matter what Campbell does he's not going to be that much better at the begining of the 2012 season

[HEROHAMO]

The "Sanchize" had a great start to the season. The middle of the season was terrible. He then ended on a high note and showed flashes of brillance. The kid did go all the way to the AFC Championship. I think he will become a very good QB in this league.

[VetSkinsFan]

The "Sanchize" had a great start to the season. The middle of the season was terrible. He then ended on a high note and showed flashes of brillance. The kid did go all the way to the AFC Championship. I think he will become a very good QB in this league.

The kid rode the defense and the running game to the AFC Championship. I would put the passing game #3 in the list of why the Jets were successful.

[brad7686]

The "Sanchize" had a great start to the season. The middle of the season was terrible. He then ended on a high note and showed flashes of brillance. The kid did go all the way to the AFC Championship. I think he will become a very good QB in this league.

The kid rode the defense and the running game to the AFC Championship. I would put the passing game #3 in the list of why the Jets were successful.

I might go 4. How good was their special teams?

[PulpExposure]

The "Sanchize" had a great start to the season. The middle of the season was terrible. He then ended on a high note and showed flashes of brillance. The kid did go all the way to the AFC Championship. I think he will become a very good QB in this league.

The kid rode the defense and the running game to the AFC Championship. I would put the passing game #3 in the list of why the Jets were successful.

Yeah. The Jets won because they had the best defense, the best offensive line, and the best running game in the league. They won despite Sanchez and his 20 INTs.