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

Cappster wrote:A smart QB who can recognize defensive plays and gets the ball out of his hands can compensate for an average line. The teams that win most consistently in the league have top tier QB's. And PAPDOG67 is correct in his statement. Neither GB or Pitt had stellar O-lines, but QB play was able to compensate for that. I will argue that if we had a top tier QB on our team right now we would have a winning record.

As far as the first Gibbs era...the same philosophy doesn't apply to modern day football. The game has changed and we need a stud at QB.

Our O-line blows with all the injuries, nothing "average" about it. So your solution is "draft Peyton Manning and it doesn't matter." It's a plan. Not a good one, but it's a plan...

I don't believe either of us is saying draft a QB and everything will be ok. I think Cappster as well as myself will admit that our O-line is in bad shape. What I am at least trying to say is even a dominant O-line will only get you so far. We need a trigger man bad. The NFL is now a passing league, more than ever, and you need an accurate QB to compete.

PAPDOG67 wrote:I don't believe either of us is saying draft a QB and everything will be ok. I think Cappster as well as myself will admit that our O-line is in bad shape. What I am at least trying to say is even a dominant O-line will only get you so far. We need a trigger man bad. The NFL is now a passing league, more than ever, and you need an accurate QB to compete.

So your point is neither our O-line nor our QB can completely blow? I'm going to have to agree with that, but I'm not sure I see why it was a point that had to be made...

You're missing the thread here. Some people are saying we need to rebuild the line entirely before we throw a rookie behind it. Normally I would agree, however, our QB situation is so horrific, if we don't draft a QB with our 1st or 2nd fround selection I may not watch a game next year. My point is we need to get oursleves a QB ASAP, as well as draft O-lineman. If the QB gets beat up a little bit the first year while the young linemen gell, so be it.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Cappster wrote:A smart QB who can recognize defensive plays and gets the ball out of his hands can compensate for an average line. The teams that win most consistently in the league have top tier QB's. And PAPDOG67 is correct in his statement. Neither GB or Pitt had stellar O-lines, but QB play was able to compensate for that. I will argue that if we had a top tier QB on our team right now we would have a winning record.

As far as the first Gibbs era...the same philosophy doesn't apply to modern day football. The game has changed and we need a stud at QB.

Our O-line blows with all the injuries, nothing "average" about it. So your solution is "draft Peyton Manning and it doesn't matter." It's a plan. Not a good one, but it's a plan...

I never said O-Line wasn't an issue. I do believe that QB is the biggest issue that we have and should be our #1 priority. If a franchise could pick between drafting a stud LT and a Franchise QB, 10/10 a Franchise QB would be drafted as they are so hard to come by. Also, if you go back and read what I wrote on the first page of this thread, I stated QB should be addressed first then O-Line after that. And that, Mr. Kaz, sounds just as good as any other plan out there.

PAPDOG67 wrote:I don't believe either of us is saying draft a QB and everything will be ok. I think Cappster as well as myself will admit that our O-line is in bad shape. What I am at least trying to say is even a dominant O-line will only get you so far. We need a trigger man bad. The NFL is now a passing league, more than ever, and you need an accurate QB to compete.

Yes, that is what I am saying and I am not sure how our statements are being misconstrued. A stud QB is more important now than ever.

How is it so difficult for this team to acquire a good QB... ?

Nobody answer that please, I will just shake my head in confusion.

PAPDOG67 wrote:Lichtenstiger was actually playing well until he went down. He was actually our 2nd best lineman. hopefully he comes back fully healthy next year. I am all for drafting a QB first and then 2, 3, or even 4 O-lineman in a row. I would like to replace the C, RG, and RT. I don't know if that's wise all in one season, but we definitely need at least 2 new guys in there assuming Lichtenstiger will be back.

In the draft, everything is based on what is available. For instance, if we have the #7 selection with Luck and Jones off the board, but the #1 OT available (who is a can't miss selection), then you take the tackle. There are currently only 2 QBs worthy of top 10 picks. This may change, but that is where it stands. I don't think that the skins need to pick a QB regardless of what is on the board. We need to improve in so many areas that we don't need to adopt this type of philosophy.

When you look at the draft, there are a couple lower round QBs that have potential to be successful (although, a more thorough analysis is necessary -- and this type of analysis may change my opinion) such as Moore, Keenum, and Weeden (although his age is a MAJOR concern). As it stands right now (and stressing I would need to see more in terms of measurements and vision testing) I think that Keenum may be a quality pickup late, but would have to make sure he has the physical attributes necessary to make it in the NFL. I am not high on Foles mainly because his team is 2-8 (sort of the same reason I wasn't high on Cutler coming out).

Now in terms of drafting OL, I agree. I think that we need to specfically draft OL this year (although I am more for OT and 2 OGs; I am happy with Center). Now, we need to understand that when you draft a number of young OLs, it will take them time to gell as a unit (see the Buffalo Bills). This could take a couple years, therefore, I would not be opposed to drafting a QB letting him sit a year, bring back Grossman (or pick up a QB via FA -- I would be highly opposed to using any sort of draft pick in exchange for a QB) while the OL learns one another. Once the OL has gelled, the new QB can come in --- then we can see where we stand.

markshark84 wrote:

PAPDOG67 wrote:Lichtenstiger was actually playing well until he went down. He was actually our 2nd best lineman. hopefully he comes back fully healthy next year. I am all for drafting a QB first and then 2, 3, or even 4 O-lineman in a row. I would like to replace the C, RG, and RT. I don't know if that's wise all in one season, but we definitely need at least 2 new guys in there assuming Lichtenstiger will be back.

In the draft, everything is based on what is available. For instance, if we have the #7 selection with Luck and Jones off the board, but the #1 OT available (who is a can't miss selection), then you take the tackle. There are currently only 2 QBs worthy of top 10 picks. This may change, but that is where it stands. I don't think that the skins need to pick a QB regardless of what is on the board. We need to improve in so many areas that we don't need to adopt this type of philosophy.

When you look at the draft, there are a couple lower round QBs that have potential to be successful (although, a more thorough analysis is necessary -- and this type of analysis may change my opinion) such as Moore, Keenum, and Weeden (although his age is a MAJOR concern). As it stands right now (and stressing I would need to see more in terms of measurements and vision testing) I think that Keenum may be a quality pickup late, but would have to make sure he has the physical attributes necessary to make it in the NFL. I am not high on Foles mainly because his team is 2-8 (sort of the same reason I wasn't high on Cutler coming out).

Now in terms of drafting OL, I agree. I think that we need to specfically draft OL this year (although I am more for OT and 2 OGs; I am happy with Center). Now, we need to understand that when you draft a number of young OLs, it will take them time to gell as a unit (see the Buffalo Bills). This could take a couple years, therefore, I would not be opposed to drafting a QB letting him sit a year, bring back Grossman (or pick up a QB via FA -- I would be highly opposed to using any sort of draft pick in exchange for a QB) while the OL learns one another. Once the OL has gelled, the new QB can come in --- then we can see where we stand.

First off, there is no such thind as a "can't miss" prospect no matter where they are picked. Second, many mocks have 4 QBs going in the top 10-15 picks with Barkley & Griffin III in there as well as Jones and Luck.

PAPDOG67 wrote:

markshark84 wrote:

PAPDOG67 wrote:Lichtenstiger was actually playing well until he went down. He was actually our 2nd best lineman. hopefully he comes back fully healthy next year. I am all for drafting a QB first and then 2, 3, or even 4 O-lineman in a row. I would like to replace the C, RG, and RT. I don't know if that's wise all in one season, but we definitely need at least 2 new guys in there assuming Lichtenstiger will be back.

In the draft, everything is based on what is available. For instance, if we have the #7 selection with Luck and Jones off the board, but the #1 OT available (who is a can't miss selection), then you take the tackle. There are currently only 2 QBs worthy of top 10 picks. This may change, but that is where it stands. I don't think that the skins need to pick a QB regardless of what is on the board. We need to improve in so many areas that we don't need to adopt this type of philosophy.

When you look at the draft, there are a couple lower round QBs that have potential to be successful (although, a more thorough analysis is necessary -- and this type of analysis may change my opinion) such as Moore, Keenum, and Weeden (although his age is a MAJOR concern). As it stands right now (and stressing I would need to see more in terms of measurements and vision testing) I think that Keenum may be a quality pickup late, but would have to make sure he has the physical attributes necessary to make it in the NFL. I am not high on Foles mainly because his team is 2-8 (sort of the same reason I wasn't high on Cutler coming out).

Now in terms of drafting OL, I agree. I think that we need to specfically draft OL this year (although I am more for OT and 2 OGs; I am happy with Center). Now, we need to understand that when you draft a number of young OLs, it will take them time to gell as a unit (see the Buffalo Bills). This could take a couple years, therefore, I would not be opposed to drafting a QB letting him sit a year, bring back Grossman (or pick up a QB via FA -- I would be highly opposed to using any sort of draft pick in exchange for a QB) while the OL learns one another. Once the OL has gelled, the new QB can come in --- then we can see where we stand.

First off, there is no such thind as a "can't miss" prospect no matter where they are picked. Second, many mocks have 4 QBs going in the top 10-15 picks with Barkley & Griffin III in there as well as Jones and Luck.

I think based on your definition, nothing in the world can be considered "can't miss". So, you are misunderstanding the message I am sending. What I mean by can't miss is having a pick whose likelihood of success (something similar to pro-bowl calibur) is extremely high compared to other prospects. Historically, OT has been a position that is much easier to predict than almost all others.

Although not many come along very often, there have been what many would describe as "can't miss" (per my definition, obviously) prospects at the OT position. Many saw Chris Samuels, Jake Long, Gallery, Ferguson, and Joe Thomas as "can't miss" -- you could even say the same about Okung. Then there are guys like Jason Smith who may have been in that category -- but he suffered a very serious concussion in his rookie season causing him to sit out the rest of his rookie season. Although he is still a starter, I wouldn't classify him as a star player (though he is still young).

In terms of 4 QBs going in the top 15 -- you may be correct (because of the mindless drafting frenzy the QB position causes), BUT you have to look at value. IMHO, only Luck and Jones are "valued" in the top 10 (and I couldn't care less what some mock draft posted on the internet by some teenager with a laptop says). I don't see Barkley or Griffin as top 10 picks (although they may be drafted in the 11-25 range because of their position -- much like how Ponder was drafted way early). I do see Halil as a top 10 pick. So let me re-state it another way -- if we have the 7th pick and Luck and Jones are gone, I would take Halil, because he adds more value based on the draft position. There are other QBs the skins can draft in round 2. Now if Jones was available, draft him because he is worthy of a top 10 pick -- then we can draft other OLs in round 2. You have to understand that my "valuing" is based on opinion; if you think Barkley or Griffin are game-changer franchise QBs, then you will disagree with me -- but I don't believe Barkely or Griffin are worthy of top 10 picks.

markshark84 wrote:

PAPDOG67 wrote:

markshark84 wrote: In the draft, everything is based on what is available. For instance, if we have the #7 selection with Luck and Jones off the board, but the #1 OT available (who is a can't miss selection), then you take the tackle. There are currently only 2 QBs worthy of top 10 picks. This may change, but that is where it stands. I don't think that the skins need to pick a QB regardless of what is on the board. We need to improve in so many areas that we don't need to adopt this type of philosophy.

When you look at the draft, there are a couple lower round QBs that have potential to be successful (although, a more thorough analysis is necessary -- and this type of analysis may change my opinion) such as Moore, Keenum, and Weeden (although his age is a MAJOR concern). As it stands right now (and stressing I would need to see more in terms of measurements and vision testing) I think that Keenum may be a quality pickup late, but would have to make sure he has the physical attributes necessary to make it in the NFL. I am not high on Foles mainly because his team is 2-8 (sort of the same reason I wasn't high on Cutler coming out).

Now in terms of drafting OL, I agree. I think that we need to specfically draft OL this year (although I am more for OT and 2 OGs; I am happy with Center). Now, we need to understand that when you draft a number of young OLs, it will take them time to gell as a unit (see the Buffalo Bills). This could take a couple years, therefore, I would not be opposed to drafting a QB letting him sit a year, bring back Grossman (or pick up a QB via FA -- I would be highly opposed to using any sort of draft pick in exchange for a QB) while the OL learns one another. Once the OL has gelled, the new QB can come in --- then we can see where we stand.

First off, there is no such thind as a "can't miss" prospect no matter where they are picked. Second, many mocks have 4 QBs going in the top 10-15 picks with Barkley & Griffin III in there as well as Jones and Luck.

I think based on your definition, nothing in the world can be considered "can't miss". So, you are misunderstanding the message I am sending. What I mean by can't miss is having a pick whose likelihood of success (something similar to pro-bowl calibur) is extremely high compared to other prospects. Historically, OT has been a position that is much easier to predict than almost all others.

Although not many come along very often, there have been what many would describe as "can't miss" (per my definition, obviously) prospects at the OT position. Many saw Chris Samuels, Jake Long, Gallery, Ferguson, and Joe Thomas as "can't miss" -- you could even say the same about Okung. Then there are guys like Jason Smith who may have been in that category -- but he suffered a very serious concussion in his rookie season causing him to sit out the rest of his rookie season. Although he is still a starter, I wouldn't classify him as a star player (though he is still young).

In terms of 4 QBs going in the top 15 -- you may be correct (because of the mindless drafting frenzy the QB position causes), BUT you have to look at value. IMHO, only Luck and Jones are "valued" in the top 10 (and I couldn't care less what some mock draft posted on the internet by some teenager with a laptop says). I don't see Barkley or Griffin as top 10 picks (although they may be drafted in the 11-25 range because of their position -- much like how Ponder was drafted way early). I do see Halil as a top 10 pick. So let me re-state it another way -- if we have the 7th pick and Luck and Jones are gone, I would take Halil, because he adds more value based on the draft position. There are other QBs the skins can draft in round 2. Now if Jones was available, draft him because he is worthy of a top 10 pick -- then we can draft other OLs in round 2. You have to understand that my "valuing" is based on opinion; if you think Barkley or Griffin are game-changer franchise QBs, then you will disagree with me -- but I don't believe Barkely or Griffin are worthy of top 10 picks.

I hear you. I personally think Barkley is better than Jones definitely and worthy of a top 10 pick, but that's just my opinion. I don't know about RGIII because I haven't seen him play yet. I still think we go QB 1st round regardless, only because the sad state of affairs that is our QB position right now.