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

[The Hogster]

We need a QB. Truth. We need more than just a QB. Truth. We need our draft picks. Truth.

We will see how it plays out. But, don't be surprised if we wind up coming out of that 6th pick and going down, not up.

[Chris Luva Luva]

We need a QB. Truth. We need more than just a QB. Truth. We need our draft picks. Truth.

We will see how it plays out. But, don't be surprised if we wind up coming out of that 6th pick and going down, not up.

And there wouldn't be anything wrong with that.

[skinsfan#33]

MUST GET a FRANCHISE QB!!! If he doesn't he's done, finished, out of here!

I disagree. What he MUST do is make the right decisions for this franchise.
If the guy that they want is not there, you DO NOT TAKE A QB. His job isn't in trouble, he's gonna be here for 5 years.

Well, if he keeps regressing in wins he might not make it to year 4.

I agree. If he the team has another double digit los season MS is done.

[GoSkins]

I think it's well known that Shanny will focus on the O this off season. He has 2 avenues: FA and the Draft. We have a lot of cap room (I don't know the number but I'm sure one of our posters can give us the number). We need a QB with lot's of upside, at least 1 if not 2 starters on the OL, and a big time WR. I believe Shanny can get the OL starters and WR thru FA. That leaves a QB with a lot of upside. Despite a chorus of anti Rex posters I do believe he can be our #2 QB. Who will sign Rex in 2012 for starter money? In my view no one. I think Shanny takes a QB in the draft and he might be willing to give up some picks to get his man. Our cap space will enable us to plug a lot of holes. This will give Shanny flexibility in the draft to get his QB. Who will that QB be? While it depends on price (i.e. number of draft picks), I think we will be in the running for Luck and RG III.

[RayNAustin]

I disagree.

He can win with a good but not great QB AS LONG AS he has a GREAT TEAM.

Anybody who feels that a great QB with a bad team can have a winning season and a run to the playoffs is very mistaken. Doubt me? See Carolina.

How about "See Colts without Peyton Manning"? But to use your Panthers example, in 2010 the Panthers were LAST in points scored @ 12.2 points. They catapulted to 5th with 25.4 points per game. That is a MIRACULOUS increase of MORE than doubling the points. That Carolina had one of the worst defenses in the league doesn't take away from that incredible improvement.

Can you imagine how the Redskin's season would have turned out with an extra 13.2 points per game that Newton provided to Carolina? I say, we would have easily won the NFC east, and probably won 12 or more games.

Desperate moves to climb in the Draft would be typoical of Danny Snyder. No problem for you. He will be arguing that fans want a fancy player who can return fans to FedEx, not a long term solution leading to a long-term younger, better and deeper roster.

Quite the reverse really ... this time, taking a player that can provide LONG TERM stability at the MOST IMPORTANT position on the team would represent a long term investment and vision for the future, rather than settling for another "quick fix" FA QB that's not good enough to start for the team willing to let him go. We've already tried that approach with THREE DIFFERENT GUYS in just the last two years. How'd that work out? And your answer to fixing this compound error is to take the "safe road" by relying on dumb luck rather than Andrew Luck, hoping we stumble upon the next great QB that everyone else in the NFL missed in first round in 2012?

Additionally, the Redskin roster is filled with young players ... this is not an "old team" .... just a team desperately needing a high caliber player at the most important position.

I am not willing to sacrifice short-term gain for long-term and steady progress.

Besides, there are a number of instances where a great QB was picked below the 1st round. Do not panic. Everybody is waiting for the Redskins to give up the whole house in a desperate move for one of the two top QBs.

This is where you are really losing the argument. Finding a great quarterback outside the first round is like Jed Clampit striking oil while shooting at possums. It rarely happens.

And in case you haven't noticed ... our QB situation IS DESPERATE. Most analysts agree that of all of the teams needing a QB, the Redskins are #1 on the list, and there is no other team need that comes even close.

Keep the course. I would be delighted to pick somebody like Dalton who was picked in the 2nd round by Cinci. Look at them now.

Yes, delighted ... and so would the Titans who picked Locker instead ... or the Jags who picked Gabbert ... or the Vikings who picked Ponder .... and the Browns, Seahawks and Chiefs AND Redskins who needed a QB and didn't take him. You know that old saying "If Grandma had balls?"

But "Keep the course"? Didn't the captain of the Titanic say something along those lines? There's only one tiny problem with this "we're making progress" stuff. We were 6-10 last year and finished 5-11 this year, so apparently our competition made more progress. At this rate of progress, we'll get the #1 pick outright without having to "mortgage" our future!

[RayNAustin]

I disagree.

He can win with a good but not great QB AS LONG AS he has a GREAT TEAM.

Anybody who feels that a great QB with a bad team can have a winning season and a run to the playoffs is very mistaken. Doubt me? See Carolina.

How about "See Colts without Peyton Manning"? But to use your Panthers example, in 2010 the Panthers were LAST in points scored @ 12.2 points. They catapulted to 5th with 25.4 points per game. That is a MIRACULOUS increase of MORE than doubling the points. That Carolina had one of the worst defenses in the league doesn't take away from that incredible improvement.

Can you imagine how the Redskin's season would have turned out with an extra 13.2 points per game that Newton provided to Carolina? I say, we would have easily won the NFC east, and probably won 12 or more games.

Desperate moves to climb in the Draft would be typoical of Danny Snyder. No problem for you. He will be arguing that fans want a fancy player who can return fans to FedEx, not a long term solution leading to a long-term younger, better and deeper roster.

Quite the reverse really ... this time, taking a player that can provide LONG TERM stability at the MOST IMPORTANT position on the team would represent a long term investment and vision for the future, rather than settling for another "quick fix" FA QB that's not good enough to start for the team willing to let him go. We've already tried that approach with THREE DIFFERENT GUYS in just the last two years. How'd that work out? And your answer to fixing this compound error is to take the "safe road" by relying on dumb luck rather than Andrew Luck, hoping we stumble upon the next great QB that everyone else in the NFL missed in first round in 2012?

Additionally, the Redskin roster is filled with young players ... this is not an "old team" .... just a team desperately needing a high caliber player at the most important position.

I am not willing to sacrifice short-term gain for long-term and steady progress.

Besides, there are a number of instances where a great QB was picked below the 1st round. Do not panic. Everybody is waiting for the Redskins to give up the whole house in a desperate move for one of the two top QBs.

This is where you are really losing the argument. Finding a great quarterback outside the first round is like Jed Clampit striking oil while shooting at possums. It rarely happens.

And in case you haven't noticed ... our QB situation IS DESPERATE. Most analysts agree that of all of the teams needing a QB, the Redskins are #1 on the list, and there is no other team need that comes even close.

Keep the course. I would be delighted to pick somebody like Dalton who was picked in the 2nd round by Cinci. Look at them now.

Yes, delighted ... and so would the Titans who picked Locker instead ... or the Jags who picked Gabbert ... or the Vikings who picked Ponder .... and the Browns, Seahawks and Chiefs AND Redskins who needed a QB and didn't take him. You know that old saying "If Grandma had balls?"

But "Keep the course"? Didn't the captain of the Titanic say something along those lines? There's only one tiny problem with this "we're making progress" stuff. We were 6-10 last year and finished 5-11 this year, so apparently our competition made more progress. At this rate of progress, we'll get the #1 pick outright without having to "mortgage" our future!

[skinsfan#33]

MUST GET a FRANCHISE QB!!! If he doesn't he's done, finished, out of here!

I disagree. What he MUST do is make the right decisions for this franchise.
If the guy that they want is not there, you DO NOT TAKE A QB. His job isn't in trouble, he's gonna be here for 5 years.

I agree they must make the right decisions and one of those is getting a franchise QB.

It doesn't have to be with the sixth pick. They could move up, stay put and draft BPA and get a QB in the second round, or trade down and then get a QB. Or get a guy in FA.

Whatever you do you better be right and you had better have a plan B if you're not right. You can't go into the season with a QB situation even remotely resembling what we had this season or MS WILL NOT GET SEASON FOUR let alone season five!

[RayNAustin]

I disagree.

He can win with a good but not great QB AS LONG AS he has a GREAT TEAM.

Anybody who feels that a great QB with a bad team can have a winning season and a run to the playoffs is very mistaken. Doubt me? See Carolina.

How about "See Colts without Peyton Manning"? But to use your Panthers example, in 2010 the Panthers were LAST in points scored @ 12.2 points. They catapulted to 5th with 25.4 points per game. That is a MIRACULOUS increase of MORE than doubling the points. That Carolina had one of the worst defenses in the league doesn't take away from that incredible improvement.

Can you imagine how the Redskin's season would have turned out with an extra 13.2 points per game that Newton provided to Carolina? I say, we would have easily won the NFC east, and probably won 12 or more games.

Desperate moves to climb in the Draft would be typoical of Danny Snyder. No problem for you. He will be arguing that fans want a fancy player who can return fans to FedEx, not a long term solution leading to a long-term younger, better and deeper roster.

Quite the reverse really ... this time, taking a player that can provide LONG TERM stability at the MOST IMPORTANT position on the team would represent a long term investment and vision for the future, rather than settling for another "quick fix" FA QB that's not good enough to start for the team willing to let him go. We've already tried that approach with THREE DIFFERENT GUYS in just the last two years. How'd that work out? And your answer to fixing this compound error is to take the "safe road" by relying on dumb luck rather than Andrew Luck, hoping we stumble upon the next great QB that everyone else in the NFL missed in first round in 2012?

Additionally, the Redskin roster is filled with young players ... this is not an "old team" .... just a team desperately needing a high caliber player at the most important position.

I am not willing to sacrifice short-term gain for long-term and steady progress.

Besides, there are a number of instances where a great QB was picked below the 1st round. Do not panic. Everybody is waiting for the Redskins to give up the whole house in a desperate move for one of the two top QBs.

This is where you are really losing the argument. Finding a great quarterback outside the first round is like Jed Clampit striking oil while shooting at possums. It rarely happens.

And in case you haven't noticed ... our QB situation IS DESPERATE. Most analysts agree that of all of the teams needing a QB, the Redskins are #1 on the list, and there is no other team need that comes even close.

Keep the course. I would be delighted to pick somebody like Dalton who was picked in the 2nd round by Cinci. Look at them now.

Yes, delighted ... and so would the Titans who picked Locker instead ... or the Jags who picked Gabbert ... or the Vikings who picked Ponder .... and the Browns, Seahawks and Chiefs AND Redskins who needed a QB and didn't take him. You know that old saying "If Grandma had balls?"

But "Keep the course"? Didn't the captain of the Titanic say something along those lines? There's only one tiny problem with this "we're making progress" stuff. We were 6-10 last year and finished 5-11 this year, so apparently our competition made more progress. At this rate of progress, we'll get the #1 pick outright without having to "mortgage" our future!

To make a RATIONAL argument, I would ask you to define for us the impact that LaRon Landry, Brian Orakpo, Trent Williams, and Ryan Kerrigan has made with regard to the Redskin's final results? I mean, these were all very good #1 picks .... no busts, unlike some others have been. Yet, have those picks really netted huge dividends?

To put it another way .... say we move forward as you suggest, rather than trading 2 additional #1 picks for Luck or RG3 .... we save them. What are we saving them for? What could we possibly gain? We don't even know where we'd end up in the draft for 2013 & 2014 ... nor do we know who would be available then to pick. But you suggest those two unknown picks will definitely provide greater improvement than a top flight QB NOW?

That makes no sense to me.

[CanesSkins26]

MUST GET a FRANCHISE QB!!! If he doesn't he's done, finished, out of here!

I disagree. What he MUST do is make the right decisions for this franchise.
If the guy that they want is not there, you DO NOT TAKE A QB. His job isn't in trouble, he's gonna be here for 5 years.

Totally false. He doesn't post a record above .500 next year he's out. No NFL team keeps a coach that goes below .500 three years running.

[CanesSkins26]

Price to move up in the Draft is TOO STEEP.

If one of the good guys lands on our 6th pick, fine. But this will not happen. I would much rather TRADE DOWN get younger, better and deeper in the roster and draft a good prospect QB in lower rounds and a decent QB in FA.

I love comments like this. Have you seen the available list of FA qbs? It's a list full of Becks and Grossmans.

[RayNAustin]

With the shakeup in Indy .... I don't know what that means, if anything, relative to the course the team was planning to take regarding Peyton Manning and or what to do with the #1 pick. Hell, there could even have been disagreement between picking RG3 & Luck.

If I were Bruce Allen, I would go full steam ahead in trying to secure the #2 pick from the Rams, and forget dealing with Indy ... because they have too much uncertainty at the moment. Get a deal worked with the Rams for the #2 pick, and resign yourself to take RG3. Who knows, maybe Indy picks Griffin, and Luck goes second?

Stranger things have happened.

[CanesSkins26]

With the shakeup in Indy .... I don't know what that means, if anything, relative to the course the team was planning to take regarding Peyton Manning and or what to do with the #1 pick. Hell, there could even have been disagreement between picking RG3 & Luck.

If I were Bruce Allen, I would go full steam ahead in trying to secure the #2 pick from the Rams, and forget dealing with Indy ... because they have too much uncertainty at the moment. Get a deal worked with the Rams for the #2 pick, and resign yourself to take RG3. Who knows, maybe Indy picks Griffin, and Luck goes second?

Stranger things have happened.

Wishful thinking. No chance Luck falls out of #1. Griffin is a very good prospect but he is nowhere near the level of Luck. We can hope though.

[RayNAustin]

Price to move up in the Draft is TOO STEEP.

If one of the good guys lands on our 6th pick, fine. But this will not happen. I would much rather TRADE DOWN get younger, better and deeper in the roster and draft a good prospect QB in lower rounds and a decent QB in FA.

I love comments like this. Have you seen the available list of FA qbs? It's a list full of Becks and Grossmans.

With the possible exception of Matt Flynn (who is an unknown entity that has had a couple of great showings), it's a crap shoot on FA QBs, with not a one that represents a significant upgrade over the guys we have now who know the offensive system. Any retread brought in would have that learning curve, and it seems so obvious to me that making such a move would be a grave mistake.

I can see the McNabb move .... I thought that was a very sound decision, and hindsight is 20/20. But, if these guys go after and pay a big price tag for Matt Flynn, with the idea of drafting a 2nd or 3rd rounder as a project QB, that could easily turn out to be 5 QB mistakes in 3 years, and another major setback for the Redskins.

It's possible that Flynn might sign somewhere and become another Matt Shaub .... but he's just as likely to be another backup QB like Quinn, Leinart, Car .. etc.

Time for the redskins to step up to the plate, and swing ... no more looking for walks or bunting. Go get RG3 or Luck, and really start making progress. This "wait till next year" stuff, and the "band aid brigade" QB carousel approach is getting real old.

[StorminMormon86]

The most obvious is the fact that the Jags pick at #7 and the Skins pick ahead of them at #6.

My mistake.

The Rams have a franchise QB that they can’t afford to trade or bench because of the HUGE rookie contract he got and he had a MUCH worse WR corps than even the Skins and he has no TE either. I say that they are much more likely to pick Blackmon than RG3!

The Rams just got done firing their head coach and their GM. Is it that much of a leap to say the new GM would want to impliment his own new, franchise QB? I get that Bradford has never had the supporting cast, but that could possibly all be for naught if the new GM wants to build HIS team. Remember Joey Harrington?

You could make the case that Cleveland’s WR corps is just as bad as the Rams and McCoy can’t be graded fairly w/o more talent at WR, plus they have the ammo to move up to #1 to take Luck if they want a Franchise QB and deem McCoy to not be one.

The Browns would be foolish to stick with McCoy as their primary QB. If Luck is the only "NFL ready" QB coming out of the draft, it's not that much of a stretch to see the Browns sticking with McCoy while RGIII rides the bench until it's "his time".

So there are no teams that have a “desperate” need of a QB, ahead of the Skins. Now the Colts could draft Luck, but they also could trade down (Cleveland would be the most likely team). Cleveland isn’t in “desperate” need of a QB, but could definitely be a player for Luck or RG3. That is just two teams with a need, not four, and none of them should be deemed "desperate".

Wrong. I said there are teams that need QBs (no one knows the status of Manning going into next year, if he's not healthy or if he's a risk do you see the Colts riding the season out with Orlovsky?) SOME of which would be desperate. If Manning is not healthy, I'd say that's a desperate situation. The Brows ARE in desperate need of a franchise QB, McCoy is not their answer.

[GoSkins]

With the shakeup in Indy .... I don't know what that means, if anything, relative to the course the team was planning to take regarding Peyton Manning and or what to do with the #1 pick. Hell, there could even have been disagreement between picking RG3 & Luck.

If I were Bruce Allen, I would go full steam ahead in trying to secure the #2 pick from the Rams, and forget dealing with Indy ... because they have too much uncertainty at the moment. Get a deal worked with the Rams for the #2 pick, and resign yourself to take RG3. Who knows, maybe Indy picks Griffin, and Luck goes second?

Stranger things have happened.

Problem is the Rams are a mees too. Hopefully a lot will clear up by March when the new coaches and GMs are in place and the status of Manning is resolved. I suspect Polian wanted to dump Peyton and Isray was against that.

[StorminMormon86]

With the possible exception of Matt Flynn (who is an unknown entity that has had a couple of great showings), it's a crap shoot on FA QBs, with not a one that represents a significant upgrade over the guys we have now who know the offensive system. Any retread brought in would have that learning curve, and it seems so obvious to me that making such a move would be a grave mistake.

I think if we could get Flynn at a decent price, AND draft a QB Shanny wants (might be wishful thinking but you have to do that after another losing season) we'd be in good shape. Flynn (in his limited playtime) has already shown he's a better option than Grossman. If we need a "caretaker" for the role, why not go after Flynn?

I can see the McNabb move .... I thought that was a very sound decision, and hindsight is 20/20. But, if these guys go after and pay a big price tag for Matt Flynn, with the idea of drafting a 2nd or 3rd rounder as a project QB, that could easily turn out to be 5 QB mistakes in 3 years, and another major setback for the Redskins.

And if we give up several draft picks and draft RGIII or Luck, they could turn out to be busts. We simply have no way of knowing the future.

Time for the redskins to step up to the plate, and swing ... no more looking for walks or bunting. Go get RG3 or Luck, and really start making progress. This "wait till next year" stuff, and the "band aid brigade" QB carousel approach is getting real old.

I agree that the band aids are getting old, but on the other side of the coin you can't have your cake and eat it too. Most fans do NOT want to give up draft picks for anyone, and I think Shanahan wants to rebuild the offense collectively, not just focus on the QB position. So giving up picks just to get RGIII or Luck seems pointless to me, since we need help outside of the QB position. That's why I think the gamble is less in building up a team with studs in multiple positions, rather than taking a potential stud QB.

[GoSkins]

With the possible exception of Matt Flynn (who is an unknown entity that has had a couple of great showings), it's a crap shoot on FA QBs, with not a one that represents a significant upgrade over the guys we have now who know the offensive system. Any retread brought in would have that learning curve, and it seems so obvious to me that making such a move would be a grave mistake.

I think if we could get Flynn at a decent price, AND draft a QB Shanny wants (might be wishful thinking but you have to do that after another losing season) we'd be in good shape. Flynn (in his limited playtime) has already shown he's a better option than Grossman. If we need a "caretaker" for the role, why not go after Flynn?

I can see the McNabb move .... I thought that was a very sound decision, and hindsight is 20/20. But, if these guys go after and pay a big price tag for Matt Flynn, with the idea of drafting a 2nd or 3rd rounder as a project QB, that could easily turn out to be 5 QB mistakes in 3 years, and another major setback for the Redskins.

And if we give up several draft picks and draft RGIII or Luck, they could turn out to be busts. We simply have no way of knowing the future.

Time for the redskins to step up to the plate, and swing ... no more looking for walks or bunting. Go get RG3 or Luck, and really start making progress. This "wait till next year" stuff, and the "band aid brigade" QB carousel approach is getting real old.

I agree that the band aids are getting old, but on the other side of the coin you can't have your cake and eat it too. Most fans do NOT want to give up draft picks for anyone, and I think Shanahan wants to rebuild the offense collectively, not just focus on the QB position. So giving up picks just to get RGIII or Luck seems pointless to me, since we need help outside of the QB position. That's why I think the gamble is less in building up a team with studs in multiple positions, rather than taking a potential stud QB.

Shanny can draft a top flight QB in this draft and give up some draft picks. We have a lot of cap space and can go after a stud WR and 1-2 OL in FA. In my view this is a tipping point for Shanny and the Redskins.

[SkinsJock]

I think I'd take the chance of giving up a lot for Luck but I hope we stay with the pick and ONLY if Mike & Bruce REALLY think that RGIII can be a good QB would I even take him

OTHERWISE - I hope they trade down and continue to add and get younger- I've heard some say that we've tried this and it has not worked - I disagree - The roster has 40 new members in the 2 years since this FO came in - we have not seen the full effects of that yet
we need to keep adding and letting these guys continue trying to get this franchise out of the mess created by Snyder & Cerrato


I agree that our #1 priority is to get a good QB - we can do that without giving up anything - UNLESS we can get Luck

[1niksder]

I agree they must make the right decisions and one of those is getting a franchise QB.

It doesn't have to be with the sixth pick. They could move up, stay put and draft BPA and get a QB in the second round, or trade down and then get a QB. Or get a guy in FA.

Whatever you do you better be right and you had better have a plan B if you're not right. You can't go into the season with a QB situation even remotely resembling what we had this season or MS WILL NOT GET SEASON FOUR let alone season five!

+1

Which is why he'll go every route possible to get a guy that will get the job done.

I think "the Danny" had a lot to do with #5 showing up in the DMV, and Rex was Klye's choice from day one. He signed off on both, said they were his decisions. Now he's behind the eight-ball.

That could mean anything... Luck or RGIII.... Flynn or another FA with promise... a rookie that drops in the draft... or a UDFA QB that falls all the way out the draft. I'm wouldn't be surprised if he did all of the above. It's a new league. Talent matters but cost and profit margin still rules under "the Danny". Cash out on free agents to fix the O-line and back 7 on the D (guys like they brought in last year... young and hunger). Get Flynn, RGIII and a R. Wilson or Weeden type in the third or fourth round then sign a rookie after the draft that had been on his board as a fourth or fifth that fell for whatever reason (as long as it wasn't a charcter issue). Add in Beck and that's 5 arms in camp to get the O going... I could see 3 QBs on the active roster in 2012 if he goes this route depending on who falls to the second day.

[RayNAustin]

With the shakeup in Indy .... I don't know what that means, if anything, relative to the course the team was planning to take regarding Peyton Manning and or what to do with the #1 pick. Hell, there could even have been disagreement between picking RG3 & Luck.

If I were Bruce Allen, I would go full steam ahead in trying to secure the #2 pick from the Rams, and forget dealing with Indy ... because they have too much uncertainty at the moment. Get a deal worked with the Rams for the #2 pick, and resign yourself to take RG3. Who knows, maybe Indy picks Griffin, and Luck goes second?

Stranger things have happened.

Problem is the Rams are a mees too. Hopefully a lot will clear up by March when the new coaches and GMs are in place and the status of Manning is resolved. I suspect Polian wanted to dump Peyton and Isray was against that.

I would think the firing of Spagnola has no bearing on their pick, and that Bradford was and still is rock solidly the man in the eyes of ownership. They'll use their pick for another player, or trade their #2 pick for as much as they can get for their new coach to add more talent (jon Gruden anyone?). Bradford was the #1 overall in 2010 ... no way do they give up on him, and waste a golden opportunity to add picks to bolster their roster.

I'd bet they'd trade the #2 overall for the Redskins #6 overall, with next year's #1.

Of course, we could take a chance on the Rams, Vikings, Browns and Bucs to not take RG3 or or not trade their pick to someone (like Seattle) and have RG3 fall to us at 6, like a lot of Mock drafts have it ....but I think that would prove to be an error for a couple of good reasons.

1) The Rams may trade the pick, and Seattle needs a QB almost as badly as we do, and there is no way we can assume that the Vikings or Browns would pass on RG3 in favor of Ponder and McCoy, or trade down.

2) IF we did get the #2 pick from the Rams, and the Colts decided to take RG3 (which is not out of the realm of possibility)... we'd get LUCK-y. Either way, we'd be guaranteed to get one of the two, and that is an absolute must happen, in my opinion.

The question is, do you gamble that RG3 falls to us at 6 .... and risk coming up empty? Barkley returning to school really makes that gamble even more risky.

[1niksder]

Stranger things have happened.

Hope it gets even stranger...

Problem is the Rams are a mees too. Hopefully a lot will clear up by March when the new coaches and GMs are in place and the status of Manning is resolved. I suspect Polian wanted to dump Peyton and Isray was against that.

Shanny is known to do his best work with teams that are a mess... think Portis for Bailey AND a pick OR swapping 1st plus a 3rd and 4th to get Campbell AFTER everyone else knew why they wanted the pick. Everyone points to these trades as proof the the Skins always make bad deals and forget Shanny was the guy on the phone with Vinny BOTH times.

I would think the firing of Spagnola has no bearing on their pick, and that Bradford was and still is rock solidly the man in the eyes of ownership. They'll use their pick for another player, or trade their #2 pick for as much as they can get for their new coach to add more talent (jon Gruden anyone?). Bradford was the #1 overall in 2010 ... no way do they give up on him, and waste a golden opportunity to add picks to bolster their roster.

I'd bet they'd trade the #2 overall for the Redskins #6 overall, with next year's #1.

Not if the Browns heard about it and offered two #1s this year

Of course, we could take a chance on the Rams, Vikings, Browns and Bucs to not take RG3 or or not trade their pick to someone (like Seattle) and have RG3 fall to us at 6, like a lot of Mock drafts have it ....but I think that would prove to be an error for a couple of good reasons.

I think the Rams are set with Bradford, most reports have the Vikes and Hawks out of the QB hunt stating open competions in 2012 between Ponder and Webb / Hasselbeck and Locker.

The question is, do you gamble that RG3 falls to us at 6 .... and risk coming up empty? Barkley returning to school really makes that gamble even more risky.

He won't fall that far... I was hoped that when Spags left, McDaneils would be gone too. Meaning BLloyd would leave and the Rams wouldn't be able to pass on Blackmon and the Skins could deal with Minny (having one of there picks in hand) McDainels looks like he is staying so they'll have to out bid Cleveland (who has two ones in THIS draft)

[RayNAustin]

I think if we could get Flynn at a decent price, AND draft a QB Shanny wants (might be wishful thinking but you have to do that after another losing season) we'd be in good shape. Flynn (in his limited playtime) has already shown he's a better option than Grossman. If we need a "caretaker" for the role, why not go after Flynn?

Because due to his record setting performance in the last game, he's going to be looking for, and somebody is going to give him a fat azzed contract, so he's not going to be cheap, and he's going to be leaving Green Bay to be a starter somewhere else ... not to be a plan B place holder. And I don't think that his performance in two games justifies the risk of signing him to a big contract, and passing on a top draft talent.

And if we give up several draft picks and draft RGIII or Luck, they could turn out to be busts. We simply have no way of knowing the future.

There's no guarantee anyone will not be busts ... including those "coupons" for a couple of future players people want to save, as if they are guaranteed game changers.

I agree that the band aids are getting old, but on the other side of the coin you can't have your cake and eat it too. Most fans do NOT want to give up draft picks for anyone, and I think Shanahan wants to rebuild the offense collectively, not just focus on the QB position. So giving up picks just to get RGIII or Luck seems pointless to me, since we need help outside of the QB position. That's why I think the gamble is less in building up a team with studs in multiple positions, rather than taking a potential stud QB.

This is true ... you surely can't have your cake and eat it too. Or in this case, you can't have the best QB in the draft and keep all your draft picks too.

But, unless you have the right guy handling the ball on every offensive down, it is USELESS to focus on those that handle it only a few times per game. The average receiver might touch the ball 4 or 5 times (IF they have a QB that can even get them the ball) .... the RB might touch it 20 times ... and the QB has it 60 times per game. Somebody PLEASE do the math?

In the NFL, teams with great QBs dominate ... Rodgers, Brady, Brees, Manning, and they do so year after year. Those without great QBs FAIL year after year.

I sometimes feel I'm living in the Twilight Zone. Has it ever occurred to the "draft pick savers" that for a team like Indy, who has more roster holes than the Redskins ... when they choose to use their #1 overall pick, they are doing EXACTLY the same damned thing as giving up several draft picks to trade up? I mean really ... no one questions the choice to use the #1 damned pick .... but magically it is crazy for someone else to trade picks for it? That's what makes no sense. There's not a bit of difference, except that the Colts probably need the extra picks more than the Redskins do, while we need a QB more than the Colts do, since they already have the best one that has ever played the freaking game already under contract.

Tthe bottom line is, if Indy picks Luck ... they've given up 3 #1 picks to do so, because that's what they could have gotten for it if they traded. That's OK, even though they need those extra picks worse than anyone else (which is why they have the 1st overall to begin with).

Right. Gotcha. Makes perfect sense. NOT.

[Redskin in Canada]

That makes no sense to me.

Glad you are not running or giving advice to the team.

You have not studied the Draft and because you think you know the two top QB prospects, you feel that it is a matter of life or death to pick one of them.

It is not and we will discuss it when the time comes.

[SkinsJock]

The fan in me says to do what it takes to get the QB - thankfully this FO will not do that

they will continue what they've begun - fine tuning what what is shaping up to be a consistently competive team

thanks to the Shanaplan we're in the playoffs next season and we're going to be there for a while


keep it up, Mike & Bruce - don't let them change what you've begun here

[PulpExposure]

Man I wish Barkley was still in the draft. This is setting up to be a very bad offseason for us. We need a QB, and the only one available who is young with potential is Matt Flynn (he of the whole 2 games started). However, by the time the draft rolls around, he will have already signed with a team. Nightmare scenario; they don't sign Flynn, and both Luck and RG3 get drafted. What then? Pick a guy like Tannehill who has played a whole 1.5 years of QB in college?

smh. I really don't think I can take another year of Rex and Beck.

[I think the Rams are set with Bradford, most reports have the Vikes and Hawks out of the QB hunt stating open competions in 2012 between Ponder and Webb / Hasselbeck and Locker.

Titans /= Hawks...