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

Countertrey wrote:Vet's point should not be overlooked.

When is the last time the Redskins drafted a true "franchise" quarterback?

While we hope that it will work out, the more successful McNabb is, the less likely we are to find that future franchise quarterback in the draft.

I agree, but not all franchise QBs go in the first 10 picks (Dan Marino, Tom Brady) and not all top picked QBs pan out to be franchisers (Jamarcus Russell, Heath Shuler). It's always a bit of a crap shoot.

Deadskins wrote:

Countertrey wrote:Vet's point should not be overlooked.

When is the last time the Redskins drafted a true "franchise" quarterback?

While we hope that it will work out, the more successful McNabb is, the less likely we are to find that future franchise quarterback in the draft.

I agree, but not all franchise QBs go in the first 10 picks (Dan Marino, Tom Brady) and not all top picked QBs pan out to be franchisers (Jamarcus Russell, Heath Shuler). It's always a bit of a crap shoot.

True dat. The other thing is that next years QB crop, will be THE most talented EVER. Hands down the best. I think they realize that and would like McNabb to be a mentor to a young QB for a year or two, which fits in with his shelf life.

Look at who the coach has been for each of our last franchise QB selections. I think that plays a huge factor. I trust Shannahan to draft and groom the next one.

chiefhog44 wrote:

Look at who the coach has been for each of our last franchise QB selections. I think that plays a huge factor.

Just curious, chief... who do you consider those franchise quarterbacks to have been.

In my mind, there have been only 3 franchise quarterbacks in Redskins history...
Jurgensen
The Little General
Slingin' Sammy.
Maybe you could squeeze in Theisman...
Only Labaron and Baugh were drafted... that means that the Redskins have not drafted a franchise quarterback since 1950... IMHO.

We have had many quality quarterbacks, but few were drafted. There were a couple who shone brightly but briefly (Rypien) there were occasional journeymen who grabbed the golden ring (Doug Williams and[almost] Billy Kilmer), but there were boneheads who liked to headbutt concrete (Schraeder) and who just couldn't figure out the pro game (Shuler). Trent Edwards was drafted... and, except for a devastating injury, might have become the franchise quarterback... for the St. Louis Rams...

There were unfortunates who either came along at the wrong time and were destroyed by the coach alone (Ramsey) or through a frustrating confluence of scheme, talent, leadership, and mind just never matching up (Campbell). The Redskins history with Quarterbacks had been truly, Boom or Bust.

Countertrey wrote:chiefhog44 wrote:

Look at who the coach has been for each of our last franchise QB selections. I think that plays a huge factor.

Just curious, chief... who do you consider those franchise quarterbacks to have been.

In my mind, there have been only 3 franchise quarterbacks in Redskins history...
Jurgensen
The Little General
Slingin' Sammy.
Maybe you could squeeze in Theisman...
Only Labaron and Baugh were drafted... that means that the Redskins have not drafted a franchise quarterback since 1950... IMHO.

We have had many quality quarterbacks, but few were drafted. There were a couple who shone brightly but briefly (Rypien) there were occasional journeymen who grabbed the golden ring (Doug Williams and[almost] Billy Kilmer), but there were boneheads who liked to headbutt concrete (Schraeder) and who just couldn't figure out the pro game (Shuler). Trent Edwards was drafted... and, except for a devastating injury, might have become the franchise quarterback... for the St. Louis Rams...

There were unfortunates who either came along at the wrong time and were destroyed by the coach alone (Ramsey) or through a frustrating confluence of scheme, talent, leadership, and mind just never matching up (Campbell). The Redskins history with Quarterbacks had been truly, Boom or Bust.

I'm sure he was talking about Campbell (Gibbs II) and Shuler (Norval), in reaction to my point about 1st rounders not always becoming franchise QBs, even though they were drafted with that role in mind. But I'm surprised you don't remember that is was Gus Frerotte that head-butted the wall, not Schroeder. You could hang the franchise label on Jay, though, because we traded him for Jim Lachey.

Countertrey wrote:chiefhog44 wrote:

Look at who the coach has been for each of our last franchise QB selections. I think that plays a huge factor.

Just curious, chief... who do you consider those franchise quarterbacks to have been.

In my mind, there have been only 3 franchise quarterbacks in Redskins history...
Jurgensen
The Little General
Slingin' Sammy.
Maybe you could squeeze in Theisman...
Only Labaron and Baugh were drafted... that means that the Redskins have not drafted a franchise quarterback since 1950... IMHO.

We have had many quality quarterbacks, but few were drafted. There were a couple who shone brightly but briefly (Rypien) there were occasional journeymen who grabbed the golden ring (Doug Williams and[almost] Billy Kilmer), but there were boneheads who liked to headbutt concrete (Schraeder) and who just couldn't figure out the pro game (Shuler). Trent Edwards was drafted... and, except for a devastating injury, might have become the franchise quarterback... for the St. Louis Rams...

There were unfortunates who either came along at the wrong time and were destroyed by the coach alone (Ramsey) or through a frustrating confluence of scheme, talent, leadership, and mind just never matching up (Campbell). The Redskins history with Quarterbacks had been truly, Boom or Bust.

& Eddie was a 10th round pick.

Countertrey wrote:Vet's point should not be overlooked.

When is the last time the Redskins drafted a true "franchise" quarterback?

While we hope that it will work out, the more successful McNabb is, the less likely we are to find that future franchise quarterback in the draft.

First of all, McNabb isn't a "Franchise QB". If he was, his last franchise, a hated NFC East rival, would have kept him.

Second, draft position means nothing as to whether you'll find a Franchise QB or not.


Here are the top passers in the league last year...how many were Top 10 picks?

The answer: 2.

In fact, 2 of the Top 10 weren't drafted at all and 6 weren't even in the 1st round.


1. Drew Brees* · NOR 109.6
2. Brett Favre* · MIN 107.2
3. Philip Rivers* · SDG 104.4
4. Aaron Rodgers* · GNB 103.2
5. Ben Roethlisberger · PIT 100.5
6. Peyton Manning*+ · IND 99.9
7. Matt Schaub* · HOU 98.6
8. Tony Romo* · DAL 97.6
9. Tom Brady* · NWE 96.2
10. Kurt Warner · ARI

Wahoo McDaniels wrote:

Countertrey wrote:Vet's point should not be overlooked.

When is the last time the Redskins drafted a true "franchise" quarterback?

While we hope that it will work out, the more successful McNabb is, the less likely we are to find that future franchise quarterback in the draft.

First of all, McNabb isn't a "Franchise QB". If he was, his last franchise, a hated NFC East rival, would have kept him.

Second, draft position means nothing as to whether you'll find a Franchise QB or not.


Here are the top passers in the league last year...how many were Top 10 picks?

The answer: 2.

In fact, 2 of the Top 10 weren't drafted at all and 6 weren't even in the 1st round.


1. Drew Brees* · NOR 109.6
2. Brett Favre* · MIN 107.2
3. Philip Rivers* · SDG 104.4
4. Aaron Rodgers* · GNB 103.2
5. Ben Roethlisberger · PIT 100.5
6. Peyton Manning*+ · IND 99.9
7. Matt Schaub* · HOU 98.6
8. Tony Romo* · DAL 97.6
9. Tom Brady* · NWE 96.2
10. Kurt Warner · ARI

So what you're speculating is that you'd rather gamble on a late round draft pick becoming a franchise QB than a 1st rounder. I realize and never inteneded to insinuate that draft position = success, but I'd rather take a chance on a first rounder with those displayed leadership skills, (Ryan, Stafford, Big Ben (on field, let's not derail the thread), Aaron Rogders, than the crapshoot that was Kurt Warner or Tom Brady. I wasn't a huge fan, but I'd even take a chance on Tebow (god I can't believe I said that). Cinderella stories do exist, but how common are they really?

Others have a differing opinion and that's fine. I wouldn't want everyone to think the same, anyway. Even though I think some opinions here are boneheaded, I still love this site, and the discussions, for the most part, keep me here, along with a few people I've actually gotten to know a little outside the forum.

I'm not as worried about which round we draft a QB OR if our next QB comes from the draft at all - I think that the group here will find a QB that might not be a HOF QB but he will be really good - I might be very wrong but I think these guys have a really good chance at doing that - I look for McNabb to be able to help that QB develop here in the next few years - this guy is a solid leader and will be a great mentor



ANYONE that looks at our past history of developing QBs is way off base - NONE of the people that failed so miserably to develop anyone here are here anymore - it's NOT going to be like that, FORGET IT - this is the begining of a new way of doing things and I believe we are going to see steady improvement



I think the Eagles made a BIG mistake in letting a really good (NOT great) QB go AND especially to a division rival that had a QB that was not competitive AND there were NO really good options to locate one



we are a lot better off than we were and I think the Eagles are happy about Kolb but they should have found another team to let McNabb go to - IF AT ALL

so, please, why would the Eagles fans be laughing ?

VetSkinsFan wrote:

Wahoo McDaniels wrote:

Countertrey wrote:Vet's point should not be overlooked.

When is the last time the Redskins drafted a true "franchise" quarterback?

While we hope that it will work out, the more successful McNabb is, the less likely we are to find that future franchise quarterback in the draft.

First of all, McNabb isn't a "Franchise QB". If he was, his last franchise, a hated NFC East rival, would have kept him.

Second, draft position means nothing as to whether you'll find a Franchise QB or not.


Here are the top passers in the league last year...how many were Top 10 picks?

The answer: 2.

In fact, 2 of the Top 10 weren't drafted at all and 6 weren't even in the 1st round.


1. Drew Brees* · NOR 109.6
2. Brett Favre* · MIN 107.2
3. Philip Rivers* · SDG 104.4
4. Aaron Rodgers* · GNB 103.2
5. Ben Roethlisberger · PIT 100.5
6. Peyton Manning*+ · IND 99.9
7. Matt Schaub* · HOU 98.6
8. Tony Romo* · DAL 97.6
9. Tom Brady* · NWE 96.2
10. Kurt Warner · ARI

So what you're speculating is that you'd rather gamble on a late round draft pick becoming a franchise QB than a 1st rounder. I realize and never inteneded to insinuate that draft position = success, but I'd rather take a chance on a first rounder with those displayed leadership skills, (Ryan, Stafford, Big Ben (on field, let's not derail the thread), Aaron Rogders, than the crapshoot that was Kurt Warner or Tom Brady. I wasn't a huge fan, but I'd even take a chance on Tebow (god I can't believe I said that). Cinderella stories do exist, but how common are they really?

Others have a differing opinion and that's fine. I wouldn't want everyone to think the same, anyway. Even though I think some opinions here are boneheaded, I still love this site, and the discussions, for the most part, keep me here, along with a few people I've actually gotten to know a little outside the forum.

But Vet, we're not going to have to speculate with a late round pick next year! Even if McNabb were to lead us to the playoffs, we still have our first rounder don't we? 2011 is looking like it may be one of the most stacked QB classes since 2004.

I'm sure you'll say that we need to use that 1st rounder on either an O-lineman or a WR. It's far easier to get good depth on the O-line further down the draft boards than it is to find a future franchise QB.

I don't understand why you keep trying to find negatives in this trade for McNabb. Is it more of a case that you can't allow yourself to root for the longtime QB of one of our arch enemies? McNabb is a drastic upgrade who will help the skins be legitmate contenders and draft a late first round QB to groom for two to three years.

VetSkinsFan wrote:

Wahoo McDaniels wrote:

Countertrey wrote:Vet's point should not be overlooked.

When is the last time the Redskins drafted a true "franchise" quarterback?

While we hope that it will work out, the more successful McNabb is, the less likely we are to find that future franchise quarterback in the draft.

First of all, McNabb isn't a "Franchise QB". If he was, his last franchise, a hated NFC East rival, would have kept him.

Second, draft position means nothing as to whether you'll find a Franchise QB or not.


Here are the top passers in the league last year...how many were Top 10 picks?

The answer: 2.

In fact, 2 of the Top 10 weren't drafted at all and 6 weren't even in the 1st round.


1. Drew Brees* · NOR 109.6
2. Brett Favre* · MIN 107.2
3. Philip Rivers* · SDG 104.4
4. Aaron Rodgers* · GNB 103.2
5. Ben Roethlisberger · PIT 100.5
6. Peyton Manning*+ · IND 99.9
7. Matt Schaub* · HOU 98.6
8. Tony Romo* · DAL 97.6
9. Tom Brady* · NWE 96.2
10. Kurt Warner · ARI

So what you're speculating is that you'd rather gamble on a late round draft pick becoming a franchise QB than a 1st rounder. I realize and never inteneded to insinuate that draft position = success, but I'd rather take a chance on a first rounder with those displayed leadership skills, (Ryan, Stafford, Big Ben (on field, let's not derail the thread), Aaron Rogders, than the crapshoot that was Kurt Warner or Tom Brady. I wasn't a huge fan, but I'd even take a chance on Tebow (god I can't believe I said that). Cinderella stories do exist, but how common are they really?

Others have a differing opinion and that's fine. I wouldn't want everyone to think the same, anyway. Even though I think some opinions here are boneheaded, I still love this site, and the discussions, for the most part, keep me here, along with a few people I've actually gotten to know a little outside the forum.

But Vet, we're not going to have to speculate with a late round pick next year! Even if McNabb were to lead us to the playoffs, we still have our first rounder don't we? 2011 is looking like it may be one of the most stacked QB classes since 2004.

I'm sure you'll say that we need to use that 1st rounder on either an O-lineman or a WR. It's far easier to get good depth on the O-line further down the draft boards than it is to find a future franchise QB.

I don't understand why you keep trying to find negatives in this trade for McNabb. Is it more of a case that you can't allow yourself to root for the longtime QB of one of our arch enemies? McNabb is a drastic upgrade who will help the skins be legitmate contenders and draft a late first round QB to groom for two to three years.

VetSkinsFan wrote:

Wahoo McDaniels wrote:

Countertrey wrote:Vet's point should not be overlooked.

When is the last time the Redskins drafted a true "franchise" quarterback?

While we hope that it will work out, the more successful McNabb is, the less likely we are to find that future franchise quarterback in the draft.

First of all, McNabb isn't a "Franchise QB". If he was, his last franchise, a hated NFC East rival, would have kept him.

Second, draft position means nothing as to whether you'll find a Franchise QB or not.


Here are the top passers in the league last year...how many were Top 10 picks?

The answer: 2.

In fact, 2 of the Top 10 weren't drafted at all and 6 weren't even in the 1st round.


1. Drew Brees* · NOR 109.6
2. Brett Favre* · MIN 107.2
3. Philip Rivers* · SDG 104.4
4. Aaron Rodgers* · GNB 103.2
5. Ben Roethlisberger · PIT 100.5
6. Peyton Manning*+ · IND 99.9
7. Matt Schaub* · HOU 98.6
8. Tony Romo* · DAL 97.6
9. Tom Brady* · NWE 96.2
10. Kurt Warner · ARI

So what you're speculating is that you'd rather gamble on a late round draft pick becoming a franchise QB than a 1st rounder. I realize and never inteneded to insinuate that draft position = success, but I'd rather take a chance on a first rounder with those displayed leadership skills, (Ryan, Stafford, Big Ben (on field, let's not derail the thread), Aaron Rogders, than the crapshoot that was Kurt Warner or Tom Brady. I wasn't a huge fan, but I'd even take a chance on Tebow (god I can't believe I said that). Cinderella stories do exist, but how common are they really?

Others have a differing opinion and that's fine. I wouldn't want everyone to think the same, anyway. Even though I think some opinions here are boneheaded, I still love this site, and the discussions, for the most part, keep me here, along with a few people I've actually gotten to know a little outside the forum.

But Vet, we're not going to have to speculate with a late round pick next year! Even if McNabb were to lead us to the playoffs, we still have our first rounder don't we? 2011 is looking like it may be one of the most stacked QB classes since 2004.

I'm sure you'll say that we need to use that 1st rounder on either an O-lineman or a WR. It's far easier to get good depth on the O-line further down the draft boards than it is to find a future franchise QB.

I don't understand why you keep trying to find negatives in this trade for McNabb. Is it more of a case that you can't allow yourself to root for the longtime QB of one of our arch enemies? McNabb is a drastic upgrade who will help the skins be legitmate contenders and draft a late first round QB to groom for two to three years.

Wahoo McDaniels wrote:Here are the top passers in the league last year...how many were Top 10 picks?

The answer: 2.

In fact, 2 of the Top 10 weren't drafted at all and 6 weren't even in the 1st round.


1. Drew Brees* · NOR 109.6
2. Brett Favre* · MIN 107.2
3. Philip Rivers* · SDG 104.4
4. Aaron Rodgers* · GNB 103.2
5. Ben Roethlisberger · PIT 100.5
6. Peyton Manning*+ · IND 99.9
7. Matt Schaub* · HOU 98.6
8. Tony Romo* · DAL 97.6
9. Tom Brady* · NWE 96.2
10. Kurt Warner · ARI

Both Brees and Favre were picked at the top of round 2.

However, here's the thing you're missing. While you can find a great QB later in the draft (or undrafted), that's almost like hitting the lottery. People say "Brady was a 6th round pick!"; but then compare that to how many QBs have been drafted in the 6th round that didn't pan out (just look at our own draft history - hi Carson Palmer's brother and Colt Brennan!). Same with Warner and Romo; it's great that 2 undrafted QBs made it; that's 2 out of how many?

Whereas while you're not guaranteed to get a great QB with a high, your success rate is much, much higher. Your own chart above shows that; as 7 of the top 10 passers were picked in the first 33 draft choices.

Wahoo McDaniels wrote:

Countertrey wrote:Vet's point should not be overlooked.

When is the last time the Redskins drafted a true "franchise" quarterback?

While we hope that it will work out, the more successful McNabb is, the less likely we are to find that future franchise quarterback in the draft.

First of all, McNabb isn't a "Franchise QB". If he was, his last franchise, a hated NFC East rival, would have kept him.

Second, draft position means nothing as to whether you'll find a Franchise QB or not.


Here are the top passers in the league last year...how many were Top 10 picks?

The answer: 2.

In fact, 2 of the Top 10 weren't drafted at all and 6 weren't even in the 1st round.


1. Drew Brees* · NOR 109.6
2. Brett Favre* · MIN 107.2
3. Philip Rivers* · SDG 104.4
4. Aaron Rodgers* · GNB 103.2
5. Ben Roethlisberger · PIT 100.5
6. Peyton Manning*+ · IND 99.9
7. Matt Schaub* · HOU 98.6
8. Tony Romo* · DAL 97.6
9. Tom Brady* · NWE 96.2
10. Kurt Warner · ARI

What does any of this have to do with whether McNabb is/was a franchise quarterback? Had you actually READ my post, you would have seen that I was commenting on the fact that good performances in the future by McNabb IMPACTS OUR ABILITY TO GET A FUTURE FRANCHISE QUARTERBACK VIA THE DRAFT. PERIOD.

You were in such a hurry to dispute my assertion, that you let your agenda interpret my comment for you. Brilliant.

Second, despite your assertions, most top quarterbacks are found in the top half of the first round. Period. The Tom Brady's and the Kurt Warners of the world are the exceptions. The road to mediocrity is littered with 3rd round quarterbacks. You can make the arbitrary cut off at 10 if you want, but the reality is, below the first 2 or 3 picks, team need determines the pick, for the most part. It is nothing to find a top 5 talented QB falling to the 20th or 24th pick. That does you no good if your team performance gives you the 28th pick in the first round, though, does it?

THAT was my point.

And, regarding your comment that McNabb was not a franchise QB at Philly because if he were, they would not have traded him?

You DO know that it was Philly that traded Jurgensen to us, right?

Countertrey wrote:I was commenting on the fact that good performances in the future by McNabb IMPACTS OUR ABILITY TO GET A FUTURE FRANCHISE QUARTERBACK VIA THE DRAFT. PERIOD.
...
Second, despite your assertions, most top quarterbacks are found in the top half of the first round. Period.

Well, if there is someone that you really covet, you can always trade up to get them. Yes, it winds up costing you more in the long run, and therefore increases the risk involved, but that is the price you pay for winning now.

That's all true, JSPB... assuming you can find a trading partner... AND that you're willing to pay the price. Bottom line is the same... Win now, pay more later. In other words... "the more successful McNabb is, the less likely we are to find that future franchise quarterback in the draft."

Countertrey wrote:That's all true, JSPB... assuming you can find a trading partner... AND that you're willing to pay the price. Bottom line is the same... Win now, pay more later. In other words... "the more successful McNabb is, the less likely we are to find that future franchise quarterback in the draft."

I think we all can agree that the chances of finding a future very good QB to lead this team is looking a lot better with this FO and having Kyle's input than it has been for a long long time - I'd rather this franchise do well and not have as good a draft pick than suffer through another season with a QB that has ZERO QB skills and NO chance of leading the team as a QB

While I think we'll do a whole lot better having McNab as our QB we also are in a lot better position having him here to lead this team AND to help with whomever the new QB is than any QB we've had here in the last few year

so, again I ask - why are the Eagles fans laughing when by letting McNabb go (via trade) they not only help make the Redskins better now BUT also it would seem to me, they gave us a QB that can help this team for many years to come

this is really not a laughing matter if you're an Eagles fan

Countertrey wrote:Win now, pay more later. In other words... "the more successful McNabb is, the less likely we are to find that future franchise quarterback in the draft."

I think there is a subtle distinction, in that cost is not equivalent to likelihood, but that's just me.

Deadskins wrote:

Countertrey wrote:Win now, pay more later. In other words... "the more successful McNabb is, the less likely we are to find that future franchise quarterback in the draft."

I think there is a subtle distinction, in that cost is not equivalent to likelihood, but that's just me.

I'd agree with JSPB on that especially as it relates to who is making the decision on which QB is the best 'value' to this offense EITHER in the draft or via the trade route

Maximoral wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

Wahoo McDaniels wrote:

Countertrey wrote:Vet's point should not be overlooked.

When is the last time the Redskins drafted a true "franchise" quarterback?

While we hope that it will work out, the more successful McNabb is, the less likely we are to find that future franchise quarterback in the draft.

First of all, McNabb isn't a "Franchise QB". If he was, his last franchise, a hated NFC East rival, would have kept him.

Second, draft position means nothing as to whether you'll find a Franchise QB or not.


Here are the top passers in the league last year...how many were Top 10 picks?

The answer: 2.

In fact, 2 of the Top 10 weren't drafted at all and 6 weren't even in the 1st round.


1. Drew Brees* · NOR 109.6
2. Brett Favre* · MIN 107.2
3. Philip Rivers* · SDG 104.4
4. Aaron Rodgers* · GNB 103.2
5. Ben Roethlisberger · PIT 100.5
6. Peyton Manning*+ · IND 99.9
7. Matt Schaub* · HOU 98.6
8. Tony Romo* · DAL 97.6
9. Tom Brady* · NWE 96.2
10. Kurt Warner · ARI

So what you're speculating is that you'd rather gamble on a late round draft pick becoming a franchise QB than a 1st rounder. I realize and never inteneded to insinuate that draft position = success, but I'd rather take a chance on a first rounder with those displayed leadership skills, (Ryan, Stafford, Big Ben (on field, let's not derail the thread), Aaron Rogders, than the crapshoot that was Kurt Warner or Tom Brady. I wasn't a huge fan, but I'd even take a chance on Tebow (god I can't believe I said that). Cinderella stories do exist, but how common are they really?

Others have a differing opinion and that's fine. I wouldn't want everyone to think the same, anyway. Even though I think some opinions here are boneheaded, I still love this site, and the discussions, for the most part, keep me here, along with a few people I've actually gotten to know a little outside the forum.

But Vet, we're not going to have to speculate with a late round pick next year! Even if McNabb were to lead us to the playoffs, we still have our first rounder don't we? 2011 is looking like it may be one of the most stacked QB classes since 2004.

I'm sure you'll say that we need to use that 1st rounder on either an O-lineman or a WR. It's far easier to get good depth on the O-line further down the draft boards than it is to find a future franchise QB.

I don't understand why you keep trying to find negatives in this trade for McNabb. Is it more of a case that you can't allow yourself to root for the longtime QB of one of our arch enemies? McNabb is a drastic upgrade who will help the skins be legitmate contenders and draft a late first round QB to groom for two to three years.

There's no 'trying to find negatives' here. Even though he was an Eagle, I've always respected McNabb when he's on the field. I would prefer to take a small hit on talent in order to get that talent on the field for all 16 (or more) games. McNabb isn't going to be on the field all 16 games, and we've given up 2 draft pick for that part time player.

And I misstated obviously; by late round, I meant if McNabb takes us to the playoffs, we're drafting in the 20s in what rounds we have left (yes, first round, but LATE first round).

As for what I holes I think we have for next year's draft, don't think you know me. We haven't even finished the pre-season, let alone started the regular season. There's a lot of football out there and I haven't even begun to think draft in years ahead besides we're going to need to draft a QB SOON if we want any tutelage passed on from McNabb to the recipient. There are too many variables right now to comtemplate if we need a WR, a O lineman, or FS or whatever else.

I am looking forward to watching Sexy Rexy play tonight since I have no doubts he will be the starting QB for 4-6 games this season. McNabb is injury prone, always has been and getting older will not help that. But, I still think 10 games of McNabb and his off target throws are better than what we have seen on this team since Mark Rypien and that one beautiful year.

SkinsJock wrote:

Countertrey wrote:That's all true, JSPB... assuming you can find a trading partner... AND that you're willing to pay the price. Bottom line is the same... Win now, pay more later. In other words... "the more successful McNabb is, the less likely we are to find that future franchise quarterback in the draft."

I think we all can agree that the chances of finding a future very good QB to lead this team is looking a lot better with this FO and having Kyle's input than it has been for a long long time - I'd rather this franchise do well and not have as good a draft pick than suffer through another season with a QB that has ZERO QB skills and NO chance of leading the team as a QB

While I think we'll do a whole lot better having McNab as our QB we also are in a lot better position having him here to lead this team AND to help with whomever the new QB is than any QB we've had here in the last few year

so, again I ask - why are the Eagles fans laughing when by letting McNabb go (via trade) they not only help make the Redskins better now BUT also it would seem to me, they gave us a QB that can help this team for many years to come

this is really not a laughing matter if you're an Eagles fan

I understand what you're saying, but you're missing the point only CT and I seem to consider. The better McNabb does for us the short time he'll be here conversely impacts our ease in drafting a top talent QB in the future.

Say we go the playoffs and lose in the NFC championship game. This would put us @ 28th in the draft. There is a QB coveted to trade up for by our FO that you so adamantly follow without reservation. He's said to go around the 12-15th overall pick.

Hey, to trade up, let's offer a 1st and 4t....wait, we gave that up already for McNabb. Well, we can offer a 1st and 3r...wait, that's gone too! I got it, let's start mortgaging 2012 draft since we don't have anything left to offer from 2011.

Isn't this one of the very things we've despised from our previous regimes? Aren't we trying to get YOUNGER and DRAFT a team instead of trading to fill holes?

I've admitted more than once that statically (not statistically), right now, McNabb is an upgrade. How much of an upgrade will that 2nd and 3rd round investment be in 2014 and beyond? Chances are not a very good long term investment.

And that's my point. I didn't to give up a 2nd and 3rd for McNabb and I still don't think it was a good investment for the franchise in the long term.

And you can use your normal non-critical response of Kyle, Mike, and David know more than I do if you like. It's true, they do. But I'd rather have critical thought and be wrong (and be able to admit to it, mind you) than hedge my every opinion following the pied piper.

VetSkinsFan wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:

Countertrey wrote:That's all true, JSPB... assuming you can find a trading partner... AND that you're willing to pay the price. Bottom line is the same... Win now, pay more later. In other words... "the more successful McNabb is, the less likely we are to find that future franchise quarterback in the draft."

I think we all can agree that the chances of finding a future very good QB to lead this team is looking a lot better with this FO and having Kyle's input than it has been for a long long time - I'd rather this franchise do well and not have as good a draft pick than suffer through another season with a QB that has ZERO QB skills and NO chance of leading the team as a QB

While I think we'll do a whole lot better having McNab as our QB we also are in a lot better position having him here to lead this team AND to help with whomever the new QB is than any QB we've had here in the last few year

so, again I ask - why are the Eagles fans laughing when by letting McNabb go (via trade) they not only help make the Redskins better now BUT also it would seem to me, they gave us a QB that can help this team for many years to come

this is really not a laughing matter if you're an Eagles fan

I understand what you're saying, but you're missing the point only CT and I seem to consider. The better McNabb does for us the short time he'll be here conversely impacts our ease in drafting a top talent QB in the future.

Say we go the playoffs and lose in the NFC championship game. This would put us @ 28th in the draft. There is a QB coveted to trade up for by our FO that you so adamantly follow without reservation. He's said to go around the 12-15th overall pick.

Hey, to trade up, let's offer a 1st and 4t....wait, we gave that up already for McNabb. Well, we can offer a 1st and 3r...wait, that's gone too! I got it, let's start mortgaging 2012 draft since we don't have anything left to offer from 2011.

Isn't this one of the very things we've despised from our previous regimes? Aren't we trying to get YOUNGER and DRAFT a team instead of trading to fill holes?

I've admitted more than once that statically (not statistically), right now, McNabb is an upgrade. How much of an upgrade will that 2nd and 3rd round investment be in 2014 and beyond? Chances are not a very good long term investment.

And that's my point. I didn't to give up a 2nd and 3rd for McNabb and I still don't think it was a good investment for the franchise in the long term.

And you can use your normal non-critical response of Kyle, Mike, and David know more than I do if you like. It's true, they do. But I'd rather have critical thought and be wrong (and be able to admit to it, mind you) than hedge my every opinion following the pied piper.

OK, so would you rather have a crappy season this year just to get a higher draft pick next year? I wouldn't. And you don't always have to trade picks for picks, you can also trade talent. If you are lucky, you can trade aging talent for picks. You can also get picks as compensation for not matching an offer sheet on a RFA. If those picks come from a bad team, then they turn into high picks (See Sean Gilbert).

Deadskins wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:

Countertrey wrote:That's all true, JSPB... assuming you can find a trading partner... AND that you're willing to pay the price. Bottom line is the same... Win now, pay more later. In other words... "the more successful McNabb is, the less likely we are to find that future franchise quarterback in the draft."

I think we all can agree that the chances of finding a future very good QB to lead this team is looking a lot better with this FO and having Kyle's input than it has been for a long long time - I'd rather this franchise do well and not have as good a draft pick than suffer through another season with a QB that has ZERO QB skills and NO chance of leading the team as a QB

While I think we'll do a whole lot better having McNab as our QB we also are in a lot better position having him here to lead this team AND to help with whomever the new QB is than any QB we've had here in the last few year

so, again I ask - why are the Eagles fans laughing when by letting McNabb go (via trade) they not only help make the Redskins better now BUT also it would seem to me, they gave us a QB that can help this team for many years to come

this is really not a laughing matter if you're an Eagles fan

I understand what you're saying, but you're missing the point only CT and I seem to consider. The better McNabb does for us the short time he'll be here conversely impacts our ease in drafting a top talent QB in the future.

Say we go the playoffs and lose in the NFC championship game. This would put us @ 28th in the draft. There is a QB coveted to trade up for by our FO that you so adamantly follow without reservation. He's said to go around the 12-15th overall pick.

Hey, to trade up, let's offer a 1st and 4t....wait, we gave that up already for McNabb. Well, we can offer a 1st and 3r...wait, that's gone too! I got it, let's start mortgaging 2012 draft since we don't have anything left to offer from 2011.

Isn't this one of the very things we've despised from our previous regimes? Aren't we trying to get YOUNGER and DRAFT a team instead of trading to fill holes?

I've admitted more than once that statically (not statistically), right now, McNabb is an upgrade. How much of an upgrade will that 2nd and 3rd round investment be in 2014 and beyond? Chances are not a very good long term investment.

And that's my point. I didn't to give up a 2nd and 3rd for McNabb and I still don't think it was a good investment for the franchise in the long term.

And you can use your normal non-critical response of Kyle, Mike, and David know more than I do if you like. It's true, they do. But I'd rather have critical thought and be wrong (and be able to admit to it, mind you) than hedge my every opinion following the pied piper.

OK, so would you rather have a crappy season this year just to get a higher draft pick next year? I wouldn't. And you don't always have to trade picks for picks, you can also trade talent. If you are lucky, you can trade aging talent for picks. You can also get picks as compensation for not matching an offer sheet on a RFA. If those picks come from a bad team, then they turn into high picks (See Sean Gilbert).

You and I are on the same page here! I think McNabb is perfect simply because we can win now and then develop a future prospect.

OK, so would you rather have a crappy season this year just to get a higher draft pick next year?

I don't know that this is what Vet is arguing... I know it's not my point. I'm simply stating the fact... If McNabb does well, it degrades our chances of finding our future quarterback via the draft. That is a simple fact.

I happen to think that McNabb is well worth what we traded...and am content with the skill that Allen and Shanahan have demonstrated that they will figure something out... but, if we end up winning a playoff game or two, it won't likely be through the draft... without a lot of help from lady luck.

Countertrey wrote:

OK, so would you rather have a crappy season this year just to get a higher draft pick next year?

I don't know that this is what Vet is arguing... I know it's not my point. I'm simply stating the fact... If McNabb does well, it degrades our chances of finding our future quarterback via the draft. That is a simple fact.

I happen to think that McNabb is well worth what we traded...and am content with the skill that Allen and Shanahan have demonstrated that they will figure something out... but, if we end up winning a playoff game or two, it won't likely be through the draft... without a lot of help from lady luck.

I still disagree. We have the same chance of finding a franchise QB through the draft, regardless. We just have to be willing to pay the price.