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

SkinsJock wrote:to advocate giving up the draft picks and good players OR do whatever it takes to get a great QB shows STUPIDITY

It certainly was stupid for Mike to give up draft choices for McNabb. It would be even stupider to give up picks for a great QB. lol

jmooney wrote:To put a little different spin on it.

Bruce Allen can afford another year like this one and still keep his job. If you consider the way he handled the draft and the FA pick ups. Outstanding work.

The Shannahan's cannot afford another year like this and keep their job. They cant go into the year with Grossman and a rookie who will need a MINIMUM of half a season to develop before they are ready to start.
They almost need to pick up a QB that can start opening day.

So the real question is, does Allen mortgage the future of the team to protect the coaching staff and try to make us a contender next year. or does he approach this draft the same as 2011 and start building a dynasty, protecting his own job for many years to come?

Any of the QB's mentioned with exception of Flynn will cost multiple #1's to get, including Peyton. I think Manning is also due $28mil. for whatever roster he's on march 1st.

I'd kick the tires on Mallett from NE. probably cost a 1 and 2. as bad as I hate to send Belechic extra picks. AND he was available to us in the first round last year and we passed. The guy just spent a year in development behind Brady.

I like your thoughts on Mallett, but no way, Mike gives up a 1 and 2 on an unproven 3rd rounder (even if he has first round talent). Mike has gone on record to say he liked Mallett for the draft, but if he wasn't willing to spend a 3rd then, he doesn't spend a 1st now. I would be shocked if Mike gave a 1st rounder alone. At best, I could see a 2nd rounder and the fifth they gave us for AH for 2013. A friend of mine, says that he heard that Beli won't trade him, because he does see him as his future QB. I do like the idea of it though. Beli and Shanny are friends, so you never know - Beli took AH off his hands what's up with that?

Don't sell ShanAllen short, if somehow does move up to get Luck o RGIII, he will get something more in return for his high picks given up. Check out Mike's record on trades - Cutler - for the 11th and 15th and 68th. Bradford - passed - price too high. McNabb - 2nd and conditional 3rd -seemed lie a good deal for a pro bowl QB at the time. Look at the Carriker deal with the Rams - not a straight up deal. Creativity was shown. Look at the deal with the Rams to dump players that they each wanted to cut - scraped the edges of foul play, but they got away with it. I like what CT said, whatever, Shanny ends up doing, it will surprise us all.

SprintRightOption wrote: Why, allow me to retort:

1. Trent Dilfer , Jeff Hofstetler and Doug Williams are not great quarterbacks or as they say now a "Franchise" quarterback, yet they won Super Bowls.

2. Dan Marino , Fran Tarkenton, and Jim Kelley are Hall of Fame Quarterbacks who never won a Super Bowl. Tarkenton played in the Super Bowl three times and Jim Kelly four times yet neither could win a Super Bowl. John Elway was in three Super Bowls before he won his first.

What does this mean? Football is a team sport unlike auto racing and though having a great quarterback helps, it does not ensure a successful season or a Super Bowl title. There is no fixed formula for winning. Like war, the field of battle is always changing.

Imagine that a terrorist organization was able to take down the Twin towers and hit the Pentagon. That Russia was beaten by people with less than a third grade education in Afghanistan. That America was beaten in Vietnam. That Custer and the seventh cavalry was destroyed. That General Lee constantly won with inferior numbers and equipment. History books are filled with example like these. Some things are more important than others, but almost never singly important.

Why, allow me to retort your retort

I'd like to first maintain a little sanity by at least keeping our eyes on the Post-Leather-Helmet era of the NFL.

But some of your examples above are slightly skewed ... for example, the Redskins didn't win a Super Bowl with just Doug Williams, as Jay Schroeder was the starting QB who was a Pro Bowler from the previous season when he led the Redskins to a 12-4 record, and at that time a franchise record with over 4,000 yards passing, but lost to the Giants in the NFC Championship. The next year Schroeder got hurt, and was periodically backed up by DW during the year (Williams only started 2 games that season). So the Redskins were a dominant team, in dominant division. But to downplay Doug Williams skill is showing a lack of knowledge, as he was a #1 draft pick for Tampa Bay who had NEVER been to the playoffs until Williams came in and led them to the playoffs 3 out of 4 years there, including one Championship game appearance. Doug Williams WAS the Tampa Bay Bucs during his time there. And his performance in the Super Bowl is likely to be the greatest individual performance ever by a QB ... particularly the miraculous 2nd QT 35 points scored ... and perhaps the best 15 minutes of quarterbacking EVER.

Jim Kelley is another example ... 4 Super Bowl appearances ... that he never one one of those is just because at that time, the NFC representatives were DOMINANT teams ... including the Redskins who beat him.

But your suggestion that a great QB doesn't guarantee a Championship is true only to the extent that there are examples of failure, if you call losing the Super bowl more of a failure than actually making it to the Super Bowl to begin with .... but the success history overall would indicate you are wrong by a 10 to 1 ratio.

Denver and Elway is a classic case study of what a dominant QB brings to the table, because Denver doesn't know about a Super Bowl that wasn't associated with Elway, before or since. Brady, another. Drew Brees ... Aaron Rodgers .... Peyton Manning .... Ben Roethlisberger .... Joe Montana ... Steve Young .... Roger Staubach .... Bart Star ... Johnny Unitas .... Joe Namath .... etc. Sorry, but your "exceptions" are not going to win this argument.

Let's say that Tom Brady and the Pats play the Packers and Aaron Rodgers in the next Super Bowl ... and the Packers win. Does that make Brady any less great? Of course not. Do you think the NO Saints would have won the Super Bowl without Brees? How about the Cardinals even making it to the Super Bowl without Warner? And look at this year's Colts without Manning. They've won 10 or more games every year with Manning, and are a pathetic shell of their former selves without him.

Furthermore, Car Racing is also a team sport ... which is why Joe Gibbs was able to win one of the crown jewels of racing ... the Daytona 500 in his second year of owning Joe Gibbs Racing TEAM, with Dale Jarret. Gibbs simply knows how to assemble a team, be it football or racing. And he knows that it takes a great car and a great driver to win .... and would certainly not downplay the role of the driver, or the role of the Quarterback whether it's a racing team or a football team.

There is always the possibility that a moderately decent QB can be successful with a great team and great supporting cast ... but FAR MORE OFTEN, a great QB will make a moderately talented team hard to beat.

I would cite the most recent example in that the Vikings 3rd String QB played better than our starting QB yesterday, which is why we lost. Not that Webb is a great QB ... but just what superior performance of a QB can do. It really is the difference between winning and losing.

I tell you this .... if the Redskins had any of the top QBs playing this year, we'd have had the NFC east clinched 2 games ago, and looking at a run for the super bowl right now.

In this new era of free agency and salary caps ... those days of building a team so dominant that an moderately competent QB can win consistently are over. There is too much parity in overall talent.

I used the racing analogy for a reason. In NASCAR they have accomplished parity in the performance of the cars very scientifically, with limits of what they can do technically .... and these racing team engineering groups squeeze out every drop of HP, and trim off every ounce of weight that the rules allow. It's left to the driver's skill, and team strategy to determine who wins.

Similarly true with NFL teams, as we witness EACH AND EVERY WEEK in the NFL, with supposedly inferior teams beating superior ones. The wild card in the NFL today is the QB .... those days of Billy Kilmer are dead and gone. You couldn't win a single game in the NFL today with Billy throwing those end over end flutter balls.

frankcal20 wrote:That's a whole lotta opinion to read. I'll just say this that drafting a QB in the first round is a game changer. Folks say if Shanny doesn't draft a guy in the 1st round, he's done. Well if he drafts a guy in the 1st and he doesn't pan out, he's done. So thats where I feel that if he can get a guy like Flynn from GB and then drafting a QB later in the draft to groom is the way to go. Then your overall investment isn't that great and you've managed to upgrade another position that I'm sure we could use a top player like RT.

Frank, that's precisely my point. It is a game changer, and we've already been down that road of "pick a project" QB in Jason Campbell. It was the singularly worst decision Gibbs II made, which set this franchise backward for almost 5 years. That year we had 2 #1 picks, and we took Carlos Rogers and Jason Campbell ... neither of whom are here today ... but just as damaging as was the two wasted picks, was the lost time factor, struggling to overcome Jason's weaknesses.

That's the reason why those rare kids like Luck are so valuable, and so much more likely to be successful. They already demonstrate all of the skills required to be an NFL QB, and I contend that doing anything other than spending what it takes to get a guy like Luck who comes fully equipped from the factory with all of the necessary skills would be too much of a risk of being a repeat of drafting Jason Campbell all over again.

We know we need a QB for the here and now, and not a QB to groom for the next 2-3 years. We need one that can step in and play, day one. We also know in today's modern NFL, without a top QB, it's hard to be competitive with the better teams who do have them. And we know that there is no such thing as a guaranteed draft pick, not just at QB, but at any position. But what is a Peyton Manning type player worth to a franchise? Their value is immeasurable.

Someone could certainly argue that giving up three #1s for Luck is stupid, but not if he becomes a Manning/Brady/Rodgers type player ... in that event, he'd be worth every bit of that and even more. The risk cannot just be measured in the negative ... that he doesn't become that caliber of player, but also the risk that he does, and you passed on the opportunity to get him. By the same measure, there is no guarantee that saving those 3 picks and using them on three other players won't wind up being another Jason Campbell who represents another disastrous setback ... or a Trent Williams who seems to have been adequately backed up by an undrafted rookie free agent.

Our other most recent picks, Orakpo and Kerrigan are impact players, and were solid #1 picks. But if I had the chance to trade both of those guys, and Trent Williams for a 24 year old Peyton Manning, I'd do it in a heartbeat, and throw in a dinner at Red Lobster

You would not?

Red_One43 wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:to advocate giving up the draft picks and good players OR do whatever it takes to get a great QB shows STUPIDITY

It certainly was stupid for Mike to give up draft choices for McNabb. It would be even stupider to give up picks for a great QB. lol

The McNabb trade was a big mistake - something had to be done and that did not work out - GET OVER IT

Why can you not point out that as much as we needed to draft a QB last year, they thought it best not to

This FO has made some incredibly bad calls on 3 QBs - do you think they will continue to make bad decisions regarding the QB?
IF the answer is "yes" then it really does not matter that they give up 2 #1 picks and 2 #2 picks for a QB
BECAUSE based on the answer of "yes", these guys do not have a clue about the QB position OR about building the franchise

If the answer is "yes" - these guys won't be here long anyway



They are here - they can continue to build this franchise but ONLY if they continue with the Shanaplan

we have seen good things from this FO - it starts with not making STUPID decisions like giving up a bunch of high picks

SkinsJock wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:to advocate giving up the draft picks and good players OR do whatever it takes to get a great QB shows STUPIDITY

It certainly was stupid for Mike to give up draft choices for McNabb. It would be even stupider to give up picks for a great QB. lol

The McNabb trade was a big mistake - something had to be done and that did not work out - GET OVER IT

Why can you not point out that as much as we needed to draft a QB last year, they thought it best not to

This FO has made some incredibly bad calls on 3 QBs - do you think they will continue to make bad decisions regarding the QB?
IF the answer is "yes" then it really does not matter that they give up 2 #1 picks and 2 #2 picks for a QB
BECAUSE based on the answer of "yes", these guys do not have a clue about the QB position OR about building the franchise

If the answer is "yes" - these guys won't be here long anyway



They are here - they can continue to build this franchise but ONLY if they continue with the Shanaplan

we have seen good things from this FO - it starts with not making STUPID decisions like giving up a bunch of high picks

You don't see the circular logic and constant contradiction in your own statements, do you?

1) The McNabb trade was a big mistake - something had to be done and that did not work out - GET OVER IT

2) Why can you not point out that as much as we needed to draft a QB last year, they thought it best not to

3) This FO has made some incredibly bad calls on 3 QBs

Followed by:

1-A) They are here - they can continue to build this franchise but ONLY if they continue with the Shanaplan

2-A) we have seen good things from this FO

3-A) it starts with not making STUPID decisions like giving up a bunch of high picks

You seem to be right on the verge of losing an argument with yourself.

SkinsJock wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:to advocate giving up the draft picks and good players OR do whatever it takes to get a great QB shows STUPIDITY

It certainly was stupid for Mike to give up draft choices for McNabb. It would be even stupider to give up picks for a great QB. lol

The McNabb trade was a big mistake - something had to be done and that did not work out - GET OVER IT

Why can you not point out that as much as we needed to draft a QB last year, they thought it best not to

This FO has made some incredibly bad calls on 3 QBs - do you think they will continue to make bad decisions regarding the QB?
IF the answer is "yes" then it really does not matter that they give up 2 #1 picks and 2 #2 picks for a QB
BECAUSE based on the answer of "yes", these guys do not have a clue about the QB position OR about building the franchise

If the answer is "yes" - these guys won't be here long anyway



They are here - they can continue to build this franchise but ONLY if they continue with the Shanaplan

we have seen good things from this FO - it starts with not making STUPID decisions like giving up a bunch of high picks

SkinsJock, you are always saying that you trust the FO and a lot of us do as well. How about telling us what you would like to see happen to improve our QB situation for next year?

jmooney wrote:To put a little different spin on it.

Bruce Allen can afford another year like this one and still keep his job. If you consider the way he handled the draft and the FA pick ups. Outstanding work.

The Shannahan's cannot afford another year like this and keep their job. They cant go into the year with Grossman and a rookie who will need a MINIMUM of half a season to develop before they are ready to start.
They almost need to pick up a QB that can start opening day.

So the real question is, does Allen mortgage the future of the team to protect the coaching staff and try to make us a contender next year. or does he approach this draft the same as 2011 and start building a dynasty, protecting his own job for many years to come?

Any of the QB's mentioned with exception of Flynn will cost multiple #1's to get, including Peyton. I think Manning is also due $28mil. for whatever roster he's on march 1st.

I'd kick the tires on Mallett from NE. probably cost a 1 and 2. as bad as I hate to send Belechic extra picks. AND he was available to us in the first round last year and we passed. The guy just spent a year in development behind Brady.

In comparison Mallett is nothing compared to Luck, Griffin or Manning. Not a bad idea but the price you mentioned is too high in my opinion. Id give up a third round pick for Mallet tops. Not saying Mallet cant be great or isnt going to be? Just saying he isnt the prospect Luck or Griffin is nor does he have the same accomplishments. Obviously not even in the conversation with Manning.

Either way I like Flynn better then Mallett. Flynn actually has a national Championship under his belt and has been in big time situations and has been under Rogers with a SuperBowl ring as well. If your willing to give up a 1st and a second for Mallett then why not Flynn who is much better in my opinion with actual game experience.

I agree Mallett isnt of the same mold as the others. It seems I remember his draft stock fell due to some off-field character issues. Athleticly , he was projected late 1st early 2nd.

I do agree that a first and second would be a bit steep. Just thinking thats what it would take to get him away from NE. They seem to like him as Brady's successor.

The one thing that concerns me is whether or not this coaching staff has the ability to develop a rookie QB or willingness to change the offense enough to do so. I guess thats why I see RGIII to much of a project for them to take on.

Flynn is the best option for me because, in the end, its only money. And he looks like an upgrade to Grossman day 1.

I'm afraid If we dont get our QB this year, we will be looking for one next year and, another coaching staff to go with him.

jmooney wrote:Flynn is the best option for me because, in the end, its only money. And he looks like an upgrade to Grossman day 1.

I'm afraid If we dont get our QB this year, we will be looking for one next year and, another coaching staff to go with him.

+1

I agree that if we don't draft a QB, Flynn should be the QB we go after. I also think Cleveland will want to nab RGIII (if he's not staying in college), and Luck will already be gone by the time it's our pick. Aren't the rumors that if Shanahan's "guy" isn't available, he'll bypass a QB altogether? If this happens, do you honestly want another season of Wrecks Grossman? That's why the FA market would be vital to our next season (if we don't draft a QB). And Flynn, IMO, is the best FA available.

StorminMormon86 wrote:

jmooney wrote:Flynn is the best option for me because, in the end, its only money. And he looks like an upgrade to Grossman day 1.

I'm afraid If we dont get our QB this year, we will be looking for one next year and, another coaching staff to go with him.

+1

I agree that if we don't draft a QB, Flynn should be the QB we go after. I also think Cleveland will want to nab RGIII (if he's not staying in college), and Luck will already be gone by the time it's our pick. Aren't the rumors that if Shanahan's "guy" isn't available, he'll bypass a QB altogether? If this happens, do you honestly want another season of Wrecks Grossman? That's why the FA market would be vital to our next season (if we don't draft a QB). And Flynn, IMO, is the best FA available.

Would you rather "gamble" on a FA like Flynn or "gamble" on trading up for Luck? This is a tipping point for the Redskins. We must get the QB situation right or we're not going to be able to move up to the next level.

This FO is going to piss off a lot of fans here

They are going to continue to build this team thru the draft

They will surprise a few here and contine what they've begun

I'm just glad that we are not going to do what Snyder and Ray and Red would like and try "the quick fix"

SkinsJock wrote:This FO is going to piss off a lot of fans here

They are going to continue to build this team thru the draft

They will surprise a few here and contine what they've begun

I'm just glad that we are not going to do what Snyder and Ray and Red would like and try "the quick fix"

Dude you keep repeating this same post thread after thread... or you're contradicting this post in those same threads. We get it you have full confidence in the "ShanaAllen Plan" although no one really knows what it is.

Post your opinion of what you think they will do or what you hope they will do is kind of what this thread is about.

It not about your opinion of whatever it is they do... you obvious don't want to trade up, so what will they do with the 7th pick, what do you think they'll do with it, or who do you think they'll bring in. I doesn't matter if you're off base we know you'll feel they had the better plan in the end.

I don't get the love affair with Flynn. He was nothing special at LSU, has a weak arm, and has started less games than Beck when we traded for him. Most of the hype with Flynn is based one good game against the Pats in 2009. Bringing in Flynn would essentially be a repeat of the Beck acquisition.

I'm still hoping that RGIII comes out and we can get him... as far as moving up to get Luck I think the cost will be too high for Shanny. I've also not found much about what he thinks abuot Luck so he might not even want him. Now if the Colts win and the Rams win the SFLS, then a guy we know Shanny loves MIGHT come into play. Considering what Bradford's cap hit (last rookie 1st pick to cash in under old CBA) will be, I think the cost for him will be lower than many people think. The Rams have already shut him down for the season although he's been practicing on the limited bases for week. That too will lower his cost (high ankle sprain last time he played). Normally a team would showcase him if the wanted to get trade offers for him, but the Rams already know Mike likes Sam. The Rams and Redskins have make trades each off-season that Bruce and Mike have been here. I'd love for the Rams to draft luck and trade Bradford to the Redskins for whoever is on the board when Washington selects that they want. It'll surely cost more than that, but maybe not much more than that.

I would still go with RGIII if available....

If neither option is there, i'd go BPA and look at Cousins or Moore in a later round. Trading down is always something to look at

CanesSkins26 wrote:I don't get the love affair with Flynn. He was nothing special at LSU, has a weak arm, and has started less games than Beck when we traded for him. Most of the hype with Flynn is based one good game against the Pats in 2009. Bringing in Flynn would essentially be a repeat of the Beck acquisition.

Only he'd cost moe

CanesSkins26 wrote:I don't get the love affair with Flynn. He was nothing special at LSU, has a weak arm, and has started less games than Beck when we traded for him. Most of the hype with Flynn is based one good game against the Pats in 2009. Bringing in Flynn would essentially be a repeat of the Beck acquisition.

With you on this one. Caleb Hanie had one good game in the NFC Cahmpionship and look what happened when he started full time.

1niksder wrote:I'm still hoping that RGIII comes out and we can get him... as far as moving up to get Luck I think the cost will be too high for Shanny. I've also not found much about what he thinks abuot Luck so he might not even want him. Now if the Colts win and the Rams win the SFLS, then a guy we know Shanny loves MIGHT come into play. Considering what Bradford's cap hit (last rookie 1st pick to cash in under old CBA) will be, I think the cost for him will be lower than many people think. The Rams have already shut him down for the season although he's been practicing on the limited bases for week. That too will lower his cost (high ankle sprain last time he played). Normally a team would showcase him if the wanted to get trade offers for him, but the Rams already know Mike likes Sam. The Rams and Redskins have make trades each off-season that Bruce and Mike have been here. I'd love for the Rams to draft luck and trade Bradford to the Redskins for whoever is on the board when Washington selects that they want. It'll surely cost more than that, but maybe not much more than that.

I would still go with RGIII if available....

If neither option is there, i'd go BPA and look at Cousins or Moore in a later round. Trading down is always something to look at

I agree with everything you wrote. I would add Tannehill into the mix because he played in under Sherman in college who was the OC at Houston before Kyle. He looks pretty solid. Moore is an interesting QB. Everything about him says stud except for height and arm, but he has defied critics at every level so far. He could be like Dalton by the time of the draft, his stock soars so much that he might go in the late 1st round or early 2nd.

1niksder wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:This FO is going to piss off a lot of fans here

They are going to continue to build this team thru the draft

They will surprise a few here and contine what they've begun

I'm just glad that we are not going to do what Snyder and Ray and Red would like and try "the quick fix"

Dude you keep repeating this same post thread after thread... or you're contradicting this post in those same threads. We get it you have full confidence in the "ShanaAllen Plan" although no one really knows what it is.

Post your opinion of what you think they will do or what you hope they will do is kind of what this thread is about.

It not about your opinion of whatever it is they do... you obvious don't want to trade up, so what will they do with the 7th pick, what do you think they'll do with it, or who do you think they'll bring in. I doesn't matter if you're off base we know you'll feel they had the better plan in the end.

+1

C'mon, SkinsJock, Let's hear what you would like to have happen for our QB situation in the draft.

Red_One43 wrote:

1niksder wrote:I'm still hoping that RGIII comes out and we can get him... as far as moving up to get Luck I think the cost will be too high for Shanny. I've also not found much about what he thinks abuot Luck so he might not even want him. Now if the Colts win and the Rams win the SFLS, then a guy we know Shanny loves MIGHT come into play. Considering what Bradford's cap hit (last rookie 1st pick to cash in under old CBA) will be, I think the cost for him will be lower than many people think. The Rams have already shut him down for the season although he's been practicing on the limited bases for week. That too will lower his cost (high ankle sprain last time he played). Normally a team would showcase him if the wanted to get trade offers for him, but the Rams already know Mike likes Sam. The Rams and Redskins have make trades each off-season that Bruce and Mike have been here. I'd love for the Rams to draft luck and trade Bradford to the Redskins for whoever is on the board when Washington selects that they want. It'll surely cost more than that, but maybe not much more than that.

I would still go with RGIII if available....

If neither option is there, i'd go BPA and look at Cousins or Moore in a later round. Trading down is always something to look at

I agree with everything you wrote. I would add Tannehill into the mix because he played in under Sherman in college who was the OC at Houston before Kyle. He looks pretty solid. Moore is an interesting QB. Everything about him says stud except for height and arm, but he has defied critics at every level so far. He could be like Dalton by the time of the draft, his stock soars so much that he might go in the late 1st round or early 2nd.

Moore is 5'11 and weighs under 200 pounds. Dalton is 6'2, 215. You're Looking at Doug Flutie height and weight with Moore. Arm strength is also going to be a major issue for him in the NFL.

CanesSkins26 wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:

1niksder wrote:I'm still hoping that RGIII comes out and we can get him... as far as moving up to get Luck I think the cost will be too high for Shanny. I've also not found much about what he thinks abuot Luck so he might not even want him. Now if the Colts win and the Rams win the SFLS, then a guy we know Shanny loves MIGHT come into play. Considering what Bradford's cap hit (last rookie 1st pick to cash in under old CBA) will be, I think the cost for him will be lower than many people think. The Rams have already shut him down for the season although he's been practicing on the limited bases for week. That too will lower his cost (high ankle sprain last time he played). Normally a team would showcase him if the wanted to get trade offers for him, but the Rams already know Mike likes Sam. The Rams and Redskins have make trades each off-season that Bruce and Mike have been here. I'd love for the Rams to draft luck and trade Bradford to the Redskins for whoever is on the board when Washington selects that they want. It'll surely cost more than that, but maybe not much more than that.

I would still go with RGIII if available....

If neither option is there, i'd go BPA and look at Cousins or Moore in a later round. Trading down is always something to look at

I agree with everything you wrote. I would add Tannehill into the mix because he played in under Sherman in college who was the OC at Houston before Kyle. He looks pretty solid. Moore is an interesting QB. Everything about him says stud except for height and arm, but he has defied critics at every level so far. He could be like Dalton by the time of the draft, his stock soars so much that he might go in the late 1st round or early 2nd.

Moore is 5'11 and weighs under 200 pounds. Dalton is 6'2, 215. You're Looking at Doug Flutie height and weight with Moore. Arm strength is also going to be a major issue for him in the NFL.

I should have been more specific about my Dalton comparison. Dalton was believed to be a 4th or 5th round pick in February. His stock kept rising, first to a prospective third round pick and then to a possible 1st or 2nd round pick by April. I expect Moore's stock to rise as well.

Shanny prefers a big arm. One of the reasons, Shanny liked McNabb was his big arm and at one time, McNabb led the league in passes over 50 yards, I have to agree Moore's arm will be a major issue especially with Shan. y.

Red_One43 wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:to advocate giving up the draft picks and good players OR do whatever it takes to get a great QB shows STUPIDITY

It certainly was stupid for Mike to give up draft choices for McNabb. It would be even stupider to give up picks for a great QB. lol

I understand the CRITICAL need for a good QB and I agree that Luck will most likely be a great QB

I do not agree that the quickest way to be a consistently competitive franchise is to simply add Luck

I agree that this FO has made mistakes to date but at the same time they have lifted this franchise by adding players and getting rid of players that did not suit - they can continue this process ONLY if they have the draft picks - we need all of the draft picks we ac get

we need to continue to build and add


I understand the frustration of some here but I cannot agree that the quickes way to get to where we all want is to simply add Luck and give up the 2 top picks in this draft and the 2 top picks in the next plus whatever else these fans want to give up to get Luck

we are better off staying the course and getting a free agent QB to come in here and be better than Grossman
THAT IS EASY, there must be a few QBs playing now that can do the job better

I understand that there are not a lot of college QBs that are going to be ready to play coming out of this draft and maybe next

I still would rather not give up 4 draft picks this year (2 in 2012 and 2 in 2013) and then who knows how many more draft picks later to help the franchise because Andrew Luck will need help

THAT SCENARIO is JUST NOT THE BEST WAT to getting a consistently competitive team here - NO WAY

Red_One43 wrote:

1niksder wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:This FO is going to piss off a lot of fans here

They are going to continue to build this team thru the draft

They will surprise a few here and contine what they've begun

I'm just glad that we are not going to do what Snyder and Ray and Red would like and try "the quick fix"

Dude you keep repeating this same post thread after thread... or you're contradicting this post in those same threads. We get it you have full confidence in the "ShanaAllen Plan" although no one really knows what it is.

Post your opinion of what you think they will do or what you hope they will do is kind of what this thread is about.

It not about your opinion of whatever it is they do... you obvious don't want to trade up, so what will they do with the 7th pick, what do you think they'll do with it, or who do you think they'll bring in. I doesn't matter if you're off base we know you'll feel they had the better plan in the end.

+1

C'mon, SkinsJock, Let's hear what you would like to have happen for our QB situation in the draft.

OK - I'm ready now - been on the road

The QB situation is dire and these guys have not helped themselves

they will bring in a QB to start here - there must be a few QBs that can do a better job here than Grossman

I would love to draft Luck or Griffin III - but not at the cost of 4 picks (2 this year and 2 next) we need the picks

there are no easy ways to do this but we cannot continue to give up high draft picks


THIS IS SIMPLE

I would love to get Andrew Luck and he will be great for many years

giving up the draft picks will mean we have to wait longer to see this team do better

I do think Andrew Luck will be a great NFL QB - AND the QB position is critical to our success




getting Luck is like the old adage - sometimes you get what you wished for and it's not what you really wanted

Bruce Allen may survive but Mike & Kyle Shanahan will not - maybe some of you think that's a good thing


Dan Snyder would love to have his job back and Andrew Luck as his QB

as bad as the college QBs coming out are, I understand wanting to give up a lot of picks to solve the QB issue

I think we're better off (although not a lot better off) by using our draft picks and continuing what these guys have done


you know what - I'd love it if Andrew Luck could come in here and play

my hesitation is because this kind of 'deal' is what Dan Snyder would love to do

RayNAustin wrote:You don't see the circular logic and constant contradiction in your own statements, do you?

NO

1) The McNabb trade was a big mistake - something had to be done and that did not work out - GET OVER IT

2) Why can you not point out that as much as we needed to draft a QB last year, they thought it best not to

3) This FO has made some incredibly bad calls on 3 QBs

Followed by:

1-A) They are here - they can continue to build this franchise but ONLY if they continue with the Shanaplan

2-A) we have seen good things from this FO

3-A) it starts with not making STUPID decisions like giving up a bunch of high picks

You seem to be right on the verge of losing an argument with yourself.

not at all - I'm simply agreeing that mistakes were made

This FO has brought this franchise back and I think they should continue to build on what they've started


I admit that I'd love to get Luck - I just wonder if these guys can survive the transition

I just don't want Snyder taking over here again



given how bad the draft situation is for QBs - this year and next - I can understand giving everything up

it's going to be an interesting 4 months here