***OFFICIAL*** Washington Redskins 2011 Season Thread (3 Viewers)

[dgreen]

I've heard/read a couple times now that the Redskins have 12 picks in this draft? Where is that number coming from? Is it just wrong?

 

[thayman]

I've heard/read a couple times now that the Redskins have 12 picks in this draft? Where is that number coming from? Is it just wrong?

I thought they just had the extra picks from The Raiders for Campbell and The Vikinigs for McNabb. So an extra 4th and 6th IIRC.

 

[dgreen]

FYI, for those who don't make it over to the FFA.

 

[Marvelous]

So right now it looks like The Skins lose the tiebreakers to the other 4-9 teams. Looks like they would have the 4th pick if the draft was today.

The 4-9 teams and worse are: Indy, St. Louis, Minnesota, Tampa Bay, Miami, Jacksonville, Cleveland and Washington. Philly, KC and Buffalo are at 5-8.

I would expect Indy, Miami, Cleveland and Washington to be the only ones in the top 10 to be looking to go QB. So I suppose the good news is hopefully we should end up with Griffen or Barkley. I'd be happy with either.

I think both St. Louis and Jacksonville could be looking for a QB. From what I have heard, Luck, Barclay, and Griffin are all better prospects than Gabbert.

If St. Louis takes a QB that would be huge. Do they then deal Sam Bradford? He hasn't been a great QB this year, but there is no doubt he has tons of talent and would be a major upgrade for many teams. I could see JAX taking one because Gabbert has stunk, but taking another top 10 QB the year after taking one in the top 10...oy vey. But, with new ownership, you can get away with it probably -- i.e. "new day."

Indy is a lock to take a QB in my opinion, probably Luck

Miami? It sounds weird but if you are Miami do you entertain the thought of rolling with Moore? Hasn't he actually played pretty well since he's been in? With a new coach, though, they may want to go a new direction.

I think Minnesota and Tampa Bay are set.

Cleveland...any chance they roll with McCoy?

There are a lot of wild cards in here. The worst case scenario for the Skins is if Luck, Barkley and Griffith all go before they pick. And if that happens, you may be looking at another trade down situation, with them taking next best available QB in the mid rounds and stocking up another 2nd or 3rd round pick?

I think JAX has to give Gabbertt one more year at least. He looks awful but he also didn't have an offseason at all.

Agreed. They traded up for him and he got a mini-offseason. They'll give him at least 1 more year to prove he's a bust or not. It would help if they tried to upgrade his WRs too, they have a bad bunch there. I think the Skins are only competing with the Dolphins and possibly the Browns (Colts I assume are married to Luck despite what some reports say). I don't think there's anyway the Rams bail on Bradford, that's crazy talk.

PFT saying that the Rams still think Bradford is the future.PFT article

 

[dgreen]

So right now it looks like The Skins lose the tiebreakers to the other 4-9 teams. Looks like they would have the 4th pick if the draft was today.

The 4-9 teams and worse are: Indy, St. Louis, Minnesota, Tampa Bay, Miami, Jacksonville, Cleveland and Washington. Philly, KC and Buffalo are at 5-8.

I would expect Indy, Miami, Cleveland and Washington to be the only ones in the top 10 to be looking to go QB. So I suppose the good news is hopefully we should end up with Griffen or Barkley. I'd be happy with either.

I think both St. Louis and Jacksonville could be looking for a QB. From what I have heard, Luck, Barclay, and Griffin are all better prospects than Gabbert.

If St. Louis takes a QB that would be huge. Do they then deal Sam Bradford? He hasn't been a great QB this year, but there is no doubt he has tons of talent and would be a major upgrade for many teams. I could see JAX taking one because Gabbert has stunk, but taking another top 10 QB the year after taking one in the top 10...oy vey. But, with new ownership, you can get away with it probably -- i.e. "new day."

Indy is a lock to take a QB in my opinion, probably Luck

Miami? It sounds weird but if you are Miami do you entertain the thought of rolling with Moore? Hasn't he actually played pretty well since he's been in? With a new coach, though, they may want to go a new direction.

I think Minnesota and Tampa Bay are set.

Cleveland...any chance they roll with McCoy?

There are a lot of wild cards in here. The worst case scenario for the Skins is if Luck, Barkley and Griffith all go before they pick. And if that happens, you may be looking at another trade down situation, with them taking next best available QB in the mid rounds and stocking up another 2nd or 3rd round pick?

I think JAX has to give Gabbertt one more year at least. He looks awful but he also didn't have an offseason at all.

Agreed. They traded up for him and he got a mini-offseason. They'll give him at least 1 more year to prove he's a bust or not. It would help if they tried to upgrade his WRs too, they have a bad bunch there. I think the Skins are only competing with the Dolphins and possibly the Browns (Colts I assume are married to Luck despite what some reports say). I don't think there's anyway the Rams bail on Bradford, that's crazy talk.

PFT saying that the Rams still think Bradford is the future.PFT article

Yeah, I doubt they're ready to move on from Bradford yet. Maybe if they had a shot at Luck, but they won't.5-9 after a nice game today. They may actually be favored next week and really should get to 6-9. Then they'll close the season out against Philly.

 

[dehaven123]

total team effort today.

good win.

 

[crispus attucks]

very proud of my team today. 5 straight weeks of ballin' out. it'll probably cause them to lose out on RG3 or Barkley...

stealing a line from the post game: we got our RG3 and it = rex grossman 3-turnovers

 

[Sebowski]

I finally put my finger on it today. Yes, I hate the Cowboys more than any other team, but I hate ShElie more than all. #### the Giants. Break out the brooms. Sweeeeeeep!!!!!!

 

[dgreen]

it'll probably cause them to lose out on RG3 or Barkley...

I think they're currently sitting in 7th, so they should still have a shot at someone. Of course, with Minnesota next week, they'll likely win one more. Still, you never know what will happen with we hit the combine, individual workouts start, teams interview players, etc. Players will rise and players will fall.

 

[MikeApf]

it'll probably cause them to lose out on RG3 or Barkley...

I think they're currently sitting in 7th, so they should still have a shot at someone. Of course, with Minnesota next week, they'll likely win one more. Still, you never know what will happen with we hit the combine, individual workouts start, teams interview players, etc. Players will rise and players will fall.

7 sounds about right. That said, it's good to see the team winning. I would rather them build a culture of winning and get a lower pick than "sucking for the high pick." I think it's more valuable to build that culture of winning. I agree they will get someone. At 7 they still may be able to pull one of the top 3 QBs depending on who else is picking above them, though I think that's kind of sketchy since there is the possibility that teams try to trade up to get one of the top three, possibly outflanking them. That said, here's a look at the teams definitely "in front of them" if the season ended today:Worse Record than Skins:1. Colts: 1-13 2. Rams: 2-12 3. Vikings: 2-12 4. Browns: 4-10 5. Jags: 4-10 6. Bucs: 4-10Same Record as Skins:7. Dolphins: 5-98. Bills: 5-99. Panthers: 5-9My guess is that even if teams like the Rams or Vikings don't want a new QB, there is going to be opportunity for them to trade that pick so someone can get Barkley or RBGIII. Colts will likely go QB and beyond that, I think the Browns are next most likely to go QB. Jags are a wildcard to me for a team that could take that third QB. Either way, sitting at 7 is not a place where you can count on getting one of the top three QBs necessarily. The Skins may have to make a decision whether they want to trade up for the big pick or hang back and get a guy who, while being rated a bit lower, shows lots of promise leading up to the draft.

 

[thayman]

it'll probably cause them to lose out on RG3 or Barkley...

I think they're currently sitting in 7th, so they should still have a shot at someone. Of course, with Minnesota next week, they'll likely win one more. Still, you never know what will happen with we hit the combine, individual workouts start, teams interview players, etc. Players will rise and players will fall.

7 sounds about right. That said, it's good to see the team winning. I would rather them build a culture of winning and get a lower pick than "sucking for the high pick." I think it's more valuable to build that culture of winning. I agree they will get someone. At 7 they still may be able to pull one of the top 3 QBs depending on who else is picking above them, though I think that's kind of sketchy since there is the possibility that teams try to trade up to get one of the top three, possibly outflanking them. That said, here's a look at the teams definitely "in front of them" if the season ended today:Worse Record than Skins:1. Colts: 1-13 2. Rams: 2-12 3. Vikings: 2-12 4. Browns: 4-10 5. Jags: 4-10 6. Bucs: 4-10Same Record as Skins:7. Dolphins: 5-98. Bills: 5-99. Panthers: 5-9My guess is that even if teams like the Rams or Vikings don't want a new QB, there is going to be opportunity for them to trade that pick so someone can get Barkley or RBGIII. Colts will likely go QB and beyond that, I think the Browns are next most likely to go QB. Jags are a wildcard to me for a team that could take that third QB. Either way, sitting at 7 is not a place where you can count on getting one of the top three QBs necessarily. The Skins may have to make a decision whether they want to trade up for the big pick or hang back and get a guy who, while being rated a bit lower, shows lots of promise leading up to the draft.

The top of this draft looks pretty good. Even if there is no QB available when they pick there are several OLinemen and a couple of pretty good CBs that should be there. Although I really don't want to suffer through Grossman again.

 

[Marvelous]

it'll probably cause them to lose out on RG3 or Barkley...

I think they're currently sitting in 7th, so they should still have a shot at someone. Of course, with Minnesota next week, they'll likely win one more. Still, you never know what will happen with we hit the combine, individual workouts start, teams interview players, etc. Players will rise and players will fall.

7 sounds about right. That said, it's good to see the team winning. I would rather them build a culture of winning and get a lower pick than "sucking for the high pick." I think it's more valuable to build that culture of winning. I agree they will get someone. At 7 they still may be able to pull one of the top 3 QBs depending on who else is picking above them, though I think that's kind of sketchy since there is the possibility that teams try to trade up to get one of the top three, possibly outflanking them. That said, here's a look at the teams definitely "in front of them" if the season ended today:Worse Record than Skins:1. Colts: 1-13 2. Rams: 2-12 3. Vikings: 2-12 4. Browns: 4-10 5. Jags: 4-10 6. Bucs: 4-10Same Record as Skins:7. Dolphins: 5-98. Bills: 5-99. Panthers: 5-9My guess is that even if teams like the Rams or Vikings don't want a new QB, there is going to be opportunity for them to trade that pick so someone can get Barkley or RBGIII. Colts will likely go QB and beyond that, I think the Browns are next most likely to go QB. Jags are a wildcard to me for a team that could take that third QB. Either way, sitting at 7 is not a place where you can count on getting one of the top three QBs necessarily. The Skins may have to make a decision whether they want to trade up for the big pick or hang back and get a guy who, while being rated a bit lower, shows lots of promise leading up to the draft.

The top of this draft looks pretty good. Even if there is no QB available when they pick there are several OLinemen and a couple of pretty good CBs that should be there. Although I really don't want to suffer through Grossman again.

In most drafts, the QBs fall and need really does play into it. Last year, for some reason, the QBs were flying off the draft board. Hopefully, the Redskins can stay put and get one of the top 3 QBs. Maybe it will be like the 2004 draft: 1 Eli Manning, 5 Philip Rivers, 11 Ben Rothlisberger.

 

[thayman]

it'll probably cause them to lose out on RG3 or Barkley...

I think they're currently sitting in 7th, so they should still have a shot at someone. Of course, with Minnesota next week, they'll likely win one more. Still, you never know what will happen with we hit the combine, individual workouts start, teams interview players, etc. Players will rise and players will fall.

7 sounds about right. That said, it's good to see the team winning. I would rather them build a culture of winning and get a lower pick than "sucking for the high pick." I think it's more valuable to build that culture of winning. I agree they will get someone. At 7 they still may be able to pull one of the top 3 QBs depending on who else is picking above them, though I think that's kind of sketchy since there is the possibility that teams try to trade up to get one of the top three, possibly outflanking them. That said, here's a look at the teams definitely "in front of them" if the season ended today:Worse Record than Skins:1. Colts: 1-13 2. Rams: 2-12 3. Vikings: 2-12 4. Browns: 4-10 5. Jags: 4-10 6. Bucs: 4-10Same Record as Skins:7. Dolphins: 5-98. Bills: 5-99. Panthers: 5-9My guess is that even if teams like the Rams or Vikings don't want a new QB, there is going to be opportunity for them to trade that pick so someone can get Barkley or RBGIII. Colts will likely go QB and beyond that, I think the Browns are next most likely to go QB. Jags are a wildcard to me for a team that could take that third QB. Either way, sitting at 7 is not a place where you can count on getting one of the top three QBs necessarily. The Skins may have to make a decision whether they want to trade up for the big pick or hang back and get a guy who, while being rated a bit lower, shows lots of promise leading up to the draft.

The top of this draft looks pretty good. Even if there is no QB available when they pick there are several OLinemen and a couple of pretty good CBs that should be there. Although I really don't want to suffer through Grossman again.

In most drafts, the QBs fall and need really does play into it. Last year, for some reason, the QBs were flying off the draft board. Hopefully, the Redskins can stay put and get one of the top 3 QBs. Maybe it will be like the 2004 draft: 1 Eli Manning, 5 Philip Rivers, 11 Ben Rothlisberger.

I just don't want them to trade up. The team has too many holes and needs some playmakers

 

[MikeApf]

it'll probably cause them to lose out on RG3 or Barkley...

I think they're currently sitting in 7th, so they should still have a shot at someone. Of course, with Minnesota next week, they'll likely win one more. Still, you never know what will happen with we hit the combine, individual workouts start, teams interview players, etc. Players will rise and players will fall.

7 sounds about right. That said, it's good to see the team winning. I would rather them build a culture of winning and get a lower pick than "sucking for the high pick." I think it's more valuable to build that culture of winning. I agree they will get someone. At 7 they still may be able to pull one of the top 3 QBs depending on who else is picking above them, though I think that's kind of sketchy since there is the possibility that teams try to trade up to get one of the top three, possibly outflanking them. That said, here's a look at the teams definitely "in front of them" if the season ended today:Worse Record than Skins:1. Colts: 1-13 2. Rams: 2-12 3. Vikings: 2-12 4. Browns: 4-10 5. Jags: 4-10 6. Bucs: 4-10Same Record as Skins:7. Dolphins: 5-98. Bills: 5-99. Panthers: 5-9My guess is that even if teams like the Rams or Vikings don't want a new QB, there is going to be opportunity for them to trade that pick so someone can get Barkley or RBGIII. Colts will likely go QB and beyond that, I think the Browns are next most likely to go QB. Jags are a wildcard to me for a team that could take that third QB. Either way, sitting at 7 is not a place where you can count on getting one of the top three QBs necessarily. The Skins may have to make a decision whether they want to trade up for the big pick or hang back and get a guy who, while being rated a bit lower, shows lots of promise leading up to the draft.

The top of this draft looks pretty good. Even if there is no QB available when they pick there are several OLinemen and a couple of pretty good CBs that should be there. Although I really don't want to suffer through Grossman again.

In most drafts, the QBs fall and need really does play into it. Last year, for some reason, the QBs were flying off the draft board. Hopefully, the Redskins can stay put and get one of the top 3 QBs. Maybe it will be like the 2004 draft: 1 Eli Manning, 5 Philip Rivers, 11 Ben Rothlisberger.

I just don't want them to trade up. The team has too many holes and needs some playmakers

Let's play that scenario out. Let's say the Redskins finish the season winning at least one of their last two games and end up picking, say, 10th. Assuming they do not trade up, who do they target with that 10th pick and what QB may be available in the second round?

 

[Sebowski]

it'll probably cause them to lose out on RG3 or Barkley...

I think they're currently sitting in 7th, so they should still have a shot at someone. Of course, with Minnesota next week, they'll likely win one more. Still, you never know what will happen with we hit the combine, individual workouts start, teams interview players, etc. Players will rise and players will fall.

7 sounds about right. That said, it's good to see the team winning. I would rather them build a culture of winning and get a lower pick than "sucking for the high pick." I think it's more valuable to build that culture of winning. I agree they will get someone. At 7 they still may be able to pull one of the top 3 QBs depending on who else is picking above them, though I think that's kind of sketchy since there is the possibility that teams try to trade up to get one of the top three, possibly outflanking them. That said, here's a look at the teams definitely "in front of them" if the season ended today:Worse Record than Skins:1. Colts: 1-13 2. Rams: 2-12 3. Vikings: 2-12 4. Browns: 4-10 5. Jags: 4-10 6. Bucs: 4-10Same Record as Skins:7. Dolphins: 5-98. Bills: 5-99. Panthers: 5-9My guess is that even if teams like the Rams or Vikings don't want a new QB, there is going to be opportunity for them to trade that pick so someone can get Barkley or RBGIII. Colts will likely go QB and beyond that, I think the Browns are next most likely to go QB. Jags are a wildcard to me for a team that could take that third QB. Either way, sitting at 7 is not a place where you can count on getting one of the top three QBs necessarily. The Skins may have to make a decision whether they want to trade up for the big pick or hang back and get a guy who, while being rated a bit lower, shows lots of promise leading up to the draft.

The top of this draft looks pretty good. Even if there is no QB available when they pick there are several OLinemen and a couple of pretty good CBs that should be there. Although I really don't want to suffer through Grossman again.

In most drafts, the QBs fall and need really does play into it. Last year, for some reason, the QBs were flying off the draft board. Hopefully, the Redskins can stay put and get one of the top 3 QBs. Maybe it will be like the 2004 draft: 1 Eli Manning, 5 Philip Rivers, 11 Ben Rothlisberger.

I just don't want them to trade up. The team has too many holes and needs some playmakers

Let's play that scenario out. Let's say the Redskins finish the season winning at least one of their last two games and end up picking, say, 10th. Assuming they do not trade up, who do they target with that 10th pick and what QB may be available in the second round?

Impossible to say until after the combine. Last year Ponder was looking like an early 2nd rounder and he went top 10.

 

[Brunell4MVP]

I think the draft experts are ignoring the new contract structures more than the teams will. QBs are no longer going to get huge deals that teams can't get out of within a couple of year. I'd be very surprised if the top 3 QBs aren't gone by pick 5. It's worth it to take a risk on them now more than ever, even if you already have a QB.

 

[southeastjerome]

I think the draft experts are ignoring the new contract structures more than the teams will. QBs are no longer going to get huge deals that teams can't get out of within a couple of year. I'd be very surprised if the top 3 QBs aren't gone by pick 5. It's worth it to take a risk on them now more than ever, even if you already have a QB.

I agree. I have a feeling we'll be looking at Landry Jones or Weeden. Sadly I think this win pushed us out of RG3 range. Still a long way to go until the draft.

 

[Marvelous]

it'll probably cause them to lose out on RG3 or Barkley...

I think they're currently sitting in 7th, so they should still have a shot at someone. Of course, with Minnesota next week, they'll likely win one more. Still, you never know what will happen with we hit the combine, individual workouts start, teams interview players, etc. Players will rise and players will fall.

7 sounds about right. That said, it's good to see the team winning. I would rather them build a culture of winning and get a lower pick than "sucking for the high pick." I think it's more valuable to build that culture of winning. I agree they will get someone. At 7 they still may be able to pull one of the top 3 QBs depending on who else is picking above them, though I think that's kind of sketchy since there is the possibility that teams try to trade up to get one of the top three, possibly outflanking them. That said, here's a look at the teams definitely "in front of them" if the season ended today:Worse Record than Skins:1. Colts: 1-13 2. Rams: 2-12 3. Vikings: 2-12 4. Browns: 4-10 5. Jags: 4-10 6. Bucs: 4-10Same Record as Skins:7. Dolphins: 5-98. Bills: 5-99. Panthers: 5-9My guess is that even if teams like the Rams or Vikings don't want a new QB, there is going to be opportunity for them to trade that pick so someone can get Barkley or RBGIII. Colts will likely go QB and beyond that, I think the Browns are next most likely to go QB. Jags are a wildcard to me for a team that could take that third QB. Either way, sitting at 7 is not a place where you can count on getting one of the top three QBs necessarily. The Skins may have to make a decision whether they want to trade up for the big pick or hang back and get a guy who, while being rated a bit lower, shows lots of promise leading up to the draft.

The top of this draft looks pretty good. Even if there is no QB available when they pick there are several OLinemen and a couple of pretty good CBs that should be there. Although I really don't want to suffer through Grossman again.

In most drafts, the QBs fall and need really does play into it. Last year, for some reason, the QBs were flying off the draft board. Hopefully, the Redskins can stay put and get one of the top 3 QBs. Maybe it will be like the 2004 draft: 1 Eli Manning, 5 Philip Rivers, 11 Ben Rothlisberger.

I just don't want them to trade up. The team has too many holes and needs some playmakers

Let's play that scenario out. Let's say the Redskins finish the season winning at least one of their last two games and end up picking, say, 10th. Assuming they do not trade up, who do they target with that 10th pick and what QB may be available in the second round?

Although I am a huge proponent of keeping your draft picks and not trading up, if they think Barclay or RG3 is the real deal, they seraiously have to consider trading up for him. I am actually very skeptical of QBs coming out of college, but from what I hear, these two (and Luck) are the real deal.If you think it is a crap shoot, then don't trade up. You could get Blaine Gabbert'ed. Or Ryan Leaf'ed.

 

[thayman]

it'll probably cause them to lose out on RG3 or Barkley...

I think they're currently sitting in 7th, so they should still have a shot at someone. Of course, with Minnesota next week, they'll likely win one more. Still, you never know what will happen with we hit the combine, individual workouts start, teams interview players, etc. Players will rise and players will fall.

7 sounds about right. That said, it's good to see the team winning. I would rather them build a culture of winning and get a lower pick than "sucking for the high pick." I think it's more valuable to build that culture of winning. I agree they will get someone. At 7 they still may be able to pull one of the top 3 QBs depending on who else is picking above them, though I think that's kind of sketchy since there is the possibility that teams try to trade up to get one of the top three, possibly outflanking them. That said, here's a look at the teams definitely "in front of them" if the season ended today:Worse Record than Skins:1. Colts: 1-13 2. Rams: 2-12 3. Vikings: 2-12 4. Browns: 4-10 5. Jags: 4-10 6. Bucs: 4-10Same Record as Skins:7. Dolphins: 5-98. Bills: 5-99. Panthers: 5-9My guess is that even if teams like the Rams or Vikings don't want a new QB, there is going to be opportunity for them to trade that pick so someone can get Barkley or RBGIII. Colts will likely go QB and beyond that, I think the Browns are next most likely to go QB. Jags are a wildcard to me for a team that could take that third QB. Either way, sitting at 7 is not a place where you can count on getting one of the top three QBs necessarily. The Skins may have to make a decision whether they want to trade up for the big pick or hang back and get a guy who, while being rated a bit lower, shows lots of promise leading up to the draft.

The top of this draft looks pretty good. Even if there is no QB available when they pick there are several OLinemen and a couple of pretty good CBs that should be there. Although I really don't want to suffer through Grossman again.

In most drafts, the QBs fall and need really does play into it. Last year, for some reason, the QBs were flying off the draft board. Hopefully, the Redskins can stay put and get one of the top 3 QBs. Maybe it will be like the 2004 draft: 1 Eli Manning, 5 Philip Rivers, 11 Ben Rothlisberger.

I just don't want them to trade up. The team has too many holes and needs some playmakers

Let's play that scenario out. Let's say the Redskins finish the season winning at least one of their last two games and end up picking, say, 10th. Assuming they do not trade up, who do they target with that 10th pick and what QB may be available in the second round?

Although I am a huge proponent of keeping your draft picks and not trading up, if they think Barclay or RG3 is the real deal, they seraiously have to consider trading up for him. I am actually very skeptical of QBs coming out of college, but from what I hear, these two (and Luck) are the real deal.If you think it is a crap shoot, then don't trade up. You could get Blaine Gabbert'ed. Or Ryan Leaf'ed.

Well there is some quality at other positions that The Redskins need. In no order of preference you've got:QB Luck, Griffin, BarkleyOL Kalil, Martin, Riff? (from Iowa)DB Claibourne, that kid from Alabama, I think his name is Patrick?Those are eight guys off the top of my head that would fill needs nicely.

 

[Sidewinder16]

Although I am a huge proponent of keeping your draft picks and not trading up, if they think Barclay or RG3 is the real deal, they seraiously have to consider trading up for him. I am actually very skeptical of QBs coming out of college, but from what I hear, these two (and Luck) are the real deal.If you think it is a crap shoot, then don't trade up. You could get Blaine Gabbert'ed. Or Ryan Leaf'ed.

Well there is some quality at other positions that The Redskins need. In no order of preference you've got:QB Luck, Griffin, BarkleyOL Kalil, Martin, Riff? (from Iowa)DB Claibourne, that kid from Alabama, I think his name is Patrick?Those are eight guys off the top of my head that would fill needs nicely.

I agree w/ thayman, here. This team still has numerous holes to file. I know the QB position is deemed top priority by most fans and media, but look what they've done recently with Rex. They are averaging 23.2 ppg over the past 5 games, and that's with no offensive playmakers and an OL constantly shuffled around and currently full of rookies and journeymen. Prior to that, they hadn't even scored 23 points in one game since week 1. [as an aside, I hope it's purely coincidental that the team loses Williams and Davis and sees the offense getting better, but I'm a little concerned that it was addition by subtraction]If they can keep this kind of progress going, I don't see a need to reach and/or sell the farm for a rookie QB. Adding a solid OL or WR or DB in the middle of round 1 would be just fine by me, but many fans will revolt, as it means another year of Grossman (I know dgreen and maybe a few others have shared similar sentiments, too).

 

[TobiasFunke]

Although I am a huge proponent of keeping your draft picks and not trading up, if they think Barclay or RG3 is the real deal, they seraiously have to consider trading up for him. I am actually very skeptical of QBs coming out of college, but from what I hear, these two (and Luck) are the real deal.

If you think it is a crap shoot, then don't trade up. You could get Blaine Gabbert'ed. Or Ryan Leaf'ed.

Well there is some quality at other positions that The Redskins need. In no order of preference you've got:QB Luck, Griffin, Barkley

OL Kalil, Martin, Riff? (from Iowa)

DB Claibourne, that kid from Alabama, I think his name is Patrick?

Those are eight guys off the top of my head that would fill needs nicely.

I agree w/ thayman, here. This team still has numerous holes to file. I know the QB position is deemed top priority by most fans and media, but look what they've done recently with Rex. They are averaging 23.2 ppg over the past 5 games, and that's with no offensive playmakers and an OL constantly shuffled around and currently full of rookies and journeymen. Prior to that, they hadn't even scored 23 points in one game since week 1. [as an aside, I hope it's purely coincidental that the team loses Williams and Davis and sees the offense getting better, but I'm a little concerned that it was addition by subtraction]If they can keep this kind of progress going, I don't see a need to reach and/or sell the farm for a rookie QB. Adding a solid OL or WR or DB in the middle of round 1 would be just fine by me, but many fans will revolt, as it means another year of Grossman (I know dgreen and maybe a few others have shared similar sentiments, too).

The bolded argument, which you're making to demonstrate that it's not that vital to add a QB in Round 1, is equally valid in support of an argument that it's not that vital to add an elite OL or WR in the first round. Just sayin'.I think the urgency at QB is not that necessarily it's the most pressing problem, but also that most people think it usually takes a year or two for a new QB to reach a comfort level in the NFL, which means if you don't draft one now you don't have a quality option at QB until 2014 at the earliest, which would really test fans' patience. I don't know if that's the case given recent rookie QB performances, but I think that's an argument to consider.

There's also the fact that most fans expect the Skins to be a better team in 2012 than they are in 2011, which means a lower draft pick and thus a greater degree of difficulty in finding a franchise QB. Although this unexpected late-season burst of competence may be changing that calculation.

 

[thayman]

Although I am a huge proponent of keeping your draft picks and not trading up, if they think Barclay or RG3 is the real deal, they seraiously have to consider trading up for him. I am actually very skeptical of QBs coming out of college, but from what I hear, these two (and Luck) are the real deal.

If you think it is a crap shoot, then don't trade up. You could get Blaine Gabbert'ed. Or Ryan Leaf'ed.

Well there is some quality at other positions that The Redskins need. In no order of preference you've got:QB Luck, Griffin, Barkley

OL Kalil, Martin, Riff? (from Iowa)

DB Claibourne, that kid from Alabama, I think his name is Patrick?

Those are eight guys off the top of my head that would fill needs nicely.

I agree w/ thayman, here. This team still has numerous holes to file. I know the QB position is deemed top priority by most fans and media, but look what they've done recently with Rex. They are averaging 23.2 ppg over the past 5 games, and that's with no offensive playmakers and an OL constantly shuffled around and currently full of rookies and journeymen. Prior to that, they hadn't even scored 23 points in one game since week 1. [as an aside, I hope it's purely coincidental that the team loses Williams and Davis and sees the offense getting better, but I'm a little concerned that it was addition by subtraction]If they can keep this kind of progress going, I don't see a need to reach and/or sell the farm for a rookie QB. Adding a solid OL or WR or DB in the middle of round 1 would be just fine by me, but many fans will revolt, as it means another year of Grossman (I know dgreen and maybe a few others have shared similar sentiments, too).

The bolded argument, which you're making to demonstrate that it's not that vital to add a QB in Round 1, is equally valid in support of an argument that it's not that vital to add an elite OL or WR in the first round. Just sayin'.I think the urgency at QB is not that necessarily it's the most pressing problem, but also that most people think it usually takes a year or two for a new QB to reach a comfort level in the NFL, which means if you don't draft one now you don't have a quality option at QB until 2014 at the earliest, which would really test fans' patience. I don't know if that's the case given recent rookie QB performances, but I think that's an argument to consider.

There's also the fact that most fans expect the Skins to be a better team in 2012 than they are in 2011, which means a lower draft pick and thus a greater degree of difficulty in finding a franchise QB. Although this unexpected late-season burst of competence may be changing that calculation.

I think it depends on how much you are in love with this class of QBs. The top three look like they are going to be pretty decent QBs, so I wouldn't be upset if they traded up as long as they don't give up another 1st rounder.

 

[MikeApf]

Although I am a huge proponent of keeping your draft picks and not trading up, if they think Barclay or RG3 is the real deal, they seraiously have to consider trading up for him. I am actually very skeptical of QBs coming out of college, but from what I hear, these two (and Luck) are the real deal.If you think it is a crap shoot, then don't trade up. You could get Blaine Gabbert'ed. Or Ryan Leaf'ed.

Well there is some quality at other positions that The Redskins need. In no order of preference you've got:QB Luck, Griffin, BarkleyOL Kalil, Martin, Riff? (from Iowa)DB Claibourne, that kid from Alabama, I think his name is Patrick?Those are eight guys off the top of my head that would fill needs nicely.

I agree w/ thayman, here. This team still has numerous holes to file. I know the QB position is deemed top priority by most fans and media, but look what they've done recently with Rex. They are averaging 23.2 ppg over the past 5 games, and that's with no offensive playmakers and an OL constantly shuffled around and currently full of rookies and journeymen. Prior to that, they hadn't even scored 23 points in one game since week 1. [as an aside, I hope it's purely coincidental that the team loses Williams and Davis and sees the offense getting better, but I'm a little concerned that it was addition by subtraction]If they can keep this kind of progress going, I don't see a need to reach and/or sell the farm for a rookie QB. Adding a solid OL or WR or DB in the middle of round 1 would be just fine by me, but many fans will revolt, as it means another year of Grossman (I know dgreen and maybe a few others have shared similar sentiments, too).

Rex is Rex. He is a QB that can move the ball down the field, and your offense will look good for awhile, but on balance he just turns it over way more than he should. In a league where giveaway / takeaway ration is basically correlated to Wins and Losses year after year, that will inevitably lead to mediocrity, and so you have to find another signal caller. Yes, you can add other pieces, but QB touches the ball every play and often impacts the game more than anyone...the rebuild will always be frustrated if the QB consistently turns it over. I also agree with the comment that you have to start grooming a guy now. If it takes some time for the new QB to learn the ropes; even if you draft someone now, you STILL may have to go with Rex at times. Look, I see what you guys are saying in that the Redskins have a ton of other holes to fill. You are totally correct about that. We could Olinemen, a playmaking WR, etc. But I don't think it's just a "stupid fan" perspective that you have to prioritize QB over the other needs. I think there are a lot of really smart football people who think that the QB need is so central that for a team like the Redskins, it should be # 1 priority. And, I tend to agree with that assessment. Where I am flexible actually is whether then trade up to get one of the top three or stand pat where they are and take one later. If they can get a really good QB where they stand or go OL in the first and pick a good QB in the second...that's cool either way. That depends on if there is a guy later who meets your needs. But one way or the other, you really do need to move on from Grossman. Primarily due to turnovers, there are lots of sound football reasons to move on. It is not just emotional fan reaction.

 

[dgreen]

But I don't think it's just a "stupid fan" perspective that you have to prioritize QB over the other needs. I think there are a lot of really smart football people who think that the QB need is so central that for a team like the Redskins, it should be # 1 priority. And, I tend to agree with that assessment.

There's certainly nothing stupid about having QB as priority #1. The stupid part would be reaching for a QB, which would include drafting someone too high or giving up too much in a trade to get a particular player. I think many fans will be pissed off if they don't draft a QB in round, giving no consideration to the circumstances that might have led to that decision. The "stupid fan" would then just go on and on about the Shanahans think they can change Rex and that Kyle must have whined again to get his way from daddy because he just loves Rex so much. In reality, it could just be that the value wasn't there.

But one way or the other, you really do need to move on from Grossman. Primarily due to turnovers, there are lots of sound football reasons to move on. It is not just emotional fan reaction.

It may not be emotional for you, but for many it seems to be. Take Steve Czaben, for example. He says they shouldn't re-sign Rex next year. When pushed on who would take his roster spot, his response is basically, "Anyone but Rex." That's an emotional response. It's saying, "Get rid of Rex, no matter the cost."

 

[Sidewinder16]

I agree w/ thayman, here. This team still has numerous holes to file. I know the QB position is deemed top priority by most fans and media, but look what they've done recently with Rex. They are averaging 23.2 ppg over the past 5 games, and that's with no offensive playmakers and an OL constantly shuffled around and currently full of rookies and journeymen. Prior to that, they hadn't even scored 23 points in one game since week 1. [as an aside, I hope it's purely coincidental that the team loses Williams and Davis and sees the offense getting better, but I'm a little concerned that it was addition by subtraction]

If they can keep this kind of progress going, I don't see a need to reach and/or sell the farm for a rookie QB. Adding a solid OL or WR or DB in the middle of round 1 would be just fine by me, but many fans will revolt, as it means another year of Grossman (I know dgreen and maybe a few others have shared similar sentiments, too).

The bolded argument, which you're making to demonstrate that it's not that vital to add a QB in Round 1, is equally valid in support of an argument that it's not that vital to add an elite OL or WR in the first round. Just sayin'.

Absolutely. Which is what I'm trying to point out. Fixating on any given position, especially this far out from the draft, is the wrong way to go, IMO. The purpose of the draft for this team should be to continue building an annual contender by adding as much talent as possible. If we're already deciding that QB is a must in the 1st round, that may mean having to bundle a bunch of high draft picks for the next few years to move up 10-12 spots. I'm far from convinced that improves the team the most for the long run.

I think the urgency at QB is not that necessarily it's the most pressing problem, but also that most people think it usually takes a year or two for a new QB to reach a comfort level in the NFL, which means if you don't draft one now you don't have a quality option at QB until 2014 at the earliest, which would really test fans' patience. I don't know if that's the case given recent rookie QB performances, but I think that's an argument to consider.

There's also the fact that most fans expect the Skins to be a better team in 2012 than they are in 2011, which means a lower draft pick and thus a greater degree of difficulty in finding a franchise QB. Although this unexpected late-season burst of competence may be changing that calculation.

Drafting a rookie QB isn't necessarily the best way to be better in 2012, or even 2013. Of the 4 teams that have played their rookie QBs extensively this season (CAR, CIN, MIN, JAC), 3 of them have a worse record than the 'Skins with Grossman (the other team to draft a QB in the 1st, Tennessee, is only marginally better than the 'Skins, if that, IMO). Two of the 3 teams currently relying on 2nd year QBs (CLE, STL) also have a worse record than the 'Skins do (and many believe the 3rd team, Denver, isn't set for the future with it's 2nd year QB). People are already talking about Minnesota, Jacksonville, St. Louis and Cleveland using first round picks on QBs again, for some of them (something the 'Skins won't be able to do if they trade away 2-3 years of 1st round picks to move up, and then the QB busts). If the next 2 seasons only see 4-5 wins a year and a young, struggling QB, that will test fans patience more than another season of Rex, IMO.If they conduct this year's draft like they did last year (not reaching/over paying for a QB, even though QB was the same major hole in the roster it is now), I think the team will be better for it in the long run.

 

[MikeApf]

But I don't think it's just a "stupid fan" perspective that you have to prioritize QB over the other needs. I think there are a lot of really smart football people who think that the QB need is so central that for a team like the Redskins, it should be # 1 priority. And, I tend to agree with that assessment.

There's certainly nothing stupid about having QB as priority #1. The stupid part would be reaching for a QB, which would include drafting someone too high or giving up too much in a trade to get a particular player. I think many fans will be pissed off if they don't draft a QB in round, giving no consideration to the circumstances that might have led to that decision. The "stupid fan" would then just go on and on about the Shanahans think they can change Rex and that Kyle must have whined again to get his way from daddy because he just loves Rex so much. In reality, it could just be that the value wasn't there.

But one way or the other, you really do need to move on from Grossman. Primarily due to turnovers, there are lots of sound football reasons to move on. It is not just emotional fan reaction.

It may not be emotional for you, but for many it seems to be. Take Steve Czaben, for example. He says they shouldn't re-sign Rex next year. When pushed on who would take his roster spot, his response is basically, "Anyone but Rex." That's an emotional response. It's saying, "Get rid of Rex, no matter the cost."

Agree on both points. We need a QB, but it should be a value pick. If we can trade up without giving a Number 1 or something like that, and get Barkley or Griffin in the process that would be fine by me (for instance, if we gave our # 1 and one other non-first round pick to switch with someone above us). Regarding Rex, don't get me wrong I don't hate the guy. I actually think it would be crazy NOT to bring him back next year. He is still a great backup...knows the system...can win you some games...just not the QB of the future that's all. But I would bring him back for sure.

 

[Sidewinder16]

Agree on both points. We need a QB, but it should be a value pick. If we can trade up without giving a Number 1 or something like that, and get Barkley or Griffin in the process that would be fine by me (for instance, if we gave our # 1 and one other non-first round pick to switch with someone above us).

Personally, I don't think the bolded will be possible, but I'll grant that we still have a long way to go before we know that for sure. There's a very real chance the 'Skins will be drafting in the 10-15 range. To get back up in to the top 3-5 picks (which is the current predictions for the top 3 QBs) will take multiple 1st and 2nd round picks, IMO.

Regarding Rex, don't get me wrong I don't hate the guy. I actually think it would be crazy NOT to bring him back next year. He is still a great backup...knows the system...can win you some games...just not the QB of the future that's all. But I would bring him back for sure.

Yes, no matter how the draft plays out, Rex needs to be on the roster next year. I agree he's not the QB of the future, but I don't think that precludes him from being the QB of 2012.

 

[dgreen]

All the Rex hate (not suggesting it's coming from this thread; just the fanbase in general and the media) makes me like him more.

 

[Eastwood]

Barkley not coming out this year REALLY hurts the Skins chances of getting a franchise QB. I hate that they have won these meaningless games as of late. We're gonna be stuck with Rex again next year

 

[MikeApf]

Barkley not coming out this year REALLY hurts the Skins chances of getting a franchise QB. I hate that they have won these meaningless games as of late. We're gonna be stuck with Rex again next year

Barkley staying in is huge. The Big 3 are now the Big 2. And now you may see the likes of Landry Jones creeping into the top 10, even making the second tier competitive...

 

[ChrisCooleyFan]

Remember Matt Flynn's name

 

[thayman]

Remember Matt Flynn's name

Is he a FA next year? Anybody know what QBs may be available in FA next year as well?

 

[dgreen]

Remember Matt Flynn's name

Is he a FA next year? Anybody know what QBs may be available in FA next year as well?

Yes, he is a FA.So is Brees!

 

[thayman]

Remember Matt Flynn's name

Is he a FA next year? Anybody know what QBs may be available in FA next year as well?

Yes, he is a FA.So is Brees!

That's right, I remember hearing that Brees wouldn't sign a Franchise Tag offer. I can't imagine New Orleans wouldn't resign him though

 

[southeastjerome]

Remember Matt Flynn's name

This is exactly who I would target. Draft a QB in the second round. Sucks, I really wanted RG3. No way I would trade up to get him though. With high draft pick contracts more manageable now, there will likely be more teams willing to move up and thus likely more compensation. It would take a bevy of high picks this year and some next to move up the 7 or so spots we'd have to move up to get him after the skins blow it and win again Saturday.

 

[southeastjerome]

Remember Matt Flynn's name

Is he a FA next year? Anybody know what QBs may be available in FA next year as well?

Yes, he is a FA.So is Brees!

Hoyer and Josh Johnson are lesser names to watch.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Barkley not coming out this year REALLY hurts the Skins chances of getting a franchise QB. I hate that they have won these meaningless games as of late. We're gonna be stuck with Rex again next year

Barkley staying in is huge. The Big 3 are now the Big 2. And now you may see the likes of Landry Jones creeping into the top 10, even making the second tier competitive...

I'm kinda with Rich Tandler on this one. If the Skins' future is really heavily dependent upon the decision of a single 21 year old kid, they're pretty much ####ed regardless.

 

[Marvelous]

In a doctor's office yesterday, they had Todd McShay's draft projections. He had RG3 going to the Redskins at #8. This was before Barclay announced he was staying at USC. Barclay was #9 going to Miami.

The draft is a long ways away and there is a chance RG3 will fall. We will see.

 

[dgreen]

So, word on the street is there's a game tomorrow. Redskins are favored by 6! How long has it been since that kind of line in Washington's favor?

 

[Dexter Manley]

So, word on the street is there's a game tomorrow. Redskins are favored by 6! How long has it been since that kind of line in Washington's favor?

Not as long as it has been since the Skins have swept the Giants in the regular season (1999). They should be able to pass on Minny all day. Let's hope Jared Allen doesn't kill sexy rexy. I really hope they win this week and beat Philly next weekend to close out the season with some serious mo.

 

[thayman]

Barkley not coming out this year REALLY hurts the Skins chances of getting a franchise QB. I hate that they have won these meaningless games as of late. We're gonna be stuck with Rex again next year

Barkley staying in is huge. The Big 3 are now the Big 2. And now you may see the likes of Landry Jones creeping into the top 10, even making the second tier competitive...

I'm kinda with Rich Tandler on this one. If the Skins' future is really heavily dependent upon the decision of a single 21 year old kid, they're pretty much ####ed regardless.

Not heavily dependant. But Griffin, Luck and Barkley should all be franchise QBs, something The Redskins are in desperate need of. If all 3 come out at once they have very good shot of landing one. Personally I'm not too upset since The Skins have so many needs and this draft's top 10-15 players look pretty good.

 

[fatness]

With a win next week Mike Shanahan and Bruce Allen will tie the record of Jim Zorn and Vinnie Cerrato in Zorn's 2 years here.

 

[thayman]

With a win next week Mike Shanahan and Bruce Allen will tie the record of Jim Zorn and Vinnie Cerrato in Zorn's 2 years here.

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? The team that Zorn and Cerrato had was Gibbs's playoff team. The crap that Shannahan inherited is a complete rebuild that is moving in the right direction.

 

[Sebowski]

With a win next week Mike Shanahan and Bruce Allen will tie the record of Jim Zorn and Vinnie Cerrato in Zorn's 2 years here.

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? The team that Zorn and Cerrato had was Gibbs's playoff team. The crap that Shannahan inherited is a complete rebuild that is moving in the right direction.

Can't judge these things by stats.

 

[dgreen]

Defense was a big disappointment yesterday.

 

[thayman]

Defense was a big disappointment yesterday.

I don't dislike Haslett but you have to put most of that on him. They looked like they prepared for Ponder and Peterson and couldn't adjust to backups.

 

[dehaven123]

With a win next week Mike Shanahan and Bruce Allen will tie the record of Jim Zorn and Vinnie Cerrato in Zorn's 2 years here.

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? The team that Zorn and Cerrato had was Gibbs's playoff team. The crap that Shannahan inherited is a complete rebuild that is moving in the right direction.

i think Fatness is making a wider point than that.the 2 W-L's of the different organizational tandems similarities has to add to one's perspective, right?

 

[thayman]

With a win next week Mike Shanahan and Bruce Allen will tie the record of Jim Zorn and Vinnie Cerrato in Zorn's 2 years here.

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? The team that Zorn and Cerrato had was Gibbs's playoff team. The crap that Shannahan inherited is a complete rebuild that is moving in the right direction.

i think Fatness is making a wider point than that.the 2 W-L's of the different organizational tandems similarities has to add to one's perspective, right?

Not when you consider one is a rebuilding project moving towards the playoffs. The other was a declining team that was a couple of plays from the NFC Championship game.

 

[dgreen]

Current standings:

1. Indy 2-13

2. StL 2-13

3. Minn 3-12

4. TB 4-11

5. Cle 4-11

6. Jax 4-11

7. Was 5-10

8. Mia 5-10

9. Car 6-9

10. Buf 6-9

11. KC 6-9

I believe Washington would win the SOS tiebreaker against any team they could possible be tied with. So, even if they get to 6 wins, they shouldn't drop below 8. If they lose, they'd climb a draft spot for each win by TB, Cle, and Jax. Jax plays Indy, so that's a real possibility. Cleveland plays Pittsburgh and Tampa plays Atlanta. The chances of them winning is going to depend on how many people their opponents rest. Even with Pitt starters resting, I don't see Cleveland winning.

Washington could draft anywhere from 4 to 8 in 2012.

 

[dehaven123]

With a win next week Mike Shanahan and Bruce Allen will tie the record of Jim Zorn and Vinnie Cerrato in Zorn's 2 years here.

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? The team that Zorn and Cerrato had was Gibbs's playoff team. The crap that Shannahan inherited is a complete rebuild that is moving in the right direction.

i think Fatness is making a wider point than that.the 2 W-L's of the different organizational tandems similarities has to add to one's perspective, right?

Not when you consider one is a rebuilding project moving towards the playoffs. The other was a declining team that was a couple of plays from the NFC Championship game.

i do agree the team is seemingly headed in the right direction.