***OFFICIAL*** Washington Redskins 2011 Season Thread (1 Viewer)

[Eastwood]

I really hope TB, Cleveland, and Jacksonville all win next week and we lose. We might NEED that to happen to get a franchise QB

 

[thayman]

I really hope TB, Cleveland, and Jacksonville all win next week and we lose. We might NEED that to happen to get a franchise QB

Meh,I'd like nothing more than to get Griffin or Luck, but the top 10 of this draft looks pretty good and looks good at positions the Redskins need. It won't be the end of the world if they don't end up with their Franchise QB in next year's draft.

 

[Eastwood]

I really hope TB, Cleveland, and Jacksonville all win next week and we lose. We might NEED that to happen to get a franchise QB

Meh,I'd like nothing more than to get Griffin or Luck, but the top 10 of this draft looks pretty good and looks good at positions the Redskins need. It won't be the end of the world if they don't end up with their Franchise QB in next year's draft.

I wish I could feel that way. But I'm sick of having a mediocre to CRAPPY QB. The NFL is a passing league. The teams that are fun to watch each weekend are the Packers, Saints, and Patriots for a reason, they all have great offenses with great QBs. Hell, even the Panthers were a blast to watch this year (and I believe will easily make the playoffs next year) If the Skins don't get that franchise QB, its another crappy year, mark it down.

 

[jbz]

I really hope TB, Cleveland, and Jacksonville all win next week and we lose. We might NEED that to happen to get a franchise QB

I highly doubt TB and Jax bail on their recent 1st round QBs this soon. Cleveland is the team to worry about.

 

[Eastwood]

I really hope TB, Cleveland, and Jacksonville all win next week and we lose. We might NEED that to happen to get a franchise QB

I highly doubt TB and Jax bail on their recent 1st round QBs this soon. Cleveland is the team to worry about.

I hope you are right. But I would NOT be shocked if the Jags did. Gabbert was HORRIBLE and with a new coach and staff, they aren't exactly tied to him. But yeah, hopefully they pass on the QBs.

 

[TankRizzo]

I wish I could feel that way. But I'm sick of having a mediocre to CRAPPY QB. The NFL is a passing league. The teams that are fun to watch each weekend are the Packers, Saints, and Patriots for a reason, they all have great offenses with great QBs. Hell, even the Panthers were a blast to watch this year (and I believe will easily make the playoffs next year) If the Skins don't get that franchise QB, its another crappy year, mark it down.

Finding a gem of a QB in the later rounds is becoming more and more or a rarity. IF the opportunity to move up and get Luck arises, you give up whatever it takes. Although my love with what's left of QBs in the first round begins and ends there. Not feeling the RGIII love. If we can't land Luck though...just go the scattershot method and take 2 QBs later in the draft and take the best available with the first rounder or even trade down and stockpile picks like we did last year.

 

[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.

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 don't yet see a rebuilding project moving towards the playoffs. I see talk of that. I see some positive signs that point towards that. I see some negative signs that do not point towards that. Bottom line, I see, at best, 2 consecutive 6-10 seasons with no established QB. At some point results matter more than hopes. Every 6-10 (or worse) team thinks they're headed in a positive direction, but not all of them are. Allen and Shanahan are not nearly as clownish and embarrassing as Zorn and Cerrato. Practices are actually conducted like NFL practices, and gameplay doesn't look amateurish as it did too often under Zorn. But there are still plenty of gameplay problems. In 2 years the Redskins struggle for the most part with their 2-minute offense. Too ofthenthey dawdle and waste time and look disorganized, still. It wasn't McNabb causing the problems with the 2-minute offense, it was and is the coaching staff. The abandonment of the run game for too many games has been another recurring problem.

What I do find encouraging, though, is that Kyle Shanahan finally adapted his playcalling the last several games to what the players on the field could do best instead of relying on his pass-heavy system. That's a big step forward that benefits the team in the long run. Kyle's a young guy and he's learning. He was and is no offensive genius. The Texans success under him was due to Matt Schaub, not Kyle. You can see that from the Texans' offensive results after Kyle left --- their results with Schaub in the lineup, and out of the lineup. But Kyle's learning and apparently losing the stubbornness that resulted in game plans that just kept repeating failed passing plays. The recent emphasis on the run is very encouraging --- the players on the field can do that pretty well, and Kyle's taking advantage of that to the team's benefit.

The other thing I find encouraging is Mike Shanahan finally admitting his initial assessment of the team was wrong. Granted, it came across somewhat as "the guys before me were even worse than I thought", but he admitted he was wrong and that rebuilding will take longer than he thought. Link.

I think the first draft under Shanahan and Allen was mishandled badly, and the second draft under them was a very good draft. I think their personnel choices have ranged from good to lousy, with no consistent pattern yet. With 2-3 more drafts in a row like last year's the team will clearly be headed towards regular playoff contention. Will that happen? Based on a mixed record so far, we really can't tell and are left to hope.

Next year will tell if they're rebuilding into a playoff team. At the moment, it is certainly not clear that they are, or are not.

 

[jbz]

I really hope TB, Cleveland, and Jacksonville all win next week and we lose. We might NEED that to happen to get a franchise QB

I highly doubt TB and Jax bail on their recent 1st round QBs this soon. Cleveland is the team to worry about.

I hope you are right. But I would NOT be shocked if the Jags did. Gabbert was HORRIBLE and with a new coach and staff, they aren't exactly tied to him. But yeah, hopefully they pass on the QBs.

I would be shocked if the Jags did. They traded up with the Skins to get Gabbert. They sold him to the fans as the new face of the franchise. They are paying him top 10 money (granted not as big of a deal now with the new CBA). For a team strapped with financial issues, I would think bailing on Gabbert would be a bad business investment. Or maybe I'm just being very hopeful because I want the Skins to get a real QB for once

 

[fatness]

Ryan Torain cut.

Aldrick Robinson activated.

I guess they want to see Robinson on the field against the Eagles.

link

 

[fatness]

In his ninth year in the league, Grossman has played as well as he likely ever will, which is just about league-average. The problem is that league-average sounds a lot better than it is. That average includes many 2nd and 3rd stringers forced into duty. Grossman ranks 29th in EPA per play and 23rd in WPA per game. If advanced stats like WPA or EPA aren’t your cup of tea, consider that Grossman leads the NFL in interceptions, and his Adjusted Yards Per Attempt (AYPA) is 4.2, tied for 31st in the league.

“Best season ever”, “31st in the league”, and “leads the league in interceptions” is a combination that does not bode well for the future of a franchise that would consider standing pat at quarterback.

link

The free agent options are thin, and the Redskins need to look to the draft. The Redskins can expect either the second or third quarterback to fall to the seventh pick. The team would be best not to fall in love with a particular quarterback, and resist the temptation to sell picks to move up to ensure they get their guy.

Recent history shows that there isn’t usually a large drop-off in career success between the second and third quarterbacks taken. Depending on how the first round unfolds and which teams are picking behind the Redskins, it might even make sense to trade down, pick up an extra pick and still land the third quarterback available. Shanahan’s experience with Cutler might just pull him in that direction.

 

[fatness]

No Redskins make the Pro Bowl, including London Fletcher who leads the league in tackles.

Carlos Rogers and Andre Carter make the Pro Bowl.

 

[fatness]

Update.

Fletcher, Orakpo, and Alexander named as Pro Bowl alternates.

 

[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.

I don't yet see a rebuilding project moving towards the playoffs. I see talk of that. I see some positive signs that point towards that. I see some negative signs that do not point towards that. Bottom line, I see, at best, 2 consecutive 6-10 seasons with no established QB. At some point results matter more than hopes. Every 6-10 (or worse) team thinks they're headed in a positive direction, but not all of them are. Allen and Shanahan are not nearly as clownish and embarrassing as Zorn and Cerrato. Practices are actually conducted like NFL practices, and gameplay doesn't look amateurish as it did too often under Zorn. But there are still plenty of gameplay problems. In 2 years the Redskins struggle for the most part with their 2-minute offense. Too ofthenthey dawdle and waste time and look disorganized, still. It wasn't McNabb causing the problems with the 2-minute offense, it was and is the coaching staff. The abandonment of the run game for too many games has been another recurring problem.

What I do find encouraging, though, is that Kyle Shanahan finally adapted his playcalling the last several games to what the players on the field could do best instead of relying on his pass-heavy system. That's a big step forward that benefits the team in the long run. Kyle's a young guy and he's learning. He was and is no offensive genius. The Texans success under him was due to Matt Schaub, not Kyle. You can see that from the Texans' offensive results after Kyle left --- their results with Schaub in the lineup, and out of the lineup. But Kyle's learning and apparently losing the stubbornness that resulted in game plans that just kept repeating failed passing plays. The recent emphasis on the run is very encouraging --- the players on the field can do that pretty well, and Kyle's taking advantage of that to the team's benefit.

The other thing I find encouraging is Mike Shanahan finally admitting his initial assessment of the team was wrong. Granted, it came across somewhat as "the guys before me were even worse than I thought", but he admitted he was wrong and that rebuilding will take longer than he thought. Link.

I think the first draft under Shanahan and Allen was mishandled badly, and the second draft under them was a very good draft. I think their personnel choices have ranged from good to lousy, with no consistent pattern yet. With 2-3 more drafts in a row like last year's the team will clearly be headed towards regular playoff contention. Will that happen? Based on a mixed record so far, we really can't tell and are left to hope.

Next year will tell if they're rebuilding into a playoff team. At the moment, it is certainly not clear that they are, or are not.

I won't argue that they need a franchise QB. As Eastwood has said several times it is a QB driven league. However I do think you have unrealistic expectations. Shanny and Allen have not drafted or added much flash or sizzle, they have gone after solid contributors. I do expect at least one more year of 6-10 to .500 football.

 

[thayman]

I really hope TB, Cleveland, and Jacksonville all win next week and we lose. We might NEED that to happen to get a franchise QB

I highly doubt TB and Jax bail on their recent 1st round QBs this soon. Cleveland is the team to worry about.

I hope you are right. But I would NOT be shocked if the Jags did. Gabbert was HORRIBLE and with a new coach and staff, they aren't exactly tied to him. But yeah, hopefully they pass on the QBs.

I don't think the Jags can bail on him. He looked rough this year but also had no offseason at all. He also looks much worse since you have Newton, Ponder and to an extent Locker looking pretty good.

 

[dehaven123]

I wish I could feel that way. But I'm sick of having a mediocre to CRAPPY QB. The NFL is a passing league. The teams that are fun to watch each weekend are the Packers, Saints, and Patriots for a reason, they all have great offenses with great QBs. Hell, even the Panthers were a blast to watch this year (and I believe will easily make the playoffs next year) If the Skins don't get that franchise QB, its another crappy year, mark it down.

Finding a gem of a QB in the later rounds is becoming more and more or a rarity. IF the opportunity to move up and get Luck arises, you give up whatever it takes. Although my love with what's left of QBs in the first round begins and ends there. Not feeling the RGIII love. If we can't land Luck though...just go the scattershot method and take 2 QBs later in the draft and take the best available with the first rounder or even trade down and stockpile picks like we did last year.

agreed. get Luck with whatever it will take, if it can be done with a willing trade partner @ #1.i do like RGIII tho. not sure he's a fit tho.it Luck isn't an option, take a couple QB's later in the draft and go w/ best fit for one of the other needs in the 1st.

 

[dehaven123]

I really hope TB, Cleveland, and Jacksonville all win next week and we lose. We might NEED that to happen to get a franchise QB

I highly doubt TB and Jax bail on their recent 1st round QBs this soon. Cleveland is the team to worry about.

I hope you are right. But I would NOT be shocked if the Jags did. Gabbert was HORRIBLE and with a new coach and staff, they aren't exactly tied to him. But yeah, hopefully they pass on the QBs.

I don't think the Jags can bail on him. He looked rough this year but also had no offseason at all. He also looks much worse since you have Newton, Ponder and to an extent Locker looking pretty good.

i wud not be surprised at all if the Jags took a QB.Gabbert looked that bad.

 

[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 don't yet see a rebuilding project moving towards the playoffs. I see talk of that. I see some positive signs that point towards that. I see some negative signs that do not point towards that. Bottom line, I see, at best, 2 consecutive 6-10 seasons with no established QB. At some point results matter more than hopes. Every 6-10 (or worse) team thinks they're headed in a positive direction, but not all of them are. Allen and Shanahan are not nearly as clownish and embarrassing as Zorn and Cerrato. Practices are actually conducted like NFL practices, and gameplay doesn't look amateurish as it did too often under Zorn. But there are still plenty of gameplay problems. In 2 years the Redskins struggle for the most part with their 2-minute offense. Too ofthenthey dawdle and waste time and look disorganized, still. It wasn't McNabb causing the problems with the 2-minute offense, it was and is the coaching staff. The abandonment of the run game for too many games has been another recurring problem.

What I do find encouraging, though, is that Kyle Shanahan finally adapted his playcalling the last several games to what the players on the field could do best instead of relying on his pass-heavy system. That's a big step forward that benefits the team in the long run. Kyle's a young guy and he's learning. He was and is no offensive genius. The Texans success under him was due to Matt Schaub, not Kyle. You can see that from the Texans' offensive results after Kyle left --- their results with Schaub in the lineup, and out of the lineup. But Kyle's learning and apparently losing the stubbornness that resulted in game plans that just kept repeating failed passing plays. The recent emphasis on the run is very encouraging --- the players on the field can do that pretty well, and Kyle's taking advantage of that to the team's benefit.

The other thing I find encouraging is Mike Shanahan finally admitting his initial assessment of the team was wrong. Granted, it came across somewhat as "the guys before me were even worse than I thought", but he admitted he was wrong and that rebuilding will take longer than he thought. Link.

I think the first draft under Shanahan and Allen was mishandled badly, and the second draft under them was a very good draft. I think their personnel choices have ranged from good to lousy, with no consistent pattern yet. With 2-3 more drafts in a row like last year's the team will clearly be headed towards regular playoff contention. Will that happen? Based on a mixed record so far, we really can't tell and are left to hope.

Next year will tell if they're rebuilding into a playoff team. At the moment, it is certainly not clear that they are, or are not.

I won't argue that they need a franchise QB. As Eastwood has said several times it is a QB driven league. However I do think you have unrealistic expectations. Shanny and Allen have not drafted or added much flash or sizzle, they have gone after solid contributors. I do expect at least one more year of 6-10 to .500 football.

unfortunately, right now i culd see a another 6-10 type season too.however, drafts and FA periods have a way of influencing opinions too.

things are dramatically different very easily if they get a young QB who can excite the base.

let's see where we sit after draft and FA.

 

[thayman]

I wish I could feel that way. But I'm sick of having a mediocre to CRAPPY QB. The NFL is a passing league. The teams that are fun to watch each weekend are the Packers, Saints, and Patriots for a reason, they all have great offenses with great QBs. Hell, even the Panthers were a blast to watch this year (and I believe will easily make the playoffs next year) If the Skins don't get that franchise QB, its another crappy year, mark it down.

Finding a gem of a QB in the later rounds is becoming more and more or a rarity. IF the opportunity to move up and get Luck arises, you give up whatever it takes. Although my love with what's left of QBs in the first round begins and ends there. Not feeling the RGIII love. If we can't land Luck though...just go the scattershot method and take 2 QBs later in the draft and take the best available with the first rounder or even trade down and stockpile picks like we did last year.

agreed. get Luck with whatever it will take, if it can be done with a willing trade partner @ #1.i do like RGIII tho. not sure he's a fit tho.it Luck isn't an option, take a couple QB's later in the draft and go w/ best fit for one of the other needs in the 1st.

Trading up would be pretty dumb considering the amount of needs the team has. I like Luck, but before the season reports were it would take 3 1st rounders for him. That's a moronic deal.

 

[Eastwood]

Sometimes you gotta call a spade a spade. How bad would it have been for the Panthers if they didn't admit the obvious and give up on Clausen to take Newton? That franchise would be moving in the polar opposite direction. If the Jags are smart, they would do the same, but I sure hope they don't!

 

[MikeApf]

I wish I could feel that way. But I'm sick of having a mediocre to CRAPPY QB. The NFL is a passing league. The teams that are fun to watch each weekend are the Packers, Saints, and Patriots for a reason, they all have great offenses with great QBs. Hell, even the Panthers were a blast to watch this year (and I believe will easily make the playoffs next year) If the Skins don't get that franchise QB, its another crappy year, mark it down.

Finding a gem of a QB in the later rounds is becoming more and more or a rarity. IF the opportunity to move up and get Luck arises, you give up whatever it takes. Although my love with what's left of QBs in the first round begins and ends there. Not feeling the RGIII love. If we can't land Luck though...just go the scattershot method and take 2 QBs later in the draft and take the best available with the first rounder or even trade down and stockpile picks like we did last year.

agreed. get Luck with whatever it will take, if it can be done with a willing trade partner @ #1.i do like RGIII tho. not sure he's a fit tho.it Luck isn't an option, take a couple QB's later in the draft and go w/ best fit for one of the other needs in the 1st.

Trading up would be pretty dumb considering the amount of needs the team has. I like Luck, but before the season reports were it would take 3 1st rounders for him. That's a moronic deal.

This is really a tough decision for the Redskins (and other teams) conceivably. I think it's become conventional wisdom around DC that it's stupid to give up too many future draft picks to move up or to get a hot free agent, as it's better to have those draft picks for more players. But this conventional wisdom has in many ways arisen from the team giving up draft picks for bust free agents, like Duckett, Archelleta, etc. However, on the face of it, it is not absolutely true that it's always better to hold on to draft picks than to trade up to get a better player.For instance, let's say Andrew Luck becomes literally as elite as Peyton Manning. That's not a sure thing at all...he could become Ryan Leaf, but just for the sake of argument, let's say he does.And let's say to get Peyton Manning in his prime, you would have to give up 2 Redskins top 10 draft picks in a row. Since 2004, the Redskins have had a number of top 10 draft picks:2004 5 Sean Taylor 2005 9 Carlos Rogers and 25 Jason Campbell 2006 No first-round draft pick [47]2007 6 LaRon Landry 2008 No first-round draft pick 2009 13 Brian Orakpo 2010 4 Trent Williams 2011 16 Ryan Kerrigan So this gives you kind of a benchmark to see what you'd be giving up. If, say, you gave up a combination of Rodgers and Landry for a Peyton Manning QB, and had to fill in those players with CB and Safety from further down the draft (think Gomes, for instance), then that's the equation you are looking at. What is more valuable: Luck + fill ins from lower down the draft or via FA OR Lesser QB + higher drafted players like Rodgers and Landry. And, is it easier to find elite CBs, safeties, etc, later in the draft than it is to find elite QBs later in the draft? I'm not saying that it is. I'm just saying, instead of everyone assuming: "the Redskins have lots of needs...don't trade future number ones" automatically, we should be weighing out what mix of players is more valuable. It is conceivable that having a QB as good as Manning is worth it even if you are filling in other holes with lesser players. Look at the Colts without Manning vs. the Colts with Manning. Realistically, is Manning more valuable that multiple other players? The answer has to be yes. He is worth multiple players. I'm not saying the Redskins should trade up. Honestly, it depends on their other options. For instance, if they think Matt Flynn is as good as Matt Ryan or someone and they want to go there and they use # 1's to shore up OL and other places, that combo of players may be better than Luck + fill ins. But you see what I'm saying, the analysis needs to be what combo of players are better -- not just automatically NEVER trading draft picks.Just because the Redskins made mistakes in the past, it doesn't mean they should compound those mistakes by overreaching the other direction.

 

[fatness]

i wud not be surprised at all if the Jags took a QB.Gabbert looked that bad.

Without knowing who the Jags coaching staff will be next year, it's impossible to guess what they'll do at QB. One year with a lousy team, without even the benefit of an offseason due to the lockout, is not really enough basis on which to evaluate a rookie QB. The Jags have holes everywhere in their lineup. A new coach may want "his QB" and draft one, or may want to start filling roster holes. It's impossible to guess now.Open question: what is the most the Skins can give up, without hurting themselves, for a top QB in the draft? I'd be willing to part with this year's #1, next year's #1, and Trent Williams to get Andrew Luck. Before Williams's suspension I would not have been, but the danger of losing him for an entire year is high. Come to think of it, he might be high too. As for Griffin, what I'd give to move up to get him depends on what draft slot we'd be moving up to. The most I'd give is this year and next year's #1.

 

[dehaven123]

I wish I could feel that way. But I'm sick of having a mediocre to CRAPPY QB. The NFL is a passing league. The teams that are fun to watch each weekend are the Packers, Saints, and Patriots for a reason, they all have great offenses with great QBs. Hell, even the Panthers were a blast to watch this year (and I believe will easily make the playoffs next year) If the Skins don't get that franchise QB, its another crappy year, mark it down.

Finding a gem of a QB in the later rounds is becoming more and more or a rarity. IF the opportunity to move up and get Luck arises, you give up whatever it takes. Although my love with what's left of QBs in the first round begins and ends there. Not feeling the RGIII love. If we can't land Luck though...just go the scattershot method and take 2 QBs later in the draft and take the best available with the first rounder or even trade down and stockpile picks like we did last year.

agreed. get Luck with whatever it will take, if it can be done with a willing trade partner @ #1.i do like RGIII tho. not sure he's a fit tho.it Luck isn't an option, take a couple QB's later in the draft and go w/ best fit for one of the other needs in the 1st.

Trading up would be pretty dumb considering the amount of needs the team has. I like Luck, but before the season reports were it would take 3 1st rounders for him. That's a moronic deal.

if Luck is the nxt elite QB, then 3 1st rd'ers(using ur example) doesn't seem like bad value at all to me. jus my opinion, but not necessarily a dumb move.

 

[dehaven123]

I wish I could feel that way. But I'm sick of having a mediocre to CRAPPY QB. The NFL is a passing league. The teams that are fun to watch each weekend are the Packers, Saints, and Patriots for a reason, they all have great offenses with great QBs. Hell, even the Panthers were a blast to watch this year (and I believe will easily make the playoffs next year) If the Skins don't get that franchise QB, its another crappy year, mark it down.

Finding a gem of a QB in the later rounds is becoming more and more or a rarity. IF the opportunity to move up and get Luck arises, you give up whatever it takes. Although my love with what's left of QBs in the first round begins and ends there. Not feeling the RGIII love. If we can't land Luck though...just go the scattershot method and take 2 QBs later in the draft and take the best available with the first rounder or even trade down and stockpile picks like we did last year.

agreed. get Luck with whatever it will take, if it can be done with a willing trade partner @ #1.i do like RGIII tho. not sure he's a fit tho.it Luck isn't an option, take a couple QB's later in the draft and go w/ best fit for one of the other needs in the 1st.

Trading up would be pretty dumb considering the amount of needs the team has. I like Luck, but before the season reports were it would take 3 1st rounders for him. That's a moronic deal.

This is really a tough decision for the Redskins (and other teams) conceivably. I think it's become conventional wisdom around DC that it's stupid to give up too many future draft picks to move up or to get a hot free agent, as it's better to have those draft picks for more players. But this conventional wisdom has in many ways arisen from the team giving up draft picks for bust free agents, like Duckett, Archelleta, etc. However, on the face of it, it is not absolutely true that it's always better to hold on to draft picks than to trade up to get a better player.For instance, let's say Andrew Luck becomes literally as elite as Peyton Manning. That's not a sure thing at all...he could become Ryan Leaf, but just for the sake of argument, let's say he does.And let's say to get Peyton Manning in his prime, you would have to give up 2 Redskins top 10 draft picks in a row. Since 2004, the Redskins have had a number of top 10 draft picks:2004 5 Sean Taylor 2005 9 Carlos Rogers and 25 Jason Campbell 2006 No first-round draft pick [47]2007 6 LaRon Landry 2008 No first-round draft pick 2009 13 Brian Orakpo 2010 4 Trent Williams 2011 16 Ryan Kerrigan So this gives you kind of a benchmark to see what you'd be giving up. If, say, you gave up a combination of Rodgers and Landry for a Peyton Manning QB, and had to fill in those players with CB and Safety from further down the draft (think Gomes, for instance), then that's the equation you are looking at. What is more valuable: Luck + fill ins from lower down the draft or via FA OR Lesser QB + higher drafted players like Rodgers and Landry. And, is it easier to find elite CBs, safeties, etc, later in the draft than it is to find elite QBs later in the draft? I'm not saying that it is. I'm just saying, instead of everyone assuming: "the Redskins have lots of needs...don't trade future number ones" automatically, we should be weighing out what mix of players is more valuable. It is conceivable that having a QB as good as Manning is worth it even if you are filling in other holes with lesser players. Look at the Colts without Manning vs. the Colts with Manning. Realistically, is Manning more valuable that multiple other players? The answer has to be yes. He is worth multiple players. I'm not saying the Redskins should trade up. Honestly, it depends on their other options. For instance, if they think Matt Flynn is as good as Matt Ryan or someone and they want to go there and they use # 1's to shore up OL and other places, that combo of players may be better than Luck + fill ins. But you see what I'm saying, the analysis needs to be what combo of players are better -- not just automatically NEVER trading draft picks.Just because the Redskins made mistakes in the past, it doesn't mean they should compound those mistakes by overreaching the other direction.

nice comparison to consider. i'd trade 3 of those guys for a Peyton comparable QB.

 

[dehaven123]

i wud not be surprised at all if the Jags took a QB.Gabbert looked that bad.

Without knowing who the Jags coaching staff will be next year, it's impossible to guess what they'll do at QB. One year with a lousy team, without even the benefit of an offseason due to the lockout, is not really enough basis on which to evaluate a rookie QB. The Jags have holes everywhere in their lineup. A new coach may want "his QB" and draft one, or may want to start filling roster holes. It's impossible to guess now.Open question: what is the most the Skins can give up, without hurting themselves, for a top QB in the draft? I'd be willing to part with this year's #1, next year's #1, and Trent Williams to get Andrew Luck. Before Williams's suspension I would not have been, but the danger of losing him for an entire year is high. Come to think of it, he might be high too. As for Griffin, what I'd give to move up to get him depends on what draft slot we'd be moving up to. The most I'd give is this year and next year's #1.

yes, id do that deal. ur right too, no way of knowing wat new jags regime will do, but new regime increases chances they go a different direction.

 

[Sidewinder16]

if Luck is the nxt elite QB, then 3 1st rd'ers(using ur example) doesn't seem like bad value at all to me. jus my opinion, but not necessarily a dumb move.

For whatever it's worth, Keim retweeted this yesterday:[QUOTE='Evan Silva]On SportsCenter, Adam Schefter suggested #Rams could get "three ones & two twos" in a trade if STL lands the No. 1 pick in the 2012 draft.
[/QUOTE]Has there ever been a trade with this number and value of picks that didn't turn out bad for the team receiving just the one player? The Herschel Walker and Ricky Williams trades (as examples) have me worried that it won't end well for the team dumping the draft picks.

 

[TobiasFunke]

if Luck is the nxt elite QB, then 3 1st rd'ers(using ur example) doesn't seem like bad value at all to me. jus my opinion, but not necessarily a dumb move.

For whatever it's worth, Keim retweeted this yesterday:[QUOTE='Evan Silva]On SportsCenter, Adam Schefter suggested #Rams could get "three ones & two twos" in a trade if STL lands the No. 1 pick in the 2012 draft.

Has there ever been a trade with this number and value of picks that didn't turn out bad for the team receiving just the one player? The Herschel Walker and Ricky Williams trades (as examples) have me worried that it won't end well for the team dumping the draft picks.[/QUOTE]There's just not a lot of evidence to draw from as far as QBs go, because teams that are drafting #1 overall or close to it usually have a terrible QB, which makes it a non-issue. Very few trades have been made in the last 15 years where a team moved into the first few spots to draft a QB. Certainly the Vick trade worked out well for both sides (Vick made the Falcons a winner and a playoff team and sold a ton of jerseys and tickets, Chargers ended up with Tomlinson as a consolation prize), as did the Manning/Rivers fiasco.

 

[MikeApf]

I wish I could feel that way. But I'm sick of having a mediocre to CRAPPY QB. The NFL is a passing league. The teams that are fun to watch each weekend are the Packers, Saints, and Patriots for a reason, they all have great offenses with great QBs. Hell, even the Panthers were a blast to watch this year (and I believe will easily make the playoffs next year) If the Skins don't get that franchise QB, its another crappy year, mark it down.

Finding a gem of a QB in the later rounds is becoming more and more or a rarity. IF the opportunity to move up and get Luck arises, you give up whatever it takes. Although my love with what's left of QBs in the first round begins and ends there. Not feeling the RGIII love. If we can't land Luck though...just go the scattershot method and take 2 QBs later in the draft and take the best available with the first rounder or even trade down and stockpile picks like we did last year.

agreed. get Luck with whatever it will take, if it can be done with a willing trade partner @ #1.i do like RGIII tho. not sure he's a fit tho.it Luck isn't an option, take a couple QB's later in the draft and go w/ best fit for one of the other needs in the 1st.

Trading up would be pretty dumb considering the amount of needs the team has. I like Luck, but before the season reports were it would take 3 1st rounders for him. That's a moronic deal.

This is really a tough decision for the Redskins (and other teams) conceivably. I think it's become conventional wisdom around DC that it's stupid to give up too many future draft picks to move up or to get a hot free agent, as it's better to have those draft picks for more players. But this conventional wisdom has in many ways arisen from the team giving up draft picks for bust free agents, like Duckett, Archelleta, etc. However, on the face of it, it is not absolutely true that it's always better to hold on to draft picks than to trade up to get a better player.For instance, let's say Andrew Luck becomes literally as elite as Peyton Manning. That's not a sure thing at all...he could become Ryan Leaf, but just for the sake of argument, let's say he does.And let's say to get Peyton Manning in his prime, you would have to give up 2 Redskins top 10 draft picks in a row. Since 2004, the Redskins have had a number of top 10 draft picks:2004 5 Sean Taylor 2005 9 Carlos Rogers and 25 Jason Campbell 2006 No first-round draft pick [47]2007 6 LaRon Landry 2008 No first-round draft pick 2009 13 Brian Orakpo 2010 4 Trent Williams 2011 16 Ryan Kerrigan So this gives you kind of a benchmark to see what you'd be giving up. If, say, you gave up a combination of Rodgers and Landry for a Peyton Manning QB, and had to fill in those players with CB and Safety from further down the draft (think Gomes, for instance), then that's the equation you are looking at. What is more valuable: Luck + fill ins from lower down the draft or via FA OR Lesser QB + higher drafted players like Rodgers and Landry. And, is it easier to find elite CBs, safeties, etc, later in the draft than it is to find elite QBs later in the draft? I'm not saying that it is. I'm just saying, instead of everyone assuming: "the Redskins have lots of needs...don't trade future number ones" automatically, we should be weighing out what mix of players is more valuable. It is conceivable that having a QB as good as Manning is worth it even if you are filling in other holes with lesser players. Look at the Colts without Manning vs. the Colts with Manning. Realistically, is Manning more valuable that multiple other players? The answer has to be yes. He is worth multiple players. I'm not saying the Redskins should trade up. Honestly, it depends on their other options. For instance, if they think Matt Flynn is as good as Matt Ryan or someone and they want to go there and they use # 1's to shore up OL and other places, that combo of players may be better than Luck + fill ins. But you see what I'm saying, the analysis needs to be what combo of players are better -- not just automatically NEVER trading draft picks.Just because the Redskins made mistakes in the past, it doesn't mean they should compound those mistakes by overreaching the other direction.

nice comparison to consider. i'd trade 3 of those guys for a Peyton comparable QB.

Too bad there is no crystal ball to see which draft picks will work out. I dug up some of the Redskins other first round picks, dating back to the 90s:1991 17 Bobby Wilson1992 4 Desmond Howard 1993 19 Tom Carter 1994 3 Heath Shuler 1995 4 Michael Westbrook 1996 30 Andre Johnson 1997 17 Kenard Lang 1998 No first-round draft pick 1999 7 Champ Bailey 2000 2 LaVar Arrington, 3 Chris Samuels 2001 15 Rod Gardner 2002 32 Patrick Ramsey I mean, if you could say, I'll give up Rod Gardner, Ramsey and Westbrook for Luck, you would do it in a heartbeat and throw in Heath Shuler to boot. So no first round pick is for certain. It's all a big guessing game and I think that's why this Luck Sweepstakes thing is so interesting. If someone makes a big deal for him -- Redskins or someone else -- then there is going to be a lot of second guessing and analysis after the fact.Regarding the Redskins, based on what I've seen, I don't think Allen and Shanahan are overly enamomored with "giving away the farm." I think if someone offers 3 number 1's and a couple of 2's, the Redskins will not up the bidding as in the olden days, leaping right to 4 or 5 # 1's to seal the deal. If Ceratto were here, that may well happen. My guess is that the Redskins will talk to the team sitting in the number 1 spot, but will not likely win the bidding if it goes too high. That's just my knee jerk on it. Trading up for Griffin for less picks might be the clever move, if you could just give up a single number one?

 

[TheGBU]

The Redskins will NEVER, ever, ever, ever win until Synder decides to sell the team and based on his current level of involvement, it appears that won't happen for many, many years.

You Skins fans need to trade in your jerseys for Ravens gear as that is the closet REAL football team you have.

Peace.

 

[thayman]

The Redskins will NEVER, ever, ever, ever win until Synder decides to sell the team and based on his current level of involvement, it appears that won't happen for many, many years. You Skins fans need to trade in your jerseys for Ravens gear as that is the closet REAL football team you have. Peace.

Snyder hasn't been involved in the day to day since he hired Shanny and Allen. You could argue and present other fails that Shanny and Allen have done, but feel free to continue to show exactly how little you know.

 

[TheGBU]

gayman, get back to me when your deadskins have a winning record....LOL!

Synder is still pulling all the strings and continues to bring in washed up has beens like Shanny and Allen.

 

[TobiasFunke]

gayman, get back to me when your deadskins have a winning record....LOL!Synder is still pulling all the strings and continues to bring in washed up has beens like Shanny and Allen.

See it's funny because he called you "gayman," which suggests that you are gay, which was totally an insult in 1987.By the way, although I do not subscribe to your logic, I feel like I should point out that it would dictate that every baseball fan in Baltimore abandon the Orioles for the Nationals. Which is cool with me, I guess. Welcome to Natstown, Baltimore!

 

[TheGBU]

gayman, get back to me when your deadskins have a winning record....LOL!Synder is still pulling all the strings and continues to bring in washed up has beens like Shanny and Allen.

See it's funny because he called you "gayman," which suggests that you are gay, which was totally an insult in 1987.By the way, although I do not subscribe to your logic, I feel like I should point out that it would dictate that every baseball fan in Baltimore abandon the Orioles for the Nationals. Which is cool with me, I guess. Welcome to Natstown, Baltimore!

I have never met a Redskins fan who wasn't a complete d-bag.Thanks for keeping the streak alive.Peace.

 

[dgreen]

 

[thayman]

gayman, get back to me when your deadskins have a winning record....LOL!Synder is still pulling all the strings and continues to bring in washed up has beens like Shanny and Allen.

See it's funny because he called you "gayman," which suggests that you are gay, which was totally an insult in 1987.By the way, although I do not subscribe to your logic, I feel like I should point out that it would dictate that every baseball fan in Baltimore abandon the Orioles for the Nationals. Which is cool with me, I guess. Welcome to Natstown, Baltimore!

I have never met a Redskins fan who wasn't a complete d-bag.Thanks for keeping the streak alive.Peace.

And I've never met a Ravens fan who had an IQ above a 8th grader.Thanks for keeping the streak alive.

 

[dgreen]

In about 70 hours, we can get the 2012 Offseason Thread started! Some might say this has been the 2012 Offseason Thread for a couple months now, but it will be ***OFFICIAL*** around 4 PM this Sunday.

 

[jbz]

Sometimes you gotta call a spade a spade. How bad would it have been for the Panthers if they didn't admit the obvious and give up on Clausen to take Newton? That franchise would be moving in the polar opposite direction. If the Jags are smart, they would do the same, but I sure hope they don't!

I don't either, but the comparison is very different in the Panthers situation. Clausen was a 2nd round pick. Gabbert was a top 10 pick that the Jags traded up for. I don't think they will pull the plug on that after 1 year. Here's an article written about this exact scenario:http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/16/gabbert-may-be-bad-enough-to-make-jaguars-draft-another-qb/

 

[dehaven123]

gayman, get back to me when your deadskins have a winning record....LOL!Synder is still pulling all the strings and continues to bring in washed up has beens like Shanny and Allen.

See it's funny because he called you "gayman," which suggests that you are gay, which was totally an insult in 1987.By the way, although I do not subscribe to your logic, I feel like I should point out that it would dictate that every baseball fan in Baltimore abandon the Orioles for the Nationals. Which is cool with me, I guess. Welcome to Natstown, Baltimore!

I have never met a Redskins fan who wasn't a complete d-bag.Thanks for keeping the streak alive.Peace.

And I've never met a Ravens fan who had an IQ above a 8th grader.Thanks for keeping the streak alive.

see, it's was sooo funny because he called u gheyman, instead of thayman. so stoopid.

 

[MikeApf]

The Redskins will NEVER, ever, ever, ever win until Synder decides to sell the team and based on his current level of involvement, it appears that won't happen for many, many years. You Skins fans need to trade in your jerseys for Ravens gear as that is the closet REAL football team you have. Peace.

True football fans don't "switch teams." The fact that you don't understand that makes me wonder what kind of great fan you are. If the Ravens fall on tough times, are you then going to abandon them for the closest "winning team." Great.

 

[thayman]

Sometimes you gotta call a spade a spade. How bad would it have been for the Panthers if they didn't admit the obvious and give up on Clausen to take Newton? That franchise would be moving in the polar opposite direction. If the Jags are smart, they would do the same, but I sure hope they don't!

I don't either, but the comparison is very different in the Panthers situation. Clausen was a 2nd round pick. Gabbert was a top 10 pick that the Jags traded up for. I don't think they will pull the plug on that after 1 year. Here's an article written about this exact scenario:http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/16/gabbert-may-be-bad-enough-to-make-jaguars-draft-another-qb/

I don't think it is even the amount they invested. Granted Gabbert looks awful this year but he never had an offseason, I don't think they can cut bait that quickly. Of course I wouldn't be shocked if they did, I just don't see them trading up to grab another QB in round 1.

 

[Marvelous]

Some of the more interesting scenarios I thought were:

1. If the Rams get the #1 pick, coluld they draft Luck and trade Bradford? And would the Redskins be interested in Bradford?

2. If the Redskins are picks around #7 and RG3 falls to #4 or #5, do the Redskins trade up to get him? He may only cost next years 1st round pick or possibly this years 2nd round pick at that point.

By the way, I am in the camp usually does not like trading up. But if they think a QB is the real deal and can get him affordably, they need to go get him.

 

[thayman]

Some of the more interesting scenarios I thought were:1. If the Rams get the #1 pick, coluld they draft Luck and trade Bradford? And would the Redskins be interested in Bradford?2. If the Redskins are picks around #7 and RG3 falls to #4 or #5, do the Redskins trade up to get him? He may only cost next years 1st round pick or possibly this years 2nd round pick at that point.By the way, I am in the camp usually does not like trading up. But if they think a QB is the real deal and can get him affordably, they need to go get him.

A lot more of these scenarios will play out after the Combine as well. Kalil looks like he will be a stud OLineman, Reiff from Iowa should be pretty good as well on the Oline. I also really like Claibourne and Kirkpatrick for DBs. So I won't be too upset if they don't go QB since there are so many quality players that have been overshadowed by Luck and Griffin.It would be interesting (if anyone is bored) to see what Shanny's history with trading up has been.

 

[fatness]

ou Skins fans need to trade in your jerseys for Ravens gear as that is the closet REAL football team you have.

Many 13-year-old Ravens fans are afraid of the upcoming Bengals game, not just you. There's no shame in that. Go ahead, you can cry here.

 

[fatness]

I mean, if you could say, I'll give up Rod Gardner, Ramsey and Westbrook for Luck, you would do it in a heartbeat and throw in Heath Shuler to boot.

OK, I'm in. Let's do this. Bruce? Get on it!

 

[fatness]

For whatever it's worth, Keim retweeted this yesterday:

[QUOTE='Evan Silva]On SportsCenter, Adam Schefter suggested #Rams could get "three ones & two twos" in a trade if STL lands the No. 1 pick in the 2012 draft.

[/QUOTE]No team will offer them that. With no talks going on and no inside information on trades, Schefter's just guessing, and guessing wrong.

 

[fatness]

In about 70 hours, we can get the 2012 Offseason Thread started! Some might say this has been the 2012 Offseason Thread for a couple months now, but it will be ***OFFICIAL*** around 4 PM this Sunday.

I think this year is the earliest in the season we've shifted to "offseason mode". It's been difficult to maintain that "OMG WILL WE WIN 5 GAMES OR 6????!!!!!" intensity for half a season.

 

[fatness]

1. If the Rams get the #1 pick, coluld they draft Luck and trade Bradford? And would the Redskins be interested in Bradford?

Yes, and probably yes.

2. If the Redskins are picks around #7 and RG3 falls to #4 or #5, do the Redskins trade up to get him? He may only cost next years 1st round pick or possibly this years 2nd round pick at that point.

If that's what he costs at that spot, I'd be for them doing it.

 

[thayman]

In about 70 hours, we can get the 2012 Offseason Thread started! Some might say this has been the 2012 Offseason Thread for a couple months now, but it will be ***OFFICIAL*** around 4 PM this Sunday.

I think this year is the earliest in the season we've shifted to "offseason mode". It's been difficult to maintain that "OMG WILL WE WIN 5 GAMES OR 6????!!!!!" intensity for half a season.

A big part was that most of us were expecting this type of year. I'm actually more optimistic going into the offseason than I thought I would be (with the expection of Kyle). There are some nice role players on this team right now, they just need a superstar or two.

 

[Sidewinder16]

And I've never met a Ravens fan who had an IQ above a 8th grader.

Thanks for keeping the streak alive.

Even more un-surprising, he's an Eagles fan.

 

[Sebowski]

In about 70 hours, we can get the 2012 Offseason Thread started! Some might say this has been the 2012 Offseason Thread for a couple months now, but it will be ***OFFICIAL*** around 4 PM this Sunday.

I think this year is the earliest in the season we've shifted to "offseason mode". It's been difficult to maintain that "OMG WILL WE WIN 5 GAMES OR 6????!!!!!" intensity for half a season.

A big part was that most of us were expecting this type of year. I'm actually more optimistic going into the offseason than I thought I would be (with the expection of Kyle). There are some nice role players on this team right now, they just need a superstar or two.

I called 4-12. Looks like I'll be a game off. I'm pretty tired of expecting to be bad though. Really hope we address the main issues with this team starting at QB. I'd still like to see VJax come on board. Gaffney was a real surprise for me this year. He had a great season (relatively speaking). I did not expect him to be so productive. I hope we can get him to 1,000 yards this week. It is nice to have a good possession WR out there. VJax, Moss, and Gaffney would make very good starters with Hankerson developing and getting some time. I don't think I can even watch the game tracker on Sunday. I can't actively root for a loss, but I certainly don't won't to drop further in the draft. Think I'll keep myself busy and check in after the game.

 

[fatness]

In about 70 hours, we can get the 2012 Offseason Thread started! Some might say this has been the 2012 Offseason Thread for a couple months now, but it will be ***OFFICIAL*** around 4 PM this Sunday.

I think this year is the earliest in the season we've shifted to "offseason mode". It's been difficult to maintain that "OMG WILL WE WIN 5 GAMES OR 6????!!!!!" intensity for half a season.

A big part was that most of us were expecting this type of year. I'm actually more optimistic going into the offseason than I thought I would be (with the expection of Kyle). There are some nice role players on this team right now, they just need a superstar or two.

If we're halfway through next season and thinking about "next year" again, It'll be a pretty clear indication the team's not going in the right direction. The team could have done better this year on the field if not for one glaring series of errors --- personnel choices at QB for 2 full years now.