Redskins trading out of the 4 spot?

A NFL weight/nutrition program will have him bulked up in no time. He definitely has the frame to put on more weight.

I'm beating both sides of the fence so I'll say the weight/nutrition program hasn't done a lot for Brennan unless he was extremely thin framed. lol.

I know I'm not helping my arguement that we need a QB this year and honestly I'm not trying to change peoples minds. I'd be happy with the best OL if we get him. It's just when people talk QB's usually only the top tier are like 1-3 QB's then there is a drop off and the rest are not so accurate or don't have good arm strength or can't scramble or will need a few years sitting on the bench before they shine.

So I sit back and look at the situation from two aspects.... Unless the team already has a Franchise QB most new HC's that take over a team pick up a QB they think will work in their system right out of the box. Then there's the fact that Campbell was a mid 1st round pick and you see what we got. Brennan was a mid round drafted QB and we see what we got. Chase Daniels was not even drafted and we saw what we got. So if we are in need of a Franchise QB that is more accurate then I'd rather pick as high in the draft as possible where the best QB's with the best skills are instead of hoping for the diamond in the rough or praying we can coach up a 2nd rounder.

Yeah, a pro-bowl type season for him was hypothetical thinking and believe me I really meant it to sound that way.

Maybe I missed something but you did say SQB 2010. So what does SQB stand for? I took it to mean if JC becomes the Superbowl QB in 2010. I almost laughed. I'll eat almost whatever I have to eat but no way does JC become the 2010 SQB. It would be a major feet going from 4-12 to the SB and I guess it would make for a pretty bed time story but I don't see it.

Which is why it doesn't make sense moving him for low compensation. At worst he can be a back up if he's yanked in mid-season.

I think we are on the same page. I'd rather see a low 1st round draft pick or second round draft pick for JC. Hell he was a starter and honestly his stats do look good. For teams who wish they could get a Cutler, JC has similar stats.

If the trade value is not good enough then instead of going out hunting down a Vet FA then keep JC and let the Rookie learn the play book better. But I get tired of the whole don't throw the Rookie in. Look at Baltimore their Rookie had an awsome season and did well last yr also, the Jets almost made it to the SB with their Rookie QB, the Falcons have had two decent years with a Rookie. I don't see any problem putting whoever we draft on the field if he is better then JC. Plus we have a back up plan if the Rookie does not work out.

I think he meant Starting Qb.

BTW I'll take the 3rd and the 5th. Or better yet the 3rd and Whitner.

I think we are on the same page. I'd rather see a low 1st round draft pick or second round draft pick for JC. Hell he was a starter and honestly his stats do look good. For teams who wish they could get a Cutler, JC has similar stats.

If the trade value is not good enough then instead of going out hunting down a Vet FA then keep JC and let the Rookie learn the play book better. But I get tired of the whole don't throw the Rookie in. Look at Baltimore their Rookie had an awsome season and did well last yr also, the Jets almost made it to the SB with their Rookie QB, the Falcons have had two decent years with a Rookie. I don't see any problem putting whoever we draft on the field if he is better then JC. Plus we have a back up plan if the Rookie does not work out.

I think you can throw a rookie to the fire under good conditions, and honestly I don't know if our team has it. I think each of the teams that you mention above have things that we don't have or things that I am not sure how they are going to workout such as:

- Great offensive lines (Jets, Ravens)
- Solid running games (Falcons, Jets, Ravens)
- Elite defenses (Jets, Ravens)
- Good receiving corps (Jets, Falcons)

I know Atlanta seems to be a bit of an exception to the rule, but both the Jets and Ravens had really good situations for their rookie QB to thrive in, and honestly a lot of those areas that I mentioned above are either questionable or not good enough to be able to help a rookie QB succeed.

What bothers me is who would we bring in and would we be getting worse by trading out a Vet we already have for some one possibly worse.

Jake Plummer.

I think he meant Starting Qb.

BTW I'll take the 3rd and the 5th. Or better yet the 3rd and Whitner.

the 3rd and Whitner would be great. I'm thinking that they are probably offering Whitner and a 5th, though.

I think we are on the same page. I'd rather see a low 1st round draft pick or second round draft pick for JC. Hell he was a starter and honestly his stats do look good. For teams who wish they could get a Cutler, JC has similar stats.

If the trade value is not good enough then instead of going out hunting down a Vet FA then keep JC and let the Rookie learn the play book better. But I get tired of the whole don't throw the Rookie in. Look at Baltimore their Rookie had an awsome season and did well last yr also, the Jets almost made it to the SB with their Rookie QB, the Falcons have had two decent years with a Rookie. I don't see any problem putting whoever we draft on the field if he is better then JC. Plus we have a back up plan if the Rookie does not work out.

i think you're overvaluing him a bit. Sage only got the texans a 3rd. Campbells a little better than him, but not by much. Also, would your feelings about letting Campbell go for a 3rd and conditional 5th in 2011 change if we draft a QB with the 4th overall pick, finish the 2010 season around 8-8, and Campbell walks away as free agent and we receive no compensation in return?

At that point, i think you'd be missing those two draft picks. I hate to break it to you, but this team is not going to be a contender in 2010. Since thats the case, there's no reason to keep ANY player for one year, when we could trade him for a 3rd round pick - a pick that would probably get us a future starting offensive linemen or running back.

Jake Plummer.

That's a joke right?

I think you can throw a rookie to the fire under good conditions, and honestly I don't know if our team has it. I think each of the teams that you mention above have things that we don't have or things that I am not sure how they are going to workout such as:

- Great offensive lines (Jets, Ravens)
- Solid running games (Falcons, Jets, Ravens)
- Elite defenses (Jets, Ravens)
- Good receiving corps (Jets, Falcons)

I know Atlanta seems to be a bit of an exception to the rule, but both the Jets and Ravens had really good situations for their rookie QB to thrive in, and honestly a lot of those areas that I mentioned above are either questionable or not good enough to be able to help a rookie QB succeed.Ryan also appears to be the strongest of the three as a player, although with that said, 2010 is going to be a really critical year for his career. Being ahead of the curve as a rookie only takes you so far.

I wonder if a case could be made to draft Golden Tate in the second if he fell?