And with the 6th pick in the 2012 NFL Draft, the redskins select...........

The only problem I'd have with taking him is that it would mean that we once again are settling at the QB position. For me, anything less than Luck or RGIII out of this draft will be a huge disappointment.

Neither guy is going to be there by the time we pick.

Seems that the word is they are very high on Tannehill to begin with, so it really wouldn't be settling if they were getting their guy in the end...

We've heard "the word is they are very high on..." before.

We've heard "the word is they are very high on..." before.

The front office, or Fred Davis and Trent Williams? :Smoker:

Seems that the word is they are very high on Tannehill to begin with, so it really wouldn't be settling if they were getting their guy in the end.

Moving up to grab Luck or RGIII is going to be costly, and what if Cleveland is fine with sitting there and taking RGIII? I'm not even really thinking about Luck. Just doesn't seem possible.

In terms of settling, I'm referring to someone who is on the 2nd tier of QB prospects. Luck and RGIII are considered elite prospects. Tannehill, Jones and Foles are all considered next tier or below. To me, that just signals 'same old-same old' following the pattern we've been in at that position for 20+ years. I won't go as far as to say I don't care about the cost to move up, but I'm close to that. I know the Giants don't regret the cost to get Eli, we will be looking at a similar price to get to the Rams pick at #2. Luck is in play as long as Peyton remains on the Colts roster because he will force a trade rather than sit.

I don't think the Colts are as talent limited as they seemed early this year.
Curtis Painter is not a good QB by any stretch.
He's probably the worst QB in the NFL.
When Dan Orlovosky sparks an uptick in performance its a telling indictment on the previous QB.

Also, their defense was terrible and a portion of that blame goes to the coaching.

Newsflash...their defense has always been very talent-poor. Due to the stud ends who kept them competitive and the fact that teams had to play from behind so much they were able to hide the fact that their defense was mostly junk for the last decade.

Personally I don't buy that Manning will force the Colts hand and prevent them from drafting Luck but we'll see. And I don't think Luck or RGIII are the only viable solutions at QB either.

I know this...we're going to get a very good player at 6 or wherever we end up. The possibilities at 6 are loaded with studs. Seems like a pretty top-heavy draft. They real key to this draft is what happens with RGIII.

If Luck, RGIII and Blackmon are gone by the time the skins pick, I say trade down draft David DeCastro (beast G) and with the other pick a CB. Pick Foles in the 2nd. DeCastro is the type of guard this team needs, wonder why Stanford's is so good in the running game?

Seems that the word is they are very high on Tannehill to begin with, so it really wouldn't be settling if they were getting their guy in the end.

Moving up to grab Luck or RGIII is going to be costly, and what if Cleveland is fine with sitting there and taking RGIII? I'm not even really thinking about Luck. Just doesn't seem possible.

I could see this. Either picking Blackmon or trading down some slots to draft someone else, then sliding back up to take Tannehill. I agree, the cost of trading up will be significant and I'm not sure we'd be willing to gamble that much.

6th pick going to Rams as part of deal for Bradford. Fisher gets some ammo to build around RG3 when he's ready to take over for Peyton Manning

Part of? I would like to think that's pretty much the entire deal. He can't be worth much more then that off the 1st 2 years he's had. I still love him but I would think his value has to be a little lower then it was when he entered the league.