Eight QBs and Where The Latest Rumors Have Them Going

Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 [35] 36 37 38 39

MTK
02-24-2012, 01:56 PM
That's just it...I don't care...you can make both of the other picks as good as you want them to be and I will still take the elite QB. This is a QB league now...the teams that win consistently have the best QB's. Every team in the league is flawed in this era of free agency...you can work around everything except the QB position.

Sorry but an elite QB doesn't solve all of our woes. Giving up 2-3 starters, 2-3 potential pro bowl quality starters, is a big price to pay. If MS decides it's worth the gamble I'll get behind it, but there's more than one way to approach this.

celts32
02-24-2012, 02:05 PM
Sorry but an elite QB doesn't solve all of our woes. Giving up 2-3 starters, 2-3 potential pro bowl quality starters, is a big price to pay. If MS decides it's worth the gamble I'll get behind it, but there's more than one way to approach this.

It doesn't solve them but it sure does mask them. Ask the Colts, Patriots, Giants & Packers. We can't try and plug every hole and build a completely solid team and get by with okay QB's like we did in the 1980's anymore. You will start losing them to free agency before you ever get finished. Those days are gone. Just get the QB and get in the game.

MTK
02-24-2012, 02:10 PM
It doesn't solve them but it sure does mask them. Ask the Colts, Patriots, Giants & Packers. We can't try and plug every hole and build a completely solid team and get by with okay QB's like we did in the 1980's anymore. You will start losing them to free agency before you ever get finished. Those days are gone. Just get the QB and get in the game.

Who says Tannehill can't be that guy?

All the teams you mention are/were still stronger across the board than we are right now, especially in the playmaker department.

Chief X_Phackter
02-24-2012, 02:22 PM
This is what I've been trying to get at when I say I don't believe the gap between RG3 and Tannehill is huge

At QB, it's a matter of value - Rich Tandler's Real Redskins (http://www.realredskins.com/rich-tandlers-real-redsk/2012/02/at-qb-its-a-matter-of-value.html)

Most say it will cost this year’s first- and second-round picks and next year’s first, and perhaps more, to move up to draft Griffin. Instead of the Redskins making that move they could take Tannehill with their own pick, the sixth overall.

So, it’s not a matter of Griffin vs. Tannehill. It’s Griffin v. Tannehill plus whoever the Redskins could get in the second round this year plus the player they could get in the first round next year

Good point. I'm still not sold on Tannehill at #6, or even #8 but when you put it in overall value terms like that I can see the logic behind it. I would like to push even further back and get him if they think he is their guy, but then you risk losing him to someone else...glad it isn't my job to figure all this out :)

celts32
02-24-2012, 02:28 PM
Who says Tannehill can't be that guy?

All the teams you mention are/were still stronger across the board than we are right now, especially in the playmaker department.

It's possible Tannehill could be that guy but the consensus is that RG3 has a better chance to be a franchise QB. However, if the Redskins thought Tannehill had as good a chance as RG3 then I would be okay with drafting him instead. Unfortunately we have to decide what we prefer without the luxury of knowing what the Redskins think about the prospects.

As far as the other teams I mentioned...Probably but I believe that our playmakers would look better if we had a better QB. Plus we have 49 mil of cap space to add to what we have.

TheMalcolmConnection
02-24-2012, 02:31 PM
Who says Tannehill can't be that guy?

All the teams you mention are/were still stronger across the board than we are right now, especially in the playmaker department.

Not only that but the Ravens are a perfect example of how having a solid team all the way around can make a QB look even better.

Yes, I want that "franchise" QB, but I won't be sad either if we stand pat and use our picks wisely or trade back.

Bushead
02-24-2012, 02:32 PM
The redskins looked like a mediocre or average team when fully healthy and turned into a below average team after taking some hits with injuries. The injury bug is going to happen every year, so what if we draft RGIII but then lose a starting WR, couple OL and a TE? IT would be nice to have some quality depth.

At first, I was all for drafting RGIII, but sometimes I get to thinking about the cost & I wonder if it is worth it.

Ruhskins
02-24-2012, 02:35 PM
It's possible Tannehill could be that guy but the consensus is that RG3 has a better chance to be a franchise QB. However, if the Redskins thought Tannehill had as good a chance as RG3 then I would be okay with drafting him instead. Unfortunately we have to decide what we prefer without the luxury of knowing what the Redskins think about the prospects.

As far as the other teams I mentioned...Probably but I believe that our playmakers would look better if we had a better QB. Plus we have 49 mil of cap space to add to what we have.

But the important thing is what the Redskins think about the prospects.

Given their willingness to trade down and not to reach for a QB in the past two drafts, I think the team is not willing to bet the farm for a QB. Now I do think our cap space and a young free agent class may allow the Redskins to do this. But it would not surprise if they don't do this.

Personally, I just want to make sure that they don't once again put a lot of draft/FA resources on the defense (and none on offense) and that we don't have a repeat of last year in terms of QBs.

celts32
02-24-2012, 02:45 PM
But the important thing is what the Redskins think about the prospects.

Given their willingness to trade down and not to reach for a QB in the past two drafts, I think the team is not willing to bet the farm for a QB. Now I do think our cap space and a young free agent class may allow the Redskins to do this. But it would not surprise if they don't do this.

Personally, I just want to make sure that they don't once again put a lot of draft/FA resources on the defense (and none on offense) and that we don't have a repeat of last year in terms of QBs.

Of course...what we think about any of these players is irrelevant. I just want them to get their #1 guy and i don't really care about the cost. I am tired of the Redskins settling at the most important position in sports. If they accomplish that then i am fine if they need to settle for a little bit weaker starter at a couple other positions.

SOUL-SKINS
02-24-2012, 02:55 PM
Blah blah blah blah blah blahhhhhhhhhhh .... I've never heard one thing said in so many different ways .......

EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum