Please Draft ??? at #13

SmootSmack · 04-22-2009, 01:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

The whole situation just doesn't add up. This is just one more fact in a line of them that draw no clear path.

All reports use the word "smitten" to describe Snyder's attitude towards Sanchez. It's been many decades since anyone has used that term, and yet, multiple outlets use it within a day or so? Sounds like a direct leak.

The term was used just a couple of years ago with us and Calvin Johnson

Quote:

We don't have a plethora of cap room, but we're supposedly trying to get in the top 5, where the rookie pool might end up exceeding our cap room.

Not to mention a QB would be a the upper echelon of the rookie scale

Quote:

Jay Cutler. We chased him hard because we thought he was the missing piece. We didn't get him, and now it's Sanchez? Really?

As simple as ABC (Anyone But Campbell...or Always Bet on Colt)

Quote:

Cerrato pulled an eleventh hour trade down last year, and now were considering going up?

Another trade down would be nice

Quote:

No one in the Redskins organization has ever tried to squash these rumors at all. All Snyder has done is thrown gasoline on the fire. He might just be this short-sighted, or he might be wise enough to leverage his position. Prior evidence suggests he's probably just shortsighted.

What's the point of squashing them?

Quote:

We've avoided adding pretty much any help in free agency after the Dockery signing, despite unexpectedly cutting Jason Taylor since then.

Not counting Haynesworth, or even Robert Thomas (to a lesser extent)? Or the guys we brought back?

Quote:

We're frank enough to tell Sanchez where he stands with us, but we're okay going "behind" Campbell's back (I say "behind" because if it is a smokescreen, Campbell's in on it).

Campbell's our guy!!...until he's not

Quote:

Brian Orakpo might be a simultaneous smokescreen, or a last ditch attempt to divert attention from Sanchez.

The one guy VC has been most open about is Orakpo, don't know if that's a good thing,k since the start of this whole draft stuff back in January

Quote:

We can't even outbid other teams who need Sanchez' services far more than we do.

We can...but probably shouldn't

GTripp0012 · 04-22-2009, 01:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GMScud

Promising Sanchez the keys to the car from day one would basically cancel out Campbell. His trade value would plummet, and he'd likely walk after '09. Not to mention what it would do to the locker room. Snyder was just going status quo. With Campbell on the team, Sanchez would have to compete for the job. That's a no brainer. That doesn't mean Campbell couldn't be traded after drafting Sanchez. At least we're not tipping our hand in that regard. Currently, telling him anything other than what we are would be foolish. At this point I'd say it's possible (however unlikely), that we're running a good bluff.

If that's true, this is the first time in the month of April that Snyder stayed the status quo.

GMScud · 04-22-2009, 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

If that's true, this is the first time in the month of April that Snyder stayed the status quo.

Not saying it will stay that way come Saturday, but for now, I'd say that's what we're doing with this particular situation. If I had to guess anyway.

GTripp0012 · 04-22-2009, 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

What's the point of squashing them?

Well, what if we do want him, but at 13. And it gets to pick 11 or 12, and the Jets go up to get him because, even though there's no one between 11 and 17 that need a QB, they think we'll actually do it.

That's a successful smokescreen...but if they wanted him enough to grab him at 13, which seems to be the picture that Snyder is painting, cut the beast off at the head, and up your chance of getting him at your slot.

General draft logic says the Skins would only be acting this way if they really didn't care about Sanchez. But logic in general suggests that Jason Campbell is on the verge of something great, so I'm not sure any reasoning should be applied to this situation.

GTripp0012 · 04-22-2009, 01:12 AM

The only thing that really appears to be clear from this process is that the 5 year hiatus of Snyder intervention appears to be over for good. Even Joe Gibbs' mark on this team can't last forever.

Again, that's not a death sentence. But it is the very thing that got us in deep crap in the early part of the decade.

Dirtbag59 · 04-22-2009, 01:17 AM

Wow, very lonely here in Mark Sanchez's corner.

SmootSmack · 04-22-2009, 01:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

The only thing that really appears to be clear from this process is that the 5 year hiatus of Snyder intervention appears to be over for good. Even Joe Gibbs' mark on this team can't last forever.

Again, that's not a death sentence. But it is the very thing that got us in deep crap in the early part of the decade.

He has the same level of involvement that he had the past five years. He has always been part of the process (along with Cerrato and Gibbs/Zorn) in the final weeks leading up to the draft. The only difference between him and other owners is that not all other owners will attend the dinner with the "client" Instead they'll meet him the next day in their office.

SmootSmack · 04-22-2009, 01:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirtbag359

Wow, very lonely here in Mark Sanchez's corner.

Even lonelier in Beanie Wells' corner (seriously, I want to draft a running back...not at 13 though. Give me Rashad Jennings in the 5th)

GTripp0012 · 04-22-2009, 01:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

He has the same level of involvement that he had the past five years. He has always been part of the process (along with Cerrato and Gibbs/Zorn) in the final weeks leading up to the draft. The only difference between him and other owners is that not all other owners will attend the dinner with the "client" Instead they'll meet him the next day in their office.

Okay, but, the clear difference to me at least, is that being intricately involved in all processes while deferring to the football opinion of his coaches was a strong way to lead. I realize he was always around Gibbs, and Gibbs speaks highly of him. However, Zorn's opinion isn't carrying the same weight about Redskins Park. And without Gibbs there, it sure looks like Cerrato is having to answer to Snyder, and not Zorn, regarding scheme fits and stuff.

I mean, Blache never even really got a word in on Jason Taylor prior to the deal. I understand that was Cerrato's brainchild, but Cutler was CLEARLY Snyder, and I'm in agreement with you, if it was Cerrato's call, it's a no on Sanchez. I'm just not sure at the end of the day, it's not Cerrato making the case to Snyder (clear intervention), instead of Zorn making the case to Cerrato (non intervention).

SmootSmack · 04-22-2009, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Okay, but, the clear difference to me at least, is that being intricately involved in all processes while deferring to the football opinion of his coaches was a strong way to lead. I realize he was always around Gibbs, and Gibbs speaks highly of him. However, Zorn's opinion isn't carrying the same weight about Redskins part. And without Gibbs there, it sure looks like Cerrato is having to answer to Snyder, and not Zorn, regarding scheme fits and stuff.

I mean, Blache never even really got a word in on Jason Taylor prior to the deal. I understand that was Cerrato's brainchild, but Cutler was CLEARLY Snyder, and I'm in agreement with you, if it was Cerrato's call, it's a no on Sanchez. I'm just not sure at the end of the day, it's not Cerrato making the case to Snyder (clear intervention), instead of Zorn making the case to Cerrato (non intervention).

From all I've gathered, Zorn is a lot more involved than I would have thought and Cerrato a lot less involved. And I think as far as those three are concerned, Blache got what he wanted with Haynesworth so they don't need his input as much right now (not until draft day).

Eknox · 04-22-2009, 03:01 AM

I'll take A Smith, because as much as I like Rey and Orapko the defense wasn't the real problem, and we did add Albert..

CRedskinsRule · 04-22-2009, 07:59 AM

It occurred to me this morning, (probably way after everyone else), that the whole intent of the Cutler, and even moreso Sanchez, bluffs is to force Denver to use its early pick on Sanchez. This makes alot of sense to me, because clearly Denver picking right before us, and needing DE's, we want to impact their thinking and strategy as much as possible. Certainly, if Denver wants Sanchez, they would now believe that they have to get him no later than at their 12 spot.

Well that was my morning revelation. Wishful thinking sure leads to creative theories!

dmek25 · 04-22-2009, 08:05 AM

man, i hope all the talk is that, a smokescreen. we have at least 2 other major needs above the qback position

Mattyk · 04-22-2009, 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

From all I've gathered, Zorn is a lot more involved than I would have thought and Cerrato a lot less involved. And I think as far as those three are concerned, Blache got what he wanted with Haynesworth so they don't need his input as much right now (not until draft day).

And Hall got re-signed, something Blache really wanted too, right?

Redskin Jim · 04-22-2009, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dmek25

man, i hope all the talk is that, a smokescreen. we have at least 2 other major needs above the qback position

Agreed, and 2 is being optimistic!

View Poll Results: Matty Loves Mocks' Who Would You Draft at 13 Poll
Rey Maualuga	25	10.82%
Aaron Maybin	6	2.60%
Michael Oher	54	23.38%
Brian Orakpo	93	40.26%
Mark Sanchez	17	7.36%
Andre Smith	36	15.58%
Voters: 231. You may not vote on this poll

04-22-2009, 01:12 AM	#95
GTripp0012 Living Legend Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Grand Rapids, MI Age: 25 Posts: 15,143	Re: Please Draft ??? at #13 The only thing that really appears to be clear from this process is that the 5 year hiatus of Snyder intervention appears to be over for good. Even Joe Gibbs' mark on this team can't last forever. Again, that's not a death sentence. But it is the very thing that got us in deep crap in the early part of the decade. __________________ Shanahan: “The bad thing is he's [Sav Rocca] probably our best offensive weapon and that’s not good.”

04-22-2009, 01:17 AM	#96
Dirtbag59 Naega jeil jal naga Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Atlanta, Georgia From: Silver Spring, Maryland Age: 27 Posts: 13,958	Re: Please Draft ??? at #13 Wow, very lonely here in Mark Sanchez's corner. __________________ Flacco is 1337 Fanclub President

04-22-2009, 03:01 AM	#101
Eknox Impact Rookie Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Flint,Mi Posts: 525	Re: Please Draft ??? at #13 I'll take A Smith, because as much as I like Rey and Orapko the defense wasn't the real problem, and we did add Albert..

04-22-2009, 07:59 AM	#102
CRedskinsRule MVP Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Pasadena, Md Age: 45 Posts: 10,923	Re: Please Draft ??? at #13 It occurred to me this morning, (probably way after everyone else), that the whole intent of the Cutler, and even moreso Sanchez, bluffs is to force Denver to use its early pick on Sanchez. This makes alot of sense to me, because clearly Denver picking right before us, and needing DE's, we want to impact their thinking and strategy as much as possible. Certainly, if Denver wants Sanchez, they would now believe that they have to get him no later than at their 12 spot. Well that was my morning revelation. Wishful thinking sure leads to creative theories!

04-22-2009, 08:05 AM	#103
dmek25 MVP Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: lancaster,pa Age: 51 Posts: 10,442	Re: Please Draft ??? at #13 man, i hope all the talk is that, a smokescreen. we have at least 2 other major needs above the qback position __________________ "It's better to be quiet and thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt." courtesy of 53fan

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Please Draft ??? at #13

NFL Draft Central