Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room > NFL Draft Central


2012 QB Prospects (Part 2)

NFL Draft Central


Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-12-2011, 01:10 AM   #496
Registered User
 
The Goat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,662
Re: 2012 QB Prospects (Part 2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
I still don't think it'll be either of those guys. I think the name you're going to hear a lot of next April in connection with the Skins is Tannehill
Why?
The Goat is offline  

Advertisements
Old 12-12-2011, 05:54 AM   #497
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,484
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Goat View Post
Why?
Why would they pick him or why do I think it'll be him?
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 10:22 AM   #498
Franchise Player
 
mredskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,560
Re: 2012 QB Prospects (Part 2)

Only a matter of time.

__________________
When life gives you paper jams, turn them into paper footballs!
mredskins is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 12:06 PM   #499
Registered User
 
The Goat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,662
Re: 2012 QB Prospects (Part 2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
Why would they pick him or why do I think it'll be him?
Both. Assuming we pick in the 4 to 7 range and one of Luck, Barkley or RGIII is available why take a project QB?
The Goat is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 12:18 PM   #500
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,484
Re: 2012 QB Prospects (Part 2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Goat View Post
Both. Assuming we pick in the 4 to 7 range and one of Luck, Barkley or RGIII is available why take a project QB?
Well let's take Luck off. Now it's just Barkley or RGIII.

Here are the various reasons for my thinking. Tannehill, contrary to popular belief, wasn't a WR converted to QB. He was a QB coming into A&M, who played some WR before starting at QB. I think the combine and workouts will increase RT's value (and may drop RGIIIs a bit actually). Tannehill is a more unlikely choice, which fits a bit of the Mike Shanahan mold. Plus there is the Mike Sherman-Kyle Shanahan connection from their days with the Texans. And I also have a feeling still that our first first round pick won't be a QB.
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 12:27 PM   #501
Registered User
 
The Goat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,662
Re: 2012 QB Prospects (Part 2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
Well let's take Luck off. Now it's just Barkley or RGIII.

Here are the various reasons for my thinking. Tannehill, contrary to popular belief, wasn't a WR converted to QB. He was a QB coming into A&M, who played some WR before starting at QB. I think the combine and workouts will increase RT's value (and may drop RGIIIs a bit actually). Tannehill is a more unlikely choice, which fits a bit of the Mike Shanahan mold. Plus there is the Mike Sherman-Kyle Shanahan connection from their days with the Texans. And I also have a feeling still that our first first round pick won't be a QB.


Something you've said a couple/few times now. Have no idea what to say except I hope you're wrong on this one.

...actually, I'd say not drafting the best QB w/ our first pick would reflect Mike's supreme arrogance and ego. The fact there's even a chance of this happening (which I acknowledge) should be enough reason to bring in a new regime.
The Goat is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 12:28 PM   #502
The Starter
 
mbedner3420's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,821
Re: 2012 QB Prospects (Part 2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
Well let's take Luck off. Now it's just Barkley or RGIII.

Here are the various reasons for my thinking. Tannehill, contrary to popular belief, wasn't a WR converted to QB. He was a QB coming into A&M, who played some WR before starting at QB. I think the combine and workouts will increase RT's value (and may drop RGIIIs a bit actually). Tannehill is a more unlikely choice, which fits a bit of the Mike Shanahan mold. Plus there is the Mike Sherman-Kyle Shanahan connection from their days with the Texans. And I also have a feeling still that our first first round pick won't be a QB.
Is that feeling backed up any inside knowledge? I can possibly see us trade back a bit (perhaps with the browns), draft a true number one WR and pick up tannehill in the second. I'd still rather we take Barkley with the first pick... I'm tired of mediocre QB play.
mbedner3420 is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 12:41 PM   #503
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,484
Re: 2012 QB Prospects (Part 2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Goat View Post
[/B]

Something you've said a couple/few times now. Have no idea what to say except I hope you're wrong on this one.

...actually, I'd say not drafting the best QB w/ our first pick would reflect Mike's supreme arrogance and ego. The fact there's even a chance of this happening (which I acknowledge) should be enough reason to bring in a new regime.
Well I guess it's terrible if you think the gap between Barkley/RGIII (let's assume they're both available) and let's say Tannehill and Jonathan Martin is significant.

Personally, I think if Barkley is there we should take him and not even hesitate. RG III I still have some doubts about. But I'm just telling you what I think may happen. It's an informed guess.

Just remember, it's only December
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 12:44 PM   #504
The Starter
 
redsk1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,351
Re: 2012 QB Prospects (Part 2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
Well let's take Luck off. Now it's just Barkley or RGIII.

Here are the various reasons for my thinking. Tannehill, contrary to popular belief, wasn't a WR converted to QB. He was a QB coming into A&M, who played some WR before starting at QB. I think the combine and workouts will increase RT's value (and may drop RGIIIs a bit actually). Tannehill is a more unlikely choice, which fits a bit of the Mike Shanahan mold. Plus there is the Mike Sherman-Kyle Shanahan connection from their days with the Texans. And I also have a feeling still that our first first round pick won't be a QB.
I would be ok w/ sliding down in the draft again or drafting a non qb in the first round as long as we got "our guy" later. It's just a gamble that I don't know is worth playing.
redsk1 is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 12:57 PM   #505
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,963
Re: 2012 QB Prospects (Part 2)

As good as this class is, and it may be historically great, there's no one in the draft who is a quarterback solution on draft day. There is no question that the Redskins need fresh blood at quarterback in 2012. They needed fresh blood in 2010 and in 2011 as well. The youngest QB on the roster heading into 2010 was 28. In 2011 the youngest QB heading into the offseason was 29.

When Zorn was the coach here, we had younger QB prospects in Jason Campbell under age 27, and Chase Daniel (and to a lesser extent, 26 year old Colt Brennan). So obviously the need to find a younger quarterback is reaching a critical level which we haven't had in Washington.

But no one in this draft is going to solve the QB problem the day they walk in the door. The biggest issue the Shanahan's have to overcome is that kids are not walking out of college knowing how to execute their offense the way they want it executed at a pro level. I understand that Luck, Barkley, and Tannehill all play in a multiple WCO where the terminology and concepts will be similar to what Kyle Shanahan wants to run. But no one (except maybe Luck) has actually succeeded to move the ball, score, and win games in college actually doing the things that Kyle Shanahan is going to do with them here.

If the system remains really rigid as it is now, the Redskins are better out going and finding a veteran to run this offense who has experience winning games the way the Redskins want to win them. I see no point of drafting a QB in the first round if the Redskins are going to maintain their current ways. If they want to change coaches to someone with a track record of QB development in the last, oh, lets say four NFL drafts, then great. Bill Musgrave and Rob Chudzynski probably deserve the promotion. If the Redskins are willing to meet in the middle, well, I'm not sure if Kyle Shanahan knows how to accomplish this, but in that case, I think they could win right away.

My biggest problem with the Redskins and Tannehill is not the player, but if that's who the Redskins end up targeting, it suggests they are going to stay inside the same thinking box that has put this organization where he is now. He knows this system. And he's used to playing for a coaching staff that gets outcoached in the Big XII. He'll be great here.

As silly as it sounds to the traditionalist, I like Tannehill a lot more in a different system with different coaches than I do with him running what he has at Texas A&M in the pros. We've seen that struggle to beat even mediocre opponents already. Might as well go get David Garrard or Matt Flynn or Kyle Orton.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 01:28 PM   #506
Franchise Player
 
skinsfan69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Arlington, VA.
Posts: 9,202
Re: 2012 QB Prospects (Part 2)

What about Nick Foles? He's seems to be just as good as Barkley if not better.
skinsfan69 is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 01:34 PM   #507
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,484
Re: 2012 QB Prospects (Part 2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsfan69 View Post
What about Nick Foles? He's seems to be just as good as Barkley if not better.
I think he's probably in the later first round/high second round category
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 01:34 PM   #508
You did WHAT?!?
 
EARTHQUAKE2689's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In The Kitchen With Dyna.
Age: 25
Posts: 11,710
Re: 2012 QB Prospects (Part 2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
Well let's take Luck off. Now it's just Barkley or RGIII.

Here are the various reasons for my thinking. Tannehill, contrary to popular belief, wasn't a WR converted to QB. He was a QB coming into A&M, who played some WR before starting at QB. I think the combine and workouts will increase RT's value (and may drop RGIIIs a bit actually). Tannehill is a more unlikely choice, which fits a bit of the Mike Shanahan mold. Plus there is the Mike Sherman-Kyle Shanahan connection from their days with the Texans. And I also have a feeling still that our first first round pick won't be a QB.
So you think it will be Blackmon, Claiborne, Richardson, or Jeffery? I find it hard to believe that if we picked top 5 Shanny would pass on Barkley and RGIII if we had our pick of the two.
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpp3ycMvQd0

This is why you need Mentos. To justify your questionable problem solving skills.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7geP5ev0VI

Awesome isn't it.
EARTHQUAKE2689 is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 01:38 PM   #509
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,963
Re: 2012 QB Prospects (Part 2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsfan69 View Post
What about Nick Foles? He's seems to be just as good as Barkley if not better.
I think so. Barkley is a lot more polished as a player, but I think he's significantly less talented. I'd feel a lot better on draft day about a high pick on Foles than a high pick on Barkley.

With that said, my expectations in the NFL for Foles aren't any higher than those for Barkley, I just think Foles needs to be managed significantly less earlier in his career. He can clearly create outside the pocket, but movement in the pocket is so important in the modern game, and that's something Nick Foles has yet to master. With Barkley, that pocket presence is a non-issue.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.

Last edited by GTripp0012; 12-12-2011 at 01:44 PM.
GTripp0012 is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 01:47 PM   #510
Registered User
 
SBXVII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,766
Re: 2012 QB Prospects (Part 2)

#1- I too hope the team drafts a QB in the 1st round. One who is more accurate and more mobile and has speed or is evasive.

#2- I just have not been getting the feeling the coaching staff cares where they fall in the draft and what QB's might be available to them.

#3- We have had 2-3 weeks of this team battling hard, showing emotion, "almost" winning the games, tough games, and I sit back wondering although they are not outwardly showing they want to lose in order to pick up the next best QB, is there a posibility the coaching staff is finding a way to sabotage the games through play calling? I think ... ok your just being an idiot thinking like that, but the team plays as well as they have during the whole game then either it's the 4th quarter or last 5 min. it all goes to hell in a hand basket.

But all in all this is year 2 for the Shanahan's. The defense took a major step in the off season, and the offense even though it's not the starters has almost looked better these last 2-3 games with creating holes for the RB and pass protection.

I don't know about the rest of you but I'm almost seeing the end of the tunnel and we have fans here shouting ...."Perhaps a change at HC is needed". Continuity, continuity, continuity. This team is starting to play better and actually look better because they have been in the same system for 2 yrs. Now lets see what they look like year 3 and 4. Although a loss, I was excited after yesterdays game because NE didn't sit their starters, they played to win the game and the Skins believe it or not played toe to toe with them. Not many other teams this year can say that. More would say they got blown out.

Last edited by SBXVII; 12-12-2011 at 01:50 PM.
SBXVII is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.31151 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

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