Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft

irish · 03-11-2012, 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreekSkin

Let's be honest here, we (as Redskins fans) shouldn't care who is perceived as the winner of the trade if RGIII can come in here and lead our team to multiple playoff appearances. If the Rams go on and win a Superbowl in three years good for them, but it doesn't mean we would have similar success had we kept those draft picks, and it doesn't mean we made the wrong move. The only way this trade should be deemed a failure is if RGIII is a true bust and we continue to lose more games than we win.

I don't need to see his bust in Canton 30 years from now to deem this trade a success, what I need is a return to winning ways.

I dont think the Redskins or any other team give away this much for a player get them to multiple playoff appearances, they want multiple championships. I do think you are right though, college style QBs do lead NFL teams to playoff appearances but not Super Bowl wins. Who knows maybe RGIII will break the mold.

itvnetop · 03-11-2012, 07:44 AM

I look at the trade like I looked at Atlanta's last draft for Julio Jones. Most people thought ATL gave up way to much to get JJ. I looked at it like Atlanta made the move for Julio Jones, not for the 6th pick. He represented (what they believed) was their greatest need- a second vertical threat to complement Roddy White (ToGo, while productive, is aging).

While the Falcons certainly may have had less holes to fill than the Skins', we gave away "the farm" not for the prestige of second pick overall. We're not using it for Claiborne, Kalil or Blackmon. It's for RG3- a potential stud (which describes every prospect) quarterback. The player who has the ball in his hands every offensive snap (minus kicks and wildcat formations).

This draft play also sets the table for free agency, especially on the offensive side of the ball.

itvnetop · 03-11-2012, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irish

I dont think the Redskins or any other team give away this much for a player get them to multiple playoff appearances, they want multiple championships. I do think you are right though, college style QBs do lead NFL teams to playoff appearances but not Super Bowl wins. Who knows maybe RGIII will break the mold.

The flipside is the Cam Newton story: I thought he ran too simplistic an offense at Auburn to translate to NFL success (pistol, zone-read option). Then we saw what happened- singlehandedly resurrected Steve Smith's career and broke all kinds of passing records against professional defenses.

RG3's got smarts, so I'm betting on him picking up any system he needs to learn. His physical gifts will take care of the rest.

Schneed10 · 03-11-2012, 08:01 AM

This trade:

- Increases the chances we will win the Super Bowl
- Increases the chances we will be absolutely terrible the next 10 years
- Decreases the chances we'll be mired in mediocrity

The only bullet I care about is the first one. I see no difference between mediocrity and terrible. We will never ascend beyond mediocrity in the NFL without a star quarterback. Rex Grossman gives us no hope. I don't believe any QB in this draft aside from RG3 and Luck give you significant hope.

Nobody would ever say the Broncos paid too much for Elway, and nobody would ever say the Giants paid too much for Eli.

Who wants a sporadic playoff berth here and there? I want Super Bowls, multiple Super Bowls. Take your shot, never up never in.

Mechanix544 · 03-11-2012, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

Statue of Limitations. It's a beautiful thing.

She is kinda purty, isnt she, lol.....

irish · 03-11-2012, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by itvnetop

The flipside is the Cam Newton story: I thought he ran too simplistic an offense at Auburn to translate to NFL success (pistol, zone-read option). Then we saw what happened- singlehandedly resurrected Steve Smith's career and broke all kinds of passing records against professional defenses.

RG3's got smarts, so I'm betting on him picking up any system he needs to learn. His physical gifts will take care of the rest.

Yep, CN had a great year but hasnt won anything yet. Time will tell if he's a stat machine or a championship winner.

I have no doubt RGIII will pick up whatever system he's asked to run. His physical skills are very impressive but IMO his physical skill set does not match up with that of championship winning NFL QBs. Time will tell if he's successful.

celts32 · 03-11-2012, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Well, even then, it still requires Ryan Tannehill to be something short of a real NFL quarterback.

If Bradford is out of the league in three years and Griffin goes on to be Robert Griffin, then the Rams probably didn't get enough to justify their decision to not pick Griffin. But they couldn't have done any better in the trade market. And so yes, they still win.

I don't think we can just go out and set expectations for Griffin so high as to win games by himself with the roster as currently constructed. I think we have to be very accepting that if Griffin ends up being a periodicly exciting, often frustrating, quality NFL starter who does get a big money second contract from the Redskins, well, that's what the second overall pick is supposed to get you. Steve McNair and Kerry Collins weren't draft busts. They played in Super Bowls.

IMO, the expectations for Griffin will be tied to what the Redskins gave up for him, but the Redskins were likely just being shortsighted.

I get what your saying, I just think QB's change the logic behind your point. And besides in my opinion the trade will work out for both teams. I like Bradford so i think the Rams were smart to trade the pick and they got good value for it. I also think the Redskins made a great trade because they got the QB they have seemingly needed forever and the price will be looked at as insignificant if he plays to anywhere near his potential. win win IMO...

Brody81 · 03-11-2012, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Sorry you're not gonna make it

Too Funny

Gtothearry · 03-11-2012, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by celts32

I get what your saying, I just think QB's change the logic behind your point. And besides in my opinion the trade will work out for both teams. I like Bradford so i think the Rams were smart to trade the pick and they got good value for it. I also think the Redskins made a great trade because they got the QB they have seemingly needed forever and the price will be looked at as insignificant if he plays to anywhere near his potential. win win IMO...

I agree and would rather take RGIII by moving up then draft Tannehill @ say 4like Cleveland may be forced too do now.

Chief X_Phackter · 03-11-2012, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irish

I dont think the Redskins or any other team give away this much for a player get them to multiple playoff appearances, they want multiple championships. I do think you are right though, college style QBs do lead NFL teams to playoff appearances but not Super Bowl wins. Who knows maybe RGIII will break the mold.

So what "style" QBs lead NFL teams to Super Bowl wins? QBs that did not go to college?

I fail to understand your point here...

REDSKINS4ever · 03-11-2012, 11:20 AM

So, we have our 1st round draft choice this offseason. Without a 2nd rounder, we have a 3rd, two 4ths, a 5th, 6th, and 7th rounders, correct? Besides RG3 or Luck, that leaves us with six other draft choices. I'm sure Bruce Allen and Mike Shanahan can find very good players in those rounds. Something tells me that they will be drafting more for offense than defense this coming draft.

redskinsman18 · 03-11-2012, 11:23 AM

Allow me to pose this question to everyone:

Would you trade our #2 overall pick to a team if they come over the top with even more draft picks than what we gave up? For example: Browns offer us this years 2 1st rounders, this years 2nd round pick, & 2013 1st and 2nd round picks.

SmootSmack · 03-11-2012, 11:25 AM

Tannehill at #4 then?

Mechanix544 · 03-11-2012, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redskinsman18

Allow me to pose this question to everyone:

Would you trade our #2 overall pick to a team if they come over the top with even more draft picks than what we gave up? For example: Browns offer us this years 2 1st rounders, this years 2nd round pick, & 2013 1st and 2nd round picks.

no. roll with what we got.

VTSkins1961 · 03-11-2012, 11:54 AM

That would be tough call. I think that problem with that is that everyone would feel that we would not get the "franchise" qb although (in theory) you would be able to land 2 or possibly 3 (depending on who get in the 2'nd round) impact players this year and 2 impact players next year if you didn't trade the picks.

I think I wouldn't do it because we would still have a qb issue this year and unless we had an top 3 pick next year we would still have to make a trade to "the franshise qb".

Quote:

Originally Posted by redskinsman18

Allow me to pose this question to everyone:

Would you trade our #2 overall pick to a team if they come over the top with even more draft picks than what we gave up? For example: Browns offer us this years 2 1st rounders, this years 2nd round pick, & 2013 1st and 2nd round picks.

View Poll Results: Do you approve of the Redskins' trade up to #2?
Yes	193	91.47%
No	18	8.53%
Voters: 211. You may not vote on this poll

03-11-2012, 07:44 AM	#632
itvnetop Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Los Angeles, CA Age: 36 Posts: 2,706	Re: Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft I look at the trade like I looked at Atlanta's last draft for Julio Jones. Most people thought ATL gave up way to much to get JJ. I looked at it like Atlanta made the move for Julio Jones, not for the 6th pick. He represented (what they believed) was their greatest need- a second vertical threat to complement Roddy White (ToGo, while productive, is aging). While the Falcons certainly may have had less holes to fill than the Skins', we gave away "the farm" not for the prestige of second pick overall. We're not using it for Claiborne, Kalil or Blackmon. It's for RG3- a potential stud (which describes every prospect) quarterback. The player who has the ball in his hands every offensive snap (minus kicks and wildcat formations). This draft play also sets the table for free agency, especially on the offensive side of the ball. __________________ "Sit your five dollar ass down before I make change." - Nino Brown my blather

03-11-2012, 08:01 AM	#634
Schneed10 RG Glee Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Newtown Square, PA Age: 33 Posts: 7,892	Re: Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft This trade: - Increases the chances we will win the Super Bowl - Increases the chances we will be absolutely terrible the next 10 years - Decreases the chances we'll be mired in mediocrity The only bullet I care about is the first one. I see no difference between mediocrity and terrible. We will never ascend beyond mediocrity in the NFL without a star quarterback. Rex Grossman gives us no hope. I don't believe any QB in this draft aside from RG3 and Luck give you significant hope. Nobody would ever say the Broncos paid too much for Elway, and nobody would ever say the Giants paid too much for Eli. Who wants a sporadic playoff berth here and there? I want Super Bowls, multiple Super Bowls. Take your shot, never up never in. __________________ Skins' Salary Cap Status \| CrazyCanuck's Cap Figures by Player \| Salary Cap 101

03-11-2012, 11:20 AM	#641
REDSKINS4ever The Starter Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Born and raised in D.C. and now lives in Harlem, New York Posts: 2,028	Re: Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft So, we have our 1st round draft choice this offseason. Without a 2nd rounder, we have a 3rd, two 4ths, a 5th, 6th, and 7th rounders, correct? Besides RG3 or Luck, that leaves us with six other draft choices. I'm sure Bruce Allen and Mike Shanahan can find very good players in those rounds. Something tells me that they will be drafting more for offense than defense this coming draft.

03-11-2012, 11:23 AM	#642
redskinsman18 Camp Scrub Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Kentucky Posts: 13	Re: Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft Allow me to pose this question to everyone: Would you trade our #2 overall pick to a team if they come over the top with even more draft picks than what we gave up? For example: Browns offer us this years 2 1st rounders, this years 2nd round pick, & 2013 1st and 2nd round picks.

03-11-2012, 11:25 AM	#643
SmootSmack Mad Men Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 43,095	Re: Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft Tannehill at #4 then? __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

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

Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft

NFL Draft Central