Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;860131]As OU is preparing for Baylor all I've heard all week is this kid is a great leader and all about TEAM... NTM He has NFL tools again I'll see him Saturday first hand and looking forward to it![/quote]Make sure you let us know how it was. Hopefully the game is on down here.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)
 

[quote=GridIron26;860132]That would be an ideal for offense but I don't think we are at the position where we can afford to trade away picks because we need picks to draft CB, WR, and maybe a couple of O-linemen for depth[/quote]We definitely need picks. Fortunatley it appears this draft will be strong at areas of need for us.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)
 

[quote=Chico23231;860130]its early still, but all indications saying he's top 5 pick. What ive read hes certainly worthy. I think we gotta get a QB with our pick though, Luck, RG3, Jones one of those would make my day.

Some of the senior grades suggest upwards of 10 2nd round-3rd round Guards and Centers available. Id like to see a [B]quality[/B] young interior guy added to the line.[/quote]

Don't we have two guys who can play Center? Montgomery, who's doing a bang up job, and whoever filled in when they moved Montgomery to LT.

I too would like more quality depth at Guard but RT Brown is not impressing me. Maybe he never did but they definitly need a replacement at RT.

I'd go QB round 1, RT or OL round 2, and look for FS, CB, or another WR in round 3. If they can work another magic trick with some of our picks and turn 7 picks into 12 or 14 then we can get some more OL.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;860134]Make sure you let us know how it was. Hopefully the game is on down here.[/quote]

I will do

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;860133]You are missing the point by a lot.

The argument that the Redskins were handcuffed to Rex Grossman and John Beck this season must die. It must die right now. It's an irrational, apologetic argument. Look around. We certainly could have kept three QBs on the active roster.

One of the biggest failures of the 2010 season was that the Redskins didn't go into the year with a long-term development option at QB, and ended up wasting the last three games of the season. At least, once you acquired McNabb, those roster spots seem frivolous. But he's a guy that gets hurt all the time, it certainly would have seemed prudent to bring in a long term option with potential to play if when the season is lost. That's what rebuilding is.

But to enter 2011 with the same quarterback situation minus McNabb isn't rational. It was pure arrogance. You must understand: the downside to the failure of those two quarterbacks was enormous. It means a totally wasted season on offense. But the risk of failure seemed highly likely.

The argument that the Redskins were obligated to already have their long-term franchise QB by now is a strawman. No one is saying the Redskins are worse off long term because they don't have their quarterback right now. They are worse off because the last two seasons would appear to be a total waste of my time and of your time. And so rationally, a new direction would seem to be beneficial for the franchise.

I think your anger is misdirected here. [B] The people that want to hold Shanahan accountable have not run the Redskins into the ground. Mike Shanahan has[/B].[/quote]

I agree not getting young guy to come in to attempt to develop is a failure, how big of one with our options at our time is an unknown. With the talent we've seen since, not substantiable. Meanwhile, almost everyother facet of the team has been rebuilt...WR, RB, Oline, Dline, Linebacker, (attempts at) CB . This was more than a 2 year job.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)
 

[quote=SBXVII;860136]Don't we have two guys who can play Center? Montgomery, who's doing a bang up job, and whoever filled in when they moved Montgomery to LT.

I too would like more quality depth at Guard but RT Brown is not impressing me. Maybe he never did but they definitly need a replacement at RT.

I'd go QB round 1, RT or OL round 2, and look for FS, CB, or another WR in round 3. If they can work another magic trick with some of our picks and turn 7 picks into 12 or 14 then we can get some more OL.[/quote]

Montgomery and Kory are free agents at the end of year, I think we can do better there at both positions.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)
 

[quote=Chico23231;860138]I agree not getting young guy to come in to attempt to develop is a failure, how big of one with our options at our time is an unknown. With the talent we've seen since, not substantiable. Meanwhile, almost everyother facet of the team has been rebuilt...WR, RB, Oline, Dline, Linebacker, (attempts at) CB . This was more than a 2 year job.[/quote]However long the rebuilding process was going to take when we hired MS...that's how far we are from winning today under MS.

I make no guarantees that a younger, fresher mind can turn this around any quicker. But I think it would be a good idea to try.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)
 

[quote=SBXVII;860136]I'd go QB round 1, RT or OL round 2, and look for FS, CB, or another WR in round 3. [B]If they can work another magic trick with some of our picks and turn 7 picks into 12 or 14[/B] then we can get some more OL.[/quote]

That would be awesome if we could do that again

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;860110]I'm not sure Ponder was overvalued, many people expected him to go top 15. But what's kind of not discussed is that the Redskins didn't trade down with the intent of passing on Ponder. They knew the Jaguars liked Gabbert so they passed on him by trading down (and with Jacksonville), but they took a gamble that maybe, just maybe, Ponder would fall to them and they could add picks and get Ponder.

I'm not saying Ponder was the choice over Kerrigan had both been there at 16, that I don't know. But they didn't trade down with the intent of adding Kerrigan. They traded down with the intent of adding picks.

They knew the only team that might take Ponder between 10 and 16 was the Vikings. And in fact the Vikings were seriously considering Kerrigan.

Of course, all this would have been moot had Locker been there at 10.[/quote]

Thank you for the rundown, SS.

My man-crush on Ponder makes it difficult when I see him in purple. :) So close yet so far!

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;860134]Make sure you let us know how it was. Hopefully the game is on down here.[/quote]

WatchESPN.com

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;860127]Agree. Here's a thought, if Kalil falls to us (and Luck, RG3 are gone) do we take him, plug him in at LT and move TW over to RT? Trade back up into late 1st or wait until 2nd for QB?[/quote]

I like it

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)
 

[quote=SBXVII;860115]Your right but a ton of other teams passed on them and we took them. I wonder why? Your right I think it was their grading system.[/quote]Players "fall" based on how much folks expect them to [I]actually[/I] produce. For example, Haynesworth could produce like a perennial Pro-Bowler. But we only got a 5th rounder from the Pats because there was a legit chance that he might very well do nothing. Teams did not want to risk a 3rd rounder for absolutely nothing. Similarly, that's why Thomas and Kelly "fell" to us. Thomas for being lacking in knowledge. Kelly due to his injury risk.

Devin Thomas was a one year wonder in college. Thus, he had little knowledge of what WRs do at the pro level. But he was physically gifted. He was not expected to be an immediate impact guy because of this. But they thought he could pick up the game in a couple years. It obviously never happened.

Malcolm Kelly was a huge injury risk. But a workout with JC put him on their wanted radar because of chemistry. He also had size and hands and was more NFL-ready.

Essentially, it seems they(or just Vinny) ignored the red flags and probably believed the worst couldn't happen. Well, the worst did happen, and we know the results.


This is why I do not believe overemphasizing need is good strategy. It [I]is[/I] factor in breaking a tie between two similarly good prospects. BUT there is a big temptation to overlook flaws just so filling the need is accomplished. If there are huge red flags, folks ought to have had the balls to "let them go" and pick a quality prospect elsewhere, even at a position of non-need like RB(Forte or Rice were there). Being able to let a good player walk and replace him seamlessly is a good thing in its own right: it means you addressed a need before it became one.

Of course, there is a subjective element in grading prospects. Some flaws aren't really big flaws at all, while others are huge. Trent Williams was had the more "flawed" profile than Okung, but it seems that under Shanahan, his question marks haven't popped up much during his time here. What was unsure about Trent to us was apparently not a big deal for Mike Shanahan.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;860133]I think your anger is misdirected here. The people that want to hold Shanahan accountable have not run the Redskins into the ground. [B]Mike Shanahan has[/B].[/quote]Good article, this supports the points I have made about MS/KS and not modifying their system to the in-house talent.

[URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/John-Fox-Tim-Tebow-would-be-8216-screwed-821?urn=nfl-wp11923"]John Fox: Tim Tebow would be ‘screwed’ in a normal offense - Shutdown Corner - NFL*Blog - Yahoo! Sports[/URL]

From the link:
It's beautiful. [I][B]How many NFL coaches have lost their jobs through the years because they have a specific way of doing things, and they will not deviate from that way, no matter what the talent around them dictates?[/B][/I] Fox has not only been flexible, he's taken it to an absolute extreme. It's such a massive change of pace from the traditional copycat nature of the NFL that it almost makes me want to root for Fox and Tebow.

The reality for John Fox, though, is that he doesn't have a Brady, Brees or Rodgers. [B][I]He has what he has[/I],[/B] and he's embracing it full force. That's a pretty good way to go about things.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;860151]Good article, this supports the points I have made about MS/KS and not modifying their system to the in-house talent.

[URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/John-Fox-Tim-Tebow-would-be-8216-screwed-821?urn=nfl-wp11923"]John Fox: Tim Tebow would be ‘screwed’ in a normal offense - Shutdown Corner - NFL*Blog - Yahoo! Sports[/URL]

From the link:
It's beautiful. [I][B]How many NFL coaches have lost their jobs through the years because they have a specific way of doing things, and they will not deviate from that way, no matter what the talent around them dictates?[/B][/I] Fox has not only been flexible, he's taken it to an absolute extreme. It's such a massive change of pace from the traditional copycat nature of the NFL that it almost makes me want to root for Fox and Tebow.

The reality for John Fox, though, is that he doesn't have a Brady, Brees or Rodgers. [B][I]He has what he has[/I],[/B] and he's embracing it full force. That's a pretty good way to go about things.[/quote]I don't know if anyone would argue that the Broncos are more competitive on defense and special teams than the Redskins are this year, but against a significantly more difficult schedule, John Fox is winning games with Tim Tebow.

I'm actually writing about the sustainability of the Broncos offense right now and why I think Fox doesn't really understand why what he and Mike McCoy are running on offense is working. I don't think he understands why this offense is fundamentally more sustainable than the wildcat. But I offer this comparison:

[url=http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TeboTi00.htm]Tim Tebow NFL Football Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com[/url]
[url=http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/V/VickMi00.htm#2001-2002-sum:passing]Michael Vick NFL Football Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com[/url]

That's the first 732 action plays of Michael Vick's NFL career against Tebow's career to date. It's, uh, similar. Both are getting about 7 yards per attempt early on in their career on runs to boot.

I don't think Tebow can run this offense deep into his career. But he's under contract through his age 27 season, and there's no reason to believe the Broncos can't just run a variation of what they are doing now every year, winning 9-10 games a season in the process. It makes Tebow's shelf life in this league kind of short, but there's a lot of quarterbacks who were believed in by the scouts who would have killed to have 3.5 successful seasons in their pro careers.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;860110]I'm not sure Ponder was overvalued, many people expected him to go top 15. But what's kind of not discussed is that the Redskins didn't trade down with the intent of passing on Ponder. They knew the Jaguars liked Gabbert so they passed on him by trading down (and with Jacksonville), but they took a gamble that maybe, just maybe, Ponder would fall to them and they could add picks and get Ponder.

I'm not saying Ponder was the choice over Kerrigan had both been there at 16, that I don't know. But they didn't trade down with the intent of adding Kerrigan. They traded down with the intent of adding picks.

They knew the only team that might take Ponder between 10 and 16 was the Vikings. And in fact the Vikings were seriously considering Kerrigan.

Of course, all this would have been moot had Locker been there at 10.[/quote]

That last sentence about Locker is what drives me crazy! When are we going to stop sitting on our asses hoping that a QB is going to fall from the sky? It's going on 30 years now. the whole football world knew that Tennessee had interest in Locker. If they saw him as their future at QB then they should have traded up ahead of Tennesee. We could have our future QB gaining valuable experience right now instead of wasting time with BRex. A couple extra draft picks is a small price to pay for locking up a franchise QB...