Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Ruhskins;663131]To me, making the QB position a priority over the offensive line is very similar to what Snyder and Cerrato have been trying to do over the past 10 years, get skill position players (in their case it was through the draft...sometimes, free agency, and trades) without building in the trenches. And drafting Okung is not necessarily by itself going to rebuild the line, but you have a player that can start at tackle right away. Meanwhile, drafting Bradford means putting him behind JC for at least year, and any chance for him to start would be for JC to fail (which would make a lot of ppl happy I'm sure).

As I said, if we do draft Bradford, we better hope that Shanahan can build our depleted offensive line with what he has left. And we better hope that all the money we pay Bradford is worth it at the end and that shoulder that has been twice injured is not as serious as everyone makes it out to be.

You mentioned that people say that this year's QB class is weak, and they'll probably say the same about next year's class. Well, this is the second year when some people are calling out for the Redskins to take a first-round tackle, and well something gets in the way and a tackle is not drafted (and may not be drafted). I know we drafted an pro bowler in Orakpo, and I was fine with that selection, but once again it seems that our drafting of a first-round tackle will be pushed to the next year. [B] Well I wonder what will be the excuse in 2011 as to why we shouldn't take a first-round tackle[/B].[/quote]
CB Patrick Peterson, Safety DeAndre McDaniel, RB Mark Imgram may all be to good to pass up. There always seems to be a reason not to draft an OT in the first round. Jake Locker and Ryan Mallet will be available too.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=53Fan;663136]CB Patrick Peterson, Safety DeAndre McDaniel, RB Mark Imgram may all be to good to pass up. There always seems to be a reason not to draft an OT in the first round. [B]Jake Locker and Ryan Mallet will be available too.[/B][/quote]

Aside from the idea of weather or not they're worthy the question becomes will we be in position to select them, and if not initially what will it cost to get them. Will it be at the expense of a second round pick that could become a lineman? Or maybe we get the O-Line situated and need to find a LB to pair with Fletch on the inside.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

I wanna lean towards trading back and aquiring more picks. But the more i think about it and analyze the more i wanna lean on taking bradford. The NFL has become a pass happy league, not saying the run game and good defense cant win championships because the jets were only a step away, but more often than not, you need a franchise QB to lead you. And as been said, there are a quality amount of tackles in most any draft, but not a good quality amount of QB's in each draft. I think since we are in need @ both positions (campbell doesnt cut it) i think it would be more important to get a franchise QB then a franchise Tackle, cuz you can find quality starters on OLine in round 2-5, while if you take QB's in those rounds, now they are labeled as "projects." With all the OTHER needs we have (RB, MLB, FS, possibly CB) i dont think we can afford to use a pick that SHOULD go towards not a star, but a quality producer (offense/defense/special teams) on a QB project that prolly wont pan out. Everyone says well grab an LT here and keep campbell and draft a QB next year. Well Bradford AND Clausen are above the QB's that will be coming out next year. When you're picking this high you grab an impact player that wont involve us choosing this high again. Take this years Super bowl for example, Peyton Manning and Drew Brees. Draft insiders said Sam Bradford had the highest grade of any QB coming out since Peyton Manning. Thats higher than eli manning, phillip rivers, tom brady, ben rothlinsberger, etc. And Drew Brees was takin in the 2nd round, but this years QB's isnt as deep as the one brees was in. After Bradford/Clausen, they start getting tagged with the "project" label. Tebow (throwing motion, spread offense) McCoy (small stature, not alot of arm strength) Now lets look at the Super Bowl Olines

Super Bowl Runner up Colts:

LT Charlie Johnson - Round 6 pick
LG Ryan Lilja - Undrafted Free Agent
C Jeff Saturday - Undrafted Free Agent
RG Mike Pollack - Round 2 pick
RT Ryan Diem - Round 4 pick

So the highest pick on the Colts Oline was a 2nd round pick.

Super Bowl Champ Saints:

LT Jeremy Bushrod - Round 4 pick
(they have a 1st round pick in Jammal Brown but he was injured this season)
LG Carl Nicks - Round 5 pick
C Jonathan Goodwin - Undrafted Free Agent
RG Jahri Evans - Round 4 pick
RT Jon Stinchcomb - Round 2 pick

So the highest drafted player on the Saints starting Oline for the super bowl was ALSO a 2nd round pick.

Now granted with a rookie QB in order for him to have an easier time to succeed you need to have a run game. And with saints finishing #21 and the colts finishing #24 on the NFL's list this year that appears to be a chink in the armor of my case for a QB. But those #'s are misleading. Neither team ran enough to put up the #'s of some of the other teams. The colts averaged 4.3 yards per carry and the saints averaged 4.5 yards a carry. Thats BOTH more than the 4.0 the redskins put up this year. Now Mike Shanahan has a knack for finding smaller Olineman that other teams wont use cuz he is the master of the zone blocking scheme. Someone might have to correct me but i believe the only 1st round tackle Shanahan took was R. Clady. And the very next year he was fired. So even tho Clady is a great player, that pick didnt save his job. This also brings me back to the Washington Redskins 1994 draft........yes....you know what im talking about. With the 1st round selection, the Washington Redskins take, Heath Shuler, Quarterback, Tennessee Volunteers. But what did they do in the 7th round of that draft? took a chance on a project who otherwise prolly could have came in as an undrafted free agent. A man by the name of Gus Frerotte. Shuler was an EPIC FAIL and we put in that "project" and that "project" turned into a Pro Bowler for us. So if you really wanna take a QB as a project, then grab one that is undrafted, or use the current one on our roster Colt Brennan. Shanahan has proved he can do alot with a little.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=53Fan;663104]Also, counting Pennington, Jamarcus Russell and Brady Quinn, if you want to count them as starters, 15 of the 26 first round QB picks start. 11 first round picks don't, and if you take away Russell and Quinn who haven't proven much, 50% of the QB's taken in the first round in the last 10 years did not start last year. Take away Pennington, which I guess you could since Henne is starting for Miami, it becomes even more who are not starting.

This is just my opinion and in the grand scheme of things it doesn't really count for much, but there are 2 things I feel strongly about.

1- [B]Considering the personell we have, the Redskins needs at o-line are far greater than our need at QB to become a winning team[/B].

2- [B]Russell Okung is [B]much less [/B]of a risk than Bradford or Clausen at #4[/B].[/quote]

i agree

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=PHazard;663138] Someone might have to correct me but i believe the only 1st round tackle Shanahan took was R. Clady. And the very next year he was fired. So even tho Clady is a great player, that pick didnt save his job. [/quote]

George Foster would be the only other first round lineman selected by Shanhan. He ended up being a bust.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

Yeah.. Shanahan needs the right linemen for his system as well, which might not be the top guy or whatever.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Paintrain;663071]So unless we're hoping for another miracle (Brady, Warner, Romo, Delhomme)or a slightly undervalued gem (Favre, Brees) or are hoping to find an undiscovered star (Hasselbeck, etc) then 'picking up a QB in the mid rounds' is likely not going to yield us anything beyond mediocre football in the future.[/quote]

Everything is true until it isn't.
You don't have to draft top 5 to get a good QB.
And there is some room between top 5-15 and mid round.

I don't put a lot of faith in 'stats' like this because every situation is different and there are so many variables in the development and success of QB apart from where they're drafted.

I think the coach is an important factor.
I don't think Holmgren has ever taken a top 5 QB and he's developed a lot of QBs over that period.
Shanny has taken 1 top 15 QB.
Payton coached Romo then traded for Brees.
Reid drafted McNabb a special talent but groomed Kolb.
McCarthy groomed Rodgers.

On the flip side many top QBs have been drafted to bad teams with either no plan for their development or poor coaching from the QB coach or OC or HC only to fail.

I agree that you should spend a quality draft pick to aquire any good player.
But, it doesn't have to be top 5-15.
I just find the risk and cost prohibitive.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;663135]Are you saying I'm like Cerrato. That is unforgivable RuhSkins :D

I will say this though Vinny's problem wasn't refusing to take lineman in the first round but rather taking every other position besides O-Lineman throughout the draft, which was unwise, especially given the track record of lineman in all rounds of the draft. As the jokes go Vinny would constantly scout TE, DB, LB, QB, WR, and maybe DL if he was feeling crazy. I'm calling for the team to draft 2 or 3 lineman a year for the next two years where as Vinny would have maybe considered drafting 2 guys this year.

Drafting Okung might be smart but it could also be the whole "one player away" mentality that we've doing all along and as you've seen it's taken Soup 5 years just to get to the point where he might be the guy, waiting a year to draft a QB that we might not be in position to draft isn't on par with long term planning. We'd be better served to think 2 or 3 years down the line rather then focusing soley on 2010 and filling the biggest need with the 4th pick despite the high probability of quality options in the second round isn't the best way to go about it in my opinion.

Besides Shanahans track record says he will find mid round lineman that will produce. Ryan Clady was the only successful first round tackle under Shanhan, the rest of the time he was using third, fourth, and fifth rounders. Keep in mind these lines were frequently considered among the best in the league.

In the end I believe drafting Bradford/Clausen in the first and a tackle in the 2nd will provide more value for us in the long run rather then Okung/McCoy/Pike.

-Dirtbag (because signing my name shows how damn important I am)[/quote]

Well you are talking about the draft and not trading away picks, so no you are not like Cerrato. Besides it's not like you are talking about picking up Dez Bryant with the #4. LOL. :smashfrea

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Ruhskins;663150]Well you are talking about the draft and not trading away picks, so no you are not like Cerrato. Besides it's not like you are talking about picking up Dez Bryant with the #4. LOL. :smashfrea[/quote]

Wait Dez Bryant is available this draft :eek: ????????!??!?! Forget everything I said, this is a game chnager!! We're taking him at #4 if we're lucky enough that he falls to us. And you know what on top of that I'm trading this years second next years 1st and 3rd to move up to select Jermaine Gresham!!!!

In the meantime I'll sign Peyton to the vet min plus incentives!!!!!!!

On a somewhat related note ESPN Insider is ticking me off. Look at what they have written in Dez Bryants scouting report keep in mind I didn't leave anything out in this section:
[quote]The NCAA suspended Bryant for the final 10 games of the 2009 season for lying to an NCAA investigator who was looking into Bryant's off-season meeting with former NFL player Deion Sanders. Multiple NFL scouts h[B]ave told us that Bryant comes from a difficul[/B][/quote]

"Difficul"? I assume they mean difficult but difficult what? What am I paying you for ESPN?

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

pay your bill in full. then you get the whole article:)

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=dmek25;663152]pay your bill in full. then you get the whole article:)[/quote]

Bastardo, I doa pay me bill What you think I is, some sort of funny pastrami?

Still it seems to happen in one out of every 10 reports, some section ends up incomplete. The way they also post stats in the production section is also pretty annoying:

[quote]2007: (12/3) 43 rec., 622 yards, 6 TD. 2008: (13/13) 87 rec., 1,480 yards, 19 TD. 2009: (3/3) 17 rec., 323 yards, 4 TD. Career: Averaged 19.6 yards on 22 punt returns, including three for scores, also averaged 23.8 yards on six kickoff returns.[/quote]

I mean WTF? How am I suppose to read that?

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;663151]Wait Dez Bryant is available this draft :eek: ????????!??!?! Forget everything I said, this is a game chnager!! We're taking him at #4 if we're lucky enough that he falls to us. And you know what on top of that I'm trading this years second next years 1st and 3rd to move up to select Jermaine Gresham!!!!

In the meantime I'll sign Peyton to the vet min plus incentives!!!!!!!

On a somewhat related note ESPN Insider is ticking me off. Look at what they have written in Dez Bryants scouting report keep in mind I didn't leave anything out in this section:


"Difficul"? I assume they mean difficult but difficult what? What am I paying you for ESPN?[/quote]

Didn't you hear there's a new Elite Insider package that spells check all of their articles, it will just cost you an extra 20 bucks. :laughing2

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

Offensive lines are clearly incredibly important, but PHazard's post above notes why a great QB is so much more important. Neither the Colts nor the Saints offensive lines are riddled with natural talent. They're all smart, hard working players. But they weren't protypical linemen coming out of college. Some are undersized, some aren't that quick, some are free agent castoffs, but they play well enough as a unit to allow their QBs to work. Manning and Brees didn't have the greatest lines, but Brees has enough escapability and accuracy on the run to be elite behind that line. And Manning has a knack for getting the ball out so quickly that he's elite behind his line.

When you have a Drew Brees or Peyton Manning, the offensive line doesn't need to dominate games like the Hogs. You want to talk about Redskin QBs, the reason we didn't need a dominant franchise QB is because our offensive line was DOMINANT. But look at the Saints, they don't need a dominant offensive line because their QB is dominant.

So clearly that says there are plenty of ways to build a championship team. But look at history, how many Super Bowls have been won using the Hogs formula, dominating with an offensive line with an adequate-to-good QB? How many have been won with dominating QBs but less-than-dominant lines? Bradshaw, Staubach, Montana/Young, Aikman, Brady, Roethlisberger, Manning, Brees. Some of those lines were very good and occasionally dominant, but mostly those guys played behind good-but-not-great lines. And look at how many of them won multiple times.

The elite QB just makes everything easier. They open up the secondary, teams think twice about blitzing QBs who are cool as a cucumber, elite QBs audible into successful plays to cover for their line's susceptibilities. And most importantly, they complete passes to covered receivers who most QBs wouldn't even throw to.

In history, it's a lot rarer for the offensive line to make the offense dominate than it is for the QB to make the offense dominate.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

This isnt on the topic of anything but does anyone have a link to the Inside the Redskins edition "Meeting the coaches". The coaches were suppose to talk in length about some of their philosophies but since i dont live in the area, it obv. wasnt on my television station. can anyone help?

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

Well just to put it out there, Bill Polian blamed the o-line and ST's for losing the SB. And if Bradford or Clausen are Peyton Manning, draft one. Peyton is being touted as the best QB to ever play the game so they would have some pretty big shoes to fill. If Jake Locker would have come out, it's very possible he would be the #1 pick this year, not Bradford or Clausen. The argument seems to be if we don't get a QB at #4 this year, we won't be in position to get a top one next year. I would assume that's because the thought is our record is going to be better....even without a new QB. Schneed is right, not many teams won the same way the Redskins did. I just think the first round, especially this high, is much more hit or miss as far as Franchise QB's go compared to offensive linemen. Now I'm not talking about starters, we have a first round starter. The argument is for FRANCHISE QB's. Franchise QB's can take many picks and years to find, or you may hit one after the first round like Brady, Brees, Favre, or Warner.[B] None of whom were selected in the first round.[/B] THOSE guys are true Franchise QB's and will be going to the HOF. It's a hard call. I really like Bradford, but I'm tired of trying to catch lightning in a bottle with FA's, UDFA's, guys off the street and 3rd round picks for our o-line. It may take time, but draft o-line high and you can have a dominant line.