Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=Lotus;879891]I agree. But while those who take the risk may not be rewarded, those who are risk averse in finding their guy, [B]the current game shows, will commonly miss ultimate rewards[/B]. In other words, sooner or later you have to take the plunge...and then pray.[/quote]It depends what the ultimate reward is. The AFC has only sent three different teams to the Super Bowl since 2002. The NFC has sent pretty much anyone. Including the Cardinals and almost the Alex Smith 49ers.

What I'm saying is that there's been no formula to make the super bowl in the NFC beyond having a good season and a great playoff run. There's no question that being great at the quarterback position is going to help you, but I would say no more than being able to shut down an opponent's great quarterback. We never talk about how the Redskins haven't been able to do the latter in about five years, while the former gets all sorts of discussion.

The history of the Redskins (and the Cowboys) suggests that if there's any franchise in pro football that can win consistently without stability at the QB position, it's those large market teams that can throw their weight and money around and develop the best coaching and player development techniques. Small market teams: they're not going to be able to put together much of a run without one signal caller that they can rely on for 10 years or so. But the Redskins absolutely could if they wanted to just go with veterans at quarterback.

I mean, the Redskins are kind of the gold standard for the idea that you can win year to year in the NFL without one guy at the quarterback position making 100 million dollars. San Diego can't win consistently without an elite franchise quarterback, but I still think Washington can.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=Lotus;879898]Uh, the Giants?

Also, several players on the list produced above were #1 overall picks. Do you really want to wait until we have the first overall pick? I don't.[/quote]

Cutler

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=Paintrain;879833]The Tony Banks to Shane Matthews transition doesn't make you all tingly inside?

I'd love either scenario... Things will be much clearer in the coming weeks as Mannings fate is decided.

[B][B]Question for SS, if Manning is released prior to his bonus date, which precedes the league year beginning, can teams speak to him/evaluate his status prior to free agency?[/B][/B][/quote]

Yes, if Mannning or any other player is released now that player is up for grabs by any team in the league. The same goes for any player who is a free agent now. TO for example could be signed by anyone right now.

When the league year begins in March is when players like Laron Landry will be available for any team to sign. Or players like Vjax, Desean and all other FA. These players contracts don't officially end till the league year begins, so until then they are still the property of their respective teams.

Is that clear or do you have another question pertaining to FA and when they are available to sign.

[QUOTE=CapitalDefense;879881]Neither do I, but look at the NFL playoffs, if you do not have a QB you are not making a run at a Superbowl. I love Orakpo, but if we can get Luck........... SEE YA!!!!!

In no particular order
Rogers
Manning
Stafford
Ryan
Brady
Rothlesberger (sp)
Flacco

That is 7 of your top 10 QB's in this league and 2 of them are going to the big game.[/QUOTE]

Joe flacco is not a top ten qb

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;879903]Joe flacco is not a top ten qb[/quote]Top Nine in Total QBR this year:

1. Rodgers
2. Brees
3. Brady
4. Romo
5. Ryan
6. Schaub
7. Stafford
8. Rivers
9. Roethlisberger

As long as Peyton's active, he can't drop out of the top ten

Your next four:

Michael Vick
Carson Palmer
Matt Hasselbeck
Eli Manning

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=irish;879862]It amazes me how many fans are willing to give away the store for the opportunity to roll the dice on a QB that has never played a down in the pros. Brett Favre was a heck of a band-aid for GB. I wonder if the Saints think Drew Brees is a band-aid. I wonder if the Eagles think Vick is a band-aid.

I never got the impression the Skins let BJ walk, it seemed to me they told him to take a hike when they brought in Jeff George.[/quote]

danny boy threw brad out he was in love with jeff georges arm strength

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

Here's your Eli Manning conundrum: Manning spent a lot of his career playing with stiffs like Amani Toomer and Plaxico Burress, and his biggest weapon for a while was either Tiki Barber on screen passes, or Jeremy Shockey. He got his first true no. 1 WR (at least by the standards of the modern game; Toomer and Burress were adequate for the 2005 passing environment) in 2009. The best receiver he ever played with is Victor Cruz, who was undrafted and signed in Manning's seventh season, then spent a year on IR.

Could that have all been avoided if the Giants hadn't traded so much to get Manning? Maybe, maybe not. But if the payoff to trading up for a guy is one pro bowl before the age of 30, typically, your coach (at least) gets fired because of that trade, right?

I'm not saying Eli Manning hasn't been a successful quarterback for the Giants, but it took the guy who made the trade (Ernie Accorsi) retiring and getting a new personnel guy (Jerry Reese) in there to get the Giants over the top in the playoffs. Manning/Coughlin/Accorsi was essentially no better than Brunell/Gibbs/Cerrato or Bledsoe/Parcells/Jones. Manning only separated the Giants from the Redskins and the Cowboys deep into his career when the Giants started having really strong drafts.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=diehardskin2982;879894]Everyone assumes that Luck will be the next Aaron Rogers or Manning. What if we spend all those picks and Luck is the next Heath Shuler. Let's not forget that the Rams with Bradford are still picking second in the draft because they don't have quality players around him. We need quality talent and great depth more than we need a franchise QB.[/quote]

That is the exact opposite of what we need.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=irish;879883]Kyle Shanny said on the radio on Fri that he didnt think Rex played too bad. He said Rex had waaaaay too may turnovers but did move the ball pretty good. He felt the bigger problem was that once Rex completed a pass it was usually not run for many yds and never had a pass run in for a TD. He felt that QB was one of the many areas where the Skins needed to improve.[/quote]

Yep, it is no secret that we have no play makers on offense outside of a drug addict TE. :)

Hankerson showed some flashes maybe he will pan out

Get the QB first though

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;879903]Joe flacco is not a top ten qb[/quote]

Ok replace Flacco with Brees, my bad, the argument still stands.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;879730]We've been through this. I've been "in the biz" for 15 years. I don't get everything right but members here were the first to know about:

Betts' new contract
Our interest in Andre Carter
Our interest in Haynesworth
That we were going to draft Trent Williams
Sign Grossman
Sign Torain
Not be interested in Peppers
Dockery's crazy contract figures before he sign with Buffalo
Steve Jackson's firing
Keenan's firing
That we were going to draft Hankerson

And so on[/quote]
Fair enough, like I said.. No disrespect, I'm just surprised that these type of things would be getting tossed around outside of the big guys.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=NC_Skins;879732]Why do you even bother responding to the peanut gallery SS?...lol I'm glad we have so few like him that act like that. [B]Most of us understand the deal and realize the information is changing constantly.[/B][/quote]
Lol, ya because I'm not aware of this.

He answered me because I was curious, don't get offended by it or anything.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=irish;879895]I'm trying to think of a team with a franchise QB that gave up the farm to get him.[/quote]

[quote=Alvin Walton;879901]Cutler[/quote]

Good example Alvin. Also Eli Manning, Carson Palmer, and Sanchize. Also, arguably, Kolb, Tebow, and Gabbert, depending on how one defines "franchise QB" and how one defines "giving up the farm."

The fact is, teams regularly give up a lot if it means they can land their QB guy.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=IrMitchell;879921]Fair enough, like I said.. No disrespect, I'm just surprised that these type of things would be getting tossed around outside of the big guys.[/quote]

The big guys? Who are they?

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;879936]The big guys? Who are they?[/quote]

Colin Cowherd.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;879936]The big guys? Who are they?[/quote]

Bruce Allen, Mike Shanahan, Kyle Shanahan, and whoever they want to include into their ideas.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=IrMitchell;879941]Bruce Allen, Mike Shanahan, Kyle Shanahan, and whoever they want to include into their ideas.[/quote]

Ah I see. Well it's certainly harder than when Cerrato was there or when I was going to Redskin Park all the time. But I still have my ways.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;879942]Ah I see. Well it's certainly harder than when Cerrato was there or when I was going to Redskin Park all the time. But I still have my ways.[/quote]

It's amazing what toture will do for you isn't it?

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=artmonkforhallofamein07;879902]Yes, if Mannning or any other player is released now that player is up for grabs by any team in the league. The same goes for any player who is a free agent now. TO for example could be signed by anyone right now.

When the league year begins in March is when players like Laron Landry will be available for any team to sign. Or players like Vjax, Desean and all other FA. These players contracts don't officially end till the league year begins, so until then they are still the property of their respective teams.

[B]Is that clear or do you have another question pertaining to FA and when they are available to sign.[/B][/quote]

Well obviously players who are still under contract with their current teams (like the projected UFA) are off limits but I wasn't sure how the new CBA was written pertaining to players released during the existing league year but after all games were completed. I'm not a moron, just seeking clarification.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;879900]It depends what the ultimate reward is. The AFC has only sent three different teams to the Super Bowl since 2002. The NFC has sent pretty much anyone. Including the Cardinals and almost the Alex Smith 49ers.

What I'm saying is that there's been no formula to make the super bowl in the NFC beyond having a good season and a great playoff run. There's no question that being great at the quarterback position is going to help you, but I would say no more than being able to shut down an opponent's great quarterback. We never talk about how the Redskins haven't been able to do the latter in about five years, while the former gets all sorts of discussion.

[B]The history of the Redskins (and the Cowboys) suggests that if there's any franchise in pro football that can win consistently without stability at the QB position, it's those large market teams that can throw their weight and money around and develop the best coaching and player development techniques. Small market teams: they're not going to be able to put together much of a run without one signal caller that they can rely on for 10 years or so. But the Redskins absolutely could if they wanted to just go with veterans at quarterback.

I mean, the Redskins are kind of the gold standard for the idea that you can win year to year in the NFL without one guy at the quarterback position making 100 million dollars. San Diego can't win consistently without an elite franchise quarterback, but I still think Washington can.[/B] [/quote]


What about the last 20 years says that is even remotely true?

We have not been a competitive franchise for [I]decades[/I] and the one constant has been QB play.

We need to go after someone who has a legitimate shot at fixing our QB problems.

Like I'm saying, if we have a real chance at Luck, we need to take that opportunity by any means necessary.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=TenandSix:Unacceptable;879950]What about the last 20 years says that is even remotely true?

We have not been a competitive franchise for [I]decades[/I] and the one constant has been QB play.

We need to go after someone who has a legitimate shot at fixing our QB problems.

Like I'm saying, if we have a real chance at Luck, we need to take that opportunity by any means necessary.[/quote]There are plenty of constants that aren't QB play within this organization. And really, the years of bad QB play over the last 20 years were pretty much (with obvious exception to 2004) contained to the Schottenheimer/Spurrier years, and now the Shanahan years. You've had your bad quarterbacks: Shuler, Wuerffel, that one Ramsey/Brunell season, Grossman, Beck. But it's not like the quarterback play has been consistently bad. That doesn't hold up under scrutiny. Turner and Gibbs/Zorn didn't have any issue solving the quarterback position. In fact, the coaches who did have trouble are infamous for their bad QB decisions in Washington.

Only two franchises in the last 20 hasn't endured a period of bad quarterback play: New England, who went right from Bledsoe to Brady (and even Brady had a lean year or two), and Green Bay, who went right from Favre to Rodgers. For 30 other teams, they've had the same kind of issue with quarterabcks the Redskins have had with quarterbacks. The Cowboys hardly went right from Aikman to Romo, they suffered through Chad Hutchinson, Quincy Carter, Vinny Testaverde, Drew Henson, and Bledsoe. Teams like the Lions and Bears have actually had it far worse.

Complaining about the QB situation is old and tiring. Sure, Shanahan gutted the roster and hasn't offered a viable solution. I get that. I have been critical of him for doing that. It's not like there aren't guys out there who can play the position well who can be acquired easily if Andrew Luck proves too elusive. It's obvious to me at least that there are much bigger issues with this organization that were causing us many losses even before Shanahan got here. Those issues have not been fixed.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=TenandSix:Unacceptable;879950]What about the last 20 years says that is even remotely true?

We have not been a competitive franchise for [I]decades[/I] and the one constant has been QB play.

We need to go after someone who has a legitimate shot at fixing our QB problems.

Like I'm saying, if we have a real chance at Luck, we need to take that opportunity by any means necessary.[/quote]

Agreed,
It's just the reality of today's rules. It's how you have to build a team right now until there are rules changes again.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;879912]Here's your Eli Manning conundrum: Manning spent a lot of his career playing with stiffs like Amani Toomer and Plaxico Burress, and his biggest weapon for a while was either Tiki Barber on screen passes, or Jeremy Shockey. He got his first true no. 1 WR (at least by the standards of the modern game; Toomer and Burress were adequate for the 2005 passing environment) in 2009. The best receiver he ever played with is Victor Cruz, who was undrafted and signed in Manning's seventh season, then spent a year on IR. [/quote]

You must be joking with this statement. Toomer and Burress were legit big receivers. Hakeem Nicks is not a bad player. Plus they always had a strong power running game backing them up.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=diehardskin2982;879957]You must be joking with this statement. Toomer and Burress were legit big receivers. Hakeem Nicks is not a bad player. Plus they always had a strong power running game backing them up.[/quote]What are you basing any of this on? A vague memory of the 2005 Giants?

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=Evilgrin;879954]Agreed,
It's just the reality of today's rules. It's how you have to build a team right now until there are rules changes again.[/quote]It's been easier for everyone at the quarterback position the last four years, not just the elite guys. Everyone is benefiting from the relaxed passing environment. It's why you can compare 2006 Rex Grossman to 2011 Rex Grossman and think that maybe the Redskins have a better player (even though its the same guy with the same skill set).

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;879960]What are you basing any of this on? A vague memory of the 2005 Giants?[/quote]

The 2008 Giants were a well-oiled machine...until Burress literally shot himself. Toomer, sure, was not that good anymore.

Toomer was a damn good wr man and so was pb

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=Lotus;879925]Good example Alvin. Also Eli Manning, Carson Palmer, and Sanchize. Also, arguably, Kolb, Tebow, and Gabbert, depending on how one defines "franchise QB" and how one defines "giving up the farm."

The fact is, teams regularly give up a lot if it means they can land their QB guy.[/quote]Would it be fair, in every one of those cases including Cutler, to say that the team that they currently play for would have been much better off not trading for them than to trade for them? On a case-by-case level, that's probably not correct. But in the aggregate, I think I agree with irish that no team really bettered themselves by giving up a ton to go get a quarterback.

I think the Texans were rewarded for their move to get Schaub but that seemed to be more along the lines of picking up an undervalued asset at a (newly open) need position than trading a ton of picks for an established quarterback.

Perhaps the only trade up to get a QB that looks really good in hindsight is Shanahan's move to get Cutler, and we might have a totally different perception of him in Denver if McDaniels wasn't intelligent enough to sell high and grab picks for a guy he didn't know whether or not he fit his system. I mean, if Denver had held on to Cutler through the McDaniels era, we could have been talking about a situation where John Fox might have traded the last year of his contract for a fourth round pick. Could have happened.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;879963]Toomer was a damn good wr man and so was pb[/quote]Toomer's last 1000 yard season for the Giants came in 2003. Manning was drafted in 2004. His best season with Eli: 59 catches, 760 yards. Michael Crabtree this season: 72 catches, 874 yards.

Burress had 2 1,000 yard seasons for Eli, but Plaxico Burress is a career 50% catch rate guy. One of the most overrated careers in recent memory. Not a particularly good player, with the isolated exception of his red zone performance, a place where he had three really good seasons.

The Giants, when they won the super bowl in 2007, were kind of like this year's 49ers. If you looked hard enough, you could see good offensive talent, but they went as their defense went.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;879965]Would it be fair, in every one of those cases including Cutler, to say that the team that they currently play for would have been much better off not trading for them than to trade for them? On a case-by-case level, that's probably not correct. [B]But in the aggregate, I think I agree with irish that no team really bettered themselves by giving up a ton to go get a quarterback.[/B]

I think the Texans were rewarded for their move to get Schaub but that seemed to be more along the lines of picking up an undervalued asset at a (newly open) need position than trading a ton of picks for an established quarterback.

Perhaps the only trade up to get a QB that looks really good in hindsight is Shanahan's move to get Cutler, and we might have a totally different perception of him in Denver if McDaniels wasn't intelligent enough to sell high and grab picks for a guy he didn't know whether or not he fit his system. I mean, if Denver had held on to Cutler through the McDaniels era, we could have been talking about a situation where John Fox might have traded the last year of his contract for a fourth round pick. Could have happened.[/quote]

Actually irish's claim was not about teams bettering themselves. His claim was that teams never give up a lot to get a QB. I simply pointed out that that was not true, whether such deals end up being smart or not.

As for whether giving up a lot for a QB is worth it, I agree that you must look on a case-by-case basis. I agreed with you on the argument about Eli the other day. But in Eli's case the Giants had other easy options. That is not always the case. So we might look at the Bears' acquisition of Cutler differently than we look at trading for Eli. And until we see more the jury remains out on folks like Palmer and Gabbert. If Palmer tears it up next year and the Raiders win the Super Bowl (I said IF), the Palmer trade looks a lot more respectable.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

Just a few questions to the forum re: the Bradford rumors...

Wasn't Jeff Fischer motivated (at least in some part) to take the Rams job because they had a perceived franchise QB in Sam Bradford? Now he wants to trade him and take a shot with a rookie QB (presumably RGIII)?

I imagine Gregg Williams would love to have Orakpo at his 4-3 end which is probably his best fit. But with Quinn and Long on their roster already--do they even need Orakpo?

I am not opposed to trading Orakpo who in my opinion is out of his natural position and seems to have plateaued. He seems to have less upside than Kerrigan. Rob Jackson could probably nearly equal Rak's production at this point. Certainly in those Geico commercials...

Leveraging Orakpo's trade value, who is part of the Skins strongest unit (LBs), to potentially improve the most critical position on the team seems like a smart and prudent strategy.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=Lotus;879968]Actually irish's claim was not about teams bettering themselves. His claim was that teams never give up a lot to get a QB. I simply pointed out that that was not true, whether such deals end up being smart or not.

As for whether giving up a lot for a QB is worth it, I agree that you must look on a case-by-case basis. I agreed with you on the argument about Eli the other day. But in Eli's case the Giants had other easy options. That is not always the case. So we might look at the Bears' acquisition of Cutler differently than we look at trading for Eli. And until we see more the jury remains out on folks like Palmer and Gabbert. If Palmer tears it up next year and the Raiders win the Super Bowl (I said IF), the Palmer trade looks a lot more respectable.[/quote]I liked (and still like) the Palmer trade for the Raiders because they didn't have a whole lot of options based on the timing of Campbell's injury, and I typically enjoy teams that error on the side of aggression. There is almost no way that Palmer is worth what the Raiders gave up for him. That was more a case of the Bengals getting to name their price.

But I don't think the Raiders were deluded into thinking they were trading for a franchise quarterback. They were trading for a guy who was still one of the NFL's top 15 passers (with the hope [but not expectation] that he could be a top 10 guy over the next three years) while knowing that the only QB under contract for them in 2012 was Terrelle Pryor at close to league minimum. I always viewed the Raiders as less concerned about winning the trade and more concerned with solidifying the position for the immediate future. But it's still the Raiders, so who knows their true intentions?

The Bears gave up picks in the Jay Cutler deal that could have become franchise quarterbacks, either Josh Freeman in 2009 (the actual pick they traded to Denver for Cutler was eventually used by Tampa for Freeman), or Tebow/Clausen/McCoy/Kafka in 2010. The real issue though is that the guy who they included in the trade for Cutler (Orton) hasn't been all that much worse than Cutler since the trade. To me, the lack of a supporting cast for Cutler is not an excuse for his play when evaluating a trade where it cost so much to get him: well of course he has a limited supporting cast, the Broncos fleeced the Bears in terms of compensation.

Point being: there are never not other options at quarterback. Never. They aren't always great options, but if you're going to give up a ton of draft pick value to get a guy you like, I think you have forfeited your right to complain about the available options. I don't mind erring on the side of aggression, just make sure you are right about it, and you better win something within three years, otherwise, you surely left better choices on the table.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

More importantly, can we list successful teams that have been built following a QB trade?

2010 Bears
2009/2011 Texans
2005/2007/2008/2010/2011 Giants
2009/2010 Jets

8-8 or worse
2009/2011 Bears
2007/2008/2010 Texans
2004/2006/2009 Giants
2011 Jets
2010 Redskins

The track record for unwanted, free agent quarterbacks (Kurt Warner, Drew Brees, Peyton Manning?) actually seems to be a lot better than the record for traded quarterbacks. It seems to me like teams spend more time overcoming their trade for QBs than winning as a result.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=Lotus;879925]Good example Alvin. Also Eli Manning, Carson Palmer, and Sanchize. Also, arguably, Kolb, Tebow, and Gabbert, depending on how one defines "franchise QB" and how one defines "giving up the farm."

The fact is, teams regularly give up a lot if it means they can land their QB guy.[/quote]

Outside of Eli, there is no way the rest of the QBs you named are franchise QBs.

It just seems to me that teams that go and get a QB that actually makes a difference are already solid teams that are only a QB away from winning titles. The Redskins arent that team.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=Paintrain;879948]Well obviously players who are still under contract with their current teams (like the projected UFA) are off limits but I wasn't sure how the new CBA was written pertaining to players released during the existing league year but after all games were completed. I'm not a moron, just seeking clarification.[/quote]

I was not assuming you were I was just trying to answer your question. If Peyton was released today and the Dolphins came to terms with him today, they could sign him today. As could any other team. The Pats could go out and sign TO before the SB if they really wanted to.

Not trying to state you were a moron bud, just making sure what I wrote was understandable. :)

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=NYCSkin;879971]Just a few questions to the forum re: the Bradford rumors...

Wasn't Jeff Fischer motivated (at least in some part) to take the Rams job because they had a perceived franchise QB in Sam Bradford? Now he wants to trade him and take a shot with a rookie QB (presumably RGIII)?

I imagine Gregg Williams would love to have Orakpo at his 4-3 end which is probably his best fit. But with Quinn and Long on their roster already--do they even need Orakpo?

I am not opposed to trading Orakpo who in my opinion is out of his natural position and seems to have plateaued. He seems to have less upside than Kerrigan. Rob Jackson could probably nearly equal Rak's production at this point. Certainly in those Geico commercials...

Leveraging Orakpo's trade value, who is part of the Skins strongest unit (LBs), to potentially improve the most critical position on the team seems like a smart and prudent strategy.[/quote]

More than anything he wants stability, even if it's a rookie. I still think though RG3 ends up in Miami.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=irish;879980]Outside of Eli, there is no way the rest of the QBs you named are franchise QBs.

It just seems to me that teams that go and get a QB that actually makes a difference are already solid teams that are only a QB away from winning titles. The Redskins arent that team.[/quote]

You may think those guys aren't franchise QB's. That's fair enough. But their teams do or they would not have paid the high prices. Heck, Sanchez's coach called him "Sanchize" so we know that at least at one time an NFL coach had a perception different from yours.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;879983]More than anything he wants stability, even if it's a rookie. I still think though RG3 ends up in Miami.[/quote]

You think they are going to leapfrog up to #2 or #4 for him? Steep price to say the least. Anything on the Denver front about moving up as well?

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

The Super Bowl match up is a bit telling about what it takes to get to there.

Defensively: Both teams have horrendous defenses, ranked virtually at the bottom of the barrel, #27 & #31. The run defenses are in the bottom half and pass defenses in the bottom 4.

Offensively: Both teams had pathetic run game stats in the regular season ranked in the bottom half, Giants #31.

So how did these two teams get to the Super Bowl? What stands out about them? Both are in the top 5 in passing, #2 & #3. That's where they both stand apart from other teams. Yeah, there's more to passing numbers than just the QB, but that's where it begins and ends.

We get caught up in alot of other areas of need on this team, but QB is the most important position on the field.

Heck, the Skins had a better defense than either team but that's not this years SuperBowl theme or Pittsburgh and SF would be there.

If you think a QB like Luck or Bradford gets you "over" at that position, you do whatever it takes to get one of them.

Shanny himself has said on more than one occassion recently, that this team is close. Yeah, obviously, we're in need of a franchise QB.

Glad to hear there's a trade like that in the plans.

Re: I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)
 

[quote=Higskin;879991]Defensively: Both teams have horrendous defenses, ranked virtually at the bottom of the barrel, #27 & #31. The run defenses are in the bottom half and pass defenses in the bottom 4.[/quote]


The stats for the Giants defense is a bit misleading. Remember they had tons of injuries at the beginning of the season on the defensive side of the ball. They have Tuck and Osi back and they are destroying QBs with that 4 man rush. It lets them do more things with their defense than what they could do before.