The "we should have takens"
 

I don't follow the stuff leading up to the draft closely, but every year, we take propsects people aren't familiar with and some fans respond in a burst of passion about we should have taken player X with the pick instead.

Now, I am a bit curious about these Players Xs that we should have taken and whether we should have taken the Player Xs over the players we actually took.

Now, I can recall Kerrigan(Cameron Jordan?) and Trent(Okung) getting that treatment for sure, but my memory is shaky on the other players, so I could use some help about this here.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

They drafted the players they wanted and the players who were available that they thought would help this team, so I don't understand the point of this thread.

Could'of, would'of, should'of...is pointless. Let's focus on what we have and put this thing together.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

Markelle Martin

Brandon Boykin

Nate Potter

David Molk

Massie

Polk

Gannaway

Rainey

Joe Adams

replace 3 of these guys with

Kirk Cousins

The Iowa CB

The SMU CB

The SMU Guard and/or The Florida Atlantic RB

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

We should have taken cousins in the third. But we were patient and got him in the 4th. Way to go skins!

So basically this thread is a repeat of what was said many times over in the draft thread. Check.

Gotta love the armchair GM/Scouts.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 using Taptalk 2

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

[insert any "name" parroted by any draft analyst or beat writer]

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;913641]We should have taken cousins in the third. But we were patient and got him in the 4th. Way to go skins![/quote]

:doh:

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

the cop puncher

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;913659]:doh:[/quote]

I'm only mocking people upset about the pick. I effing love it. Behind Griffen, it's the best pick we've made in years

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

We could have had Ray Rice a few years ago too.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

Okung was/is the better pick over Williams. This FO does some strange sh!t...but hey they could get lucky!

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

I kept saying Minnifield right from the 5th round on.. Glad to see him sign.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;913641]We should have taken cousins in the third. But we were patient and got him in the 4th. Way to go skins![/quote]

Kirk Cousins was projected to be drafted in the second round and many general managers had a 1st round grade on him. He was certainly expected to be drafted before Nick Foles, who was taken in the 3rd round by the Eagles. How Cousins fell to the 4th round no one knows. But getting him there was certainly a steal for the Redskins.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

We should have taken a left at Albuquerque

[IMG]http://stylishcorpse.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/bugs-abq.jpg[/IMG]

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

:lol:

that was friggin hilarious...lol

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

The Cousins choice was a great pick, New England style. Two or three years from now we trade him for a second or first round draft choice or four years from now he becomes a free agent and we get a third round compensatory pick for him. We are finally seeing the big picture in Washington. We save 1.3 million in cap space(cutting John Beck), and get a quarterback for the legue minimum. Good back ups get as much a 5 million. [B]WAY TO GO SKINS!!!!!!!!!!!!! [/B]

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

I'm very happy with the 9 draft selections the Redskins came away with. Other than RG3, there was no other player that I wanted them to draft.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

[quote=T.O.Killa;913700]The Cousins choice was a great pick, New England style. Two or three years from now we trade him for a second or first round draft choice or four years from now he becomes a free agent and we get a third round compensatory pick for him. We are finally seeing the big picture in Washington. We save 1.3 million in cap space(cutting John Beck), and get a quarterback for the legue minimum. Good back ups get as much a 5 million. [B]WAY TO GO SKINS!!!!!!!!!!!!! [/B][/quote]

Well said, if you read this post you shouldn't IMO have a problem with the Cousins PICK.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

[quote=Ruhskins;913691]We should have taken a left at Albuquerque

[IMG]http://stylishcorpse.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/bugs-abq.jpg[/IMG][/quote]



Another GREAT post IMO. :laughing2

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

Other than RGIII they went in many different directions than I thought they would (or even should) but at the end of the day, I'm pleased with our draft. We got our QB, we added OL depth, we drafted a potential replacement for Fletcher and got some competition for DB on the back end of the secondary. I wish they would have addressed RB and WR but I'm a skill position guy. I would have liked to have seen us address the slot WR position with a Joe Adams or Devon Wylie but we've allocated assets to that position in free agency so let's see what they turn into.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

^
The Redskins most certainly did address the running back position. They drafted that kid named Alfred Morris in the 6th round.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

the one that really comes to mind, legitimately, is we should have taken santana moss over rod gardner. moss went 1 pick after rod "50/50" gardner.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

We should be thankful that Vinny is gone , 3 starters left from his past drafts !!

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

[quote=Paintrain;913737]Other than RGIII they went in many different directions than I thought they would (or even should) but at the end of the day, I'm pleased with our draft. We got our QB, we added OL depth, we drafted a potential replacement for Fletcher and got some competition for DB on the back end of the secondary. [B]I wish they would have addressed RB[/B] and WR but I'm a skill position guy. I would have liked to have seen us address the slot WR position with a Joe Adams or Devon Wylie but we've allocated assets to that position in free agency so let's see what they turn into.[/quote]

See, I looked at RB totally different. That was the one area I felt happy with what we had. Hightower, Royster, and Helu provided a good mix of styles that seemed to work fine last year. Maybe pick up a few guys through UDFA, but that's about it.

One of the things I find myself doing is keying in on "Mel's Best Available" -- like when Bobby Massie was available for awhile and I began thinking he's who we need. Then you start to wonder why Allen and Shanny didn't take him because obviously tackle was a need. In the end though, every team is going off their own board, and sometimes they agree with Kiper and sometimes they don't. Doesn't mean they whiffed, or "reached" if the guy you happen to focus in on wasn't selected.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

Love the topic, but at the end of the day you get who you get, cant cry over spilt milk is how I try to look at it. Happy will all are Draft & FA pick ups.

I wished we grabbed DB Dennard from Nebraska. He was listed as a 2nd rounder, and dropped to 7th after a bad weekend. Nice get by the Hoodie.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

Chris Polk. I like our RBs but I think this kid has got the goods. i know about his health concerns but hell we could have got him with a seventh.

Others would have been Brandon Mosley OT but I think they got a guy they really like in Compton so they know better.

Other than that I wish we would have gotten a DT late. It was a rare deep draft for DTs which means we may have gotten value late. Josh Chapman, Alabama hung around and Loni Fangupo went undrafted.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

I felt like the Eagles pretty much got the "Who's who?" of all picks second round and above. I remember checking the draft and the best value pick and suddenly the Eagles would end up with it.

I'm ready for their time in the spotlight to end. :D

We've been so bad for so long, it's their turn now.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

I wish we would have pushed harder for Vontaze Burfict ILB of ASU to come to Washington. That kid is a beast. He went undrafted to the Bangles.

I know hes a walking convict, however place him under Fletcher to groom him and if he steps out of line let Fletcher make the call to cut him. Very low risk, huge reward.

I would post a youtube video, but cant figure it out. Take a look. He makes alot of eye popping plays. You will also get to see why he went undrafted.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

I'm WAY better with Chase Minnefield. Low risk, ULTRA high reward. We have a draft next year and we can't expect to fill all needs in a single draft. Burfict is one of those guys where MAYBE he works out, but to think he's going to suddenly be a different person is pretty insane.

Anyone with wives/girlfriends can attest to this, but while you can change some practices and/or habits, you can't change who someone is. It's like telling the rain to stop.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

more often than not red flags haunt careers. m kelly's knee, vince youngs immaturity, pac mans personal problems, etc. every now and then someone's good enough to overcome their issues (randy moss's selfishness, LT's "sugar" habit) and produce great results, but usually it doesn't happen (and even when it does, the problem is still there).

missing on guys like massie may be a mistake down the road, but this staff seemed to put a LOT of weight into iowa and smu players ;) and guys they saw at the senoir bowl. both of the late dbs run 4.4 or better too, so they're not going to be speed limited.

this staff also said that next year's draft is deep in cbs/ots, so they weren't going to overdraft this years limited talent when they'll be able to get better value next year.

i'm sorry polk went to the fleagles over us, but i don't think it'll amount to much once hightower resigns.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

I agree with you on Burfict. He even had problems in High School or he would have probably been playing for USC instead. On the other hand, he did also have two great years as a freshman and a sophmore before he started to screw things up again.

Anyways, when you consider Fletchers career and all the things he had/has to go through to contantly prove himself along with his no nonesence personality, it makes me wonder if he could have gotten through that kids head. Let him know his football career is maybe 1 or 2 cuts from competely ending.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

[quote=ArcticRed;913857]I agree with you on Burfict. He even had problems in High School or he would have probably been playing for USC instead. On the other hand, he did also have two great years as a freshman and a sophmore before he started to screw things up again.

Anyways, when you consider Fletchers career and all the things he had/has to go through to contantly prove himself along with his no nonesence personality, it makes me wonder if he could have gotten through that kids head. Let him know his football career is maybe 1 or 2 cuts from competely ending.[/quote]

Having Fletch be a proxy daddy for him is a pretty tall order to demand of anyone. It takes a lot of time and commitment to be a therapist, and a little skill too. This is not to say Fletch couldn't show him the ropes on some things, but it takes a lot of effort and time to do that, and Burfict has to willing to accept the "therapy". The few months he spends here might not be enough time for him to transform sufficiently.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

Oh yeah, while he may have the inside track to domestic violence rap, he has not yet done it. The kids just got a big head of himself. The hits he makes reminds me of STaylor, including blowing his assignment cause he thinks he has the chance to make big play.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

[quote=T.O.Killa;913700]The Cousins choice was a great pick, New England style. Two or three years from now we trade him for a second or first round draft choice or four years from now he becomes a free agent and we get a third round compensatory pick for him. We are finally seeing the big picture in Washington. We save 1.3 million in cap space(cutting John Beck), and get a quarterback for the legue minimum. Good back ups get as much a 5 million. [B]WAY TO GO SKINS!!!!!!!!!!!!! [/B][/quote]

Love having Cousins instead of Beck. Actually, I will be happy to see Cousins take over the #2 job from Rex - - probably in 2013.

However, the idea that the Skins will "flip" Cousins and turn him into a second or first round pick a couple of years from now has to be based on the assumption that Cousins will play a little bit in real Sunday NFL games. And there are only 2 ways that is going to happen:
[INDENT]1. RG3 stinks out the joint and Cousins is simply the better QB. In that case, the skins will not trade Cousins and RG3 - - after stinking out the joint and losing his job to a 4th round pick - - will not get you a first or a second round pick.

2. RG3 is hurt. Just to clarify, that would not be a good thing...[/INDENT]
Being an exhibition game wonder will not be enough to make Cousins worth a first or a second round pick; he will have to do it in real games - - and no Skins' fan should be thinking about how that is going to happen in order to enhance his trade value.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

#3.- or, and I doubt it happens, if the Skins decide down the road to make up some trick play where Cousins is behind center and throws backwards one yard to RG3 at the sideline to either run the ball or pass.

Having Cousins is a no brainer. I'm sure he would love to start somewhere at some point and it may happen but not right away. Other then Tannehill and Miami all the other QB's were talked about as being back ups. Weeden is the only QB I can see possibly taking the over if he comes into camp and shows better then McCoy.

RG3 is our starter. It's nice to hear him say he has to earn it. Shows he has a level head but no way this team traded up all those picks and most likely pay him pretty good even with the Rookie cap that he is not the starter. But if he gets injured and someone needs to fill in for a game or two Cousins will fit nicely. I'd rather have two young healthy viable QB's vs. only having one really good QB and Grossman or Beck.

I hope Crompton has shown them something cause honestly I was almost hoping the team would have cut him also and picked up an UDFA to also develope. Then we could have next year had RG3, Cousins, and UDFA on the PS. Also the good news is Cousins has played in a pro style offense. So if for whatever reason RG3 is having difficulty there could be a possibility Cousins starts..... no our luck RG1 will start.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

Perhaps the team offered Jared Green a try out spot on the team I don't know but I'm kinda dissapointed to not see him being brought in as an UDFA. I kinda felt it would have been respectful to have brought him in but who knows maybe he wanted to carve out his own nitch.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

Would have liked to see us not trade out of the 3rd and take that NT ourselves.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

[quote=SBXVII;914136]#3.- or, and I doubt it happens, if the Skins decide down the road to make up some trick play where Cousins is behind center and throws backwards one yard to RG3 at the sideline to either run the ball or pass.

Having Cousins is a no brainer. I'm sure he would love to start somewhere at some point and it may happen but not right away. Other then Tannehill and Miami all the other QB's were talked about as being back ups. Weeden is the only QB I can see possibly taking the over if he comes into camp and shows better then McCoy.

RG3 is our starter. It's nice to hear him say he has to earn it. Shows he has a level head but no way this team traded up all those picks and most likely pay him pretty good even with the Rookie cap that he is not the starter. But if he gets injured and someone needs to fill in for a game or two Cousins will fit nicely. I'd rather have two young healthy viable QB's vs. only having one really good QB and Grossman or Beck.

I hope Crompton has shown them something cause honestly I was almost hoping the team would have cut him also and picked up an UDFA to also develope. Then we could have next year had RG3, Cousins, and UDFA on the PS. Also the good news is Cousins has played in a pro style offense. So if for whatever reason RG3 is having difficulty there could be a possibility Cousins starts..... no our luck RG1 will start.[/quote]


It would not surprise me to see all 4 of the QBs taken in the first round this year starting for their teams by 1 October. That would be Luck in Indy, RG3 here in DC, Tannehill in Miami and Weedon in Cleveland.

Re: The "we should have takens"
 

By October? I'd pencil them all in right now for week 1.