Mark Sanchez at 13th?

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

The funniest, most ironic thing is the lack of patience and foresight you kill the front office of is the justification for mortgaging the future because you're unhappy with consistent progress.

I'm not necessarily unhappy with consistent progress, but I understand and accept the fact that our Owner isnt. This league, and to some extent, the world we live in, is obsessed with instant gratification. You don't think a 500 season followed by a 9-7 season (and no playoff wins) with Campbell is enough for Snyder to fire Zorn - in a year when Bill Cowher, Mike Shanahan, John Gruden and Mike Holmgreen are available, then you're just not being realistic.

Zorn and Campbell would have to do EXTREMELY well for Snyder to resist the urge to make one of those guys the highest paid coaches in the history of football. For Campbell, he's got to go to the Pro-bowl. For Zorn, i dont think he keeps his job (if Campbell is QB) with anything less than 11-5 or multiple playoff victories.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Smokescreen, and it's got Kiper fooled too. Good for the FO, maybe get some better value to trade down at # 13 or force someone elses hand to leave us a better player at # 13.

However, if I'm wrong and they move up or draft Sanchez at # 13, mine will be another TV in the shop.

I'm praying this is true...

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Because of the people in here who think Jason Campbell is the ONLY problem with the Redskins and the Cult of Colt.

People like me point out that QB is ONE of our problems and we're labeled as claiming its the ONLY problem? i dont think ANYONE here has ever claimed that he is the "only" problem.

QB is a position of concern in 2009, and likely (for one reason or another) to be a position of extreme need in 2010. It needs to be evaluated and prioritized along with OL, DE, LB, WR, RB and nickleback. The evaluation needs to compare the specific players we have with the specific players we are able to acquire, what players will be available next year, the risks involved if an draftee doesnt work out, the risks involved in "doing nothing" to address each position, and so on.

The bottom line question is this - What actions can we take to have the best long-term effect on the franchise?

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Alot of you seem to look at this issue from the perspective of what SHOULD be done or makes sense to you - but it completely ignores the reality that our owner is Daniel Snyder and our GM is vinny Cerrato. Im looking at the issue of what we should do given the fact that our owner is DS and GM is VC.

What is best for the team is what SHOULD be done, regardless of who the onwer and GM are. I think the more appropriate phrase would be; Will DS & VC do what should be done in the best interest of the Redskins.

About WRs... yes, his WRs dropped some balls, but i cant even count the number of times Campbell grossly over or under threw a wide open receiver for a short catch. Many times, our receivers and TEs cant get YAC because Campbell cant hit them in stride. While Campbell has deadly accuracy on his deep ball, hes horribly erratic on the short and medium-throws.

Your statement is completely wrong. You can't count the number of times JC over or under-threw wide open receivers on a mid-short throw, because there just weren't many. If JC is inaccurate anywhere it's his deep ball, those he misses on more than his short/mid-range throws.

.....Campbell holds on to the ball way to long for this system and he absolutely needs more time....(on the flip side, if we select a QB who makes quicker decisions and is more accurate on the short throws, allowing our receivers more completions and YAC, we're fine with the line we have and can focus on upgrading it coming seasons.)

Haven't we heard this before? You put a rookie QB who had one successful season behing our current O-line (even with a healthy Thomas) and we will struggle far worse than JC did in the second half of 2008.

Unless you're ready to blow the whole thing up and start from scratch the Sanchez thing is complete stupidity. You bring a rookie QB into the mix and start him, you set the franchise back 2-3 years. IMO we are far from a position where the whole team needs to be blown up and rebuilt.

Let's say for the sake of argument we draft Sanchez at # 13. We still have immediate needs at OT, LDE & OLB which we will probably not fill, if lucky we'll fill one with our 3rd rounder. Portis isn't getting any younger, Samuels, Thomas and Rabach will all be the wrong side of 33 by Sept. 2010, and Samuels & Thomas are having injuries. Fletch isn't getting any younger, What do we do with Rogers in a contract year next year? Moss isn't getting any younger either, and his main weapon is his speed. What if one of the two young WRs doesn't develop? Now going into the 2010 season we have holes at OTx2, OLBx2, LDE, C, WR, possbily RB, possibly CB. Now we'll likely have a BAD OL and a 2nd year QB, not a good mix. But at least we'll have high draft picks because if we replace JC with Sanchez we're looking at no better than 6-10.

How about we address our OT, LDE, OLB situation this year with a trade down and fill two of those holes. Let's see if JC continues his development along the lines of what Hasslebeck did in the second year with Zorn (Pro Bowl level). He does and we re-sign him, he doesn't then we look for help next off-season.

[KLHJ2]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

People like me point out that QB is ONE of our problems and we're labeled as claiming its the ONLY problem? i dont think ANYONE here has ever claimed that he is the "only" problem.

QB is a position of concern in 2009, and likely (for one reason or another) to be a position of extreme need in 2010. It needs to be evaluated and prioritized along with OL, DE, LB, WR, RB and nickleback. The evaluation needs to compare the specific players we have with the specific players we are able to acquire, what players will be available next year, the risks involved if an draftee doesnt work out, the risks involved in "doing nothing" to address each position, and so on.

The bottom line question is this - What actions can we take to have the best long-term effect on the franchise?

It doesn't matter who is playing QB if we cannot protect him. We may have a pretty good QB right now and not know it because like a prostitute he is always on his back.

Case and point 2 seasons ago Tom Brady looked like the best QB in history because he never got touched and had all damn day to throw the ball in every game. In the Superbowl however, he was under constant pressure. Although, he was still considered a good QB, he just did not look the same in that game.

It is absolutley amazing at how good a great Oline can make the skill position players look, and oddly the skins have neglected the trenches for nearly a decade. Yet we are so quick to give up on a QB that was drafted in the first round and has shown considerable progress.

IMHO Jay Cutler, Mark Sanchez, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, and anyone else you want to name would suck behind our line too.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Its not "hate" of Campbell. He has his own sets of strenghts and weaknesses, just like any other QB. The problem is he doesnt get to use his natural strenghts in the WCO and his weaknesses are magnified 100 times. Bringing on Zorn and his WCO and expecting it to work with Campbell was a horrible decision on the FOs part... which brings me to the issue here"

Hey, I'm totally okay with you saying we shouldn't extend Jason Campbell's contract just yet. There is nothing wrong with a wait and see approach here.

But your assessment of Campbell's weaknesses center around him being "slow." If you want to see slow, you have to watch guys like McNabb, Roethlisberger, JaMarcus Russell, or someone really young like Joe Flacco.

The truth is that Jason Campbell isn't slower than you would expect a player at his age and experience level to be. There is zero reason to believe he can't improve his WCO mechanics from year to year.

See, this is the kind of thing that you NEED the opinion of the experts on. No one cares whether Trent Dilfer thinks Mark Sanchez is going to be great. But an untrained eye can't tell if a QB is going through his progressions at the right speed. I don't see any overt problem here, so until someone comes out and suggests that it's just not happening fast enough, your position on this one continues to be in the "crackpot evidence" category.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

The bottom line question is this - What actions can we take to have the best long-term effect on the franchise?

So how would possibly trading up help us long-term, if we're sacrificing future picks?

[ChuckPrez]

Originally Posted by GMScud

yep.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

What is best for the team is what SHOULD be done, regardless of who the onwer and GM are. I think the more appropriate phrase would be; Will DS & VC do what should be done in the best interest of the Redskins.

Like it or not, Snyder is the owner of this team; he probably will be for the next 30+ years; and he's not going to change... atleast not anytime soon. If you expect change, then you're just going to be disappointed for the next 30 years. However, if we accept DS and then find a way to "work around" him, then we can start making some progress. This team has been in search of a franchise QB for years. If we get a franchise QB, and keep the same system for 3-4 years, then we have plenty of time to build the pieces around him. It would be nice if we had done that with JC after we drafted him but we didnt. He's damaged goods and and if we don't cut ties with him this year, we certainly will next year. Its time to move on.

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Your statement is completely wrong. You can't count the number of times JC over or under-threw wide open receivers on a mid-short throw, because there just weren't many. If JC is inaccurate anywhere it's his deep ball, those he misses on more than his short/mid-range throws.

No, my statement is not wrong. yours shows that you dont remember a thing from last season. Jason RARELY threw deep at all. 90-95% of his passes were in the short- to medium- range and he was just awful. Receivers were regularly having to adjust dramatically to get to the ball, and it really hurt our YAC, which in turn resulted in more long 3rd downs, which resulted in JC throwing 3 yards short of a 1st down, which resulted in ended drives, which resulted in offensive futility, which resulted in us relying too heavily on our defense which resulted in us losing games. JCs strength has always been a big arm, an accurate deep ball, and play action. His weaknesses have always been indecision coupled with a slow release (likely a result of constant system changes and less than elite offensive line giving him extraordinary time), and touch and accuracy on the short stuff. JC is a guy who would THRIVE in the system he was drafted for and the modified system Saunders brought. Why we decided to make him start from scratch and learn another system is beyond me.

[guote=GTripp0012]But your assessment of Campbell's weaknesses center around him being "slow." If you want to see slow, you have to watch guys like McNabb, Roethlisberger, JaMarcus Russell, or someone really young like Joe Flacco.[/quote] Theres nothing "wrong" with any of those QBs. They are good in their systems but they rely far too heavily on an offensive line. At the beginning of last season, Peyton Manning lost 4 of his 5 starting linemen last year, his starting running back, and he had only one good receiver... yet the Colts still played extremely well. Why? Because he's quick and makes extremely good decisions. He doesnt need an offensive line to regularly protect him for 4 seconds like the Jason Campbells and Ben Rothlesburgers of the world. Its easier to replace one QB than it is to replace 3-4 starting linemen and thats exactly what we would have to do right not to give Campbell what he needs to succeed.

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

So how would possibly trading up help us long-term, if we're sacrificing future picks?

If the guy you are trading up for is a QB who you can build a team around, then its absolutely worth it. If he isn't, then its a colossal mistake and you will be worse off than you were before. Its an enormous risk - one that would push the skins in a definative direction: Towards joining the leagues elite (Pats, Colts, Giants, Steelers) or bottom-dwellers (Lions, Raiders, Bengals). In my opinion, its a risk worth taking. If it fails, then atleast it ensures we'll be rid of Vinny Cerrato once and for all. Not making the move ensures the skins remain what they have been for nearly 20 years: mediocre. I don't know about you, but I'm sick of mediocre.

[skinsfan69]

I'm kind of shocked at how MS's stock has just sky rocketed. I know he's a team leader, he's pretty talented and he's a big rah rah gym rat kind of guy. But if I were to compare him to Carson Palmer ( when Palmer was coming out) there is not comparison. Palmer when healthy is just a top 5 NFL QB. I just don't think Sanchez is in that same ballpark talent wise. If he was I wouldn't have a problem with the FO going after a talented player like that. But to me Sanchez is a 2nd round player. Campbell needs to improve but he isn't the big weak link on this team and everyone knows it. I'm just wondering if this Sanchez hype is more about marketing or is it about winning?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

If the guy you are trading up for is a QB who you can build a team around, then its absolutely worth it. If he isn't, then its a colossal mistake and you will be worse off than you were before. Its an enormous risk - one that would push the skins in a definative direction: Towards joining the leagues elite (Pats, Colts, Giants, Steelers) or bottom-dwellers (Lions, Raiders, Bengals). In my opinion, its a risk worth taking. If it fails, then atleast it ensures we'll be rid of Vinny Cerrato once and for all. Not making the move ensures the skins remain what they have been for nearly 20 years: mediocre. I don't know about you, but I'm sick of mediocre.

Again, to say this is missing the point. We're not "building" anything. At all. We're playing everyone's favorite NFL game, QB roulette.

One of my firm beliefs is that Donovan McNabb has been a detriment to the Eagles since they've been at the highest level of competition for so many years. I've always thought that QB was a position that they could try to make a significant upgrade at. I say this despite strong evidence that McNabb is a good, and at times, great Quarterback.

But you see, in order to build a team that wins consistently, the Eagles have to constantly build the team up around Donovan to win. They can't waste years upon years looking for someone better. It's called diminishing returns. They have to give up the best possible team they can and hope that in the playoffs, he can get going on a run that takes them to the super bowl. It's simply their best chance.

Think of it from this angle: they obviously made the right choice in 1999 taking him over Ricky Williams and all the other QBs. But just because they did everything right doesn't mean there wouldn't be better options out there in the past and future.

You just don't seem to understand that taking Sanchez doesn't change a goddamn thing. NOTHING IS DIFFERENT. WE STILL NEED TO IMPROVE THE BLOCKING AND HOPE FOR A QUICK DEVELOPMENT OF THE WIDE RECEIVERS WE DRAFTED. The only thing that changes is now we have uncertainty at the QB position. Instead of "How good can Jason Campbell be?" the question becomes "Can Mark Sanchez even play in the NFL?"

Ultimately, BHA, your disdain for Jason Campbell is causing you to say totally ridiculous things about the Quarterback position. There is no "disagreement" here. Your position just starts and ends with the desire to have anyone else but Campbell under center by 2010. To you, that has become more important than winning.

[Dirtbag59]

I think I now know what the Front Office thinks about our line.

C Samuals - The best, will continue to be dominant
D. Dockery - Paired with Samuals will help us get a nice push as well as help Rabach out against Nose Tackles
C. Rabach - Buges likes him so that's good enough for everyone else
R. Thomas - Apparently he's healthy now
S. Heyer - Hopefully fear of loosing his best chance to play in the league will force him to fix his technique once and for all

C. Rhinehart - He'll develop
J. Jansen - Bad all year starter, great backup
J. Fabini - Good Backup
Justin G. - Well someone needs to play backup at center.

And for anyone curious the following have expiring contracts after this year. Though I'd be amazed if some of them hit the open market

- Marcus McNeil
- Michael Roos
- Eric Winston
- Alex Barron
- Winston Justice
- Jeremy Trueblood

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

If the guy you are trading up for is a QB who you can build a team around, then its absolutely worth it. If he isn't, then its a colossal mistake and you will be worse off than you were before. Its an enormous risk - one that would push the skins in a definative direction: Towards joining the leagues elite (Pats, Colts, Giants, Steelers) or bottom-dwellers (Lions, Raiders, Bengals). In my opinion, its a risk worth taking. If it fails, then atleast it ensures we'll be rid of Vinny Cerrato once and for all. Not making the move ensures the skins remain what they have been for nearly 20 years: mediocre. I don't know about you, but I'm sick of mediocre.

I think you've brought this notion up in the past, haven't you? This idea of "If things go the way we hope, we'll fail so miserably changes will have to be made." That's a curious way to think.

[Son Of Man]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag359

I think I now know what the Front Office thinks about our line.

C Samuals - The best, will continue to be dominant
D. Dockery - Paired with Samuals will help us get a nice push as well as help Rabach out against Nose Tackles
C. Rabach - Buges likes him so that's good enough for everyone else
R. Thomas - Apparently he's healthy now
S. Heyer - Hopefully fear of loosing his best chance to play in the league will force him to fix his technique once and for all

C. Rhinehart - He'll develop
J. Jansen - Bad all year starter, great backup
J. Fabini - Good Backup
Justin G. - Well someone needs to play backup at center.

And for anyone curious the following have expiring contracts after this year. Though I'd be amazed if some of them hit the open market

- Marcus McNeil
- Michael Roos
- Eric Winston
- Alex Barron
- Winston Justice
- Jeremy Trueblood

That post actually eases my mind regarding our O-Line. I know we still need some infusion of youth and top tier talent. But we aren't forced into reaching fo a guy, like Oher, instead of drafting best player available. Mauualuga!

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I think you've brought this notion up in the past, haven't you? This idea of "If things go the way we hope, we'll fail so miserably changes will have to be made." That's a curious way to think.

I was just trying to look at the positive aspect of even the worst-case scenario (Vinny being gone for good). Trading up to draft Sanchez would be a huge risk, but i think its a risk worth taking because of the potential rewards (building around a franchise QB and becoming an elite team). If Snyder drafted Sanchez, then fired zorn and brought in Gruden or Cowher in 2010, it would be a monumental failure. Snyder would need to ensure that Zorn (or if he had to make a change, Shanahan or Holmgren) kept the same (or very similar) system in place - otherwise Sanchez would just become Patrick Ramsey 3.0 (Campbell is 2.0).

Originally Posted by Gtripp0012

You just don't seem to understand that taking Sanchez doesn't change a goddamn thing. NOTHING IS DIFFERENT. WE STILL NEED TO IMPROVE THE BLOCKING AND HOPE FOR A QUICK DEVELOPMENT OF THE WIDE RECEIVERS WE DRAFTED. The only thing that changes is now we have uncertainty at the QB position. Instead of "How good can Jason Campbell be?" the question becomes "Can Mark Sanchez even play in the NFL?"

Ultimately, BHA, your disdain for Jason Campbell is causing you to say totally ridiculous things about the Quarterback position. There is no "disagreement" here. Your position just starts and ends with the desire to have anyone else but Campbell under center by 2010. To you, that has become more important than winning.

I have NOTHING against Campbell. I have said over and over again that we wouldnt be having this discussion if we hadnt brought in Zorn and the WCO. Campbell would be lightyears ahead of where he is now and in a system that covered his flaws and played to his strenghts... Campbell would probably be a pro-bowler now if we had kept the Gibbs/Saunders system here... but we didnt. I am positive Campbell will never become a franchise QB in this system. So, I have a dilema - either the system goes, or Campbell does. I pick Campbell to go, if, for no other reason, than i think he might go postal on everyone at Redskins park right before his head explodes. I pick the system to stay, if for no other reason than it'll prevent all the other offensive players wont have to learn anything new this offseason either... thus furthering their development. To reiterate, i dont hate Campbell. I hate the "match" Snyderatto made last offseason. Campbell is a square peg. Zorns system is a round hole - it aint ever gonna fit.

I find it strange that you and other people point to Campbells improvement in some areas as reasons to stick with him... yet you want to give up on guys like Stephon Heyer, who have also shown steady improvement year after year... Why not have faith that Heyer will develop into a solid, if not elite, RT?