The "Inside Word" on the QB Search

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Roy Helu, Evan Royster, Leonard Hankerson, Fred Davis, Chris Cooley, that's a pretty good young supporting cast. Throw in a FA WR and/or a 3rd round WR or LaMichael James along with RGIII and we could be st for a while.

[theJBexperience]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

Roy Helu, Evan Royster, Leonard Hankerson, Fred Davis, Chris Cooley, that's a pretty good young supporting cast. Throw in a FA WR and/or a 3rd round WR or LaMichael James along with RGIII and we could be st for a while.

LaMichael James would be a nice addition. I wonder what round he'll drop to. Wouldn't mind taking a chance late on one of the Gators' speedsters either.

[Bushead]

The Redskins are going to get two QBs, it is just wait and see how they do it.

[KI Skins Fan]

Well, if the Skins should sign Flynn as a FA then I'd like to see them trade down to the middle of the 1st Round.

If they were to trade down that far, they should be able to pick up a 2nd Round pick and a 4th Round pick. Then, I'd like to see them trade up (using one of their three 4th Round picks and lower picks) to get another 3rd Round pick. That would give them one 1st Round pick, two 2nd Round picks, two 3rd Round picks, and two 4th Round picks. They should be able to get a lot of talented players with 7 picks in the first four rounds.

Add that to a good FA group and the Skins should be much improved.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by KI Skins Fan

Well, if the Skins should sign Flynn as a FA then I'd like to see them trade down to the middle of the 1st Round.

If they were to trade down that far, they should be able to pick up a 2nd Round pick and a 4th Round pick. Then, I'd like to see them trade up (using one of their three 4th Round picks and lower picks) to get another 3rd Round pick. That would give them one 1st Round pick, two 2nd Round picks, two 3rd Round picks, and two 4th Round picks. They should be able to get a lot of talented players with 7 picks in the first four rounds.

Add that to a good FA group and the Skins should be much improved.

Here's the problem with the whole 'gather picks' idea. The reason it works for New England and Philly (except last year) is because they already have a core of highly talented players and can afford to use the shotgun approach to the draft and hope they hit on some good players with 10-12 picks. We need to hit on most of our picks or leverage some of them to get to the place where we have that talented core.

The mindset of gathering picks is akin to 'we need to draft more OL'. There are only 53 roster spots and 22 starters. Let's say for example we get another 12 picks and 11 of them make the team again. Let's also say that the holdovers from Shanny's 1st 2 classes stick around also. That's 25-26 of a 53 man roster with less than 3 years experience, including many late rounders. How good do you think that team will really be? That's also removing 10-11 players from this roster and that's not accounting for any free agent pickups.

Your scenario would seemingly reduce the number of overall players we pick up for a top heavy draft but again, put the controller down, it just doesn't happen that way in the real world.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Here's the problem with the whole 'gather picks' idea. The reason it works for New England and Philly (except last year) is because they already have a core of highly talented players and can afford to use the shotgun approach to the draft and hope they hit on some good players with 10-12 picks. We need to hit on most of our picks or leverage some of them to get to the place where we have that talented core.

The mindset of gathering picks is akin to 'we need to draft more OL'. There are only 53 roster spots and 22 starters. Let's say for example we get another 12 picks and 11 of them make the team again. Let's also say that the holdovers from Shanny's 1st 2 classes stick around also. That's 25-26 of a 53 man roster with less than 3 years experience, including many late rounders. How good do you think that team will really be? That's also removing 10-11 players from this roster and that's not accounting for any free agent pickups.

Your scenario would seemingly reduce the number of overall players we pick up for a top heavy draft but again, put the controller down, it just doesn't happen that way in the real world.

Dang, people complain about the team being too old, now they complain the team is too young. There really is no pleasing anyone. I don't know about Philli but NE used that theory from the beginning. They got younger, faster, and healthier in a short period of time. It was after they had their team somewhat built that Darth Hoodie would pick up maybe 1 or 2 FA's he felt still had something in them.

[KI Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Here's the problem with the whole 'gather picks' idea. The reason it works for New England and Philly (except last year) is because they already have a core of highly talented players and can afford to use the shotgun approach to the draft and hope they hit on some good players with 10-12 picks. We need to hit on most of our picks or leverage some of them to get to the place where we have that talented core.

The mindset of gathering picks is akin to 'we need to draft more OL'. There are only 53 roster spots and 22 starters. Let's say for example we get another 12 picks and 11 of them make the team again. Let's also say that the holdovers from Shanny's 1st 2 classes stick around also. That's 25-26 of a 53 man roster with less than 3 years experience, including many late rounders. How good do you think that team will really be? That's also removing 10-11 players from this roster and that's not accounting for any free agent pickups.

Your scenario would seemingly reduce the number of overall players we pick up for a top heavy draft but again, put the controller down, it just doesn't happen that way in the real world.

I think you may have skimmed over the two qualifying statements I made as conditions to going with the draft strategy I proposed.

First, I would do this if we sign Matt Flynn.

Second, I would do this if we have a good FA crop. Let's say, for example, that we were able to land QB Matt Flynn, WR Vincent Jackson, and C Chris Myers.

That would put us in a position to draft fewer players overall but more higher round players who could be difference makers for this team. I might even want to trade more picks to draft two first rounders or three second rounders. I want a draft class that looks something like this: OG David DeCastro, RB LaMichael James, FS Markelle Martin, OT Ricky Wagner, ILB Tank Carder. As far as I'm concerned, that could be our entire draft.

That would add eight good players to our team. What's wrong with that scenario?

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by KI Skins Fan

I think you may have skimmed over the two qualifying statements I made as conditions to going with the draft strategy I proposed.

First, I would do this if we sign Matt Flynn.

Second, I would do this if we have a good FA crop. Let's say, for example, that we were able to land QB Matt Flynn, WR Vincent Jackson, and C Chris Myers.

That would put us in a position to draft fewer players overall but more higher round players who could be difference makers for this team. I might even want to trade more picks to draft two first rounders or three second rounders. I want a draft class that looks something like this: OG David DeCastro, RB LaMichael James, FS Markelle Martin, OT Ricky Wagner, ILB Tank Carder. As far as I'm concerned, that could be our entire draft.

That would add eight good players to our team. What's wrong with that scenario?

It was late and I did skim so I previously missed your conditions of a good FA crop and signed Flynn so my bad. It doesn't really do anything to change my point though. What doing that does is reduce the quality of our depth and presumably the effectiveness of our special teams. You need veterans to hold many of the roster spots between 25-43 so you have proven players in case a starter goes down. The bottom of your roster is great for young players to develop long term but you really don't want to count on 10-15 first or second year players as starters or major contributors.

Even the scenario of fewer picks but them all being higher round guys, again that rarely (if ever) happens in the league.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Here's the problem with the whole 'gather picks' idea. The reason it works for New England and Philly (except last year) is because they already have a core of highly talented players and can afford to use the shotgun approach to the draft and hope they hit on some good players with 10-12 picks. We need to hit on most of our picks or leverage some of them to get to the place where we have that talented core.

The mindset of gathering picks is akin to 'we need to draft more OL'. There are only 53 roster spots and 22 starters. Let's say for example we get another 12 picks and 11 of them make the team again. Let's also say that the holdovers from Shanny's 1st 2 classes stick around also. That's 25-26 of a 53 man roster with less than 3 years experience, including many late rounders. How good do you think that team will really be? That's also removing 10-11 players from this roster and that's not accounting for any free agent pickups.

Your scenario would seemingly reduce the number of overall players we pick up for a top heavy draft but again, put the controller down, it just doesn't happen that way in the real world.

I love the idea of having over half of the team in their early 20's. This is one thing that a lot of 'skins fans complained about when Gibbs was here last - the team was one of the oldest teams in the league. I love the idea of building through the draft and adding just the right touch of young free agents. It's exactly what we should be doing. It tells me if most of those draft picks of Allen and Shanahan make the team, then the front office is doing a great job with their picks. So far, the majority have turned out to contribute.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

I love the idea of having over half of the team in their early 20's. This is one thing that a lot of 'skins fans complained about when Gibbs was here last - the team was one of the oldest teams in the league. I love the idea of building through the draft and adding just the right touch of young free agents. It's exactly what we should be doing. It tells me if most of those draft picks of Allen and Shanahan make the team, then the front office is doing a great job with their picks. So far, the majority have turned out to contribute.

NOthing wrong with building thru the draft.. Flooding the roster with 1st, 2nd and 3rd year players based on sheer volume however isn't a strategy for success.

Maybe I'll restate to clarify. In a 7 round draft where we hold picks in all rounds, a team can call 3 starters and a 2 backups an excellent draft, 2 starters and 3 backups a good draft and 1-2 starters and 1-2 backups an average draft.

2007 we had an awful draft. Landry was the only starter. HB Blades was the only backup.

2008 we had an awful draft. No starters. Davis was the only quality player, Jackson the only remaining backup.

2009 we had an awful draft. Orakpo was the only starter. Barnes the only remaining backup.

2010 we had an average draft. Williams and Riley are starters, Austin is a backup.

2011 we had a potentially excellent draft. Kerrigan, Jenkins, Hankerson all look like starters. Helu looks like he will either start or be part of a strong rotation. Gomes, Paul, Royster, Hurt, Nield all are backups.

Replicating 2011 will be difficult simply based on averages that most drafts don't provide that level of depth. But since we had an excellent draft in 2011 we can afford to be more aggressive in moving up to get a player without the risk of not filling needed holes. We also don't have a need as we did last year to 'stock up on picks' in this draft for the sake of getting younger. The 2011 draft really just averaged out the 2007-2009 drafts in terms of the number of expected starters and backups from each draft.

If anything if we move back, we should be looking to acquire 2013 picks. That's what NE does better than anyone, build forward.

Nothing wrong with getting younger, but young for the sake of young doesn't build winners.

[redsk1]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

NOthing wrong with building thru the draft.. Flooding the roster with 1st, 2nd and 3rd year players based on sheer volume however isn't a strategy for success.

Maybe I'll restate to clarify. In a 7 round draft where we hold picks in all rounds, a team can call 3 starters and a 2 backups an excellent draft, 2 starters and 3 backups a good draft and 1-2 starters and 1-2 backups an average draft.

2007 we had an awful draft. Landry was the only starter. HB Blades was the only backup.

2008 we had an awful draft. No starters. Davis was the only quality player, Jackson the only remaining backup.

2009 we had an awful draft. Orakpo was the only starter. Barnes the only remaining backup.

2010 we had an average draft. Williams and Riley are starters, Austin is a backup.

2011 we had a potentially excellent draft. Kerrigan, Jenkins, Hankerson all look like starters. Helu looks like he will either start or be part of a strong rotation. Gomes, Paul, Royster, Hurt, Nield all are backups.

Replicating 2011 will be difficult simply based on averages that most drafts don't provide that level of depth. But since we had an excellent draft in 2011 we can afford to be more aggressive in moving up to get a player without the risk of not filling needed holes. We also don't have a need as we did last year to 'stock up on picks' in this draft for the sake of getting younger. The 2011 draft really just averaged out the 2007-2009 drafts in terms of the number of expected starters and backups from each draft.

If anything if we move back, we should be looking to acquire 2013 picks. That's what NE does better than anyone, build forward.

Nothing wrong with getting younger, but young for the sake of young doesn't build winners.

How Vinnie kept his job with those drafts that long is beyond comprehension. I know he only took credit for a couple of those years but still, I think he had a hand in many of them.

NE does an excellent job acquiring picks. They like to draft and accumulate 2nd rounders.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

NOthing wrong with building thru the draft.. Flooding the roster with 1st, 2nd and 3rd year players based on sheer volume however isn't a strategy for success.

Maybe I'll restate to clarify. In a 7 round draft where we hold picks in all rounds, a team can call 3 starters and a 2 backups an excellent draft, 2 starters and 3 backups a good draft and 1-2 starters and 1-2 backups an average draft.

2007 we had an awful draft. Landry was the only starter. HB Blades was the only backup.

2008 we had an awful draft. No starters. Davis was the only quality player, Jackson the only remaining backup.

2009 we had an awful draft. Orakpo was the only starter. Barnes the only remaining backup.

2010 we had an average draft. Williams and Riley are starters, Austin is a backup.

2011 we had a potentially excellent draft. Kerrigan, Jenkins, Hankerson all look like starters. Helu looks like he will either start or be part of a strong rotation. Gomes, Paul, Royster, Hurt, Nield all are backups.

Replicating 2011 will be difficult simply based on averages that most drafts don't provide that level of depth. But since we had an excellent draft in 2011 we can afford to be more aggressive in moving up to get a player without the risk of not filling needed holes. We also don't have a need as we did last year to 'stock up on picks' in this draft for the sake of getting younger. The 2011 draft really just averaged out the 2007-2009 drafts in terms of the number of expected starters and backups from each draft.

If anything if we move back, we should be looking to acquire 2013 picks. That's what NE does better than anyone, build forward.

Nothing wrong with getting younger, but young for the sake of young doesn't build winners.

Certainly good points. I like the idea of trading picks for future picks as well - making sure there's a "full" draft for the Redskins each and every year. The Redskins have about eight picks this year. Last year they had 12, and most of them all contributed or will contribute this season (Hankerson, Jenkins.) Let's say 4 out of the 8 this year become starters or at least get a lot of playing time this coming season, that's a pretty good amount of young guys in there. I don't think the Redskins necessarily HAVE to do this every season, beyond of course building and maintaining depth. And I know finding the diamonds in the rough is quite difficult when it comes to quarterback play, but on the other hand, finding a sure bet starter as a qb is not automatic by any means. For every Big Ben, Peyton Manning, or Cam Newton, there's plenty of Ryan Leafs, Heath Shulers, and Patrick Ramseys.

Joe Montana was not highly regarded coming out of college, but he turned out pretty good. I think it just really depends on who your scouts are. Anybody can look at an Andrew Luck or a RG III and easily see the talent or be fooled completely. It's finding those guys that for one reason or another, their stock went down, but knowing that they have certain qualities that meets NFL standards that aren't looked at by the talking heads on the radio or on the NFL Network. I think that coupled with the quality of your coaching staff really determines if that pick turns out great or not.

We used to laugh at the Patrick Ramsey disciples about how he was never given a "chance" to succeed in Washington. Looking back on it, I sort of understand it. I think he was probably one of those guys where he needed that development and precise coaching to really turn into a great QB, because he wasn't good enough to overcome bad coaching on his own.

I said that to say that I believe in this coaching staff, and I think picking a guy like Tannehill or maybe Foles would be the right thing for those guys, because they have a great coaching staff that could be there for them during their most critical points in their career. So, it could possibly be true that the Redskins don't necessarily NEED to bet the farm away for an RG III or an Andrew Luck. They could possibly succeed with a lower draft pick.

[skinsfaninok]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Hoyer-Foles

Jack Daniels this early?

#Hail to the Redskins

[CultBrennan59]

you know, someone on here recommended brandon weeden which I shot down, but if you think about it, I shouldn't, and nor should we, shoot down the possibility of getting him, regardless of his age, because he may enter the league as a 28 year old, but, Kurt Warner also did the same thing, and it's QB, a position where guys will play until their in that late 30's, early 40's. Vinny Testerverde played until he was like 46 or something.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

you know, someone on here recommended brandon weeden which I shot down, but if you think about it, I shouldn't, and nor should we, shoot down the possibility of getting him, regardless of his age, because he may enter the league as a 28 year old, but, Kurt Warner also did the same thing, and it's QB, a position where guys will play until their in that late 30's, early 40's. Vinny Testerverde played until he was like 46 or something.

I was the one who asked about him simply because he looked good in the bowl game against none other then Luck.

I could be totally wrong but I see yes an older QB but I also see a more mature, safer with the ball, knoweledgable QB. I think the older people get the better decisions they make, the question is can their bodies hold up to their decision making. lol. The good news is Weeden has not been beaten up in the NFL yet at 28. I wouldn't have a problem with Flynn and Weeden as our QB's next year and possibly a UDFA to compete for the PS spot with Crompton.