Mark Sanchez at 13th?

I still think this is all a smoke screen, if Det takes an OT, and they think we want a qb, maybe they will trade with us. or even trade ahead of us, thus making sure two qbs are drafted ahead of us, and hopefully leaving an OL/DL option.

ProFootballTalk.com - ‘Skins Bluffing On Sanchez Interest? (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/20/skins-bluffing-on-sanchez-interest/)

Mike Florio plays up...er down the possibility of us getting Sanchez.

you have lost your mind does any body realize that for the last 5 years we have needed a dominating pass rush to contend for the playoffs. We need to either draft a top notch pass rusher or strong side linebacker in first round or an immediate playmaker like a percy harvin. 2nd round we need a complimentary running back for clinton portis if you notice our division is full of two headed monsters in the backfield. We also should have grabbed a torry holt or a ol like peters in free agency . I think we also should bench campbell in favor of brennan

So Percy Harvin in the 1st, a complimentary running back in the 2nd (which we don't have), we should have grabbed Torry Holt, an old WR or Peters (who wasn't a free agent) in free agency and we should bench Campbell in favor of Brennan. Wow.

Welcome to the board, your week here should be interesting.

shouldn't your post end "except Campbell"? Lol, i suppose I deserve that, but seriously - I firmly beleive Campbell will be noticably better in 2009 than he was in 2008... I just don't beleive its likely his play will be enough of an improvement for Snyder to keep Campbell - Hence all my arguments about moving on now: 1) To get compensation for Campbell; 2) to go ahead and start grooming our next (hopefully) franchise QB.


What has Zorn done the past two months to change your opinion of him? I thought you had said recently hiring him was a dumb move, and next offseason (presumably when he's gone) couldn't come soon enough I like Zorn and I like Campbell - I just dont like them together. While its possible both Zorn and Campbell have success in 2009 and beyond, i dont think its likely. If you asked me to chose between the two now, i'd chose Zorn, if for no other reason than that if we fired him after 2009 and kept Campbell, Campbell would have to learn another offense and start from scratch again.

We've kept the same defensive scheme in place 5 years and, with one exception, our defense has been very good for those 5 years. The way i see it, we committed to the WCO and we need to keep it here a minimum of 5 years. Lets keep the system in place and gradually adjust our personnel to suit that system over the course of that timeframe.

BHA, I hear you. While you know we disagree on Campbell's potential here, we agree that with Campbell this is a make or break season and if it's break, then Zorn is going also.

I'm interested in in what scenario do you see Quinn as our starting QB on opening day? How would those trade machinations work out?

I'm also on board (surprisingly) with your assessment of a Sanchez based draft day. That would mean Washington, who hasn't gotten a sniff anywhere else, would come back as the starter at SLB, we've got players who have started for us before with Heyer and Daniels/Wynn who can man the RT and DE spots so we'd be entering the season with some youth, some age but nothing we hadn't seen before at those spots. It's far from the ideal scenario but it's not doomsday either.

As soon as I read that the skins were in the midst of a 3-way trade with Denver and the Browns, i wondered if Brady Quinn was our true objective and the deal would have sent Cutler to Cleavland, Quinn to DC (Cerrato is a ND boy and loves him some Quinn), and Campbell to Denver... but all the reports indicated we wanted Cutler, so i dismissed the notion.

Then, in his column today, Peter King indicated that the Browns are just as in love with Sanchez as Snyder. I also read a report today (can't remember where) that said the Skins have a tentative deal in place with Browns for a trade if Sanchez falls to Cleavlands spot. Given that Cleavland (evidently) prefers Sanchez and Anderson to Quinn (why are they even looking at Sanchez when they have those two?), it made sense to me that we would be trading for QUINN, after Cleavland selected Sanchez. So, I think its entirely possible that a senario similar to this could happen:

Brady Quinn and Braylon Edwards to Washington for our #13 and Fred Davis (and probably another player)

This would also explain why:
1. The Browns are looking at QBs when they just drafted one in the 1st round. (New coach wants to pick his own guy)
2. There were rumors of Cooley being traded to Cleveland (right position, wrong player)
3. The Browns have yet to trade Edwards. (Our deals better)

In the end, the Browns would get rid of two players they dont really want while picking up a 1st rounder and a starter, and we'd get the "franchise" QB and "stud" WR covetted by Snyder for so long, while only giving up our 2009 1st rounder and a starting caliber TE who is stuck behind a pro-bowler. We'd probably have to give up something else (possibly Santana Moss, ARE, or D. Thomas), but in the end, both sides would get what they covet, without having to give up anything they really wanted.

Again, thats all pure speculation, but its just a possibility that occurred to me after reading Kings article today.

To me, this whole situation seems very simple:

Acquiring an area of need at #13 (OT, DE, or LB) allows the team to get younger and talented in any of those area. The option of trading down is there, giving us the opportunity to get more young players (i.e. a lower 1st rounder and a 2nd or 3rd rounder)

Keeping Jason Campbell for one season does two things: Allow for true continuity from last year to this year, and put everything squarely on JC's shoulder. Prevent us from losing any future draft picks. If JC does well, then well next year we can continue to build on any success from 2009.

Should Jason Campbell fail, after the 2009 season the team can do a complete overhaul. If we have another mediocre to terrible season, our #1 pick would be a high one, and we would have all of our picks. We can either pick one of the top QBs in next year's draft, or hey maybe Phillip Rivers or Big Ben won't extend with their teams (highly unlikely, but who knows) and we could go after them.

Even if the team fails with JC at the helm, our #13 pick (OT, DE, or LB) in 2009 would be an excellent pick and something we can build on (copyright Herm Edwards) if the team goes through a complete overhaul. But unfortunately the owner is not willing to take that risk, is impatient, and will mortgage the #13 and future picks on Sanchez.

I hear what your saying, and those would be the positives to look at in a "worst case scenario" situation but the thought of starting over from scratch next year makes me sick. I mean, whens the last time this team has benefited from starting over from scratch?

Well, what Tandler is saying is it's just a player if we take Sanchez...which is true, until we trade up. Then it's multiple players.

I'm also wondering what role Quinn has in all this. Perhaps if Sanchez is there at 5, the Redskins and Browns will trade, but not for the 5th pick, but with Quinn/Campbell/the 13th.

I'd much rather have Campbell in this offense than Quinn, and they do share similar weaknesses, but buying low is a far smarter approach than buying high.

Ultimately, I think the 13th overall pick is going to be a defensive player as a Redskin, and that will be that.

To be honest, i don't like Quinn at all - atleast not for this team. I just see him as a younger Jason Campbell in terms of skills, but without JCs class. To me, hed be nothing more than a shiny new toy for Snyder, without atleast having the potential and "it" factor that Sanchez would bring.

As to your last point, id love to land Maybin. I think if we stayed at 13, the smartest move would be to take the best DE available, and that could be him. IMO the best way to receive dividends from the enormous investment we made in Haynesworth is to put a pass-rushing beast alongside him. I'd be fine with one of the big 4 OTs at 13, but I would be extremely disappointed if we took a LB there. If we bring Washington back and use a lateround pick on an OLB, our LB corps will be fine for 2009.

As soon as I read that the skins were in the midst of a 3-way trade with Denver and the Browns, i wondered if Brady Quinn was our true objective and the deal would have sent Cutler to Cleavland, Quinn to DC (Cerrato is a ND boy and loves him some Quinn), and Campbell to Denver... but all the reports indicated we wanted Cutler, so i dismissed the notion.

Then, in his column today, Peter King indicated that the Browns are just as in love with Sanchez as Snyder. I also read a report today (can't remember where) that said the Skins have a tentative deal in place with Browns for a trade if Sanchez falls to Cleveland's spot. Given that Cleavland (evidently) prefers Sanchez and Anderson to Quinn (why are they even looking at Sanchez when they have those two?), it made sense to me that we would be trading for QUINN, after Cleavland selected Sanchez. So, I think its entirely possible that a scenario similar to this could happen:

Brady Quinn and Braylon Edwards to Washington for our #13 and Fred Davis (and probably another player)

This would also explain why:
1. The Browns are looking at QBs when they just drafted one in the 1st round. (New coach wants to pick his own guy)
2. There were rumors of Cooley being traded to Cleveland (right position, wrong player)
3. The Browns have yet to trade Edwards. (Our deals better)

In the end, the Browns would get rid of two players they dont really want while picking up a 1st rounder and a starter, and we'd get the "franchise" QB and "stud" WR coveted by Snyder for so long, while only giving up our 2009 1st rounder and a starting caliber TE who is stuck behind a pro-bowler. We'd probably have to give up something else (possibly Santana Moss, ARE, or D. Thomas), but in the end, both sides would get what they covet, without having to give up anything they really wanted.

Again, that's all pure speculation, but its just a possibility that occurred to me after reading Kings article today.

It's an interesting premise. It would accomplish a couple of Snyder's long term 'goals'. I think it may be too many moving parts for it to come to fruition but it's interesting nonetheless.

Does anyone miss the relative calm of last offseason when we were just talking about a protracted coaching search, a new unproven head coach, the retirement of an organizational icon and an unprecedented number of draft picks? Ah the good old days! :)

BHA, guess I misremembered. I thought you had said you didn't like the hiring of Zorn earlier this year

I have no idea how Sanchez has "it" while Quinn and Campbell don't. Seems like an easy way to draw a line between the two with no other good reason to do so.

I agree that Quinn and Campbell are very similar in most respects. One of those respects is that they seem to be stronger players than Sanchez, based at least on the law of averages.

I have no idea how Sanchez has "it" while Quinn and Campbell don't. Seems like an easy way to draw a line between the two with no other good reason to do so.

I agree that Quinn and Campbell are very similar in most respects. One of those respects is that they seem to be stronger players than Sanchez, based at least on the law of averages.

I don't know why Collins doesn't have "it"? He's done something that none of these guys have; he's taken us to the play-offs. Of course that doesn't mean anything if you've a lot of money and spend it like a kid in the candy store.

What do I know? I'm just a fan.