Build the Redskins for 2012

I heard we weren't really interested in Barkley, but a) that might have been because we thought we couldn't get him and b) how could we not at least consider him

I'd rather take RGIII

I heard we weren't really interested in Barkley, but a) that might have been because we thought we couldn't get him and b) how could we not at least consider him

Interesting... I guess that means there is no consideration for Andrew Luck, then.

I haven't heard of any, but my personal feeling is if we have a top 5 pick we're going to try for no. 1.

We are a little premature on this thread and what we are not taking into much account is the development of the young guys. Riley, Hankerson, Paul, Mo Hurt and Austin still have a chance to seriously show before the end of the season. If Riley and Hankerson can play like they did yesterday at a consistent level, then we can pencil them in as starters next year. Riley was really impressive yesterday.

Im not giving up on Paul, Hurt or Austin but I think the next move the coaching staff should make is splitting time on punt and kick returns with Banks. We need to give Paul and Austin more work there. When it comes to disappointment in player growth, Banks is on the top of my list.

qb... lines lines lines .. secondary

Honestly, with HOW bad we are in 2011, I say trade/cut/not re-sign everyone not in the long term plans (3 years down the road). 2012 we aren't going to be good. Its not like we have a bunch of young players that can emerge (yes I know we have alot of young players on the roster...but very few have shown true potential). I'm not a scout so I don't want to evaluate the talent of the players I'm iffy on, but its plain as day to the average idiot that we need serious and numerous changes to be somewhat good. This cannot happen in a year.

Suck for luck pre-season movement not looking so bad right now eh? Not really much to root for anymore. I say we won 3 too many.

I heard we weren't really interested in Barkley, but a) that might have been because we thought we couldn't get him and b) how could we not at least consider him

Ugh... You already have inside information about whether we like Matt Barkley?

Ugh... You already have inside information about whether we like Matt Barkley?

Just rumors I've heard. Thing is the team can't really do much scouting on him anyway at this point since he's not a senior.

Ok, RB is the only position that A) we don't Really need B) is something we can get in the draft C) is what shanahan is known for getting in late rounds/UDFA

So no, even though they are great players. Forte I feel like if he got paid he'd be lazy anyway.

And can you please Repeat what you said a few weeks back about how you heard that we are NOT interested in Matt Barkley, the QB from USC. Nor should we be since A) he's flat footed B) he's still young and needs another season to mature C) He's not that accurate D) he's playing with talent that makes him look better than he is E) he's a USC QB; they aren't your top QB's in the NFL, they're just solid (Sanchez-ok, Palmer-decent, Leinart-bust, Cassel-decent [didn't even play at USC])

I'd say pretty much everything your saying (except for A and C...but I'm no scout, I can't say for or against these) is really that credible of an argument. "B"-needs another year to mature? You either have talent or you don't, spending another year in college isn't going to make him any better then spending a year on the bench in the pros. "D"-Didn't USC have a ton of their top players transfer, have significant recruiting restrictions, and get their 7th choice for head coach? USC might historically do that, but today I'd say their talent level isn't elite, hell they're not even ranked this year. "E"- The fact that USC has 3 starting qbs in the nfl means they're pretty good with qbs. I agree none of them are elite, but it's irrelevant either way because along those lines of reason Luck won't be any good because Stanford doesn't have any elite (or any) QB's in the nfl.