2012 QB Prospects (Part 2)

Great question and point. I would take either a lockdown CB like Claiborne ( or Dre Kirkpatrick) or I would trade down, and get Vontaze Burfict and a CB in the 2nd round, like a Janoris Jenkins or Cliff Harris. I would draft Nick Foles later either 2nd or 3rd round and get Kellen Moore. I would see what Matt Flynn wants in FA too. If I see no sign of improvement from the QB's in that year, I'm getting Barkley or Griffin.

My Top 10 big board based on the Redskins Needs:
1. Luck
2. Barkley
3. RGIII
4. Claiborne
5. Blackmon
6. Jeffery
7. Kirkpatrick
8. Kalil (as a right tackle/or put him at LT move Williams to RT.)
9. Richardson
10. Kuechly

2012 NFL Draft: Ranking the Top 20 QB Prospects of the Last 5 Drafts | Bleacher Report (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/953352-2012-nfl-draft-ranking-the-top-20-qb-prospects-of-the-last-5-drafts/)

Talks about the quarterback prospects coming out to other quarterbacks ratings coming out. Tells a lot about how good Barkley has been.

Lol, this is impossible to do. At least they tried though.

Landry was prob going to come back anyway but that's horrible if Barkley stays.. If so then all we can do is hope for RG3 bcuz Luck is going 1 to Indy IMO

What?? Skinsfan, you take textese to a whole new level!

I know I'm late to this thread, but Griffin is pretty comparable to Barkley, especially after yesterday's performance.

This win kind of hurts all the thought put into these threads.

I hate it when a team that isn't going anywhere anytime soon decides to win against an equal team, and put us further out of position from getting a player that will make the difference between us being drastically better to somewhat better.

I hate it when a team that isn't going anywhere anytime soon decides to win against an equal team, and put us further out of position from getting a player that will make the difference between us being drastically better to somewhat better.


Is what it is my man

I hate it when a team that isn't going anywhere anytime soon decides to win against an equal team, and put us further out of position from getting a player that will make the difference between us being drastically better to somewhat better.

True. Yet, it was nice to win, wasn't it?

I hate it when a team that isn't going anywhere anytime soon decides to win against an equal team, and put us further out of position from getting a player that will make the difference between us being drastically better to somewhat better.

Tell that to London Fletcher's face and see if he doesn't deck you in the face. Well he is a nice guy and he'll prob just laugh at your comment.

Part of having a winning culture is actually winning games.

I hate it when a team that isn't going anywhere anytime soon decides to win against an equal team, and put us further out of position from getting a player that will make the difference between us being drastically better to somewhat better.

Are you forgetting that the Redskins have a front office? Are you taking into consideration that both Washington and Seattle could end up with the same record at the end of the season? Are you aware of the fact that even though Washington defeated Seattle yesterday, Seattle could still end up with a better record with Washington at season's end, and therefore, select in the draft after Washington?

Even if Washington selects in the draft behind Seattle, the front office could always strike a deal with other teams to move up in the draft to select the player that they want.

Tell that to London Fletcher's face and see if he doesn't deck you in the face. Well he is a nice guy and he'll prob just laugh at your comment.

Part of having a winning culture is actually winning games.

I though John Keim nailed it right here:


4. Before we get to a few other things, have to address this: the notion that they shouldn’t win to preserve their draft pick. Have to say, I don’t understand that thinking. In the NBA? Sure. In that league there might be four or five potential impact players in a draft. In the NFL, there’s a heck of a lot more. That’s one point. The other: who knows which players will even come out? Matt Barkley doesn’t have to, for example. Maybe he will but do you know for sure? Besides, what if the QB you really like is, say, a guy who doesn’t project to a top-5 pick for whatever reason. And you really don’t know which direction you’re going to go until after the season, when you’ve had a chance to study these players. Besides, Mike Shanahan will be very aggressive trying to move up if there’s a guy he thinks he can get.

5. But here’s the biggest reason why you don’t do it: when you’re trying to establish a foundation for a winning franchise, you don’t get there by going 3-13 and losing 12 straight. That’s unbelievably short-sighted thinking. You go places by creating an atmosphere of success. If they go 3-13, then you’d be a heck of a lot less confident in the coaching staff, right? Well, so would some of the players. That’s a lock. Is that really what you want? If they go 4-12 they have many more issues than one QB can solve. And it would take a few years longer. I’d much rather see a team do what the Redskins did today: show some fight, overcome adversity and win. Yeah, the Seahawks aren’t very good. Yeah it could end up giving them a lower draft choice. But, again, while it’s obviously important to develop talent it’s just as important to establish a culture. I’d rather see a guy like Helu, clearly a part of the future in some way, have a big game and help lead a win.


Read more at the Washington Examiner: Ten observations: Redskins 23, Seahawks 17 | John Keim | NFL | Washington Examiner (http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/nfl/2011/11/ten-observations-redskins-23-seahawks-17#ixzz1f0gaLDuO)