2012 QB Prospects (Part 2)

Only a matter of time.

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQPe-zeMKMTer_Uo48in15eelC_ks9GNYKkgV_fTfK73J6TUqdUCQ

Why would they pick him or why do I think it'll be him?

Both. Assuming we pick in the 4 to 7 range and one of Luck, Barkley or RGIII is available why take a project QB?

Both. Assuming we pick in the 4 to 7 range and one of Luck, Barkley or RGIII is available why take a project QB?

Well let's take Luck off. Now it's just Barkley or RGIII.

Here are the various reasons for my thinking. Tannehill, contrary to popular belief, wasn't a WR converted to QB. He was a QB coming into A&M, who played some WR before starting at QB. I think the combine and workouts will increase RT's value (and may drop RGIIIs a bit actually). Tannehill is a more unlikely choice, which fits a bit of the Mike Shanahan mold. Plus there is the Mike Sherman-Kyle Shanahan connection from their days with the Texans. And I also have a feeling still that our first first round pick won't be a QB.

Well let's take Luck off. Now it's just Barkley or RGIII.

Here are the various reasons for my thinking. Tannehill, contrary to popular belief, wasn't a WR converted to QB. He was a QB coming into A&M, who played some WR before starting at QB. I think the combine and workouts will increase RT's value (and may drop RGIIIs a bit actually). Tannehill is a more unlikely choice, which fits a bit of the Mike Shanahan mold. Plus there is the Mike Sherman-Kyle Shanahan connection from their days with the Texans. And I also have a feeling still that our first first round pick won't be a QB.

Something you've said a couple/few times now. Have no idea what to say except I hope you're wrong on this one.

...actually, I'd say not drafting the best QB w/ our first pick would reflect Mike's supreme arrogance and ego. The fact there's even a chance of this happening (which I acknowledge) should be enough reason to bring in a new regime.

Well let's take Luck off. Now it's just Barkley or RGIII.

Here are the various reasons for my thinking. Tannehill, contrary to popular belief, wasn't a WR converted to QB. He was a QB coming into A&M, who played some WR before starting at QB. I think the combine and workouts will increase RT's value (and may drop RGIIIs a bit actually). Tannehill is a more unlikely choice, which fits a bit of the Mike Shanahan mold. Plus there is the Mike Sherman-Kyle Shanahan connection from their days with the Texans. And I also have a feeling still that our first first round pick won't be a QB.

Is that feeling backed up any inside knowledge? I can possibly see us trade back a bit (perhaps with the browns), draft a true number one WR and pick up tannehill in the second. I'd still rather we take Barkley with the first pick... I'm tired of mediocre QB play.

[/B]

Something you've said a couple/few times now. Have no idea what to say except I hope you're wrong on this one.

...actually, I'd say not drafting the best QB w/ our first pick would reflect Mike's supreme arrogance and ego. The fact there's even a chance of this happening (which I acknowledge) should be enough reason to bring in a new regime.

Well I guess it's terrible if you think the gap between Barkley/RGIII (let's assume they're both available) and let's say Tannehill and Jonathan Martin is significant.

Personally, I think if Barkley is there we should take him and not even hesitate. RG III I still have some doubts about. But I'm just telling you what I think may happen. It's an informed guess.

Just remember, it's only December

Well let's take Luck off. Now it's just Barkley or RGIII.

Here are the various reasons for my thinking. Tannehill, contrary to popular belief, wasn't a WR converted to QB. He was a QB coming into A&M, who played some WR before starting at QB. I think the combine and workouts will increase RT's value (and may drop RGIIIs a bit actually). Tannehill is a more unlikely choice, which fits a bit of the Mike Shanahan mold. Plus there is the Mike Sherman-Kyle Shanahan connection from their days with the Texans. And I also have a feeling still that our first first round pick won't be a QB.

I would be ok w/ sliding down in the draft again or drafting a non qb in the first round as long as we got "our guy" later. It's just a gamble that I don't know is worth playing.

As good as this class is, and it may be historically great, there's no one in the draft who is a quarterback solution on draft day. There is no question that the Redskins need fresh blood at quarterback in 2012. They needed fresh blood in 2010 and in 2011 as well. The youngest QB on the roster heading into 2010 was 28. In 2011 the youngest QB heading into the offseason was 29.

When Zorn was the coach here, we had younger QB prospects in Jason Campbell under age 27, and Chase Daniel (and to a lesser extent, 26 year old Colt Brennan). So obviously the need to find a younger quarterback is reaching a critical level which we haven't had in Washington.

But no one in this draft is going to solve the QB problem the day they walk in the door. The biggest issue the Shanahan's have to overcome is that kids are not walking out of college knowing how to execute their offense the way they want it executed at a pro level. I understand that Luck, Barkley, and Tannehill all play in a multiple WCO where the terminology and concepts will be similar to what Kyle Shanahan wants to run. But no one (except maybe Luck) has actually succeeded to move the ball, score, and win games in college actually doing the things that Kyle Shanahan is going to do with them here.

If the system remains really rigid as it is now, the Redskins are better out going and finding a veteran to run this offense who has experience winning games the way the Redskins want to win them. I see no point of drafting a QB in the first round if the Redskins are going to maintain their current ways. If they want to change coaches to someone with a track record of QB development in the last, oh, lets say four NFL drafts, then great. Bill Musgrave and Rob Chudzynski probably deserve the promotion. If the Redskins are willing to meet in the middle, well, I'm not sure if Kyle Shanahan knows how to accomplish this, but in that case, I think they could win right away.

My biggest problem with the Redskins and Tannehill is not the player, but if that's who the Redskins end up targeting, it suggests they are going to stay inside the same thinking box that has put this organization where he is now. He knows this system. And he's used to playing for a coaching staff that gets outcoached in the Big XII. He'll be great here.

As silly as it sounds to the traditionalist, I like Tannehill a lot more in a different system with different coaches than I do with him running what he has at Texas A&M in the pros. We've seen that struggle to beat even mediocre opponents already. Might as well go get David Garrard or Matt Flynn or Kyle Orton.

What about Nick Foles? He's seems to be just as good as Barkley if not better.

What about Nick Foles? He's seems to be just as good as Barkley if not better.

I think he's probably in the later first round/high second round category