Not drafting a QB a mistake?

For me its not about degrees of upside in comparison to what we have because the draft is crap shoot you just never know. The QBs in this draft could all suck or not. For me its about process and QB development in a WCO system. I like the way Ted Thompson, Reid and Holmgren and now McCarthy approached the QB position via the draft they take (waste) at least 1 every draft.


It's definitely not a bad way to go, basically roll the dice and see what you get. Of course there are also several examples of quarterbacks taking time to blossom, some bouncing around from spot to spot, like Vinny Testaverde. Alex Smith is the other one who comes to mind - definitely got better with experience.

Given that RG3 and Cousins still fit the mold of young'ns with something to prove, I'd rather have McCoy than a rookie at the 3rd spot on the depth chart.

Given that RG3 and Cousins still fit the mold of young'ns with something to prove, I'd rather have McCoy than a rookie at the 3rd spot on the depth chart.McCoy vs a rookie though is a different discussion because they serve different purposes. McCoy is like Jay's binky where vs a rookie QB would be like Jay's son or nephew or puppy.

And they wouldn't necessarily have to cut Colt; Jay/FO/Dan just need to choose between Griff or Kirk and they can't seem to be of the same accord when it comes to that decision.

I think we can discuss draft choices without wandering off into speculation or dealing in maybes. But as this thread illustrates, its not the only way.

Every team has a draft board and most teams say they pick best player available. If a team says they stayed true to their board it doesn't necessarily make them right. Only time can answer that question. So back to your example lets say a team liked Russell Wilson but figured he would be available in the 5th round (or like the Redskins admitted the 4th round) but Wilson gets taken in the 3rd round then yes the teams that passed on him with the thought that he would be available later miscalculated his availability and therefore made a mistake. It happens all the time, even the best GM hit about a rate of ~60 so there will be mistakes/misses of omission or commission every draft. So extending your line of though further (even though its not my point in regards to the QB) Bill Parcels or Polian one of the 2 says 'its better to take a player you like 1 round early then 1 pick to late'

If a GM is deciding who to draft based on where they think they will go, then the GM messed up. They need to scout the players and apply a ranking to them. If Shanny had Russell Wilson as a 2nd or 3rd rounder, and chose not to draft him until the 4th round for the simple reason that he thought he would be there, then he did not stay true to his board. So no... thats not my line of thought at all.

They need to base their board on their scouting acumen and not the perception of what 31 other teams will do. If you have a guy rated as a 5th rounder and then panic and grab him in the 3rd because you convinced yourself that he would be taken by another team then, then all you did was panic and not stay true to your board. You passed over a lot of players that you had rated higher due to panic. If you have a guy rated as a 3rd rounder but pass on him in rounds 3 and 4 because you believe he will be there in the 5th, then you did not stay true to your board.

If you base QB's above all else, then that will come out when you are rating players and deciding on your draft order. If you are desperate for a safety, then that will come out when you rate the player. Once you have that complete though, stay the course.

If a GM is deciding who to draft based on where they think they will go, then the GM messed up...Well GMs make that gamble all the time. They set their board and they try project where the other teams rank/rate players and they try to find out which teams like which players.That how/why teams trade up to get 'in front' of other teams.

They also adjust their board as the draft unfolds. If their is a run a certain position then naturally the other prospects at that position get moved up...etc...

No GM wants to draft a player, even if they like that player, higher then they need to. GMs talk all the time about wanting a player and thinking/hoping a player will fall to them and sweating it out..sometimes they're right but sometimes their wrong.

again, which QB should we have taken? i still haven't seen a name that'd be better than the guys on our roster, even given 1-2 years.

so if there weren't better choices available, why would we pick one?

same with TE, who would we have taken over the guys we have? at TE there might have at least been an upgrade over depth, but then we'd lose depth at a spot we actually took.

feel free to name names though, otherwise we have to assume you want a generic replacement level player, but that's not an upgrade and we've already got a bunch of those.

Well GMs make that gamble all the time. They set their board and they try project where the other teams rank/rate players and they try to find out which teams like which players.That how/why teams trade up to get 'in front' of other teams.

They also adjust their board as the draft unfolds. If their is a run a certain position then naturally the other prospects at that position get moved up...etc...

No GM wants to draft a player, even if they like that player, higher then they need to. GMs talk all the time about wanting a player and thinking/hoping a player will fall to them and sweating it out..sometimes they're right but sometimes their wrong.

When you move a player from round 4 to round 2 all because there was a run on that position late in round 1, then you dont value your own ratings. You are jumping a guy 60 spots based on what other teams did, not based on what you believe.

Also, why bring up the quote of 'take a player one round early, not 1 pick late' and then turn around and talk about waiting to draft a player based on your feel of what 31 other teams will do? 2 ends of the spectrum that can never go hand in hand with each other.

again, which QB should we have taken? i still haven't seen a name that'd be better than the guys on our roster, even given 1-2 years.

so if there weren't better choices available, why would we pick one?

same with TE, who would we have taken over the guys we have? at TE there might have at least been an upgrade over depth, but then we'd lose depth at a spot we actually took.

feel free to name names though, otherwise we have to assume you want a generic replacement level player, but that's not an upgrade and we've already got a bunch of those.

Had we not made the deal w/ Seattle, they could have taken Grayson in the top of the 3rd round. Give him some of Colt's reps and let him sit and learn.

To me bringing back McCoy was useless cause he's never going to be a full time starter. OK back up and all, but just can't drive the ball downfield. He was on the street and not one team wanted him. Had they kept that pick, and drafted Grayson, maybe he competes next year. That would have also given KC all or most of the 2nd team reps.

Regardless, I do believe that we'll have a new starting QB for the Redskins next year. This year was obviously about building out the rest of the roster.

When you move a player from round 4 to round 2 all because there was a run on that position late in round 1, then you dont value your own ratings. You are jumping a guy 60 spots based on what other teams did, not based on what you believe.Um yeah obviously jumping a prospect up some 60 odd spots because of a run at that position is unwise. Its also something I didn't suggest. So yeah describing an obviously poor decision doesn't have anything to do with what I was saying. Its not quite a strawman but its close.

An example of adjusting a draft board at a position happened with WRs the past 2 seasons. A team might have a say a 2nd round grade on Nelson Agoholor or Kelvin Benjamin but based on how the draft played out if you didn't take them round 1 you weren't getting them.


Also, why bring up the quote of 'take a player one round early, not 1 pick late' and then turn around and talk about waiting to draft a player based on your feel of what 31 other teams will do? 2 ends of the spectrum that can never go hand in hand with each other.I don't understand your point here.

The draft is fluid not static.

There are many different scenarios and situations at play that are interrelated and require different means of management. So sure sometimes Bill's idiom of 'better 1 round early then 1 pick' is the right approach for certain situations or like a Russell Wilson and many other Seattle "reaches" or sometimes waiting on a hidden gem that your scouts and coaching staff have identified undervalued is the right play as in a Alfred Morris or a Keenan Robinson.

again, which QB should we have taken? i still haven't seen a name that'd be better than the guys on our roster, even given 1-2 years.Your question has already been covered. And I don't profess know which QBs will or won't be better then our guys......and neither do you.

Your question has already been covered. And I don't profess know which QBs will or won't be better then our guys......and neither do you.

really, cause i've yet to see you state a name. someone else mentioned grayson, and that's been it.

I've already stated i don't think anyone pans out to do great things pages ago, so i'm accountable. you decided not to make any predictions cause then we could look back and say that you were wrong, and, well we can't have that now can we?

if you're not going to put up, then it's probably time to stop this pointless exercise. either there's someone that would be better than who we've got or there isn't. the vacuous "we should pick somebody, but i have no idea who" leads to thinking up imaginary players that might be better than the ones that were actually available in this draft.

if you're going to say you have no idea and i don't either, great, then we'll defer to the experts, which decided it wasn't a good idea. /thread.