Re: Rumor from Denver
 

Never sure bet on rumors

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

Same source that told me about Denver's interest in trading out of the #2 slot in the first place - - and started this thread - - told me this morning that one of the teams that has recently "inquired" about the availability of the pick is:


[B][INDENT]The Philadelphia Eagles.[/INDENT][/B]

Folks, it is still a rumor and nothing more than that. But it would be interesting to see what the Eagles might want to do with a pick that high. My [B]guess[/B] would be a cornerback

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

The eagles don't need to trade up to 2 lol that wouldn't make any sense IMO. Look how often do picks 1-3 ever get traded? Not very often so I still expect Denver to draft at 2. As for wsh we literally have nothing to give up unless it's our 2nd rounder And a 1st or 2nd again in 2012! Sorry but Gabbert isnt that good IMO

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=celts32;793688]haha...save the trouble all 45 are not needed! I said my theory is that the QB is more important recently...say since free agency started. Basically every super bowl winning QB since Aikman can be in the study. Since then with few exceptions you need a franchise QB to win a Super bowl.

Here's the data:
Super Bowl 27. Troy Aikman (MVP), 4 TDs
Super Bowl 28. Troy Aikman (Emmitt Smith), O TDs
Super Bowl 29. Steve Young (MVP), 6 TDs
Super Bowl 30. Troy Aikman (Larry Brown), 1 TD
Super Bowl 31. Brett Favre (Desmond Howard), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 32. John Elway (Terrell Davis), 0 TDs
Super Bowl 33. John Elway (MVP), 1 TD
Super Bowl 34. Kurt Warner (MVP), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 35. Trent Dilfer (Ray Lewis), 1 TD
Super Bowl 36. Tom Brady (MVP), 1 TD
Super Bowl 37. Brad Johnson (Dexter Jackson), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 38. Tom Brady (MVP), 3 TDs
Super Bowl 39. Tom Brady (Deion Branch), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 40. Ben Roethlisberger (Hines Ward), 0 TDs
Super Bowl 41. Peyton Manning (MVP), 1 TD
Super Bowl 42. Eli Manning (MVP), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 43: Ben Roethlisberger (Santonio Holmes), 1 TD
Super Bowl 44: Drew Brees (MVP), 2 TDs

All but 2 SB winning QB's since free agency started were franchise QB's. And the 2 exceptions(Johnson & Dilfer) had ALL TIME great defenses. We can argue about how to get one whether it's waiting and hoping or being aggressive...but the main point to remember is that we are not winning a Super Bowl until we find one.[/quote]How many "franchise QBs" actually won the super bowl while playing at an elite level? The first three on the list qualify, I believe, but something has changed starting with Elway. Elway was out of his prime, Dilfer was on his second team, Brady didn't hit his prime until the middle of the decade. Roethlisberger hasn't achieved the elite level of play until just recently. Johnson was nearing the end of a journeyman career. Eli won it in a season where he wasn't even playing well.

I think there is no clear instance of the cause of winning super bowls being an effect of having a franchise quarterback. I think the correlation exists, but in a couple of cases, the opportunity to develop and achieve "franchise quarterback" designation came, oftentimes, seemingly as the result of playoff success. This happened in the recent cases of Brady, Roethlisberger, and Eli Manning. It also happened with Aaron Rodgers to an extent: even though he was already a pro-bowl level performer, he won his first playoff game and his first super bowl in the same year. Clearly now, Rodgers is a franchise QB, but even in his case, the super bowl he won was part of the cause of achieving franchise status, and not entirely an effect of having him.

I think when we start to adjust for revisionist history, there are only a couple instances of elite quarterbacks winning a super bowl. Manning in 06, Brees in 09, and then perhaps Brady in 04, Warner in 99, and Rodgers in 10 should also qualify. So that's what, 5 times in the last 14 years that the super bowl winning QB was also a regular season MVP candidate? Seems almost like the frequency has gone down in the last 15 years. Because in the early to mid 90s, it may have been an every year thing.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

What I may argue, if I was going to support the "we need a QB at all costs argument" is that the last couple of years (2009 and 2010), the only teams to even make it to the super bowl had franchise QBs having elite years. The last time teams met in the super bowl on the strength of their defenses was 2008.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;793916]The eagles don't need to trade up to 2 lol that wouldn't make any sense IMO. Look how often do picks 1-3 ever get traded? Not very often so I still expect Denver to draft at 2. As for wsh we literally have nothing to give up unless it's our 2nd rounder And a 1st or 2nd again in 2012! Sorry but Gabbert isnt that good IMO[/quote]

I guess to take Patrick Peterson.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

^ yeah I guess but they can draft the kid from Colorado IMO or go get Nnamdi in FA

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

Is it necessary to have...Francise QB's with rare pedigree's?
Or just QB's that play like it on the field? There are of course....MANY variables that lead to stellar play on the part of the QB that are not actually the...QB.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

Fran Tarkenton, Dan Fouts, Trent Dilfer, Dan Marino.

3 Of these 4 QB's are in the HOF and 1 of the 4 has a SB Winners ring.

What's my point?

I haven't a freakin' clue.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=GTripp0012;793917]How many "franchise QBs" actually won the super bowl while playing at an elite level? The first three on the list qualify, I believe, but something has changed starting with Elway. Elway was out of his prime, Dilfer was on his second team, Brady didn't hit his prime until the middle of the decade. Roethlisberger hasn't achieved the elite level of play until just recently. Johnson was nearing the end of a journeyman career. Eli won it in a season where he wasn't even playing well.

I think there is no clear instance of the cause of winning super bowls being an effect of having a franchise quarterback. I think the correlation exists, but in a couple of cases, the opportunity to develop and achieve "franchise quarterback" designation came, oftentimes, seemingly as the result of playoff success. This happened in the recent cases of Brady, Roethlisberger, and Eli Manning. It also happened with Aaron Rodgers to an extent: even though he was already a pro-bowl level performer, he won his first playoff game and his first super bowl in the same year. Clearly now, Rodgers is a franchise QB, but even in his case, the super bowl he won was part of the cause of achieving franchise status, and not entirely an effect of having him.

I think when we start to adjust for revisionist history, there are only a couple instances of elite quarterbacks winning a super bowl. Manning in 06, Brees in 09, and then perhaps Brady in 04, Warner in 99, and Rodgers in 10 should also qualify. So that's what, 5 times in the last 14 years that the super bowl winning QB was also a regular season MVP candidate? Seems almost like the frequency has gone down in the last 15 years. Because in the early to mid 90s, it may have been an every year thing.[/quote]

I don't realy understand what you are trying to say...maybe you are overanalyizing. everyone on that list other then johnson and Dilfer is clearly a franchise QB. Aikman, Elway, Brady, Ben, favre...that list is a textbook example of a franchise QB.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

I get what Tripp is trying to say, these guys werent in their primes when they won but I don't totally agree yet I really don't feel like responding either.

My prediction is Quinn at 10, trade up to the bottom of the 1st for Ponder

My wish is get Locker and add another pick in the first two rounds and get something like Paea and Justin Houston (just to throw a couple of names out there)

I'm of the belief that we need to add at least one starting caliber QB. Ponder is a much safer pick, but give me the high risk, high reward of Jake Locker. Go big or go home!

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;793916]The eagles don't need to trade up to 2 lol that wouldn't make any sense IMO. Look how often do picks 1-3 ever get traded? Not very often so I still expect Denver to draft at 2. As for wsh we literally have nothing to give up unless it's our 2nd rounder And a 1st or 2nd again in 2012! Sorry but Gabbert isnt that good IMO[/quote]

Yes it would actually. Philly has been okay defensively, but nothing like they were in the early 2000's when teams feared them. Back then they were loaded with talent, which included among others, two high level DT's in Corey Simon and Darwin Walker. Today they only have one in Peterson. I have to imagine they'd relish the chance to add a Marcell Dareus or even a Nick Fairley.

They would also possibly be interested in adding Von Miller as one of the most common complaints I hear from Eagle fans comes from the teams weak linebacking corps. Still I don't think that OLB is the type of position that entices a team to trade up from 23 to 2 unless they're a 3-4 team with no one to rush the passer.

Still in considering their ammo they wouldn't have enough to move up, even if they wanted to. Plus Philly likes quantity and value when it comes to the draft.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

What if Denver drafts Gabbert at 2, then trades Orton to us for a 2012 2nd round pick, we take Quinn at 10 or trade down then also pick a rookie QB in the late 1st or early 2nd? Thatd be a great scenario imo

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;793962]What if Denver drafts Gabbert at 2, then trades Orton to us for a 2012 2nd round pick, we take Quinn at 10 or trade down then also pick a rookie QB in the late 1st or early 2nd? Thatd be a great scenario imo[/quote]

Obviously you mean they trade Orton later, after a new CBA.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

you have to take nick fairly at the number two spot if you are denver.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;793962]What if Denver drafts Gabbert at 2, then trades Orton to us for a 2012 2nd round pick, we take Quinn at 10 or trade down then also pick a rookie QB in the late 1st or early 2nd? Thatd be a great scenario imo[/quote]

That would be expensive for a one or two year qb, while we wait for the heir apparent.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

^ did it last year

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=SmootSmack;793952]I get what Tripp is trying to say, these guys werent in their primes when they won but I don't totally agree yet I really don't feel like responding either.

My prediction is Quinn at 10, trade up to the bottom of the 1st for Ponder

My wish is get Locker and add another pick in the first two rounds and get something like Paea and Justin Houston (just to throw a couple of names out there)

I'm of the belief that we need to add at least one starting caliber QB. Ponder is a much safer pick, but give me the high risk, high reward of Jake Locker. Go big or go home![/quote]

I guess, but all that is really saying is that they were franchise QBs that had not yet been crowned as such. That still doesn't change the fact that the greatness was in them.

From your lips to gods ears on the Locker pick. Ponder or Dalton may become good starters but I can't see either one of them becoming the type of QB that we win because of.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;793962]What if Denver drafts Gabbert at 2, then trades Orton to us for a 2012 2nd round pick, we take Quinn at 10 or trade down then also pick a rookie QB in the late 1st or early 2nd? Thatd be a great scenario imo[/quote]

Orton for a 2nd rounder? Are you shitting me...lol


I would personally drive to DC and light the Redskins office on fire if they did that.



(not really, because somebody probably would do it...lol)

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

(cough, cough) If there is a fire at Redskins Park we know who is suspect (cough, cough) lol.

The sad thing is in yrs past half the group would side with one player and the other with another. This yr is so open as far as who everyone wants. Gabbert, Mallet, Locker, Dalton, Newton, Kaepernick, Ponder, .... thats just QB's alone. No one can agree on the fact of who is the best pick. I'm not sure if they all are really that good or are they all just about the same level talent wise but with different talents?

Then you have the OL, DL, LB, WR, RB, and CB fans. In reality I just hope the team picks someone that works out. If it's QB then I hope whoever they are looking at is coached up well and helps the team start winning. If it's any of the other positions fine. But we need more picks which is why I'd prefer the team drop back out of the 10 (if possible) to collect another draft pick or two and be able to get more players in the 2nd or 3rd round.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

No picks for a QB!!!!!!!

However I'd rather have Tebow than Orton.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

Amen, SB. I agree with you on every point. You took the words right off my finger tips.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

Well Orton was better than mcnabb last year and we Gave a 2nd for him

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;794005]Well Orton was better than mcnabb last year and we Gave a 2nd for him[/quote]

Two wrongs don't make a right...

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

True but I think he'd fit well w kyle

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;794008]True but I think he'd fit well w kyle[/quote]

I agree and he would be a great option as the veteran to start now while we groom a rookie but I would not trade a draft pick to get him.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[Q] Call it a poker face, or call it honesty. But this draft does seem to have quarterbacks — Jake Locker, Andy Dalton, Christian Ponder, Ryan Mallett, Colin Kaepernick — that analysts believe are capable of breaking the trend of second-rounders that never deliver. Do the Redskins believe so as well? [U]

[url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/post/nfl-draft-trading-down-makes-more-sense-than-trading-up-for-redskins/2011/04/18/AFSN5CzD_blog.html]NFL draft: Trading down makes more sense than trading up for Redskins - The Insider - The Washington Post[/url]

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

I would hope we would trade down but with the Skins who knows what will happen. They will probably try to trade up to get a higher pick and a qb.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

We're not trading up our #10 pick

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=SmootSmack;794040]We're not trading up our #10 pick[/quote]

It would take more ammunition than we currently have to move up. Any such move would involve the possibility of a 2012 1st round pick to complete.

If memory serves me correctly, just recently Dan Snyder issued a proclamation preserving the rights to all our future 1st round draft picks. Of course nothing is etched in stone and I'm in agreement with anyone who does not see it happening.

[url=http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/39321/could-elway-shanahan-be-trade-partners]Could Elway, Shanahan be trade partners? - NFL Nation Blog - ESPN[/url]

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[QUOTE=SmootSmack;794040]We're not trading up our #10 pick[/QUOTE

Pretty definitive Smoot. Really think there's no chance, or you're 99% sure?

Logically that doesn't seem likely, but if Shanny really wants Gabbert I could see it happening. Maybe the price to trade up won't be as steep as it usually is?

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

When dealing future picks the price is almost always higher. What commands a 2nd in this draft commands a 1st in next year's.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=freddyg12;794193][QUOTE=SmootSmack;794040]We're not trading up our #10 pick[/QUOTE

Pretty definitive Smoot. Really think there's no chance, or you're 99% sure?

Logically that doesn't seem likely, but if Shanny really wants Gabbert I could see it happening. Maybe the price to trade up won't be as steep as it usually is?[/quote]

Well no one can say for sure...but no one I've heard from that has informed opinions on what's happening has said we have any intention to move up from 10th overall.

But none of the people I've talked to have the last name Shanahan...or do they

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

[quote=Mattyk;794196]When dealing future picks the price is almost always higher. What commands a 2nd in this draft commands a 1st in next year's.[/quote]

True, doesn't mean they have to trade future picks though. If Denver really wants out of that #2 spot & can't find a partner, they may be willing to swap some picks, e.g. they get our #s10 & 41, we get their #2 & 3rd or 4th round pick.

Re: Rumor from Denver
 

We would need to give up quite a bit more than just #10 and #41 to get to #2. Not worth it.