|
Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
03-17-2010, 06:33 PM | #256 |
Uncle Phil
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,256
|
Re: Redskins Sign Grossman
Technically the Jets first tried to trade up for Reggie Bush before deciding on Brick over Hot Tub
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You |
Advertisements |
03-17-2010, 07:20 PM | #257 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 36
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: Redskins Sign Grossman
2008 Dolphins, but first, why don't you name all the teams that have been in a similar situation who have had success, period.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
03-17-2010, 07:24 PM | #258 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 36
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: Redskins Sign Grossman
Quote:
I don't actually think the prime cuts of this class are underclassmen, but again, that's a valuation problem with defined arbitrage opportunities. Your argument is that 1) arbitrage opportunities don't exist in the NFL draft (at least at QB), which by extension means that 2) drafting higher is drafting smarter. Which is something I disagree with philosophically. At least, that's what I think I'm reading in that middle paragraph, that getting a great QB after the top ten picks requires good fortune. I don't know if that's what you were trying to say, but I'd agree to an extent. The idea is to get a player in the bottom half of the first round or in the second round that should have been rated in the top half of the first round. Drafting quarterbacks, at value, is one of the worst strategies that is common in the NFL draft. Quarterbacks need to be taken later than you have them rated. And if there's no one that's rated higher on the big board than the pick suggests, there's nothing you can do to make the opportunity better. That's essentially playing with the hand you are dealt, and not moving in with whatever just because you are tired of taking down small pots.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
03-17-2010, 07:32 PM | #259 |
MVP
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Seattle
Age: 45
Posts: 10,069
|
Re: Redskins Sign Grossman
So long as we didn't give this chump playing time or lots of money I'm cool. I'm sure he'll make a fine practice dummy for our defense.
__________________
"The Redskins have always suffered from chronic organizational deformities under Snyder." -Jenkins |
03-17-2010, 08:08 PM | #260 | |
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,052
|
Re: Redskins Sign Grossman
Quote:
Related to that is that you also continue to assume that the GMs are in consensus all the damn time even though it wouldn't make any sense to reveal all the cards to the other franchises. Final draft order does not necessarily reflect the draft boards of each individual franchise's scouting department, it's the manifestation of individual teams' FO's making decisions on which of the top prospects who are all going to go somewhere in the first round to choose. It's highly likely some teams rated Pacman higher than Rogers and vice versa, for example. And actually, the Texans did not have a perceived need at LT at the time because they chose Tony Boselli to be that guy in the expansion draft. Since the percecption was that they were set at LT, they took a QB. So, the "Carr was simply the BPA" premise is suspect at best. They thought they had their tackle at the time, but in actuality, they didn't. Even so, there's no way to know how much of a gap Leinart really had with Ferguson or what other incentives were in play when weighing the BPA vs. need for the Jets. So yeah, I'll retract that the Jets clearly thought Ferguson was better than Leinart because it's damn hard to weight the BPA vs. need incentive. They chose the fix OL and see what Pennington, etc can do. Al Davis probably just didn't believe he had the ridiculous measurables he wanted, Buffalo had to see what they had in Losman, a first-rounder, and Millen believed Kitna would be the guy. I already dealt with San Fran and Green Bay earlier. Because these teams between the 4th and 10th pick didn't have a pressing incentive for drafting a QB, it's hard to judge the Leinart was soooo ZOMG worse that he fell off a cliff down to #10. 'Zona, on the other hand, did not view Warner to be nothing more than a true stopgap to hold the fort until "the future one" develops. Nothing Warner did in his stint with the Giants would hint of what would happen in the last couple of years. Not my problem you can't frame a syllogism to save your life. |
|
03-17-2010, 08:36 PM | #261 |
Gamebreaker
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 13,949
|
Re: Redskins Sign Grossman
The Giants got Sergie(sp) and ...I don't like it,Garcia is still out there and he is a good back up....I wish we had gotten him.I feel Grossman will want to start.....and just might.JC is as good as gone ....and it's a shame ....yes I would take him,I like Eli but Campbell can play.
|
03-17-2010, 08:45 PM | #262 |
The Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Staunton, VA
Posts: 1,261
|
Re: Redskins Sign Grossman
Wtf?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?
__________________
F#$% the Cowpukes! |
03-17-2010, 09:20 PM | #263 | |
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,766
|
Re: Redskins Sign Grossman
Quote:
|
|
03-17-2010, 09:32 PM | #264 |
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C.
Posts: 7,570
|
Re: Redskins Sign Grossman
I don't think anyone on here is saying that every position on the o-line needs to be a first round pick. That is ridiculous. The line plays as a group and 2 #1 picks who are worthy of being #1 picks, can upgrade the line tremendously.
__________________
Defense wins championships. Bring it! |
03-17-2010, 09:33 PM | #265 |
MVP
Join Date: May 2005
Location: washington, D.C.
Posts: 11,460
|
Re: Redskins Sign Grossman
As reasonable as you sound, you can bet people will be unhappy with how the Redskins approach "fixing" the offensive line.
|
03-17-2010, 09:40 PM | #266 |
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C.
Posts: 7,570
|
Re: Redskins Sign Grossman
Some people are unhappy not matter what you do.
__________________
Defense wins championships. Bring it! |
03-17-2010, 09:40 PM | #267 |
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: South Jersey
Age: 39
Posts: 5,604
|
Re: Redskins Sign Grossman
I love after a while every, almost Evert thread title bears no meaning on what's being discussed after the first three, if ur lucky, pages. Lmao
__________________
R.I.P #21SEAN TAYLOR
|
03-17-2010, 09:44 PM | #268 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 36
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: Redskins Sign Grossman
Quote:
I'm not even suggesting that we need two tackles in this draft. They just need to be serious about improvement.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
03-17-2010, 09:56 PM | #269 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Detroit area
Posts: 4,153
|
Re: Redskins Sign Grossman
Grossman? Grossman?!! I mean Rex Grossman? You might have been better off getting Gus Frerotte after all. Well one thing is for sure, Brennan is the odd man out. He had no business getting drafted in the first place.
|
03-17-2010, 10:00 PM | #270 | |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,323
|
Re: Redskins Sign Grossman
Quote:
I figured/hoped Dan Orlovsky or maybe even John David Booty. But, Rex will suffice maybe Dan wasn't available? |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|