News from the Combine

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I think head to head, pound for pound, Vilma is the better player. Plus he's a lot younger.

you're right on that, but again, its branch + fletcher + betts, or vilma + someone that's not that good (or not going to contribute big in his first year).

[Rajmahal33]

The Vilma trade is a horrible idea for what we need. We need multiple day 1 picks to address some of our holes on defense. Keeping betts/#6 pick and signing fletcher or clements or both (who will make immediate impacts) is the better move for this team. We can then trade the #6 pick for a late 1st rounder and a 2nd/3rd rounder, which u then use to pick up D-line and secondary help. WE HAVE TALENT ON DEFENSE! We just need to build around it and fill some holes like every other playoff team in the NFL does thru the draft.

Maximizing the number of picks in draft can get us back to the playoffs next year.

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

We have too many holes on the defensive line to spend that 6th pick on a linebacker, no matter how good that linebacker is.

Plus if we traded Betts, we'd have no depth at RB. It's be Portis and my two grandmothers at the RB position.

That Vilma trade would be a horrendous idea.

I agree.....We have too many holes to fill on defense to think we can fix every position this off-season. This team needs HELP in the first line of defense more than any other position. We have virtually nothing up front, and I think we should saty at #6 and draft the best DT- DE available.

[redskins5044]

this trade is the dumbest shit i have heard of. how we give up Betts who is a better player at his position for Vilma is. and swap first round picks if we did this trade i would so pissed out the front office. this trade is know where an even trade. maybe if we trade betts for vilma swaped first rounders and also got 2nd round pick and a 4th.

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by redskins5044

this trade is the dumbest shit i have heard of. how we give up Betts who is a better player at his position for Vilma is. and swap first round picks if we did this trade i would so pissed out the front office. this trade is know where an even trade. maybe if we trade betts for vilma swaped first rounders and also got 2nd round pick and a 4th.

If we don't do something to upgrade our front four, we could have Dick Butkus at MLB and it wouldn't matter. I can't begin to count the times I watched our defense shredded in the passing game, more from the lack of a pass rush than anything else. We need some muscle up front to occupy blockers in order to make any LB effective.

[dall-assblows]

we need a poll of weather getting vilma is good or bad.

it would be interesting.

[AlvinWalton'sNeckBrace]

its not just getting him...because that would be good, its whether or not giving up an arm and a leg is worth it...and its not

[dall-assblows]

matty make a poll

[RobH4413]

Don't do it.

Portis cannot take the entire load of the season without Betts.

That's huge. We can't afford that.

[724Skinsfan]

Originally Posted by RobH4413

Don't do it.

Portis cannot take the entire load of the season without Betts.

That's huge. We can't afford that.

Not advocating the move but I would think that they will find someone serviceable to backup Clinton. Who knows, it may be someone that doesn't fumble...

[Rajmahal33]

I agree that a suitable backup can be found for Portis, but thats not even the issue. If we are gonna shop around Betts, it should be for something that this team needs. Thats either draft picks and/or and upgrade on the defensive line or secondary. Our linebacking core doesn't need that much help, esp not enuff to sacrifice our #6 pick AND betts. Like ppl were saying Betts stock is sky high right now and IF we are gonna shop him we had better get a lot more than what we would for that lopsided Vilma trade...

On another note, as good as he may be I always thought a guys whose last name is Vilma, sounded too close to Wilma and i don't know if i can cheer for such an effeminate sounding name. haha

[EXoffender]

The head scratcher is that we traded our 3rd rounder for Duckett. It makes sense to try to aquire more picks involving Betts since his stock is as high as it's going to get.

[RobH4413]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

Not advocating the move but I would think that they will find someone serviceable to backup Clinton. Who knows, it may be someone that doesn't fumble...

This is true... I just don't want portis having to take a full load. If we can find a good back-up then I can see the trade happening.

[SmootSmack]

I'd rather keep Betts, but if we're going to trade him...Betts and the #6 to Houston for the #8 and the #40.

[NFLeurope]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

I'd rather keep Betts, but if we're going to trade him...Betts and the #6 to Houston for the #8 and the #40.

See, i dont really understand why you would like this trade...

Here you are suggesting to trade down from number 6 to number 8, which in itself could command a 2nd or 3rd round pick...depending on how badly the team wanted to move up to get a player available at #6.

And then trading betts away for a 2nd round pick...

So if you count the value of going from 6th overall to 8th overall...then you are essentially suggesting we trade Betts and a 2nd or 3rd rd pick (which is the value we could get for dropping from 6th to 8th) for the texans 2nd rounder... I dont really see how this would be a beneficial trade from our angle.