Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

[mooby]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

What if it's Manning/Status Quo vs. RG3?

Like suppose we couldn't/didn't make any QB move this year other than make Manning our new starter? So we don't add any young QB prospect this year

Blegh. That's a crappy scenario. I prefer RG3 right now, because the only way Manning makes sense is if we take someone to groom behind him.

What if he goes down 3 quarters into the season, having led us to a 9-3 season, and our only other options are Rex and Beck? And we get into the playoffs but get destroyed in our first game and we end up with a late first round draft pick, thus making the cost to move up and get our guy even greater?

[Dirtbag59]

Tripp the argument about Matt Ryan was more about passing up a chance at the first tier guys and thinking you can get the same type of quality in the second round with guys like Henne.

In 2012 terms it's like saying that instead of getting RG3 you can get the same quality player with Tannehill.

RGIII is far and beyond Matt Ryan as a prospect.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

What if it's Manning/Status Quo vs. RG3?

Like suppose we couldn't/didn't make any QB move this year other than make Manning our new starter? So we don't add any young QB prospect this year

No can do. We should protect the short- and long-term by having both PM and a real developmental (i.e., not Curtis Painter) QB.

[Chief X_Phackter]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

What if it's Manning/Status Quo vs. RG3?

Like suppose we couldn't/didn't make any QB move this year other than make Manning our new starter? So we don't add any young QB prospect this year

Not a fan of status quo. I think it has to be all in on either RG3 or Luck --- or Manning/Tannehill (or other rookie the staff feels comfortable to groom for 2-3 years down the road).

[irish]

Originally Posted by mooby

Blegh. That's a crappy scenario. I prefer RG3 right now, because the only way Manning makes sense is if we take someone to groom behind him.

What if he goes down 3 quarters into the season, having led us to a 9-3 season, and our only other options are Rex and Beck? And we get into the playoffs but get destroyed in our first game and we end up with a late first round draft pick, thus making the cost to move up and get our guy even greater?

What if RGIII has a Joe Theisman leg break 3 quarters into the season? He's lost and so are all those draft picks. I think that's a much worse situation than having Manning go down and having to revert to the status quo.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

Tripp the argument about Matt Ryan was more about passing up a chance at the first tier guys and thinking you can get the same type of quality in the second round with guys like Henne.

In 2012 terms it's like saying that instead of getting RG3 you can get the same quality player with Tannehill.

RGIII is far and beyond Matt Ryan as a prospect.

Understood, but I think you're doing more to prove the opposite.

Obviously the argument that first round players are better than second round players will hold for any position, as will the argument that first tier players are better than second tier players. Luck is probably a tier above Griffin. How much more is Luck worth to the Redskins than Griffin? Hard to say.

I don't think every one of Foles, Tannehill, Kellen Moore, or Kirk Cousins will make it in the NFL. I think there's a good chance that someone I gave a first round grade to in this draft washes out. Happens every year. But that doesn't mean that Tannehill or Foles isn't worth the 6th overall pick, just like it doesn't mean that Robert Griffin isn't worth the 2nd overall pick.

The big issue re: Griffin is that QB trade ups in the draft have a strong tendency to not work out in the end. Speaking only based on history, you'd be more justified in taking Tannehill at 6th overall than trading to 2nd for Griffin. That's the situation that's typically been most rewarding.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by irish

What if RGIII has a Joe Theisman leg break 3 quarters into the season? He's lost and so are all those draft picks. I think that's a much worse situation than having Manning go down and having to revert to the status quo.

Anything can happen. Whatever does happen, we have to adapt and move on. Whatever moves we make this offseason, there will be inherent risks associated with every one. It's all a gamble. The only difference is what your preference in gambling is.

And everyone wants to talk about draft picks, but look at our upper round draft picks from 04-09. Where are they now? Were they worth it to our team? In those 5 years, we sat where we had our original pick, we traded up once for JC, and we traded down once for more picks (08). Were those moves worth it? The draft is a crapshoot. If the Shannies have identified RG3 as the guy they want representing the B&G for the next decade, go get him. I'm not saying be stupid in their pursuit of him, but how you go get him is up for debate.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

What if it's Manning/Status Quo vs. RG3?

Like suppose we couldn't/didn't make any QB move this year other than make Manning our new starter? So we don't add any young QB prospect this year

we have to add a young QB, the status quo has been the problem.

When you get down to Manning vs RG3, its all about the cost of RG3. It the cost is greater than our 6th and next years 1st, Manning is the way to go. But the thing is even if you get Manning you still have to add young QBs this year. Combo of Tannehill, Cousins, Foles, Clausen, Hoyer, Johnson, Quinn...

[SBXVII]

This is the rumored cost...

Report: Redskins want RG3 badly

NBC Philadelphia’s Howard Eskin reports, via team sources, the Redskins are “prepared” to make the Rams a massive offer — their top three picks this year and “at least” their first-rounder next year — to land Griffin III.

Also...

After a terrific showing at the Combine, highlighted by a blazing forty-yard dash time of 4.38, Griffin can now sit back and watch his suitors offer up an arm and a leg

What showing? we were not privy to any of the meetings. we only saw his NFL Network media spotlight. and his 40 time. What showing? he didn't throw, he didn't run the shuttle, did he long jump or high jump? did he bench press? I must have missed something.

[GTripp0012]

To try to shift the argument for a moment, does anyone want to make the argument that the Rams SHOULDN'T draft RG3 with the second pick? I mean sure, they'll get a haul of picks to move down from 2 to 4 or 6 or 8 or wherever. But, the Colts would get twice as much to move out of the first slot, and they're not going to do it. Why SHOULDN'T the Rams leave all those picks on the table and just fix their quarterback situation.

The answer probably has something to do with the risk of Griffin not being as effective as Bradford already is, which is a pretty low bar. But the Rams are one team, at least, that apparently thinks even though RG3 is good, that they're better off with the picks. Point is: teams that value the picks over RG3 exist.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

The big issue re: Griffin is that QB trade ups in the draft have a strong tendency to not work out in the end. Speaking only based on history, you'd be more justified in taking Tannehill at 6th overall than trading to 2nd for Griffin. That's the situation that's typically been most rewarding.

True that trading up is risky but I've seen two situations where teams traded up for a highly touted rare QB prospect in both Vick and Manning. Both teams saw success and the trade up was a positive for both franchises. Atlanta became relevant and New York won two Super Bowls.

I propose that any QB where you feel comfortable paying the price to trade up in the top 3 to acquire him is likely to pay off. Worse case scenario playoff appearances. Best case scenario - multiple Super Bowls

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

This is the rumored cost...

Report: Redskins want RG3 badly



Also...


What showing? we were not privy to any of the meetings. we only saw his NFL Network media spotlight. and his 40 time. What showing? he didn't throw, he didn't run the shuttle, did he long jump or high jump? did he bench press? I must have missed something.

His hair looked awesome. That's worth a first round pick right there.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

What if it's Manning/Status Quo vs. RG3?

Like suppose we couldn't/didn't make any QB move this year other than make Manning our new starter? So we don't add any young QB prospect this year

It would be horrible and short sighted. If they sign Manning...IMO they need to draft Tannehill at #6 and not even fool around with it.

This is part of why i just want them to get RG3 and be done with it. I think signing Manning will take away all their aggressiveness to secure a long term QB upgrade. And that is one position that never just falls to you...teams routinely draft QB's higher then they are projected to go.

[Bubba305-ST21-]

[QUOTE=SBXVII;889478]This is the rumored cost...

Report: Redskins want RG3 badly

Is that too much of a cost if he leads us to the playoffs in just his first few years and shows promise as out guy for the future? i dont think so, and i think he can be the guy. There comes a guy when you have to take a chance, nothing is guaranteed.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by celts32

It would be horrible and short sighted. If they sign Manning...IMO they need to draft Tannehill at #6 and not even fool around with it.

This is part of why i just want them to get RG3 and be done with it. I think signing Manning will take away all their aggressiveness to secure a long term QB upgrade. And that is one position that never just falls to you...teams routinely draft QB's higher then they are projected to go.

I think if Manning can't get an assurance that we'll use the 6th overall pick to help him win games now, I doubt he even considers Washington. Just wouldn't be a good fit for him.

If Tannehill is good enough to go at no. 6, he should be playing over Manning anyway.