What is Andrew Luck Worth?

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by celts32

I think we discussed this before and i don't agree. I just can't get my head around not making the play for the QB this year early in the draft. In my mind it's time to stop dking around with the most important position in the sport and do whatever it takes to get one of the QB's I mentioned. Short of Shanny sitting me down and telling me face to face that Tannehill is his #1 guy...I want them to trade up.

They could end up with Tannehill only becasue they settled for him becasue the price was to high to get the others...that's what i don't want.

Yeah, I think there comes a time when you have to just go against better judgment and do what you have to do to get the QB who is considered a can't miss. If the Colts don't get the #1 pick, then I think the Rams will and I think we all agree that the Rams wouldn't keep both Luck and Bradford. So, this would be the most realistic shot at the 'skins landing Andrew Luck, and I'm all for whatever it takes for them to get him. If it means the Rams drafting Luck and dealing Bradford, I'm all in for that as well. The quarterback position is such a huge position for the offense, and we have all seen that if you don't have an Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, or a Tom Brady, you're going to be an 8-8 team at best.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by celts32

I think we discussed this before and i don't agree. I just can't get my head around not making the play for the QB this year early in the draft. In my mind it's time to stop dking around with the most important position in the sport and do whatever it takes to get one of the QB's I mentioned. Short of Shanny sitting me down and telling me face to face that Tannehill is his #1 guy...I want them to trade up.

They could end up with Tannehill only becasue they settled for him becasue the price was to high to get the others...that's what i don't want.

Yeah but you have to consider the QBs at play and look at all needs as a whole, and play the percentages so to speak.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Yeah but you have to consider the QBs at play and look at all needs as a whole, and play the percentages so to speak.

I hear you but i no longer belive in the traditional way of building a team with the QB just being one part of that. That worked for us 25 years ago but this is a different league now. It's a totally pass happy league now...all the teams are flawed do to the salary cap & free agency. The teams that win consistently are the ones with the great QB's. I would rather have a roster with 5 holes and a great QB then a roster with 1 hole at QB. Almost every Super Bowl that has been won since the last time the Redskins won has been won by a team with a great QB. It's easier to except that and try and join that club then it is to try and be the 1 or 2 exceptions to the rule...

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by celts32

I hear you but i no longer belive in the traditional way of building a team with the QB just being one part of that. That worked for us 25 years ago but this is a different league now. It's a totally pass happy league now...all the teams are flawed do to the salary cap & free agency. The teams that win consistently are the ones with the great QB's. I would rather have a roster with 5 holes and a great QB then a roster with 1 hole at QB. Almost every Super Bowl that has been won since the last time the Redskins won has been won by a team with a great QB. It's easier to except that and try and join that club then it is to try and be the 1 or 2 exceptions to the rule...

Agreed. But you're saying, I think, go for RGIII at #7 because he's way better than Tannehill. And I'm saying the gap isn't that big. At least I think that's essentially where we're disagreeing

[Landry44]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Agreed. But you're saying, I think, go for RGIII at #7 because he's way better than Tannehill. And I'm saying the gap isn't that big. At least I think that's essentially where we're disagreeing

RG3 is a much better passer and runner than Tannehill as it stands today. However, I think with some hard work and good coaching Tannehill might be a franchise guy if he can continue to improve on this skills. He has the tools to be successful. It's just to much of a risk to take a chance on this guy. If we miss on him that sets us back for years. I wouldn't risk drafting him.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Agreed. But you're saying, I think, go for RGIII at #7 because he's way better than Tannehill. And I'm saying the gap isn't that big. At least I think that's essentially where we're disagreeing

Okay then yes...that is where we disagree. I like RG3 much more then you do. My rankings right now are:
1. Luck
2. RG3
3. Bradford Trade
dropoff
4. Tannehill
5. Jones

The problem we have now which we always seem to have is that we will not get Luck or RG3 without a trade up and we won't draft Tannehill or Jones without a trade down. And Bradford only comes into play at all if the Rams end up picking #1.

[skinsfaninok]

Originally Posted by celts32

Okay then yes...that is where we disagree. I like RG3 much more then you do. My rankings right now are:
1. Luck
2. RG3
3. Bradford Trade
dropoff
4. Tannehill
5. Jones

The problem we have now which we always seem to have is that we will not get Luck or RG3 without a trade up and we won't draft Tannehill or Jones without a trade down. And Bradford only comes into play at all if the Rams end up picking #1.

Agreed

Sent from my HTC PH39100 using Tapatalk

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

For some reason I still feel we will get Luck or RGIII.

[mredskins]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

For some reason I still feel we will get Luck or RGIII.

I have that itch too, like MS has to make splash and this is his chance.

[CultBrennan59]

Originally Posted by mredskins

I have that itch too, like MS has to make splash and this is his chance.

Exactly


My QB rankings/options

1. Luck
2. RG3
3. Bradford
4. Kellen Moore
5. Foles
6. Flynn
7a. Tannehill
7b. Landry Jones
9. Lindley
10. Cousins
11. Sanchez


If Peyton is really Available and they get the first pick, then I would put peyton after sam bradford before kellen at 4, bad neck and all.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

Exactly


My QB rankings/options

1. Luck
2. RG3
3. Bradford
4. Kellen Moore
5. Foles
6. Flynn
7a. Tannehill
7b. Landry Jones
9. Lindley
10. Cousins
11. Sanchez


If Peyton is really Available and they get the first pick, then I would put peyton after sam bradford before kellen at 4, bad neck and all.

That you have sanchez below Flynn, who's barely played, and all those rookies is a joke. Sanchez had won playoff games. half those rookies won't even be 2nd rounders

[skinsfaninok]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

For some reason I still feel we will get Luck or RGIII.

I really see Luck being a Redskin come april.. I think we give up what we need to get to number 1

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by celts32

Okay then yes...that is where we disagree. I like RG3 much more then you do. My rankings right now are:
1. Luck
2. RG3
3. Bradford Trade
dropoff
4. Tannehill
5. Jones

The problem we have now which we always seem to have is that we will not get Luck or RG3 without a trade up and we won't draft Tannehill or Jones without a trade down. And Bradford only comes into play at all if the Rams end up picking #1.

Agree and actually think Jones, Foles and maybe some others better than Tannehill.

[CultBrennan59]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

That you have sanchez below Flynn, who's barely played, and all those rookies is a joke. Sanchez had won playoff games. half those rookies won't even be 2nd rounders

It's off of potential. I'll take flynn who showed he's been great in one start than Sanchez whose running game, OL, WR's, and Defense have taken him to all those wins in the playoffs. Sanchez has been in the league in 3 years, and hasn't showed me anything that makes me go, 'he's a great qb that i'd want on my team.' No no. And the Rookies are on upside/potential.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

It's off of potential. I'll take flynn who showed he's been great in one start than Sanchez whose running game, OL, WR's, and Defense have taken him to all those wins in the playoffs. Sanchez has been in the league in 3 years, and hasn't showed me anything that makes me go, 'he's a great qb that i'd want on my team.' No no. And the Rookies are on upside/potential.

if youre looking at potential, you need to compare their potential now vs. the potential that sanchez had when he was in college. otherwise you arent comparing apples ot apples. Other than Luck, i dont think any of the others will come close to the level of success that sanchez has already had. you also have to consider how unbalanced the jets offense is.