Redskins Sign Grossman

BigHairedAristocrat · 03-17-2010, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Hells yeah

SneadSmack has a rather nice ring to it...

SirClintonPortis · 03-17-2010, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Audi

You're right. You and the mock drafts know better. All GMs should be required to use Mel Kiper's Big Board as a reference from now on.

The reason why Polian isn't surprised is probably because he probably researched out most of the "probable" ways the teams could have picked in the draft except that unlike the mocks, he has access to even more info. That's how he's never surprised. Being surprised is an emotion. Please do freaking tell how after rating that it would be probable the Rams would take either Suh or Bradford would result in me be surprised if one or the other is not chosen.

Not this omniscient "they all got together and shared notes on who they're picking" and got a predetermined draft order before it even happened. Not to mention that even with a "secret flaw" that wasn't so secret(like who didn't know about Oher's potential learning issues?), Leinart still had excellent size, accuracy, pocket presence, learned in a pro offense, winning records, ability to put touch on the passes, blah, blah, blah. That's stuff you'd expect from a top prospect (unlike our JC#17, who is mediocre at best at all of those skill).

Not only that, Leinart didn't fall that much. He was STILL a top ten pick, not a precipitous fall-off like Oher, who was drafted 23.

Summary:
Polian's being not surprised is NOT because of some godly omniscience you keeping attributing to him, but because educated guess due to information garnered from various sources.

SmootSmack · 03-17-2010, 04:11 PM

We're taking a QB for sure. And we have to add in some real value to get a 2nd in return for Campbell

tryfuhl · 03-17-2010, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

We're taking a QB for sure. And we have to add in some real value to get a 2nd in return for Campbell

guessing real value depends on which team is asking

are we talking the guys that you mention.. rocky, moss, etc

or are we talking bigger?

tryfuhl · 03-17-2010, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

SneadSmack has a rather nice ring to it...

http://www.thewarpath.net/666000-post21.html

12thMan · 03-17-2010, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

We're taking a QB for sure. And we have to add in some real value to get a 2nd in return for Campbell

I would like to see us take Okung, but I think we're betting on someone else of similar potential at tackle to be there later in the draft and take a stab at Bradford or Clausen.

As I stated in another thread, I favor Clausen over Bradford.

over the mountain · 03-17-2010, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

I think what people keep forgetting is that drafting a QB with #4 is not right for the Redskins right now, plain and simple.

i hear what your saying ruhskins but theres a flip side to it: sitting at the no 4 spot, this draft may be our best bet at actually being in position to land a potential franchise qb.

honestly, im going to trust shanny and allen's evaluations of whats best for the team. all things equal thoo, id prefer a potential franchise qb over a potential franchise LT.

i forgot who coined this phrase of most important positions to a football team but it goes:

qb
guys who protect the qb
guys who rush the qb

Audi · 03-17-2010, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Summary:
Polian's being not surprised is NOT because of some godly omniscience you keeping attributing to him, but because educated guess due to information garnered from various sources.

Summary:
Matt Leinart was not ranked in the Top 4 and thus was not taken in the Top 4. The Jets took Ferguson because Ferguson was rated higher than Leinart, not due to some philosophy that they believed an equally rated OT was more valuable than an equally rated QB.

That is why my example of David Carr vs Mike Williams applies, while your example of Ferguson vs Leinart does not.

Mechanix544 · 03-17-2010, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

We're taking a QB for sure. And we have to add in some real value to get a 2nd in return for Campbell

Not so sure about that. JC, Rex and Colt could be our opening day lineup at QB...........makes me cringe......

Audi · 03-17-2010, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by over the mountain

honestly, im going to trust shanny and allen's evaluations of whats best for the team. all things equal thoo, id prefer a potential franchise qb over a potential franchise LT.

My thoughts exactly.

The question should be are Jimmy Clausen and Sam Bradford potential franchise quarterbacks worth taking at #4. If the answer is yes, then you take them. If the answer is no, then you don't.

The question should not be whether you should take a QB or LT first. It should ALWAYS be the QB first.

MTK · 03-17-2010, 04:21 PM

If anything Colt is the odd man out. I think we're looking at JC, Rex, and a rook.

Ruhskins · 03-17-2010, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by over the mountain

i hear what your saying ruhskins but theres a flip side to it: sitting at the no 4 spot, this draft may be our best bet at actually being in position to land a potential franchise qb.

honestly, im going to trust shanny and allen's evaluations of whats best for the team. all things equal thoo, id prefer a potential franchise qb over a potential franchise LT.

i forgot who coined this phrase of most important positions to a football team but it goes:

qb
guys who protect the qb
guys who rush the qb

I'd be fine with taking a QB if we had JaMarcus Russell at QB last season, but we didn't. We can still pick up a damn good QB with the 2nd rounder, and let him learn for a year before he starts. I just hate for the team to once again go into the season with a suspect line and hoping that a bunch of older guys stay healthy. As I said, I know a first round LT is not going to fix the team right away, but you basically solidify the most important position in the offensive line for the next 9-10 years.

And as I said, I'm not sold on Bradford, everytime I hear the positives about him, I keep thinking 2.5 games played, twice injured shoulder. I'm sure he can be a very good QB, I just don't think he can be a good QB here nor do I want the team to gamble this high pick on him.

tryfuhl · 03-17-2010, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk

If anything Colt is the odd man out. I think we're looking at JC, Rex, and a rook.

If we sign a rookie higher than the 6th or 7th round it's going to be hard to justify keeping Colt

Ruhskins · 03-17-2010, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk

If anything Colt is the odd man out. I think we're looking at JC, Rex, and a rook.

Agreed. I think if Colt had been able to beat out Collins for the #2 spot things would have been different. But he didn't. On to the next preseason favorite I guess.

Audi · 03-17-2010, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

I'd be fine with taking a QB if we had JaMarcus Russell at QB last season, but we didn't. We can still pick up a damn good QB with the 2nd rounder, and let him learn for a year before he starts.

The Vikings took Tarvaris Jackson in the 2nd round. The Jets took Kellen Clemens in the 2nd round.

Neither have amounted to much despite the offensive lines put in front of them.

03-17-2010, 04:11 PM	#183
SmootSmack Uncle Phil Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 45,256	Re: Redskins Sign Grossman We're taking a QB for sure. And we have to add in some real value to get a 2nd in return for Campbell __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

03-17-2010, 04:21 PM	#191
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: NY Age: 52 Posts: 99,462	Re: Redskins Sign Grossman If anything Colt is the odd man out. I think we're looking at JC, Rex, and a rook. __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

Redskins Sign Grossman

Locker Room Main Forum