Re: And with the 6th pick in the 2012 NFL Draft, the redskins select...........
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;872456]They won't trade a legend that made that franchise what it is especially if he can still play and I think he will so they will have a huge decision to make[/quote]

You ever hear of Brett Favre and Joe Montana? Nothing is sacred in the new NFL, money talks.

Re: And with the 6th pick in the 2012 NFL Draft, the redskins select...........
 

[quote=SFREDSKIN;872454]They got rid of the Polians who wanted Manning and not Luck for a reason.[/quote]

Woah now.

It was Irsay who said 'There is no doubt in my mind that Peyton will be playing in Indy next year.' It was polian who said 'we need to look at all QB's in this draft not knowing what the future holds.'

If anything, the Polians were hinting at wanting Luck and wanting to get rid of peyton with his uncertain health.

Re: And with the 6th pick in the 2012 NFL Draft, the redskins select...........
 

[quote=SFREDSKIN;872462]You ever hear of Brett Favre and Joe Montana? Nothing is sacred in the new NFL, money talks.[/quote]

Brett Favre did not have an easy exit from GB (the Packers took too long to move on from him) and Montana's injury helped in that decision. While possible, it is easier said than done. Although, I've said before that this is the best possible way for the Colts to move on from Manning. But, with a new GM on hand, who knows what will happen.

Re: And with the 6th pick in the 2012 NFL Draft, the redskins select...........
 

[quote=GTripp0012;872255]If I told you that the Redskins could trade up to the first overall pick creatively, and it wouldn't cost us any of our young players, but it would cost you in sum: the 6th overall pick in 2012, our second round pick in 2012, our first round pick in 2013, and our second round pick in 2014, would you do that?

That's the price the Buccaneers paid to get Jon Gruden in 2002. And I think the same price could get the Redskins the first overall pick in this draft. I can explain if you wish.[/quote]

In a heart beat. Where do I sign up?

Re: And with the 6th pick in the 2012 NFL Draft, the redskins select...........
 

[quote=Ruhskins;872469]Brett Favre did not have an easy exit from GB (the Packers took too long to move on from him) and Montana's injury helped in that decision. While possible, it is easier said than done. Although, I've said before that this is the best possible way for the Colts to move on from Manning. But, with a new GM on hand, who knows what will happen.[/quote]

I wish that was the case, but if Indy has any brains they draft Luck. Manning is coming of an injury like Montana what a perfect time to get rid of him.

Re: And with the 6th pick in the 2012 NFL Draft, the redskins select...........
 

They probably got fired for botching the Manning injury thing.

Due diligence.

You don't pay a 28 mil to someone that's not gonna take a snap.
You don't leave the back-up job in the hands of Curtis Painter and Kerry Collins, knowing that Manning has a serious neck injury.
You don't fiddle around with the idea of drafting a QB [I][B]knowing[/B][/I] that it will likely piss off and spell the end of the QB that [I][B]built[/B][/I] Lucas Oil Stadium.

Re: And with the 6th pick in the 2012 NFL Draft, the redskins select...........
 

[quote=FRPLG;872476]In a heart beat. Where do I sign up?[/quote]I think that it could be a worthwhile deal. But my whole thing is it all goes back to what grade you have on Jones/Foles/Tannehill. If any one of them profiles as a high first rounder, I don't go up for either Griffin or Luck. It's a huge cost in terms of future picks.

The whole reason I put the idea out there was not because I was making a prediction on what the Redskins would do, but because I wanted to point out that going to get Robert Griffin would cost the Redskins another first round pick. If you're already going up for a quarterback, I think you might as well give away the extra picks to position oneself for Luck.

It was meant to dispel the notion that trading up for Griffin would be a good idea on grounds of it being cheaper. You can probably get Griffin by trading up to third overall. But the third overall pick and the second overall pick are going to cost about the same. If you're going up to get Griffin, positioning yourself to get Luck isn't a much more significant investment.

Both are going to cost you about a half-draft in terms of trade value.

Re: And with the 6th pick in the 2012 NFL Draft, the redskins select...........
 

[quote=SFREDSKIN;872454]They got rid of the Polians who wanted Manning and not Luck for a reason.[/quote]

The prevailing wisdom right now is the opposite. Irsay canned them because they were prepared to move on from Manning and he wasn't on-board.

Re: And with the 6th pick in the 2012 NFL Draft, the redskins select...........
 

[quote=GTripp0012;872483]I think that it could be a worthwhile deal. But my whole thing is it all goes back to what grade you have on Jones/Foles/Tannehill. If any one of them profiles as a high first rounder, I don't go up for either Griffin or Luck. It's a huge cost in terms of future picks.

The whole reason I put the idea out there was not because I was making a prediction on what the Redskins would do, but because I wanted to point out that going to get Robert Griffin would cost the Redskins another first round pick. If you're already going up for a quarterback, I think you might as well give away the extra picks to position oneself for Luck.

It was meant to dispel the notion that trading up for Griffin would be a good idea on grounds of it being cheaper. You can probably get Griffin by trading up to third overall. But the third overall pick and the second overall pick are going to cost about the same. If you're going up to get Griffin, positioning yourself to get Luck isn't a much more significant investment.

Both are going to cost you about a half-draft in terms of trade value.[/quote]

Yeah the value judgment is tough and really requires knowing the whole picture. Based on my viewing this year I like Tannehill...but maybe not for us in our current situation... and not sold on the other two being right for our system and/or how they project career-wise. I like Tannehill simply based on his "look" and the fact that he was pretty impressive for a guy who played WR until half through last season (I believe)...he can't possibly project to a top 15 pick though. I'd be shocked.

Re: And with the 6th pick in the 2012 NFL Draft, the redskins select...........
 

[quote=30gut;872480]They probably got fired for botching the Manning injury thing.

Due diligence.

You don't pay a 28 mil to someone that's not gonna take a snap.
[B]You don't leave the back-up job in the hands of Curtis Painter and Kerry Collins, knowing that Manning has a serious neck injury.[/B]
You don't fiddle around with the idea of drafting a QB [I][B]knowing[/B][/I] that it will likely piss off and spell the end of the QB that [I][B]built[/B][/I] Lucas Oil Stadium.[/quote]

To me...this. The failures of that team come down to this...they went in the total tank once Manning was out. Any team built in such a manner is a house of cards. They should be shot for letting the team become so talent-poor. The perils of having a stud QB I guess...you have to pay them and it kills your talent unless you are particularly good a drafting young cheap talent to cycle in.

Re: And with the 6th pick in the 2012 NFL Draft, the redskins select...........
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;872433]^he's also a huge nerd lol[/quote]

Nerds win though dude...nerds always win.

Re: And with the 6th pick in the 2012 NFL Draft, the redskins select...........
 

The Redskins need a QB as we all know. Unless Bruce Allen executes a trade that will put the Redskins in a position to draft either Andrew Luck or Robert Griffin III, then the Redskins will stay put and draft the next best QB- Ryan Tannehill. The one thing I like about Tannehill is his athletic ability. He was a WR before he was a QB. He might not have the upside that Griffin and Luck has, but he's definitely an upgrade over Beck and Grossman. He just needs time to develop to the pro game.

Re: And with the 6th pick in the 2012 NFL Draft, the redskins select...........
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;872493]The Redskins need a QB as we all know. Unless Bruce Allen executes a trade that will put the Redskins in a position to draft either Andrew Luck or Robert Griffin III, then the Redskins will stay put and draft the next best QB- Ryan Tannehill. The one thing I like about Tannehill is his athletic ability. He was a WR before he was a QB. He might not have the upside that Griffin and Luck has, but he's definitely an upgrade over Beck and Grossman. He just needs time to develop to the pro game.[/quote]

Hopefully Tannehill doesn't have the personality of a WR :)

Re: And with the 6th pick in the 2012 NFL Draft, the redskins select...........
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;872493]The Redskins need a QB as we all know. Unless Bruce Allen executes a trade that will put the Redskins in a position to draft either Andrew Luck or Robert Griffin III, then the Redskins will stay put and draft the next best QB- Ryan Tannehill. The one thing I like about Tannehill is his athletic ability. He was a WR before he was a QB. He might not have the upside that Griffin and Luck has, but he's definitely an upgrade over Beck and Grossman. He just needs time to develop to the pro game.[/quote]

If Bruce Allen somehow pulls a rabbit out of his ass and executes a trade for Andrew Luck, he would go down as one of the greatest GM's in the history of the NFL. I give up whatever is needed to get Luck.

Re: And with the 6th pick in the 2012 NFL Draft, the redskins select...........
 

[quote=FRPLG;872486]Yeah the value judgment is tough and really requires knowing the whole picture. Based on my viewing this year I like Tannehill...but maybe not for us in our current situation... and not sold on the other two being right for our system and/or how they project career-wise. I like Tannehill simply based on his "look" and the fact that he was pretty impressive for a guy who played WR until half through last season (I believe)...he can't possibly project to a top 15 pick though. I'd be shocked.[/quote]All three guys look the part of the pro quarterback. Foles and Jones throw better balls down the field than Tannehill. Maybe a lot better.

Tannehill is the only one of the bunch with athleticism that exceeds "functional." Because of that athleticism, he will be taken higher. But typically that ability to run with the football is not what makes quarterbacks great at playing quarterback.

This is just my sense of watching all three of them this year, but Tannehill is incredibly limited as a passer. I know a lot of people watch him and think about what could be when he gets to the pro level and gets to study the offense and opposing offenses on a scout team, and how good he can be. But I just don't see the ability to use the whole field and throw people open in man coverage, which makes him an awful fit here since our system is all about blowing holes open in zones and throwing a moving receiver into a void.

With that said, if we've learned anything from the last five years, it is that players with functional athleticism can move the chains by using their legs if the opponent wants to play man coverage. And Tannehill can do that. I'm not totally sold he will be able to make quick enough decisions to turn designed passing plays with progressions into [I]successful[/I] runs: that takes a really refined instinct for pocket mechanics. I have no idea if he can do that or not. For some guys, athleticism is a huge help to their game, for other guys it is a curse. It has long been easier to predict pocket passers than dual threat guys.

Landry Jones and Ryan Tannehill have both undergone [B]very[/B] troubling regressions down the stretch this year. In the middle of the season, they seemed to both be no-doubter first rounders. But now what? Landry Jones wasn't even able to stay on the field in high leverage situations for his college team. And Tannehill quarterbacked a team that was consistently awful playing with a lead.

That's why I liked Foles the most out of them. Sure, his team was awful. But he made every kind of throw on film, he creates space to function well, he actually had better mechanics coming from under center than from the shotgun. Foles gets caught on his first read if he's going to break open, but not unjustifiably, IMO. He likes to tight window that first read rather than move on in the progression, but that may be as much a function of playing with a bunch of receivers who can't consistently beat coverage as anything.

Foles' offense also showed the tendency to use a lot of two or three man combination routes, the same ones that Kyle Shanahan uses periodically, and he reads those progressions very well. Does that make him a one-side of the field guy? I guess. But even in the pros, they don't use two sides of the field on anything except deeper routes. And Kyle Shanahan certainly does not require a player to use two sides of the field in his progression.