Re: Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft
 

[quote=redskinsman18;894879]This move tells me that BA, MS, DS believe we can win now. Thats why we mortgaged our future.[/quote]

Bruce Allen is George Allen's son whose motto was "the future is now" and was known for mortgaging the Redskins future with old over the hill players for #1 picks (during the 70's the Redskins didn't have a #1pick for years thanks to George) . The difference in this case is that they went for a young player, yes they overspent but the potential is there for super stardom. We shall see if this was a good trade or a really bad trade in a year or 2.

Re: Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft
 

It's not really from Rogers leaving, just extra picks the NFL hands out at the end of the draft

Re: Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft
 

Either way it's an additional pick.

Re: Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft
 

Here's what I'll say: if a quarterback of Robert Griffin's stature was this important to the success of the Washington Redskins under Mike Shanahan, then they should never have made the McNabb deal. They should have been willing to take their 2011 and 2012 1st rounders along with the 2010 second that went for McNabb and traded it to whomever for the quarterback they really wanted.

I realize Griffin is probably a better prospect then anyone they could have had in 2010, certainly better than Sam Bradford was in that draft, but they shouldn't have been worried about trading up for Bradford. They should have went out and got Rodgers or Flacco or Ryan or Roethlisberger (since he was on the trade block at the time) or Eli or Schaub or Palmer and frankly just admitted that they were incapable of winning without such a player.

There was no reason to waste two years waiting for the perfect prospect if you were just going to pay whatever it took to get him and ignore all historical context for the market anyway. Given what we know now, that was a brutal waste of two years.

Better late than never, I suppose, and Griffin is about as good as pro prospects get at this position. But it's hard to see this as anything but a huge admission of poor planning by the Shanahans who feel it's totally cool to spend draft picks which they are contractually obligated to use to build this team, though they were/are unlikely to actually be around when the picks will actually be made.

Re: Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft
 

[quote=Paintrain;894734]The price is much higher than I thought it would be, the 2014 First was the kicker but you know what, if those are late in the first round which means that we are WINNING so I won't care at that point. We've sucked for so long that we seem to associate a first rounder with a top 10 selection. If those picks are in the bottom 10 of the draft I'll be ok with it.

The other benefit (we have plenty of time to debate RGIII) of making this trade now is clarity for the rest of the offseason. Our top question has been answered, we know who the QB will be, now we can shop in free agency without having to wonder who is going to be under center. We can focus on WR, OL, RB, S, CB with our $45 million in cap space.

I'm waking up on the sunny side of the bed this morning, we got our QB, we still have 7 picks in 2012, 7 picks in 2013 & 6 picks in 2014.[/quote]

Solid post dude. Other side of the argument for me, but I gotta respect the optimism.

Re: Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft
 

[quote=GTripp0012;894969]Here's what I'll say: if a quarterback of Robert Griffin's stature was this important to the success of the Washington Redskins under Mike Shanahan, then they should never have made the McNabb deal. They should have been willing to take their 2011 and 2012 1st rounders along with the 2010 second that went for McNabb and traded it to whomever for the quarterback they really wanted.

I realize Griffin is probably a better prospect then anyone they could have had in 2010, certainly better than Sam Bradford was in that draft, but they shouldn't have been worried about trading up for Bradford. They should have went out and got Rodgers or Flacco or Ryan or Roethlisberger (since he was on the trade block at the time) or Eli or Schaub or Palmer and frankly just admitted that they were incapable of winning without such a player.

There was no reason to waste two years waiting for the perfect prospect if you were just going to pay whatever it took to get him and ignore all historical context for the market anyway. Given what we know now, that was a brutal waste of two years.

Better late than never, I suppose, and Griffin is about as good as pro prospects get at this position. But it's hard to see this as anything but a huge admission of poor planning by the Shanahans who feel it's totally cool to spend draft picks which they are contractually obligated to use to build this team, though they were/are unlikely to actually be around when the picks will actually be made.[/quote]


I wouldn't necessarily call it poor planning. Maybe (maybe) I would go as far as to say they were over-confident in their abilities to make this team a winner with the likes of McNabb or RG1 or John Beck. But you know, sometimes shit just doesn't work out the way you draw it up. They realized the past two years' experiments didn't work and the opportunity presented itself to get a potential superstar and they went "all in" as the saying goes. I think the price was high, but the more I look at it, the more I am ok with it. If not now, when...if not this guy, who...

I for one am excited and ready to see what else we can pull off between now and the end of April. There is legitimate reason to be pumped up about the Redskins this year and I can't wait until September.

[QUOTE=Ruhskins;894926]Here are the Redskins 2012 picks:

1st
3rd
4th
4th (JC trade)
5th
6th (McNabb trade)
7th

That is still a lot of picks.

Sent from my Samsung Epic 4G.[/QUOTE]

This post may have brought me down off the ledge an saved my life. Thanks.

Re: Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft
 

[quote=DynamiteRave;894944]Trying to decide between Luck and RGIII is like trying to decide whether to sleep with the hot girl or her hot friend. You're winning either way.[/quote]

And who doesn't like winning?

Re: Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft
 

[quote=WaldSkins;894964]What about a compensatory pick for Carlos Rogers or Stephon Heyer?[/quote]

Heyer was an undrafted free agent, so no pick

Re: Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;894948]Both are a 6-7 out of 10. Nothing out of the ordinary, behavior-wise.[/quote]

LOL that's the funniest/strangest post I've read in years! Rating a dude on the attractive scale alongside his girlfriend :laughing2

Re: Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft
 

[quote=GTripp0012;894969]Here's what I'll say: if a quarterback of Robert Griffin's stature was this important to the success of the Washington Redskins under Mike Shanahan, then they should never have made the McNabb deal. They should have been willing to take their 2011 and 2012 1st rounders along with the 2010 second that went for McNabb and traded it to whomever for the quarterback they really wanted.

I realize Griffin is probably a better prospect then anyone they could have had in 2010, certainly better than Sam Bradford was in that draft, but they shouldn't have been worried about trading up for Bradford. They should have went out and got Rodgers or Flacco or Ryan or Roethlisberger (since he was on the trade block at the time) or Eli or Schaub or Palmer and frankly just admitted that they were incapable of winning without such a player.

There was no reason to waste two years waiting for the perfect prospect if you were just going to pay whatever it took to get him and ignore all historical context for the market anyway. Given what we know now, that was a brutal waste of two years.

Better late than never, I suppose, and Griffin is about as good as pro prospects get at this position. But it's hard to see this as anything but a huge admission of poor planning by the Shanahans who feel it's totally cool to spend draft picks which they are contractually obligated to use to build this team, though they were/are unlikely to actually be around when the picks will actually be made.[/quote]


I appreciate your frustration, but perhaps it's more falling completely for RG3. If you feel that in 20 years RG3 will be entering Canton with 5 Super Bowl rings, wouldn't you want him to have played for you instead of someone else? The thought among a lot of NFL people is that Luck and RG3 are two once in a decade QB's. I think they overpaid, but if you think RG3 is a faster Tom Brady, what wouldn't you trade for him?

Re: Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft
 

[quote=GTripp0012;894969]Here's what I'll say: if a quarterback of Robert Griffin's stature was this important to the success of the Washington Redskins under Mike Shanahan, then they should never have made the McNabb deal. They should have been willing to take their 2011 and 2012 1st rounders along with the 2010 second that went for McNabb and traded it to whomever for the quarterback they really wanted.

I realize Griffin is probably a better prospect then anyone they could have had in 2010, certainly better than Sam Bradford was in that draft, but they shouldn't have been worried about trading up for Bradford. They should have went out and got Rodgers or Flacco or Ryan or Roethlisberger (since he was on the trade block at the time) or Eli or Schaub or Palmer and frankly just admitted that they were incapable of winning without such a player.

There was no reason to waste two years waiting for the perfect prospect if you were just going to pay whatever it took to get him and ignore all historical context for the market anyway. Given what we know now, that was a brutal waste of two years.

Better late than never, I suppose, and Griffin is about as good as pro prospects get at this position. But it's hard to see this as anything but a huge admission of poor planning by the Shanahans who feel it's totally cool to spend draft picks which they are contractually obligated to use to build this team, though they were/are unlikely to actually be around when the picks will actually be made.[/quote]

Or you could say they were smart enough to wait it out and go all in on someone they really believed in. If they just wanted any young QB they would surely have had one by now. Lots of different ways to look at things...

Re: Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft
 

[quote=GTripp0012;894969]Here's what I'll say: if a quarterback of Robert Griffin's stature was this important to the success of the Washington Redskins under Mike Shanahan, then they should never have made the McNabb deal. They should have been willing to take their 2011 and 2012 1st rounders along with the 2010 second that went for McNabb and traded it to whomever for the quarterback they really wanted.

I realize Griffin is probably a better prospect then anyone they could have had in 2010, certainly better than Sam Bradford was in that draft, but they shouldn't have been worried about trading up for Bradford. They should have went out and got Rodgers or Flacco or Ryan or Roethlisberger (since he was on the trade block at the time) or Eli or Schaub or Palmer and frankly just admitted that they were incapable of winning without such a player.

There was no reason to waste two years waiting for the perfect prospect if you were just going to pay whatever it took to get him and ignore all historical context for the market anyway. Given what we know now, that was a brutal waste of two years.

Better late than never, I suppose, and Griffin is about as good as pro prospects get at this position. But it's hard to see this as anything but a huge admission of poor planning by the Shanahans who feel it's totally cool to spend draft picks which they are contractually obligated to use to build this team, though they were/are unlikely to actually be around when the picks will actually be made.[/quote]

I've said it numerous times the last two years, Mike's performance as a legacy, 2nd time around coach, has been remarkably poor. He absolutely did not have a plan, but more importantly IMO his game-day performance has been mostly abysmal in terms of tempo, clock-management, play-calling and overall preparation. In short, Mike and Kyle have to outperform their last two seasons by a significant margin to make this trade worthwhile.

Re: Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft
 

[quote=celts32;894984]Or you could say they were smart enough to wait it out and go all in on someone they really believed in. If they just wanted any young QB they would surely have had one by now. [B]Lots of different ways to look at things[/B]...[/quote]

Especially in hindsight.

Re: Redskins agree to trade for No.2 overall pick in 2012 Draft
 

Just in case anyone hasn't brought this up. I woulda prefered Bradford for two firsts two years ago (woulda had 2 more picks from not getting McNabb). Rams woulda done it.