Eight QBs and Where The Latest Rumors Have Them Going

[MTK]

Originally Posted by celts32

That's just it...I don't care...you can make both of the other picks as good as you want them to be and I will still take the elite QB. This is a QB league now...the teams that win consistently have the best QB's. Every team in the league is flawed in this era of free agency...you can work around everything except the QB position.

Sorry but an elite QB doesn't solve all of our woes. Giving up 2-3 starters, 2-3 potential pro bowl quality starters, is a big price to pay. If MS decides it's worth the gamble I'll get behind it, but there's more than one way to approach this.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Sorry but an elite QB doesn't solve all of our woes. Giving up 2-3 starters, 2-3 potential pro bowl quality starters, is a big price to pay. If MS decides it's worth the gamble I'll get behind it, but there's more than one way to approach this.

It doesn't solve them but it sure does mask them. Ask the Colts, Patriots, Giants & Packers. We can't try and plug every hole and build a completely solid team and get by with okay QB's like we did in the 1980's anymore. You will start losing them to free agency before you ever get finished. Those days are gone. Just get the QB and get in the game.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by celts32

It doesn't solve them but it sure does mask them. Ask the Colts, Patriots, Giants & Packers. We can't try and plug every hole and build a completely solid team and get by with okay QB's like we did in the 1980's anymore. You will start losing them to free agency before you ever get finished. Those days are gone. Just get the QB and get in the game.

Who says Tannehill can't be that guy?

All the teams you mention are/were still stronger across the board than we are right now, especially in the playmaker department.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Who says Tannehill can't be that guy?

All the teams you mention are/were still stronger across the board than we are right now, especially in the playmaker department.

It's possible Tannehill could be that guy but the consensus is that RG3 has a better chance to be a franchise QB. However, if the Redskins thought Tannehill had as good a chance as RG3 then I would be okay with drafting him instead. Unfortunately we have to decide what we prefer without the luxury of knowing what the Redskins think about the prospects.

As far as the other teams I mentioned...Probably but I believe that our playmakers would look better if we had a better QB. Plus we have 49 mil of cap space to add to what we have.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by celts32

It's possible Tannehill could be that guy but the consensus is that RG3 has a better chance to be a franchise QB. However, if the Redskins thought Tannehill had as good a chance as RG3 then I would be okay with drafting him instead. Unfortunately we have to decide what we prefer without the luxury of knowing what the Redskins think about the prospects.

As far as the other teams I mentioned...Probably but I believe that our playmakers would look better if we had a better QB. Plus we have 49 mil of cap space to add to what we have.

But the important thing is what the Redskins think about the prospects.

Given their willingness to trade down and not to reach for a QB in the past two drafts, I think the team is not willing to bet the farm for a QB. Now I do think our cap space and a young free agent class may allow the Redskins to do this. But it would not surprise if they don't do this.

Personally, I just want to make sure that they don't once again put a lot of draft/FA resources on the defense (and none on offense) and that we don't have a repeat of last year in terms of QBs.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

But the important thing is what the Redskins think about the prospects.

Given their willingness to trade down and not to reach for a QB in the past two drafts, I think the team is not willing to bet the farm for a QB. Now I do think our cap space and a young free agent class may allow the Redskins to do this. But it would not surprise if they don't do this.

Personally, I just want to make sure that they don't once again put a lot of draft/FA resources on the defense (and none on offense) and that we don't have a repeat of last year in terms of QBs.

Of course...what we think about any of these players is irrelevant. I just want them to get their #1 guy and i don't really care about the cost. I am tired of the Redskins settling at the most important position in sports. If they accomplish that then i am fine if they need to settle for a little bit weaker starter at a couple other positions.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by celts32

It's possible Tannehill could be that guy but the consensus is that RG3 has a better chance to be a franchise QB. However, if the Redskins thought Tannehill had as good a chance as RG3 then I would be okay with drafting him instead. Unfortunately we have to decide what we prefer without the luxury of knowing what the Redskins think about the prospects.

As far as the other teams I mentioned...Probably but I believe that our playmakers would look better if we had a better QB. Plus we have 49 mil of cap space to add to what we have.

A better QB is definitely part of it, but I don't think our receivers are where they need to be, and the secondary needs work.

You're right, that $49M in cap space gives us room to add talent.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

A better QB is definitely part of it, but I don't think our receivers are where they need to be, and the secondary needs work.

You're right, that $49M in cap space gives us room to add talent.

Agreed.

[30gut]

When you evaluate the QBs I think Griffin should be rated higher then Tannehill.
But that doesn't mean that Tannehill can't become a franchise QB.

I also think people forget that were talking about the top prospects.
The physical, tangible difference between any of the draftable QBs isn't as large as people like to think, even though the difference usually means several drafts spots and sometimes entire rounds.

The difference between the QB is greatly exaggerated.

For some reason the prevailing logic seems to be that because Tannehill is the 3rd rated QB that he can't possibly be as good as the 2 QBs rated above him.

But just ask Josh Freeman or Joe Flacco etc...Dan Marino..

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 30gut

When you evaluate the QBs I think Griffin should be rated higher then Tannehill.
But that doesn't mean that Tannehill can't become a franchise QB.

I also think people forget that were talking about the top prospects.
The physical, tangible difference between any of the draftable QBs isn't as large as people like to think, even though the difference usually means several drafts spots and sometimes entire rounds.

The difference between the QB is greatly exaggerated.

For some reason the prevailing logic seems to be that because Tannehill is the 3rd rated QB that he can't possibly be as good as the 2 QBs rated above him.

But just ask Josh Freeman or Joe Flacco etc...Dan Marino..

Depends what you think of Griffin. If RG3 comes as advertised, then yeah, Tannehill lacks the ability to be a better prospect and a better QB down the road. If RG3's draft stock is inflated though, then you could see a reality where Tannehill actually becomes the second best QB in this draft.

This particular draft is so deep at the position that I'm not sure I'd want to bet everything on someone with the skill set of Griffin OR Tannehill without knowing exactly which direction I'd want to go with my franchise first. Foles throws the ball from the pocket a lot better than Tannehill and could be available a round later.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Depends what you think of Griffin. If RG3 comes as advertised, then yeah, Tannehill lacks the ability to be a better prospect and a better QB down the road. If RG3's draft stock is inflated though, then you could see a reality where Tannehill actually becomes the second best QB in this draft.

I think Griffin is a better prospect then Tannehill. (just not from as wide a margin as most people think.)
I think its fair to say that Griffin is a better prospect then Tannehill; and I believe that statement can be supported based on different measurable and other evaluation criteria.
But at the same time I realize that draft evaluation doesn't determine what happens in the NFL.
In 3 years Tannehill or Weeden could be the best QB of the this draft class and it shouldn't surprise anyone that much.

Originally Posted by GT

...bet everything on someone with the skill set of Griffin OR Tannehill without knowing exactly which direction I'd want to go with my franchise first. Foles throws the ball from the pocket a lot better than Tannehill and could be available a round later.

I think the bolded portion is true for any team with any QB.

Re: Foles from the pocket
I couldn't disagree more about your thought that Foles throws the ball better at all, much less 'a lot' better then Tannehill from the pocket.
I put Foles behind Tannehill when it comes to throwing from the pocket.

I like Foles as a prospect and I see some upside/value there depending on where he's drafted.
I think Foles may have more pure arm talent (combination of arm strength/velocity, release/throwing motion, consistency) then anyone in the top 3.
To my eye Foles has a bigger arm and a cleaner motion then Luck and Griffin.
I would put Foles and Tannehill arm strength in the same category; both have clean throwing motions but I think Foles is motion is more consistent. (Tannehill varies his arm angles at time which can be good and bad)
But, Foles by far has the worst footwork of the group.
And Foles doesn't provide very much in the realm of escapability, moblity or playmaking (Bill Walsh refers to this as 'spontaneous genius') compared to the top 3 QBs in this draft class.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Who says Tannehill can't be that guy?

All the teams you mention are/were still stronger across the board than we are right now, especially in the playmaker department.

Not only that but the Ravens are a perfect example of how having a solid team all the way around can make a QB look even better.

Yes, I want that "franchise" QB, but I won't be sad either if we stand pat and use our picks wisely or trade back.