The Consigliere

We lose nearly all sos tiebreakers. Any win hurts us.

Saw him in person at three games while watching w/two PT’s. Both were very alarmed at his knee/leg and shocked at his draft status.

My big problem w/this take is kind of lazy but it’s based on a clear likely scenario that will lead to even more wrongthink from the fan base, the same sort of wrongthink that justified Chase Young over a QB, and tried to justify the idiocy of not trading up for a QB last year. If we draft a QB early in ‘22, odds are we’ll land another bust. This is a draft far more in common w/‘11, ‘13, ‘14 and ‘19 than ‘17-‘18 (and ‘18 still largely missed!), and ‘20-‘21, and it was why I argued we should go hard at QB in 20 and ‘21 or wait till ‘23. Now we’re gonna repeat the mistakes that lead to us passing on guys in the loaded ‘04, ‘17, ‘20 , ‘21 type classes by likely landing a bust or getting veteraness duct tape and then passing on the position in a class much more likely to deliver a potential savior in ‘23 and worst of all if/when we draft another bust in the spring people will fault the drafting process instead of the redskins/wft process which is the real problem.

No it wasn’t. Taylor ran for 2000 yards 3 consecutive seasons. Walker topped 1000 once. It’s not remotely comparable in any universe. He’s a good rb in this class bu there’s a reason Hall and Spiller are ahead of him. I’d be targeting Charbonnet as he can be had much cheaper than any of them and comes w/a 5 star recruiting resume. Also worth noting that Hall and Spiller are legit 3 down backs that put up strong receiving #’s and Charbonnet finally added that to his game this year. Walkers made no impact as a pass catcher so he’s too much of a play telegrapher. That being said, plenty of guys like Fournette and Derrick Henry added that element as pro’s so it’s not automatically a no especially for a guy who only broke out this year. I love the prospect, ftr, I just see the take as way over the top. Every Top RB in the ‘20 class and ‘21 class and at least 2 in this one had/have better CV’s other than CEH, snd the Taylor comp is sheer lunacy. Taylor’s profile matched well w/LT2, Barkley’s, and Adrian Peterson, and superseded Gurley’s, Zeke’s and Fournettes. I wouldn’t put Walker in the top 25 of the past 15 years whereas Taylor is a top 2-3 guy of this era. Just going by how they were rated in draft years since ‘20 I had Taylor, Swift, Dobbins, Akers, Etienne, Javonte, Harris, Breece and Spiller above him and maybe Charbonnet and CEH. Gibbons I underrated (and some others too). All this being said, in a bad RB class, he’s one of the few legit options, just saying he wouldn’t have made my top 5 in any of the past six classes except ‘19 (even worse class) and this ‘22 class.

For whatever reason Mims is out with them. They should've traded him before the deadline as they clearly aren't planning on using him and he has 2.5 years left on his rookie deal, just move him and get some comp. I think Mims could be something, I'd love to go after him on the cheap (offer like a 6th or something), but there are tons of WR's like that that represent underutilized values (Tyler Johnson in Tampa is another one, Bryan Edwards in Oakland etc).

I don't think the excitement angle matters because generally that kind of vibe doesn't stick if the winning isn't hand and hand w/the excitement. I think if Willis hits, that's what matters. If he's a legit franchise QB, then that's what matters. The fan's only fill the stands consistently for winners. Very few fan bases show up perpetually regardless of results. Even our fan base eventually was basically killed by 25 years of bad ownership (the end of the Cooke era was bad, six straight years of ----- performances, and then Snyder showed us what genuinely bad, cancerous bad ownership could be over the ensuing 22 years). Some fans are gone period (almost like me), others can only be brought back by sustained success. SImple as that. Nothing else will do it. We've had one and done's ('99, '05, '07, '12, '15), and one exciting one and done ('12), but nothing ever stuck because they were all one and done's. I hope Willis falls to us, I'd take it, I don't see a franchise QB with any of these guys other than maybe Willis, and maybe Corral, but I'm better at telling who sucks, then whose actually good. It's just worth noting that in a draft w/QB's like this, it's best to just target the highest ceiling guys who also have impeccable mental make up/work habit reports. If Willis has the latter, I'm in, if he doesn't, the ceiling doesn't matter.

I have no sense for any of them, but I do find one thing interesting, at least as a question: Why does Pickett finally putting it together as he's an overage prospect trump Howell doing it from day 1 as a freshman? Howell was very good to superb as a freshman and as a sophmore, slipped as a junior. His #'s were remarkably consistent other than completion percentage which jumped freshman to sophmore year. Did it from day one. Pickett was utterly anonymous until his final overage season. Why shouldn't Howell be the better prospect? You lose Javonte Williams, Michael Carter, Dyami Brown, and Dazz Newsome? Probably not surprising that your play falls off. They aren't like Alabama where it's 5 stars all day long, just reloading. Not arguing for Howell so much as wondering why Pickett's final breakout season matters more than Howell's consistency when he was younger? Howell's CV just looks better, period, I have no idea in terms of film study and what not, just looking at the CV's.

He needs better examples: Baker transferred from Texas Tech to Oklahoma after his freshman years and immediately started killing it from year 1 at Oklahoma: 129 TD's vs 21 picks across those last 3 years, nearly identical seasons other than YPA which jumped 2 yards for his final 2 years an accuracy which jumped into the 70's his final two years. Mac Jones is a bit closer as he just had a 140 throws and about 4 or 5 starts as a sophmore, but like Mayfield, he was great too, as a sophmore in the limited action. So I don't know, Pickett sounds more like Burrow to me, except he's not doing it with megatalent like Burrow was (2 of the best 3 or 4 WR prospects of the past decade were on that LSU team).

if it wasn't for Burrow doing something similar in '19, I'd be completely ignoring him as a 1st round prospect. Overage prospects killing it against kids 3 years younger is nearly ALWAYS a red flag with a player these days. The best go into the draft early, if you're a senior, it's usually (not always) a bad sign, especially if you were irrelevant the majority of your previous years. It is super relevant with WR's, and to a lesser extent with other positions. With QB's, I don't really know, if a guy is killing it immediately it's a good sign, it's more, why was this guy mediocre every single season until he was a senior? Usually it's not a good sign, at all, that you couldn't do squat until your final year, but there are contrary examples.

Depends on the class. In '05 when the Niners idiotically took Smith at 1.01, I told my dad (a niners fan) and friends (I'm from the bay) that they should just trade up for Rodgers, because Smith was a low floor low ceiling prospect, and Rodgers was a high floor guy. Nobody ever does that, they didn't, and I'm sure they wish they did, just like I'm sure all of us wish Gibbs hadn't developed a laser focus on Campbell above all else in that draft (and a mediocre corner prospect who needed lasik). It's a waste of assets, to be fair, but when it comes to QB, the tactic that seems to work best is taking a QB fairly often in the round 2-4 zone even if you have one, if you love a guys upside. Periodically you hit, and have a huge asset you can trade for goodies, and a great backup for injury. Some teams like the Packers have done that repeatedly over the years and reaped some nice draft comp for it. The big issue is in my experience, looking back, when the league itself is down on a draft class, they are right. There are sometimes hidden gems in the class, but generally the classes where the league is blase about the talent end up being bad classes, and the classes they tend to like, are usually at least solid. Bad ones they called bad ahead of time and were right: 2002 2003 2005 2008 2009 2010 2013 2014 2015 and 2016 after the top 2 2019 Only one I can think of where they were kinda off was 2000 which gave up Drew Brees and Tom Brady outside the top 29 or thereabouts, and also featured Vick. At the time it was viewed as Vick, and not much else if memory serves. 1999 was perceived by me and plenty others as the best since '83 but it went over like a fart in church: 1: Couch-Bust 2: D. McNabb-Hit 3: Akili Smith-Bust 4. Culpepper-Hit 5. Cade McNown-Bust And in fairness, my value pick, Culpepper basically had a short career, was good like '99-'05 or something like that, and then flamed out, so only 1 out of 5 built a long term career. I had those guys rated: 1.Culpepper 2. Couch 3. McNabb 4. Smith Undraftable-McNown (saw him live against my alma mater (Cal) and he was horrific. Really, really weak arm. It was obvious he didn't have the arm, the bears took him anyway. Anyway, to me, I trust the generalized consensus the year before the draft, I'm gun shy about fast risers I never heard of in their final overage draft year, and only target drafts for QB when it's a good class: so for me, part of the problem with the redskins if they've repeatedly gone after QB's in crappy draft classes: '94, '02, '05, '19. The only year they went after QB where it was actually good was '12. Our biggest issue is we focused on DL instead of a QB solution when we knew we didn't have a long term QB in '17 and '18 (Cousins was going to leave, Alex Smith was a stupid stop gap decision (as heroic as he was in taking us to the playoffs and sabotaging our chance to get Fields or Mac Jones in '21) and again in '20. Now it's a bad class so we can overpay for an older option or draft yet another bad class high risk guy and pretend we took the problem seriously. We haven't, we didn't, and now we are paying for it, just as we were before, and just as we will continue to do barring a miracle.

I was just lazy with him. Alabama hasn't had many top end QB prospects until Tua, they're loaded with ridiculous weapons, and lines, so it makes it monstrously difficult to tell who is actually doing the job, and whose riding on coat tails. I also didn't like that he was in 1970's shape (totally irrelevant, but alarming that a guy auditioning for the NFL in this day and age wouldn't be match fit, to borrow soccer nomenclature). At the end of the day I had no opinion on him one way or another. He'd done the business to earn the 1st round grade, but beyond that, I wasn't as sold I was with Fields and Lawrence, and I liked Lance's long term upside bet. Wasn't sold Mac was anything more than basically a QB whose ceiling would be 12-18th good in the league. Clearly he's way better than all of that. I don't speak to the technical details like footwork, mechanics, what not, as you dig into that stuff and usually find a ton of disagreement and contradictions. He just looked solid to me. At this point I don't trust my QB evals anyway beyond generally sniffing out sure busts (I've missed on Rosen and Allen but otherwise have been good).

Seen him in person twice, against Idaho State in September, and New Mexico State in October (bummed I missed the Hawaii game). He's basically a tape scout guy because the #'s are completely a mess due to paucity of talent he's facing on defense, and the team itself throws a ton of bubble screens/short passes that ramp up completion percentages. He definitely has an NFL arm, no question, he's accurate on his deep throws generally. He's a pocket guy only. No Konami Code to his game.

Interesting, this draft probably isn't the draft for it. No top tier guys, though some good 2nd and 3rd tier guys. If we target the position in round 3-5 I wouldn't complain, but I'd prefer they wait for the more offensive oriented '23 class.

It's kind of a stupid take and a stupid premise for an article if it is entirely coming from those angles. I'm here for an article explaining what the hell happened with the reporting on the trade up suggesting it was all about Mac Jones until an eleventh hour switch to Lance. I'd love to know what really happened there. #2: Trey Lance WAS ALWAYS a project. He played for North Dakota State what, 14 or 15 career games. Even Wentz played more than 25 games. He was raw as hell, even produced his one sketchy start in his last one. He was guaranteed a clipboard guy barring a miraculous ability to transition perfectly to the pro's a la Herbert, and Herbert had like 40 starts. Of course he looks sketchy. Garoppolo basically gets this season to audition for a trade or FA signing elsewhere in '22, Lance gets the clipboard and hopefully Lance is ready for some Mahomes-like December start(s) as a rookie, and then takes over in '22. There's no other play here. Never was. So far, what I find extraordinarly interesting: 1.Lawrence looks fine, but not super elite. That's surprising. Although basically the two best offensive weapons are out (Chark and Etienne) 2. Fields shows the perils of a great QB prospect landing with a dumpster fire organization and coaching staff. He's getting Gased. One can only hope that they fire everybody and bring in a great top end OC, QB Coach and HC whose offensive minded next year. 3. Lance is what was expected: incredibly raw. 4. Mac Jones is WAY WAY better than advertised, and it must be said a thousand times over. The Patriots have nothing but garbage at the playmaking positions other than TE. They have no exceptional athletes or weapons at WR or RB, Damien Harris is a good solid between the tackles RB, but he's not super elite, the WR's are yuck as hell (and I say this as a fan of Harry and disappointed he's a bust), they do have two solid though not elite TE's. I guess the OL is solid to good (i think, I don't know). People aren't as insanely impressed as they should be with him. He's doing this with very, very little around him. It's amazing.

I think the board was basically in disagreement on Haskins. I don't think it was 90-10 or 80-20 against or anything, but I also tend to be a lurker other than the draft season and periodically in season since over time my fandom has cooled and I've moved my focus to other sports and dynasty fantasy in football since generally I view WFT as hopeless under Snyder. I will say that I was in the camp that was 1000% behind going for QB. That Haskins simply wasn't good enough to justify passing on QB when you landed a top 2 pick in a draft with 3 legit blue chip QB prospects. We were in a similar position to Arizona the year before that had a top 10-15 caliber QB prospect in house, but the '18 data wasn't great, and could be shaded either way (maybe it was the ----- coach/OC, or maybe it was Rosen, or maybe it was both?), same with Haskins, and Arizona didnt think twice, they just pulled the trigger on Kyler and never looked back. We should've done the same in '20, Tua or Herbert, pull the trigger on one, at worst, you've got a scenario where you've got two bust QB's, but in that situation you know pretty quick and can unload the guys and try again. I think Haskins was basically reasonably okay as a rookie, but catastrophically bad as a 2nd year guy, and I think the guys in house knew that he was a ---- bird from day 1, not serious, and not a first in last out guy. When it comes to QB eval, I still suck at is, no better than random chance (my favs of the last 20 years were Culpepper, Eli, Ben Roth, Rodgers (I'm a Cal Alum, so I was all in on taking him from having seen him produce elite #'s, set a record against USC etc), Leinart, Cam, Locker, Luck, RGIII, Winston, Mahomes, Baker, Darnold, Rosen, Jackson, Kyler, Burrow, Tua, Herbert, Lawrence, Fields, Lance: You can see plenty of hit and miss. I'm much better picking guys I hate than picking the hits in round 1), I was fine with the Haskins pick at the time because he seemed to have a top 20-45 grade, and we needed a QB. But I also didn't have the reports on him being an --- clown. Over the years, I've come around to the point where I no longer believe casual fans have access to the information necessary to evaluate QB's. The best we can do is collect data that suggests good signs, and data that suggests bad signs, but with QB's, it really seems to come down to certain core things: #1 NFL capable arm (If he's Danny Woeful, it won't work, doesn't have to be a rocket, but needs to be able to make them all). #2 Has to be accurate since this is rarely improved very much after college (this is why and how I missed on Josh Allen) #3 Has to have the right mental make up, can be a lot of different styles of leaders, but needs to approach the game studiously, and be a first in last out guy. #4 Has to be eager to learn the game, study the game, and grow with the game. I think we can figure out #1, and #2 generally from our own armchair and computer scoutings. But 3 and 4 are more nebulous, and require interviews with the player, coaches, teammates, etc. We don't have access to that, but over the years there have usually been warning signs about guys that aren't serious enough, aren't leaders, are about themselves etc. My guess is the in house guys with the redskins heard enough negatives about Haskins habits, to drop him because his #'s were ridiculous. Not sure about the tape. I think they knew he had issues but Snyder thought the local guy ---- trumped that. Anyway, it didn't. He sucked, and sucks. Technically I think he has the 1 and 2 to be a good to great pro, it's the changable stuff that he doesn't have: the problem is changing your mental make up and approach to challenges is very difficult as an adult. It's possible, just rare, and challenging. Basically Haskins has to want it, and be humble enough to make it happen. I doubt he does, but he could. Whenever I read this I always wonder, "What the hell happened the other 3 seasons then?"

That big story was exactly why I was screaming bloody murder for us to take a QB (whoops on Tua over Herbert) over Chase Young. It literrally NEVER made sense to take Young over a QB. There was no legit QB on the roster unless you thought Haskins deserved more chances, and certainly after '20, it was even more patently obvious we had to make a move for a long term answer at QB and we eschewed it yet again. I may be wrong about Fields, we'll see, but I think Fields going into the draft as a prospect, was as good or better than any prospect since Luck not named Trevor Lawrence (I have to be fair and say that Mahomes was a super unusual prospect which is why he dropped, and Allen was horrifically inaccurate, which made him a huge risk to me). Fields had everything and was basically a 1B to Lawrence. That we wouldn't pay up to move to 9, or at worst, pay up to move in front of the Pats for Mac Jones is just inexplicable to me. Don't rate him highly? Maybe fire your scouts because they don't know what they're watching? You're taking a LB in the top half of the first round, that's literally salary cap/drafting no no 101. It's beyond frustrating, but as the article alludes to, basically other than a miracle find at QB, we're screwed because the owner is poison.

They had the chance, they didn't do it. Those classes were '17 (Watson, and Mahomes), '18 (Baker, Darnold, Rosen, Allen, Jackson), '20 (Burrow, Tua, Herbert) and '21 (Lawrence, Fields, Lance, Jones). They passed all four years, and only dipped in for the crap year ('19). I have literally every single prospect I've mentioned from those classes rated above anyone from this class. I didn't include Trubisky because I didn't know him as a prospect at all. I also was idiotically changed my mind on Watson after his arm velocity testing score came in as what I equated to Woeful-esque (since then its become clear that the velocity test doesn't really seem to accurately test arm strength) You can be ready to invest and develop a legit franchise QB, but the only time it makes sense to invest blue chip draft capital are in classes with legit non pushed up talent. The past few decades those were classes like '04, '06, '11 (I hated most of the 1st round guys, but liked Newton, Locker, Kap and Dalton), '12, '15, '17, '18, '20, and '21. We've dipped in '12, and in '19, '12 was a good class, but we missed/broke our franchise guy (and landed a just below franchise level talent in Cousins anyway on day 3, a true rarity), and in '19 we reached. '22 is a '19 like class, just with no Kyler's, and more Jones/Haskins type roll of the dice guys. It's not a draft to draft a QB in the top 10. WAY WAY WAY too likely to hit the Blaine Gabbert/Blake Bortles "whammy"" to quote press your luck. This is why I was losing my ---- the past few years as we tried to massage the problem (Alex Smith instead of drafting a guy back in '18) instead of fixing it, and when that failed, reaching, instead of attacking the problem in the right class ('18, '20, '21). If you force the issue, you might get lucky and get a steal, but far more often you've just wated top 30 draft capital on a guy that would've been a day 2 or day 3 prospect in a good class (like '17-'18, '20-'21).

Yep, especially in a subpar QB draft, I'd just be nervous. I'm not a huge fan of QB's that suddenly look great after being mediocre for all previous college seasons. He was never bad, but the #'s were not interesting until this year. Maybe he's making the leap, or maybe he's 3+ years older than all the defensive talent he's facing and it shows. I imagine someone else will draft him, but after Burrow, people will be open to this being "him" and hopefully it is for whomever drafts him.

That's fair, there are more pushed into the first round mediocre low floor, high ceiling types than '19. '19 had 3 guys, this one will have 5, so it's better than '19, but this one has no Kyler (admittedly most thought Kyler was MLB bound until October of '18), so there's no QB with a truly elite, Kyler caliber grade. I fear you're right. That being said, I've felt hopeless about the whole thing since Alex Smith turned around the season last fall. Since then the '21 class seemed to fall out of reach (turns out I was kinda wrong), and I already knew '19 sucked, so that's a wrap. I suspect we'll be irrelevant for quite a while, my focus is moving to the USMNT, hoping the team can overcome an in over his head coach. Sorry about the the Debbie downer take, but it's been nearly 30 years, and I see nothing to be excited about long term, so kinda looking elsewhere. I had hope with these past few drafts, but that's left the building for me. Hope for the rest of you, your faith is rewarded.

I think your read makes the most sense, the problem is, this class is sketchy as hell. It's not as bad as some the previous decade, like the notorious classes of '11, '13-'14, but it does look at best like a weaker version of classes like '10 and '16, where you've got guys that will go high because somebody has to, and guys that go in round 1 because of the demand for QB is so strong. This is not '12, '17, '18, '20, '21 where the drafts were either rich in elite prospects at the time and known as such for years, or drafts that at least had multiple legit top 10 types. This feels like a draft where you have Goff and Wentz go high because someone has to, a class like '19 where Haskins and Jones go in the top half, because 3 teams need QB enough to roll the dice on guys that wouldn't have been first rounders, let alone top 18 guys in a draft worth a damn. That's why I didn't agree with their approach. In '20 they had access to long term elite prospects in Tua and Herbert, and fast riser Burrow. They passed on the 2 they had access to. In '20 the draft had Lawrence as the Luck prospect, and Fields as the the 2nd stud, with the fast risers being Lance and Jones. Four guys. This draft will probably have one or two fast risers, and zero long term elite prospects, with 2-3 or more Daniel Jones/Haskins type guys that go round 1 due to need. I am lower on guys like Rattler, and Howell, who generally owned top dog status for this class six months ago, and yep they've fallen, but my point w/them was always that these are basically 25-50 talents, Davis Mills, Jason Campbell type speculative guys, not elite, never elite. Corral, Willis, and Pickett are your fast risers, and Strong is the guy with a top 10-40 grade for a while but with huge concerns (I've watched two games, and see a lovely accurate ball, not a huge arm but solid, but also a no huddle offense that goes bubble screen nonstop, that's not going to work in the NFL, and of course he isn't seeing any competent defenses either). It scares the hell out of me. Either we trade for a QB, or we draft a guy w/to my mind, a greater than 50/50 bust risk because its a crappier class than usual and then fans get even more jaded about going after QB's in the draft despite the fact that the redskins/wft havent invested top level draft capital on a QB virtually EVER. Even since the collapse of the past 30 years, we've invested virtually no serious draft capital EVER on QB. It's Heath Shuler in '94, and RGIII in '11, and beyond that, it's a bunch of 2nd and 3rd tier, highly speculative guys in day 1 or day 2, or very low upside rolls of the dice on day 3 some that hit (Frerotte, and especially Cousins) nearly all that did not (your Hakel's, Hamdam's and the like). Fans can't pretend the team is seriously going after answers at QB when the team is in the toilet for nearly 30 years and they've invested only 2 of 28 potential first rounders in a top end QB at the top 10 of the given draft while having mostly garbage at QB for nearly all of those years (to be fair, it was a mix of garbage, mediocrities, and a couple of good, borderline top 10 starters like Brad Johnson and Cousins). Fan's don't get that if you want to nail QB, you have to try repeatedly, and you have to use top end draft capital to have a reasonable shot of hitting (you'll have a shot elsewhere, but it's riskier). The Cowboy way is a massive aberration that's largely unrepeatable long term (hitting home runs twice in 15 years on day 3/UDFA type guys-especially considering they didnt even want Dak, they were targeting multiple guys that ended up busts instead and were left with Dak. Lucky them). You misunderstood my point. When I'm talking QB's in the post you refer to, I'm arguing with the FO approach that wanted to build out more of the team first before risking assets. My point isn't that playmakers don't matter, they do, to an extent, and all good teams have at least some (other than many of Brady's), my point is that as long as a team has a reasonable OL in place, and a reasonable, stable coaching staff, they are absolutely 1000% good to draft a QB. If you don't have the OL, it could be a problem, especially if you play him from the jump, if you have instability or incompetence at coaching, you also could ruin your QB, but as long as you have something solid in both places, you absolutely must draft/acquire that QB, immediately if you don't have one. I'd love to have better weapons, but having good WR's, or a great RB and TE, but no QB, means you have nothing, Brady and other QB's have turned mediocre teammates into competent ones, if you have no QB, everybody is going to suck, or at best be less than they can be as pro's. The OL is necessary to prevent David Carr syndrome, and you should sit a guy before letting that happen, but beyond that, get your QB (and acknowledge that you have ----- hires at QB coach, OC, and/or HC, they will ruin your QB. See Gase and so many others).

Always a little suspicious of jumps like that (then again Burrow did that). 12-6 13-9 13-9 21-1 or whatever it is, I'm definitely suspicious, hopeful, but suspicious. Much rather see guys that breakout early, than that only show elite skills when they're older than their opponents but who knows, maybe he's a stud.

Early breakout age for Moore was telling. Dude was a monster as an 18 year old freshman.

As odd as it is to say, w/only rare exceptions, drops aren't a sticky stat. I'd ignore it unless you see it across years and years of film like Will Fuller.

Parson's definitely at least seemed like a "mine". If anything about the Penn State story is true w/regards to him, he should be in jail, that kind of thing tends to be sticky with a player. Nobody anywhere doubted Parsons a top 3-5 talent in that draft, at worst 6-10, it was the mental make up that made him borderline undraftable.

It's kind of funny that you round it out with "they played it safe at QB". To my mind there was nothing, NOTHING, less safe, than doing what they did at QB. It was utterly asinine. I can't say for certain we could move up for Fields, but Mac Jones was definitely getable, and as it turns out, a whole giant pile of teams were incredibly idiotic about Fields, and he fell 8 or 9 slots lower than he should have, and they sure as hell had a much better chance at him in April, then I had assumed they'd have in January-February when everyone everywhere fully expected Lawrence and FIelds to go top two. It's absolutely astonishing to me that we made no effort. It would've been interesting to see what we would've done if Alex Smith hadn't save the season and sabotaged the pick, and we'd ended up with a back end top 10 pick. Would we have been clinically insane and passed on Fields, and Jones for defensive help? I'd like to think the answer to that is no, but it wouldn't shock me if it was yes, and boy, that would've been 1000% my walking papers as a redskins fan. I'd be 1000% done. At least I have the face saving that they didn't have access to either QB at 16, even though they were morons for not trading up. But my God, if they were as stupid as Denver and Carolina? Good Lord (at least Denver had the working rumor that they were going hard for Rodgers).