Art Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 Doubtless this team needed a young QB of the future. Assuming Spurrier knows more than the rest of the world and Wuerffel is that player, great. But, the assumption that he is that player is not a safe one and the need for QB was certain. We passed over more talented players in free agency to acquire Wuerffel and Matthews. Entering the draft I think the vast majority of us questioned the need for a guy like Ramsey, who while a seemingly perfect fit in the offense, was a guy you weren't going to count on this year and if the team was capable now, we needed to go another direction to be assured of more success. I don't believe Ramsey will be traded and I suspect the team is going to take a hard line approach with him and get him in, but, if we DO trade him, I just have to go back to the point many were making around the draft. PICK GURODE. Pick Fonoti. Get a guard and solidify the line for years if the young guard worked out. The young guard might start immediately. Might help the team right away. If Ramsey is traded, even for a very good deal like a first and Gandy, it just accentuates the waste of a pick. Now, that's the last lamentation I'm going to offer up on our decision not to go with the offensive line . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NVskinsfan Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 Leaves you scratching your head sometimes, doesn't it?:dunce: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 Marty would have drafted a guard. (That's my last Marty comparison!) :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montilar Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 Until the next one anyway. :laugh: But I think most of us have to agree completely. Not only would it have given a Gurode to go with Samuels and janson, it would of weakened a division opponent... This gives the front office egg on their face, even if they pull off a 1 and Gandy. unless Ramsey flops and Gandy becomes all-pro.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlanta Skins Fan Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 Originally posted by Art If Ramsey is traded, even for a very good deal like a first and Gandy, it just accentuates the waste of a pick. I don't agree, for two reasons:1. Drafting Ramsey gave us some insurance, in case Wuerffel and Matthews weren't as great as Spurrier thought they were. Ramsey would have a year to prepare to start in 2003, and might even contribute in 2002. Back in April, we didn't know what we know now, which is that Wuerffel looks ready to lead this team as a starter. 2. Ramsey was a #32 pick in the first round. Unless the Bears win the Super Bowl, their pick next year will be more valuable. If we get their #1 *and* Gandy, the trade is a huge win for our team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorEye Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 Hindsight is 20/20. No one could REALLY say for sure that Danny and Shane would play well. For all we know - they could still flop. Danny only had 2 good quarters. To be honest - I can't believe after so many people were willing to cast off Danny - they are now willing to do the same with Ramsey. This before they've even seen Shane throw the first pass. Geez! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g8wayg8r Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 First round picks cost big bucks. Pace is the consumate left tackle and the Rams are paying more that few bucks for him. Rather than drafting a high-dollar guard that won't sign for less than a fortune, why not draft a semi-precious gem and trade him for a capable, less costly guard and a first or second round pick. Of course, this assumes that the money guys with the Skins (the same ones that gave away the farm to Deion (a stinkin Nole and Cowboy) are crafty fellows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted August 7, 2002 Author Share Posted August 7, 2002 Assuming total failure of Matthews and Wuerffel, the still proper choice for the Redskins was an offensive or defensive lineman. At the position we drafted, the proper choice was an offensive lineman. At the time many felt that and if we struggle further with Ramsey it will simply accentuate what many felt. Ramsey's value, while potentially great down the road, was NEVER going to be a factor THIS season. Knowing that next year was the big QB draft it would have been smart to wait on that spot because the play you are going to get at the QB spot is going to be the same whether you have Ramsey or you don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indyskinsfan Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 Good points Art, but I have one move. You aren't going to get a #1 pick (unless at 32) for Ramsey, cause he hasn't done jack squat yet. I agree,no matter what we'd do, it would still be like a wasted pick. What you can get is a young and solid OG and a #3 pick. Exploratory actions, while halting an agreement, can land in never never land. Ramsey can say no, once and for all and Thursday night, we'll have a new OG in camp, ready to go. Meanwhile we can package a #3, #2, with a #1, if we have it, to move in the top tier of the draft, depending on our finish. If we are near the bottom, we might squeek by at the top 10, by yielding our #1 and a #2 only, but isn't likely. Trading Ramsey was the last thing I wanted, but Business is business and that means agreements in some form of fashion needs to be finalyzed, whether in a Skins uni or somewhere else. We can go for 2 OG's of #2 caliber for Ramsey and have our newbies, at least one of them, in the rotation at LOG. If we land a combo who's equally good at OG and C, then that'll work too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrangeSkin Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 Nobody was expecting Ramsey to start this year anyway, so if Danny and Shane were to completely flop, then we'd be in trouble. Ramsey has no effect on this season, one way or the other, and knowing that Grossman is coming out next year we should have just waited. It's a damn shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 I'm getting tired of hearing this nonsense. Orlando pace was a top 5 pick. We could have picked Gurode at 32 and it wouldnt have been a salary cap busting signing bonus straining contract. 3 million dollar signing bonus for a six year deal for a blue chip lineman? This is the second year in a row that we blew off a chance to solidify the interior for 10 years with youth and at a decent price instead we go for a guy full of himself because of the perceived need of his services when any other year like 2k3 the guy would be in the same round as Sage was selected. Solidifying the O liine with quality players is not a waste of a high draft pick. When you have a player,agent and our cap guru on the same page it can work however when its a skill player greedy agent I say cut bait. Now I'm hoping we keep 4 QBs and he doesnt even rate carrying the clipboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 Art, I agree with you in this thread, that's why I feel the Front office dropped the ball. Spurrier had no input in the selection of Ramsey and therefore, the pick will probably be a wasted one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riggins44 Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 I believe Spurrier did have some input on selecting Ramsey. All along he said he wanted to choose his QB. The front office did talk him into picking up Matthews. I agree that we should have taken OL or DL. I'm old school and believe that you should build your OL and DL first. You can have the best QB in the world, but without a good line then he's toast. A good OL can make about any QB look good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 Joe Montana was an average guy surrounded by great players. That's why he was considered great himself. A great O line can go a long way. Just ask Mark Rypien, Doug Williams and Joe Theisman. (Not a Dan Marino among then, and Dan doesn't have a ring.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shamaran Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 The more I see regarding this "wasted" #1 pick, the more curious it becomes. So, not only did Dano waste the pick on a player that had no real need for this season or next, now it seems, his agent is demanding a king's ransom if and when the team decides he may start?! Unreal! I wish the trade to the Bears would have worked out in time for the deadline. It would have removed SOME of the egg on Dano's face. Now, we could all make an cake with what left dripping off it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 I'm going to play devil's advocate here. We've forgotten how enthusiastic we were about Ramsey just around the start of training camp. That seems to have changed for two reasons, neither of which seems solid for me right now. 1) THE HOLDOUT. We Redskins fans never like a holdout. That's particularly true for QB's, with whom we seem to have a remarkable love-hate relationship. We're always rooting for the underdog (see point #2), and we view holdouts by QB's as a lack of leadership. But unlike Shuler in 1994, we're not counting on Ramsey to lead us this year, at least that's what we're saying. This holdout therefore, while certainly not preferable, does little to damage Ramsey's value to us. He can develop at his own pace while one of the other three QB's leads the team. 2) THE OTHER QBs' PERFORMANCE Redskins fans always love to root for the underdog. When Jay Schroeder was starting, people were clamoring for Doug Williams. When Doug Williams was stinking up the joint after the Super Bowl, we were pulling for Rypien. When we had both Shuler and Frerotte on the roster, we were pulling for Frerotte, the 7th rounder. Now, we're pulling for Sage, last year's 4th rounder who has never before this year played in a passing offense, and Danny Wuerffel, whose nickname "Danny Awful" says it all about his prior NFL experience. They may turn out great. But in both cases, the primary evidence for saying that right now is the first preseason game of the year when they both were (mostly in one case, entirely in the other) playing against 49'ers backups. Let's see more before we annoint one of them the savior. Let's relax here and see what we've got in Ramsey. There wasn't a single pundit out there that bashed us for picking him up. Quite the contrary, people applauded the shrewdness of the pick, especially because we got him after trading down for more picks. I think Ramsey can be special for us. Peyton Manning, a QB who we all respect, certainly thinks so. Let's give him a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 Good points redman. I said it in another thread: If you need a QB of the Future, you just have to suck it up and draft one. Waiting until next year just means ANOTHER few years of development before we have a legitimate starter. I would have been thrilled with an OL in round one, but I understand picking a QB instead. It stinks to use a high pick on a guy who won't start this year, but eventually you HAVE to do it. If the future is now, trade for Bledsoe or Brunell or sign Blake. If it's not, draft a top QB prospect. But don't do NOTHING. Don't just pick up some minimum wage retreads and hope for the best year after year. That's just not an option, IMHO. Of course, this doesn't mean I don't think Ramsey's holdout won't hurt us. What a unfortunate way to start one's career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 I still think that we are going to pick up a serviceable guard before the start of the season. Yes, I would have loved to have Gurode or, particularly, Fonuti. But I think that Ramsey is going to work out just fine. As a vast generalization, good QB's are harder to find that good guards. For this reason, I think we made the right choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marhobo Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 I know this is something nobody even wants to consider, but what if Spurrier DOESN'T prove worthy of the NFL and decides that the experiment must end after one year? Chances are that whoever becomes the new HC won't have the system that Danny & Shane will thrive in. Without Ramsey, where would we be? Back to the drawing board? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 Originally posted by marhobo I know this is something nobody even wants to consider, but what if Spurrier DOESN'T prove worthy of the NFL and decides that the experiment must end after one year? Chances are that whoever becomes the new HC won't have the system that Danny & Shane will thrive in. Without Ramsey, where would we be? Back to the drawing board? If Snyder ends up hiring a fifth coach in four years, QB turnover will be the least of our problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marhobo Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 Originally posted by Henry If Snyder ends up hiring a fifth coach in four years, QB turnover will be the least of our problems. Not that it's likely to happen, but it's always possible that Steve might decide that the college game is more to his liking. I don't think Snyder would fire him, though history says otherwise. However....what if? Signing Patrick would take on a whole new meaning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 Other than losing 24 straight games or something, I cannot imagine a circumstance under which Spurrier being canned before the end of the 2003 season, and even that would be a remarkable failure. Both his and Snyder's credibility at the pro level rest with this relationship and this project working out. Spurrier's here because he has nothing left to prove in college. He doesn't strike me as someone who's going to simply throw in the towel if things are a bit rough at first. His ego simply won't allow that. Snyder simply can't afford to fire another coach after a year or less. What has happened so far can be (arguably) explained away without him being the bad guy or an overly meddlesome owner. But he's made clear that he's wanted Spurrier all along. He can't simply cut loose and wash his hands of the matter. And never forget, the most convenient parallel to Spurrier in recent years, Jimmy Johnson, was 1-15 in his first year before going on to success. There's a heck of a lot of room for error here before we ever have to seriously discuss Spurrier's firing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 redman, your view on the qb's in exactly how I feel.. Well put... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 7, 2002 Share Posted August 7, 2002 I've said before (the day after the draft): I don't have a problem with us not picking a lineman (O- or D-) in the first round, but I suspect it was a mistake not to get one at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.