bobzmuda Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 thats logical if you want to guarantee us losing 10 games. If you're going to trade him you have to sign him silly. Unless the thought so repulses you that you would rather forego the draft pick you would get in return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 If you're going to trade him you have to sign him silly.Unless the thought so repulses you that you would rather forego the draft pick you would get in return. the only way id be ok signing him is if his tender was like next to nothing. if we tender him for a 2nd rounder, my head will probably explode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSkins Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 Just had to pop in and throw a jab, eh? Fair enough. Most of the analysis I have read on various draft boards and, simply from what I have seen, gives me a sense that there isn't a "blue chip" QB in this class, as in one with very few questions that easily is worth a top 5 or even higher pick. But I defer to you, the certified QB guru. Who in this QB class coming out do you see as worth a top 5 or top 10 pick. And more importantly, why? I would prefer for the Redskins to not draft a qb in the 1st rd. Package players and picks for a veteran. Wasted 5 years on Heath and Gus. Wasted another 8 on Ramsey and Campbell. Made the playoffs with Brad Johnson, Mark Brunell and Todd Collins. If we had simply kept Rich Gannon in 1994, Brad Johnson in 1999 and let Collins play in 2006, the number of wins and playoff/ Super Bowl appearances would be far different over the past 17 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSkins Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 the only way id be ok signing him is if his tender was like next to nothing.if we tender him for a 2nd rounder, my head will probably explode. We absolutely should tender him a 1st and 3rd level. It is only 2.35 million. With an uncapped year, cutting him in preseason won't hurt if there is no trading partner. They can even IR him and do it again the next year or keep him inactive for the year. Maybe Dan can send him a plasma and a truck load of toilet paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 We absolutely should tender him a 1st and 3rd level. It is only 2.35 million. With an uncapped year, cutting him in preseason won't hurt if there is no trading partner. They can even IR him and do it again the next year or keep him inactive for the year.Maybe Dan can send him a plasma and a truck load of toilet paper. id like to get something for him. cutting him just gets rid of him, trading him gets rid of him and nets us something for our (hopefully) new GM to use in the draft (or another player). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Botched Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 id like to get something for him. cutting him just gets rid of him, trading him gets rid of him and nets us something for our (hopefully) new GM to use in the draft (or another player). Maybe we could trade him for an HD jumbotron for FedEx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 Maybe we could trade him for an HD jumbotron for FedEx. there is no way any company would agree to that. it would be a 100% fleecing. im starting to think maybe danny doesnt upgrade the jumbotrons so that people cant really see how bad we are? Fan #1: "i cant see that damn screen, how'd we just screw up that bad?" Fan #2: "it looked like a holding call then a fumble, but larry michael showed up and starting talking about toyotas and miller lite." Fan #1: "oh well, it probably wasnt as bad as i thoug.....LOOK!! CHEERLEADERS!!" *breathes sigh of relief* - the danny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B&G808 Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 id like to get something for him. cutting him just gets rid of him, trading him gets rid of him and nets us something for our (hopefully) new GM to use in the draft (or another player). BLC your devotion to running JC out of town really touches my heart! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 BLC your devotion to running JC out of town really touches my heart! just my devotion to seeing some good football sometime before im dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B&G808 Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 just my devotion to seeing some good football sometime before im dead.:hysterical: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSkins Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 just my devotion to seeing some good football sometime before im dead. If you redefined your standards of "good football", 6 points against the pukes might fit within that definition. It has worked for so many here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boobiemiles Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 The Redskins are always a few good descisons away from a ticker tape parade. But Dan has to be more of a man, and less a Boy King, to make all this work. JC is a good qb. Even other fans are beginning to see it. He's a gamer, and the leader we've lacked since Brad Johnson went to Tampa and won a championship. The real suckers are the people that pay all that money for tickets and parking. Why pay for a product that is belwo standard because the intiative of the organization and it's faulty philosophy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 If you redefined your standards of "good football", 6 points against the pukes might fit within that definition.It has worked for so many here. that was such a gusty performance though. i saw his guts everywhere. if only our FG kicker was 100% in every game, we might still have a losing record, just not as bad a losing record! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B&G808 Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 If you redefined your standards of "good football", 6 points against the pukes might fit within that definition.It has worked for so many here. What, 6 whole point's wasn't enough for you?:rotflmao: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 I would prefer for the Redskins to not draft a qb in the 1st rd. Package players and picks for a veteran. Who? I would only want to package players AND picks for a very good QB. What team do you think has a very good QB and would be willing to part with him for less than at the very least a 1st round pick (probably more)? Hasn't this been the failed M.O. that our front office has been using for all these years now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSkins Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 Who? I would only want to package players AND picks for a very good QB. What team do you think has a very good QB and would be willing to part with him for less than at the very least a 1st round pick (probably more)? Hasn't this been the failed M.O. that our front office has been using for all these years now? We will have a top 10 pick, Boozie is expendable and without a CBA, the rights to JC. Plus our 2nd and next year's picks are there to deal. Last time we traded a 1st rd pick for a QB was Brad Johnson. It actually was a good move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 We will have a top 10 pick, Boozie is expendable and without a CBA, the rights to JC. Plus our 2nd and next year's picks are there to deal.Last time we traded a 1st rd pick for a QB was Brad Johnson. It actually was a good move. But you didn't answer the question. What team with a very good QB would be willing to part with him for less than an arm and a leg? And, given the apparent failure of Cutler as a savior in Chicago, would you really want to trade multiple picks (maybe even two 1sts) for anyone but a perennial pro bowl QB? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSkins Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 But you didn't answer the question. What team with a very good QB would be willing to part with him for less than an arm and a leg? And, given the apparent failure of Cutler as a savior in Chicago, would you really want to trade multiple picks (maybe even two 1sts) for anyone but a perennial pro bowl QB? Depends on the CBA and the salaries some teams will want to dump. Too early to tell. It will clear up by March. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KokoMike Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 Really, we should make him the approx $1.5 million offer for one year which will make him a restricted free agent (no CBA). If some team signs him for $2 Million a year, we can sign him for that, or take the 1st round pick. In any event, if he is here, he should be told that he will have to compete for the position. I would take Colt Brennan in 2010 over Campbell. But, if it is a straight up competition, I would welcome that too. The bottom line with Campbell is he has never had to compete for the position and his entitlement has been negative for our beloved Redskins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSkins Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 Really, we should make him the approx $1.5 million offer for one year which will make him a restricted free agent (no CBA).If some team signs him for $2 Million a year, we can sign him for that, or take the 1st round pick. In any event, if he is here, he should be told that he will have to compete for the position. I would take Colt Brennan in 2010 over Campbell. But, if it is a straight up competition, I would welcome that too. The bottom line with Campbell is he has never had to compete for the position and his entitlement has been negative for our beloved Redskins. I would take Shanahan with Ramsey over both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KokoMike Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 I just want the QB to have to compete for the position in 2010, at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSkins Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 I just want the QB to have to compete for the position in 2010, at this point. Every player needs to compete on the team. That is how it is suppose to work. That was the best thing about Gregg williams. He gave everyone a chance to start. Didn't matter what the reputation was or what the salary was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 Every player needs to compete on the team. That is how it is suppose to work.That was the best thing about Gregg williams. He gave everyone a chance to start. Didn't matter what the reputation was or what the salary was. I would say that is only semi true about Williams. I think there was also the factor of him believing he could just plug anyone in anywhere in his system and it should be fine. So, yes he gave everyone the opportunity to start, but that doesn't necessarily mean it was always the best player. If a guy was a great player but a "square peg" and Williams wanted to fit him into a round hole and he just wouldn't fit, he wouldn't play as much to the guy's strengths as just find someone else who was a round peg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.