Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Rodd Newhouse draft chat (redskins questions)

aqq

By aqq
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

aqq

aqq

Posted
Posted

(DC): Which GM gets the highest grade for this draft? Also, we there any really dumb picks?

sn2.gifRodd Newhouse: (1:17 PM ET ) I really like wha the Raiders did in OAK. Heck, the entire Bay Area should be happy today. I gave them both A grades. I also gave As to CLV and JAX. As for bad drafts, I give that honor to WAS. What are they doing. I do not fault the Landry pick, but with only 5 picks in the draft and one very high one on draft day, they should have been more active to try and get out of that pick. they will never turn the corner by trying to build a tem through free agency. You HAVE to build through the draft. I am a pro personnel guy primarily and even agree with that philosophy.

Anthony (nyc): So the only thing the redskins could have done to have a better draft is to trade down...did it ever occur to u that nobody wanted to trade up. So they picked the best defensive player on the board and kept the whole 2008 draft picks intact and u kill them for it....Lenny P taught u well

sn2.gifRodd Newhouse: (1:58 PM ET ) They had 4 MONTHS to trade that pick. it is not like they just found out on Saturday they were picking #6. C'mon man, think about it. Yes, if you are stuck with your pick you are stuck with your pick, but to sit on #6 and not have ANYTHING else until#143 in the 5th round. taht makes NO SENSE at all. The Pats only took one pick in day one, but had other picks to move in order to make that happen, becasue they wanted to. I am almost tempeted to give them an F now after that logic on your part! I'm just messing with ya! LOL But the Skins should know better

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Veretax

Veretax

Posted
Posted
OK--someone go back and see what we could have done in the draft if we had decided to keep trent green for the $4 mil a year he asked for, instead of spending picks getting BJ, ramsey, etc

talk about 20/20 wish lists...

yeah... so we should give up the #6 pick just because he thinks so.. Brilliant!

I mean look at this

Damian P. (Corner Brook, NL): Chris Leak leads Florida to a national championship, and no one even uses a lousy seventh-round pick for him. Wha happen?

sn2.gifRodd Newhouse: (1:59 PM ET ) No offense, but this guys was not a full time starter his senior year, so that does cause concern.

Uh What game did leak not start? he shared time with Tim Tebo but so what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ThePreciating

ThePreciating

Posted
Posted

They had four months to trade that pick????

I would love this IDIOT to name me one team who has traded down from the Top 6 picks earlier than 1 month before the draft. I'd love to hear just ONE.

It infuriates me that I'm working a desk job and someone is giving this JERK a pay check to blow hot air about sports. Picking on the Redskins' draft philosophy as a professional writer is like having a test on addition in a calculus class. This guy is a complete clown, and the personnel department needs a shakedown if this guy qualifies as a good writer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
elkabong82

elkabong82

Posted
Posted

I like how dude gets called out by the caller, and then tries to pretend trading out of the 6th spot four months in advance (when many had Branch going 3rd overall to CLE as an example of the uncertainty at that point) would have been a wise move.

Had we traded down, the only spots that were safe enough to where we could still get one of the players we wanted, was with Miami, Minnesota, or Atlanta. Miami didn't want Quinn, neither did Minnesota, who knew nobody else would trade up for AP. Everyone thought ATL was high on Landry and then Okoye. They surprised all the "experts" and took Anderson. So really, the only viable trade options would have been in the middle to lower first round. Landry is much better for us than Jarvis Moss or Anthony Spencer and a third round reach. Sorry, but I'll take possibly the best safety tandem in the league over a marginal upgrade on the D-line.

Trade talks with the Bears and other teams were reported all offseason, and the Skins were taking calls on draft day, so it seems to me we were trying. This guy is just feeding off the illusion that D-line was our biggest problem(yes I believed D-line was the main problem also until I thought about the moves we made in the draft). I don't know how many times I have posted this, but if you back to '04 and '05, when our D was one of the most feared in the league, who were our D-ends? Daniels and Wynn. We swarm tackled, stopped the run, and forced the pass. When we were top 10, the D didn't have the most sacks, and didn't create a lot of turnovers. They simply shut everyone down on third down, something we couldn't do last year with our LBers pulled back all the time to compensate for poor pass coverage.

Landry, along with Fletcher and Smoot, brings the promise of our D returning to what it once was. A defense that blitzed from everywhere because it had the pass protection to make up for the missing guy. Landry is going to have a much more immediate impact (will probably start week 4 after the bye) than any D-lineman back-up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
REDSKINS3000

REDSKINS3000

Posted
Posted
I like how dude gets called out by the caller, and then tries to pretend trading out of the 6th spot four months in advance (when many had Branch going 3rd overall to CLE as an example of the uncertainty at that point) would have been a wise move.

Had we traded down, the only spots that were safe enough to where we could still get one of the players we wanted, was with Miami, Minnesota, or Atlanta. Miami didn't want Quinn, neither did Minnesota, who knew nobody else would trade up for AP. Everyone thought ATL was high on Landry and then Okoye. They surprised all the "experts" and took Anderson. So really, the only viable trade options would have been in the middle to lower first round. Landry is much better for us than Jarvis Moss or Anthony Spencer and a third round reach. Sorry, but I'll take possibly the best safety tandem in the league over a marginal upgrade on the D-line.

Trade talks with the Bears and other teams were reported all offseason, and the Skins were taking calls on draft day, so it seems to me we were trying. This guy is just feeding off the illusion that D-line was our biggest problem(yes I believed D-line was the main problem also until I thought about the moves we made in the draft). I don't know how many times I have posted this, but if you back to '04 and '05, when our D was one of the most feared in the league, who were our D-ends? Daniels and Wynn. We swarm tackled, stopped the run, and forced the pass. When we were top 10, the D didn't have the most sacks, and didn't create a lot of turnovers. They simply shut everyone down on third down, something we couldn't do last year with our LBers pulled back all the time to compensate for poor pass coverage.

Landry, along with Fletcher and Smoot, brings the promise of our D returning to what it once was. A defense that blitzed from everywhere because it had the pass protection to make up for the missing guy. Landry is going to have a much more immediate impact (will probably start week 4 after the bye) than any D-lineman back-up.

:cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
[[ghost]]

[[ghost]]

Posted
Posted
so if no one wants to give you fair compensation for your pick you should take whatever is offered just so you get more draft choices? Yeah that makes a whole lot of sense, not to mention we had a very good FA signing period. Screw him HTTR!!!

Eactly. No wonder nobody wanted to trade up, half of the middle round was full of reaches. Justin Harrell, Ted Ginn Jr., and maybe even Marshawn Lynch went far higher than they should have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimster

jimster

Posted
Posted
yeah... so we should give up the #6 pick just because he thinks so.. Brilliant!

I mean look at this

Uh What game did leak not start? he shared time with Tim Tebo but so what?

Tebow would come in for like 7 plays a game and that makes Leak not a full time starter? :laugh:

I look at guys like Tom Brady at Michigan as not full time starters. - Guys who were only allowed to play one half every week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JRAB

JRAB

Posted
Posted

Not real good analysis, IMO. Yes, we would have loved to trade back and get a DE or DT and added picks. Getting Anthony Spencer (unfortunately a very good player) with a later first and adding a second and a third (or something like that) would have been ideal. However, who was going to trade up at that point?

Quinn wasn't really looked at as sliding until after Miami picked and the things that people trade up for like a pass rusher (Moss, Spencer) could be had later in the first. Maybe if someone had loved Peterson enough at RB, they could've moved up in front of Minnesota. His injury concerns made him just enough of a risk, IMO, that it wasn't worth really trading up into the top 6 for though.

The way it fell though, it would've been great to drop back to say late teens/early 20's and picked up a 2nd and a third. Then, we could have taken Anthony Spencer at DE where he would wake up our pass rush and then used the 2nd and third to trade up to the top of the second and taken Branch. Now that would've been a heck of a day to walk out with Spencer and Branch! Two DL would have made a world of difference on our defense.

Oh well... we have two good safries, that's for sure!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...