Interesting discussion....

[Xfactor3]

I would trade Davis for Brunell and Taylor straight up. I couldn't imagine the #1 corner in football leaving in a trade that already involves Davis.<br /><br />I feel sick.

[Brave]

Do any of you get the feeling Art is sitting back having a hearty laugh right about now?

[JimboDaMan]

The key to me is the repeated injuries to Taylor. Davis has had some too, but a lot of that is because he's a workhorse. Taylor seems to start the year off banged up. You lose a guy to injury and you get no value whtsoever. <br /><br />For that reason I don't think I could go for this under any circumstances, but...what if the Jags were to sweeten the pot with this year's #1 and next year's #2? I think for 2 #1's (plus Brunell and Taylor) I'd do it, but nothing less, and I don't see the Jags going that high.

[Blade]

This is one of those posts that makes me wish it was Bulldog or Mick instead of Art posting this.... <br /><br />Next to the Hershel Walker & John Gruden deals, that would be about the most insane move I've ever heard. Two probowlers for two injury-prones???

[Henry]

Ok, just playing devil's advocate here. Taylor is younger than Davis and comparable to Davis in terms of ability. But he is more injury prone, so we can all agree Davis is worth more. Fine, but not much.<br /><br />Brunell is a franchise QB, easily one of the top ten in the league, arguably top five. He's still got 3-5 years left in him. We have VERY few players that we could trade for this guy straight up. Bailey is younger, and also a top player at his position, but his position isn't NEARLY as valuble as a QB is. It could be argued that Brunell for Bailey would be unfair to the Jags.<br /><br />To those not emotionally attached to the players this trade almost does seem fair. Davis and a #1 for Brunell and Taylor certainly is. <br /><br />All that said, I'd hate to see Bailey go, and I hope this is nothing more than a rumor.<br /><br />Ok, let's have it. <img border="0" title="" alt="[smile]" src="smile.gif" />

[Rat_Boy]

I agree with you Henry.<br /><br />Bailey for Brunell straight up is a steal for the Redskins. Franchise Corners are EASY to come by when compared to franchise QB's. <br /><br />But our emmotional attachments make us forget that type of fact, and we say it would be a stupid trade.<br /><br />Bailey Stays.

[Xfactor3]

Ratty I am disappointed in you. Franchise corners are not easy to come by. How many great corners are in this league. Not good but great. You think it would be a good deal if we got a 32 year old injury prone almost retired quarterback for a pro-bowl top corner. Please!

[Zen-like Todd]

Trading Champ would mean that the braintrust thinks we got an enormous steal in Smoot, and that he will be our shutdown corner for years to come, and that he has the potential to be better than Champ.<br /><br />Methinks this could be possible (the better than Champ bit)

[Xfactor3]

Even if Smoot does become better then Champ why have only one shut down corner when you can have two? Champ as a big future ahead of him, but Brunell is close to retiring. Champ is a much better value then Brunell. No way you make a deal like that.<br /><br />If you want a so called franchise quarterback so bad go trade a #1 for Bledose, but don't give up your youth that defines the Redskins.

[PCS]

Well now, Art goes on I.R. for awhile and comes back with this. Now this is what I call upsetting the old applecart. Hey, all this talk is what the post is here for huh? Okay, I'm in. Interesting thought, and the deal could be done and acceptable(yea right.I'm to much of a Big country fan), except the Baily part. That's just a bit too steep. <br />I know we're talking starter for starter here, but I have reservations about Taylor. Maybe one of our 'backers,(excluding big 56 of course),but not Baily. I'm not convinced that's impact for impact.<br />Welcom back Art <img border="0" title="" alt="[smile]" src="smile.gif" />

[Zen-like Todd]

Hmm... I'll toss in David Terrell. I swear, he's almost as good as Champ. No really, I swear.

[Braves On Warpath]

Ya! What he said!<br /><br />Trade Bailey and die! <img border="0" alt="[Guns]" title="" src="graemlins/guns.gif" />

[JonBlaze]

Champ for Brunell would not be a steal. Champ is arguably in the top 3 in a tough position to play and is entering his 4th year as a pro. Champ for Peyton Manning, Daunte Culpepper, Kurt Warner, then yeah, it's a pretty good deal. Maybe I just don't see Brunell as being a great franchise QB. <br /><br />It would be a lot more of an appealing idea if Fred Taylor wasn't made out of cotton candy and Brunell hadn't lost some of his mobility.

[Zen-like Todd]

I propose the following trade.<br /><br />Brunnell and Taylor for a box of toothpicks. I mean come on, fair is fair. We have to give them something brittle in return.

[Art]

To me, trading Bailey is taboo. He, along with Samuels and Arrington and Smoot and Jansen are as untouchable as we have on this roster at this time. Most of us are saying the same thing here, but, it does depend on where you place value. Brunell is a QB of great skill who has years left in the league. Taylor was once, not too very long ago, considered the best or at least among the best runners in football. Davis is now considered in the same breath, but, honestly, if you asked most people in football if they'd take Taylor knowing he'd play 16 games or Davis knowing the same, it would not be an answer that would tend to favor Davis.<br /><br />While I agree with the thoughts that you don't even discuss a guy like Champ in any trade, if the team is lead by people who place greater weight on the QB position than Joe Gibbs did or Marty does (both believed they could win with any QB who could fit their styles) then a trade of this sort does pass the sniff test in terms of being something someone may have mentioned.<br /><br />Again, I am against such a move, but, I wouldn't be at all surprised if such a conversation is ultimately reported as having gone on. I just do not wish to see it as being ongoing <img border="0" title="" alt="[smile]" src="smile.gif" /> .

[Rat_Boy]

I am saying that it is easier to find a DB than a QB, not that finding a DB is easy.<br /><br />Finding good players is NEVER easy, because anyone can be a bust at any time.

[mardi gras skin]

I'd do it.<br /><br />I know, I know. Its just that I look at our defense with Smoot back there to lock up the #1 receiver and I assume that he and Green are at least as good as Lewis had at B'more. If Smoot is all that is advertized, Bailey is a luxury.<br /><br />Brunell is a great player at the postion of our teams greatest need. He is exactly the smart accurate passer that Spurrier could use to full advantage. I really can't think of a better QB for his brand of offense. <br /><br />Taylor is very good, though injury prone. But if we can re-sign Ki-Jana to go with Taylor, I think we don't miss a beat. We may even be better off in the running game.<br /><br />I'd ask for a 2 to go with the deal so I could pick up a guard to go with it, but I'd take a 3. <br /><br />Man. After the initial shock, I'm kind of excited by the posibility.

[fansince62]

we are in the nfc......the prime threat is the rams - a pass happy outfit if ever there were one. no way: this trade sets you up for failure.

[NavyDave]

Some of you guys have to put the cap back on the bottle of glue.<br /><br />Champ,Smoot,Lavar,Samuels and Jansen are the untouchables with S Davis not far behind.<br /><br />Somehow some of rose colored glass wearers discount our own stars abilities fall for a name guy on another team who hasnt done squat either and some how believe he will provide the missing piece.<br /><br />This is where a real GM is needed and should have been hired prior to S Double.<br /><br />This is no way in hell Fred Taylor culd have took the pounding that Davis did last year.<br /><br />When will you guys figure out that we dont need a wussy finesse back in the NFC East when we have the type to take us to the big dance already.<br /><br />Gibbs didnt need a name QB to win three superbowls.<br /><br />The Ravens didnt and when the y sol the farm to get one did they make it back?<br /><br />The Pats have a name QB but it was the lesser known guy who won it all.<br /><br />We won 8 games despite having T Banks under center<br />and could have easily won 3 more.

[joe]

STOP THE MADNESS!!!<br /><br />The only thing that gives this rumor credibility is Fred (the groin) Taylor's Fla connection. Has he ever made it through an entire NFL season? If memory serves me correctly the answer is no. It didn't matter so much when the Jag's had James Stewart as his backup to take up the slack, but they could not hang onto both and Stewart took the bucks from the Lions. Davis might have had some nagging injuries, but nothing that kept him out for extended periods of time. No, exchanging Davis for Taylor is a bad deal for the skins any way you look at it.<br /><br />Now, let's analyse the other side of the deal, Bailey for Brunell. This makes no sense to me. Spurrier has a reputation of using QB's without great talent and plugging them into his system where they use what abilities they do have to the fullest extent. In short, he does not think that he needs a franchise QB to make his offense go. Why should he? He never has needed it in the past. Bailey on the other hand, is a shut down cornerback who are not as easy to come by as some have suggested. In fact, after watch Tom Brady and Trent Dilfer win the last two Super bowls, why would anyone think that we needed a franchise QB? A trade of Brunell for Bailey does not favor the skins. Therefore, let's just forget this one.

[SonnyJ]

A couple of points:<br /><br />-Bailey is untouchable. Great corners are only slightly behind great QBs in terms of importance. And Bailey is still young and improving. Unless you're getting a great young QB or CB in return, fuhgeddaboutit!<br /><br />-Where did this notion come from that Brunell is practically on the scrap heap? Yeah, the toll of being a mobile QB in this league for 8 years or so have dinged him up a bit. But QBs can play well into their late 30s, barring a major injury. And Brunell hasn't had one as far as I can recall. People are talking about picking up Chris Chandler, and he's freakin' 38 years old and as injury-prone as they come (he's not referred to as Crystal Chandelier for nothing).<br />Simply put, Brunell, barring major injury (and no one has any evidence to suggest the likelihood of that happening), solves the QB position for 5 years - that's long-term in the NFL nowadays.<br /><br />Davis for Brunell I do in a heartbeat. They both have about 5 productive years left in them.<br /><br />-Taylor, when healthy, is a better back than Davis. He can bang, or get outside. Great vision and speed. But his injury history is right up there with Chandler's. Too risky to give up a premium player or pick to get him.<br /><br />So, I see the deal as being Davis for Brunell, then something else for Taylor. The most I would give is a second-rounder, if that.<br /> <br /> <small>[ February 28, 2002, 09:17 AM: Message edited by: SonnyJ ]</small>

[Zen-like Todd]

The thing is, it's a buyer's market for QBs. If Jax is forced to trade Brunnell, I don't think they'll get that much. They will have to compete with the Patriots w/ Bledsoe, and free agents like Jeff Blake, Trent Dilfer, Chris Chandler, and possibly Elvis Grbac and Jim Miller.

[Henry]

I'd like Bailey to stay. He's our guy. A career Redskin. I understand this.<br /><br />But a top QB for a top corner straight up is a great deal. Period. Just look at the Redskins for proof. We've had shut down corners at both spots in <br /><br />1997 (Green and Dishman)<br />1999 (Green and Bailey)<br />2000 (Bailey and Sanders)<br />2001 (Bailey and Smoot)<br /><br />And yet we only topped 8 wins ONCE. That was in 1999, which coincidentally was the year we had a pro-bowl year from our QB and the 30th ranked defense in the league. <br /><br />Basically, if we trade Bailey and Davis for Taylor and Brunnell we fill a HUGE GAPING hole at QB in exchange for a downgrade at CB. Then all we have to do is sign merely a solid CB, and we are three deep at CB again. <br /><br />The trade does make sense.