Veretax Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 I think that drafting sanchez is a possibility. I'm not sold on Brenann, and TC would be cut if we think anything of Colt. Besides, even if we assume JC tanks, I doubt we tank so much we get a pick to get the pick of QBs next year. Personally, I hope JC succeeds, but my leash on him would be short. 5 maybe 6 games tops, if he's still struggling, start Colt and see what you have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snagletooth Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 Maybe this guy saw Jansen's claims that he was going to take the job and be a pro-bowler for the next couple of seasons. You know should anyone doubt him. He uses that stuff for fuel. This is why I can't bring myself to pay for Insider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addicted Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 My opinion, the writer of this article is half right. The speculation about LT needs to stop. My man Samuals is a beast and the best damn player on the team peroid. Sure he's getting up there in years but we don't need to be looking to replace him this draft. If we spend our number one on LT I will seriously consider quitting this team. It pisses me off so much that Chris doesn't get the respect he well deserves. The man's in the mold of the Hogs from our Superbowl teams. Every fan should be worshipping him and every beat writer worth a damn should know he's on the team. Now the part he is right about is regarding the QB. Think about this...Say Jason Campbell sucks it up this season, just work with me for a minute. Going into next season we have one guy who could start for us unless you actually believe we might go with a 39 year old starting QB who looked like garbage in this system, last offseason. So Jason's off the team and we got all of our eggs in the Colt Brennan basket. If Colt's the man like some think he is around here then we are in good shape. Problem is we won't know about that until after the draft. That's a pretty big problem. Imagin if Jason and Colt both look horrible next season. We now have ZERO QB's on the team to start in 2010. That's an extremely bad situation to be in. It's not that far fetched to think right now we don't have a QB in 2010. If we wanted to ensure we had a QB situation that was manageable and less dangerous then we don't look at starting a Rookie QB in 2010. Why do that? Starting rookie QB's usually suck. They need time to develop. So why go into 2010 offseason thinking we have to start a rookie QB that season? Or we go into the offseason and say "who ever is the best QB in FA we will sign" which is an easy way to the poor house and overpaying for a player. So now what makes the most logical sense? Since we know now that our #2 isn't going to be able to be the 16 game starter in 2010 he's eliminated. We don't know yet what we got in Colt. We don't know yet if Jason will be here next season either or is even worth being here. Sounds to me as if we in fact do need a QB. If the team and most importantly Jim Zorn think a QB coming out this season has star potential why not draft him? If Zorn thinks that dirty Sanchez is worth the pick then I say we should go get him. If we did draft him we would have to carry 4 QB's this year but we know that going into next offseason we've got two signal callers who are young and could maybe lead the franchise for the next 10 years. Next offseason we would go back to carrying three QB's on the roster. The QB spot is one where a good QB makes a bad team better but in our own case an ineffective QB makes the team worse. Getting the right guy under center is by far more important then a LBer or another Offensive lineman. If however is simply a smoke screen attempt to get teams interested in dirty Sanchez then we are failing badly. We are showing interest in this dude so if your looking to move up why wouldn't these teams move up past us so we don't draft him ourselves? I'm thinking we aren't actually playing a game here with those teams and in fact looking at our options. I wouldn't take a dump on the field if we drafted a QB, that's silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tml6157 Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 1) Tebow rates poorly as an NFL QB. Same expect him to play TE or FB in NFL. 2) Although I like McCoy, people have issues with his arm strength. 3) Some were saying Sanchez could compete with Bradford for #1 pick next year if he stayed. Other than Bradford, whom are the better prospect? Not to mention, to get Bradford, we would have to be worst team in NFL. Drafting Sanchez would not be bad idea. At best, we have Brees & Rivers scenario. At worst, JC sux again, Sanchez gets a year learning and be ready following year. Like that idea better than, drafting a rookie QB in 2010 and starting him right away. 1. I dont care what people rate Tebow to play in the NFL his leadership is unlike any other. When have you EVER seen JC carry a team like Tebow did this past season. He finds ways to win period. 2. People say the same thing about Sanchez's arm strength 3. How do you know what we will finish this season. We have just as equal of a chance to go 0-16 as we do 16-0 We cant afford to take a QB now to have him sit behind JC. Its a waste of a pick. We have major holes that need to be filled and we have a chance to fill one of them at #13 (RT, DE, LB) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPortJGibbs89 Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 since when did we need a left tackle? did i miss something about samuels? we need a right tackle. this article just lost its credibility.QFT. Retarded and of course we will be linked to Sanchez since we worked him out. Big surprise here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brlawson Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 The only QB we should take is Pat White to be our mystery man, and school fools on how to run the WCO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter_R Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 I wouldn't mind if one of those guys could replace Samuels, and then Samuels can kick Jansen to the curb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Touchdown Redskins Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 Hey, this is good for us. We need to get a lot of people thinking we're going to draft Sanchez so that people will pay a higher price to trade up with us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JVSkins n Hokies Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 All the talk of drafting Sanchez has to be for trade bait. Hopefully we'll get someone to trade up to our spot, we get a couple extra picks to fill some holes. then get cutler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flexxskins Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 Wow, this is the first time that I have seen both the threads OP and article make statements to ruin the threads credibilty.:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins2victory Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 -LOL, I dont think so!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If we did that, I would have to do more than closs my eyes and count to 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWCREDSKINS Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 Considering they are ditching Samuels, I don't buy this. We are not drafting Mark Sanchez, we have too many other needs. I think when all is said and done either Andre Smith or Michael Oher will be a Redskin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAC386 Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 I think we've established that this article was not thoroughly researched before written. However, would it make any sense to draft Sanchez as a back-up to Campbell this season anyways? If Campbell works out we can always trade Sanchez (much like Atlanta did with Shaub, I know that's a terrible spelling) and if Campbell doesn't work out we have a quarterback with tons of talent with a year of development sitting on the bench. I'm not for this, but it makes a little bit of sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flycoach Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 Slide Jansen to Left Tackle...we see how credible this source is...doesn't even realize that Samuels is way better than Jansen....Ridiculous That's EXACTLY what I thought. Not worth the ePaper it was eWrtten on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rufus T Firefly Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 Hey, this is good for us. We need to get a lot of people thinking we're going to draft Sanchez so that people will pay a higher price to trade up with us. OK, this is just one quote of many from people thinking this is the case. It's important to examine how this thought falls apart when thought about. Assume you are a team who needs a QB, likes Sanchez and is thinking of trading up to get him (most likely the Jets, Bears, Bucs or Vikings). Now, you become convinced the Redskins want Sanchez and will take him at pick 13. What do you do? Do you start talking to the Redskins about a trade? Do you think the Skins see Sanchez as their QB of the future and thus think 'well, we'll have to give up an extra 5th rounder to get them to cede his draft rights'? I doubt it. What you really would start thinking is that you need to trade up to pick 12 to get Sanchez before the Redskins do. If anything, convincing teams that we want Sanchez will hinder the chances of a trade down scenario, at least one that centers around Sanchez. Further, if draft day comes, the Skins are on the clock and Sanchez is available, and the Skins start calling teams about a trade down, that would immediately remove any doubt in said teams' minds that the whole Sanchez thing was indeed a smokescreen. No, if the Redskins are trying to convince people that they are interested in Sanchez as a smokescreen, then that would have to be intended to protect another specific player. Say, as an example, their interest is in Andre Smith. Then you convince teams that you want Sanchez so that if Smith is available at pick 11 or 12, those teams that want Smith think it's safe to wait to pick 14 to target him. Again, that is a smokecreen that makes sense, not a "we want Sanchez, so you better trade with us to get him' scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cherick Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 Good Lord........ If we draft Sanchez, I think I'm gonna cry.......after pooping in my pants.....and puking. Please let this not be true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lou4gehrig Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 The quote has been updated, so everybody can stop freaking out now about Jansen moving to LT. "While it would certainly make sense to draft a talented successor in Sanchez, the Skins might be in a tough spot if Andre Smith or Michael Oher are still on the board. Either man would be a suitable pick to supplement veterans Chris Samuels, who will turn 32 this summer, and Jon Jansen, who turned 33 in January. One player who probably hopes the team elects to boost the offensive line in the draft is Clinton Portis. Although Portis finished 2008 as the league's fourth-leading rusher with 1,487 yards, it took him 342 carries to get there. The 4.3 average yards per carry is in line with what he's produced as a member of the Redskins, but a far cry from the 5.5 yards per carry he averaged in his two seasons with the Denver Broncos." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addicted Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 No, if the Redskins are trying to convince people that they are interested in Sanchez as a smokescreen, then that would have to be intended to protect another specific player. Say, as an example, their interest is in Andre Smith. Then you convince teams that you want Sanchez so that if Smith is available at pick 11 or 12, those teams that want Smith think it's safe to wait to pick 14 to target him. Again, that is a smokecreen that makes sense, not a "we want Sanchez, so you better trade with us to get him' scenario. I agree with you that this makes the most sense, of course what else makes sense to me is that we are actually looking at our options going into next year and seeing the situation we are going to be in if Jason Campbell fails. Regardless of what some posters here want to believe, if Jim Zorn thinks that Sanchez is a good QB we should draft him. We are starring into a barrel right now with the most important position on the team and its time supporters of Jason Campbell and Colt Brennan admit this. Next offseason we are looking at the possibility that: Jason doesn't play great and wont be resigned. Our number 2 QB will be 38 years old. Why would we start him? Colt Brennan is a complete mystery. He might not be worth starting peroid We right now are looking at a bad QB situation next offseason with possibily no starter on the team between the three players. Drafting a QB that Jim Zorn whom I trust knows a thing or two about this position might be in the best interest of the team looking forward. I wouldn't mind drafting Sanchez. I don't know the kid or much about him but I believe if Zorn thinks he's worth more to the team then drafting a LBer I will support the move completely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Full Monty Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 I agree with those saying it's smokescreen for a qb-starved team that picks after us. If they think that we might take Sanchez it may be able to allows us to move back and pick up an extra first day pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PROSCOUT Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 If team's drafting later than us think we are going to take Sanchez at #13, they wouldn't necessarily try to trade up to #13. They would more likely try to trade with Denver at #12 or even higher to block us from drafting Sanchez.Unless...the team trading up thought they could offer so much to move to #13 that we would drop the notion of drafting Sanchez and move back. Yes that could be true, IF they can find a trade partner. But also, if Detroit trades up to # 11 OR 12 to take a QB, that becomes 1 less offensive lineman or linebacker that goes off the board. So somebody, anybody, trading up to get Sanchez is a benefit for the Redskins because we are not really interested in QB. That leaves more linemen and linebackers on the board is what I am saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 Toook the words right out my mind. Sanchez is a huge upgrade over Campbell and gives the Skins ... at last ... a QB with "it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PROSCOUT Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 I think we've established that this article was not thoroughly researched before written. However, would it make any sense to draft Sanchez as a back-up to Campbell this season anyways? If Campbell works out we can always trade Sanchez (much like Atlanta did with Shaub, I know that's a terrible spelling) and if Campbell doesn't work out we have a quarterback with tons of talent with a year of development sitting on the bench.I'm not for this, but it makes a little bit of sense. No you cannot sign a rookie QB to a billion dolllar contract and then trade him ONE year later. The cap hit would be rediculous. Probably 10-12 million dollars. Thats not even a possibilty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAC386 Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 No you cannot sign a rookie QB to a billion dolllar contract and then trade him ONE year later. The cap hit would be rediculous. Probably 10-12 million dollars. Thats not even a possibilty. ....well...ummm...Uncapped year? haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illone Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 The only reason in my mind that the Skins do select Sanchez would be in a sign and trade move with another team, which would be brilliant if Vinny pulled it off. Kind of like what SD did a few years ago with Eli Manning. Draft him and then trade his rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 I agree with you that this makes the most sense, of course what else makes sense to me is that we are actually looking at our options going into next year and seeing the situation we are going to be in if Jason Campbell fails. Regardless of what some posters here want to believe, if Jim Zorn thinks that Sanchez is a good QB we should draft him. We are starring into a barrel right now with the most important position on the team and its time supporters of Jason Campbell and Colt Brennan admit this. Next offseason we are looking at the possibility that: Jason doesn't play great and wont be resigned. Our number 2 QB will be 38 years old. Why would we start him? Colt Brennan is a complete mystery. He might not be worth starting peroid We right now are looking at a bad QB situation next offseason with possibily no starter on the team between the three players. Drafting a QB that Jim Zorn whom I trust knows a thing or two about this position might be in the best interest of the team looking forward. I wouldn't mind drafting Sanchez. I don't know the kid or much about him but I believe if Zorn thinks he's worth more to the team then drafting a LBer I will support the move completely I'm not following you here. If Campbell sucks and Brennan doesn't do anything, then our record will reflect that, and so will our pick number. There's great quarterbacks every year, and nobody is calling Sanchez the next Manning. If we need a quarterback next year, the year after, or ever for that matter, then we'll draft one. We don't need a quarterback right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.