Big Mac Patty Wack Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 We have to get way up there probably top 4 to get Sanchez. There's no way he goes top 4. Probably top 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wvtbred Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 There's no way he goes top 4. Probably top 10. That all depends on Seattle. If they don't take him at 4 then he goes down to the Jags at 8 and they either get a big WR or QB. I see a lot of jockeying around in the top 10 this year and can't see him going past 8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DGREENHULK Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 So basically we waste a day watching a guy practice, when we should be watching someone who plays a position of need. You know, T, LB, DE, or maybe even WR?? Well if the SKINS can fool the league and Vinny gets a late round 1 and picks up a 2nd in a trade for our 13th...then it's well worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingtar Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 If the team really does like Sanchez, maybe we will see a draft day trade where JC goes somewhere for a 2nd. I could not see keeping JC around if we did that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSkin6 Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 I believe this would be the appropriate time to say: PENIS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paintrain Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Well, if we are looking this hard at him, maybe its all fools gold to get teams to trade up in the draft and we're actually hoping that somebody good drops to us. Yeah, teams will bring in someone they have no intention of drafting either as a smokescreen or to scout them further, see what they do well or don't do well in case they face them in their rookie year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Again you guys twisting the truth in the wind. I didn't say that was too much for Cutler you did. Personally I am not sold on Sanchez in any way shape or form. I would rather of signed Garcia before the Raiders signed him and dealt Jason to trade up or down depending on how the board developed. The first part was an attempt at humor - clearly did not come across in translation. Trust me I realise you would trade JC for a small collection of garden beans. The second part you have ignored. There is a very small chance that JC is NOT under centre for us on opening day baring an injury to him. Its not 100% - very little in life is - but its probably higher than 95%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Yeah, teams will bring in someone they have no intention of drafting either as a smokescreen or to scout them further, see what they do well or don't do well in case they face them in their rookie year. I think the teams in the first round have the right to bring in up to 30 players for private workouts. Given that there probably aren't 30 players we are potentially going to draft, you might as well use it to bring in a bunch of players around where you are drafting, not only for scouting purposes (either for matchups or for future FA or trade targets) but for also knowing who will trade for what and see if a guy is worth trading up for for another team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Did we have a PERSONAL workout with Russell, though? Yes. We brought him to Washington, bought him dinner and took him to a basketball match. (I'm making the last two up - though I would not be surprised). Point is we did work him out - along with 20 or 30 other guys most of whom we probably never had any realistic hope and.or intention of drafting. Every NFL team does it. Even if you don't draft the guy you start building a file on them so that if they become free agents or you play against them you have some good quality information on their strengths and weaknesses etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wvtbred Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 The first part was an attempt at humor - clearly did not come across in translation. Trust me I realise you would trade JC for a small collection of garden beans.The second part you have ignored. There is a very small chance that JC is NOT under centre for us on opening day baring an injury to him. Its not 100% - very little in life is - but its probably higher than 95%. I didn't ignore it you just don't accept my opinion. You say 95% and I believe it's 50% at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 I didn't ignore it you just don't accept my opinion. You say 95% and I believe it's 50% at best. Time, as they say, will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wvtbred Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Time, as they say, will tell. Zackley! :point2sky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 It's times like these I wish that it were still the 70s. Can you imagine how a team would market Sanchez in 1977? I would totally be sleeping in a bed with a $6 Million Man bedspread with a giant Sanchez poster above the headboard. And on that poster, he would almost certainly be dressed as Zorro. And it would say "Arriba, Redskins!" Ah...the good old days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 He was on Sirius radio saying the Skins showed the most interest in him. I hope it's a smoke screen for two reasons: 1. I watched every USC game and was never all that impressed by Sanchez. Looked great against Penn State, but that's really it. And he was surrounded by talent. He rarely had to go through his reads or throw to a receiver who wasn't wide open. Could be a great pro, could be a bust -- a huge risk IMO. 2. He won't be there at 13. A lot of teams have him ahead of Stafford now. The Skins would definitely have to trade up to get him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamboater Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 That all depends on Seattle. If they don't take him at 4 then he goes down to the Jags at 8 and they either get a big WR or QB. I see a lot of jockeying around in the top 10 this year and can't see him going past 8. I dont see the Jags drafting him...maybe San Fran though. The Jags just signed Garrard to a long term deal and they could use help in other areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veretax Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 We have to get way up there probably top 4 to get Sanchez. Yeah Rumor is Seattle is looking hard at him, because even if He's not ready, they could extend Matt's contract and he'd be there after. How about Jason and the 13th to Seattle for the 4th? I don't think that will be enough, may require a late round pick at least to move up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Sanchez will fall to 13 for these reasons: 1. Seattle will not spend the cash for a back-up QB ... pick here is Monroe or Curry. 2. Jags desparetly need a WR ... pick here is Crabtree (Macklin goes to Raiders at 7). 3. San Francisco desparately needs a defensive lineman ...pick here is Orakpo or Rajii or Ayers. 4. Denver is really sold on Orton ... will spend its highest pick on defense: Everette Brown or Aaron Maybin. Will the Skins trade down? No way ... the picks available after 13 are of second round quality. Skins go for BPA and land their No. 6 after all. They get a possible franchise QB at a manageable cost. (PS: Campbell gets traded before or during Draft.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 If we play our cards right, we could be setting ourselves up for a nice trade down if Sanchez is there at 13. Or we really are interested...I hope not but you never know with Snyderatto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going Commando Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 i hope we don't get this guy or any other qb. i would rather wait until next year when the better qbs who stayed for their senior year in college are available. Sanchez is a good QB. His main knock was that he only played one season, and people think he should have stayed for his final year of eligibility. Had he chosen to go back and come out next year, he could have been the #1 QB. Bradford is good, but I'd take Sanchez over Tebow or McCoy anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderMustGo Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 I love how that bringing Sanchez in is some elaborate scheme to trick other teams into thinking we'll draft him... that it's all a smokescreen and we have no interest. But in a nearly identical thread, bring in Raji is because we want to line him up next the guy we just spent $100 million on--no smokescreen or anything, serious interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going Commando Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Sanchez will fall to 13 for these reasons:1. Seattle will not spend the cash for a back-up QB ... pick here is Monroe or Curry. 2. Jags desparetly need a WR ... pick here is Crabtree (Macklin goes to Raiders at 7). 3. San Francisco desparately needs a defensive lineman ...pick here is Orakpo or Rajii or Ayers. 4. Denver is really sold on Orton ... will spend its highest pick on defense: Everette Brown or Aaron Maybin. Will the Skins trade down? No way ... the picks available after 13 are of second round quality. Skins go for BPA and land their No. 6 after all. They get a possible franchise QB at a manageable cost. (PS: Campbell gets traded before or during Draft.) You are assuming that none of the teams in front of us can trade down either. The Jets or whoever can move up to 10, 11, or 12 if they want. And if we traded Campbell, who would start for us next year? Because I don't really want to sit through 16 games of some sort of Collins/Brennan amalgamation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LandoverLex Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 We need to draft Tebow. He is a great QB and an even better human being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going Commando Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 I love how that bringing Sanchez in is some elaborate scheme to trick other teams into thinking we'll draft him... that it's all a smokescreen and we have no interest.But in a nearly identical thread, bring in Raji is because we want to line him up next the guy we just spent $100 million on--no smokescreen or anything, serious interest. That's a good point. Besides, don't both Raji and Haynesworth play the 1 technique? Raji is a fat and stout bulldozer, I don't know that he could play the 3. Well maybe they would just move Haynesworth over to the 3 because he could probably play that spot too. But his natural position is at 1 and that's what they've been hyping him up as. If we drafted Raji, I doubt that he and Haynesworth would be on the field together at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 You have to cover all your bases and work out players , just in case they are there. The workout could be simply to evaluate what the Skins think they can get for him in a trade if Denver and SF pass on him and he lands at #13. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 That's a good point. Besides, don't both Raji and Haynesworth play the 1 technique? Raji is a fat and stout bulldozer, I don't know that he could play the 3. Well maybe they would just move Haynesworth over to the 3 because he could probably play that spot too. But his natural position is at 1 and that's what they've been hyping him up as. If we drafted Raji, I doubt that he and Haynesworth would be on the field together at the same time. Raji played the 3-technique in college. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.