bulldog Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 well, looking back the Redskins averaged 16.5 points per game under Zorn, which was one of the worst marks in the NFL. seems as if some changes on the offensive side of the ball beyond just the OL are recommended Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskinzfan30 Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 So in other words, waste the pick. What's the difference between sitting a rookie and not taking one? How about actually drafting a player that would start?I know.. crazy talk! It's not a wasted pick when he'll be on our team for at least 5 years. I know you're a big O-Line supporter but a guy to look at is Jason Fox LT from Miami in ROUND 2! Wait there is more than 1 round in the draft?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generals01 Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 So in other words, waste the pick. What's the difference between sitting a rookie and not taking one? How about actually drafting a player that would start?I know.. crazy talk! Because eventually, at some point in the Redskin's future, they will need a franchise QB if they are going to have any success? It's called building a team. Draft a QB in Rd 1, use the rest of the picks on OL and RB, sit the Qb his rookie year. Draft all OL in the next draft and two years from now, hopefully you have a new core of young lineman and a QB who is ready to start. If you put off drafting a franchise QB because they can't start right away, you will never have one. Eventually you have to pull the trigger. Everyone always says we are not one player away from the Super Bowl and that we need to rebuild. That is exactly why you draft the qb now so that when the rebuilding is done, they will be able to step in. The most successful franchises are built with patience around the QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nighthawk Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 Everybody keeps talking about how this is a new beginning and "the end of the status quo" and all of these things. Yet with all the problems with the offensive and secondary the vast majority of people say Sam Bradford or whoever the flavor of the month QB is will be the #4 pick. so tell me again how this is change and not the same old Skins? When have the 'skins ever drafted a QB with a high 1st round pick? Tell me? The last time was Heath Shuler. After that, they've drafted Ramsey with 32nd pick, and traded back into the 1st to draft Campbell with the 25th. If they drafted a QB with a high first it wouldn't be the same whole 'skins. The same ole 'skins would draft a CB or a Safety with their high 1st round pick. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wysknz1 Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 THe Skins haven't drafted a QB yet....give it a rest, then give it a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RypienUmApart Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 $100 says Sam Bradford will still be there in the 2nd round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TankRizzo Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 Drafting a QB does NOT mean it's the same old 'skins. Now, if they go 7 rounds and only draft 1 or none at all, then yes, same old 'skins and we're doomed to fail. But drafting a QB with the first round pick isn't the end of the world. When Bill Polian started with the Bills, one of the first things he did was get Jim Kelly. When he went to the Panthers, he drafted Kerry Collins in the first. When he went to the Colts, he drafted Peyton Manning. If Shanahan is fond of a QB in the first, don't begrudge him for wanting to have the opportunity to groom a QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceviker Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 If we draft a QB in the 1st with how bad this OL is, firing Vincenzo meant nothing. You're missing the point. We have a need at QB just the same we have a need at OL and QB is a more dire need. Disagree? Look at Green Bay. Rogers has been hit more, sacked more, and pressured more than Campbell. Yet he is able to lead his team to the playoffs. I'm not saying our OL is fine and we shouldn't address it. Its not and we should. But you can address OL better in the later rounds and FA than QB. Look at all the starting QBs in the league. Yes, some are late round gems. But most are 1st rounders. Most top tiered QBs in the league are first round picks. The fact that some are busts doesn't change that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 Because eventually, at some point in the Redskin's future, they will need a franchise QB if they are going to have any success?It's called building a team. Draft a QB in Rd 1, use the rest of the picks on OL and RB, sit the Qb his rookie year. Draft all OL in the next draft and two years from now, hopefully you have a new core of young lineman and a QB who is ready to start. If you put off drafting a franchise QB because they can't start right away, you will never have one. Eventually you have to pull the trigger. Everyone always says we are not one player away from the Super Bowl and that we need to rebuild. That is exactly why you draft the qb now so that when the rebuilding is done, they will be able to step in. The most successful franchises are built with patience around the QB. Most successful teams take a franchise QB after they have a team built around them, especially the OL. If your idea of an OL is D'Anthony Batiste, Derrick Dockery, Edwin Williams, Stephon Heyer and Will Montgomery then by all means draft a QB. I'll laugh my arse off and cry at the same time when he goes on IR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE TRUTH DETECTOR Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 Look at the teams in the playoffs. One of the hardest things to do in the NFL is find a franchise QB. Some teams get lucky (Dallas, NE) but most teams have to draft their QB, and they have to draft him early (Indy, Cincinnati, Jets, San Diego, GB, Philly, Baltimore) and AZ and NO took a chance on a guy in FA and hit the jackpot. If a franchise QB (or a guy your scouts think is a franchise QB) is available when you pick in the first round, you take him. That's not same old same old for the Skins, that's standard operating procedure for every team in the league. Offensive line people.:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 So in other words, waste the pick. What's the difference between sitting a rookie and not taking one? How about actually drafting a player that would start? I know, stupid a-hole Bengals. That certainly didn't work out for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Grundle Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 So in other words, waste the pick. What's the difference between sitting a rookie and not taking one? How about actually drafting a player that would start?I know.. crazy talk! I know right. Our new GM and coaching staff are gonna have this whole team rebuilt and ready to steamroll by the start of training camp. So we're essentially wasting a pick if he doesn't start from Day 1 and contribute to our glorious run to the Superbowl next season. Also, I heard contract is up and next season will actually be the last NFL season ever, so there really is no point in drafting for the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE TRUTH DETECTOR Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 $100 says Sam Bradford will still be there in the 2nd round. $1000 says he is injured his first year in the NFL facing the Eagles , Giants , and Cowboys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 I know, stupid a-hole Bengals. That certainly didn't work out for them. Benglas didnt have the 29th ranked OL when Palmer started his rookie year. Isn't it frustrating arguing without facts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hieverybody Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 You're missing the point. We have a need at QB just the same we have a need at OL and QB is a more dire need. Disagree? Look at Green Bay. Rogers has been hit more, sacked more, and pressured more than Campbell. Yet he is able to lead his team to the playoffs.I'm not saying our OL is fine and we shouldn't address it. Its not and we should. But you can address OL better in the later rounds and FA than QB. Look at all the starting QBs in the league. Yes, some are late round gems. But most are 1st rounders. Most top tiered QBs in the league are first round picks. The fact that some are busts doesn't change that. It doesn't matter that QB is the more dire need because we aren't going to fix our offense in one year. I'd much rather trade down and pick up an extra first rounder next year to get Locker than choose between Clausen and Bradford. Locker/Bulaga is a much better combination that Bradford or Clausen and a first round O lineman next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 I know right. Our new GM and coaching staff are gonna have this whole team rebuilt and ready to steamroll by the start of training camp. So we're essentially wasting a pick if he doesn't start from Day 1 and contribute to our glorious run to the Superbowl next season. Also, I heard contract is up and next season will actually be the last NFL season ever, so there really is no point in drafting for the future. Sarcasm aside, a starting rookie QB with a sieve OL is IR bait. Ask Matthew Stafford. So the difference between a rookie QB on the bench, a rookie QB on IR because of a bad OL and a wasted 1st round pick is what exactly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordac Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 If we draft a QB in the 1st with how bad this OL is, firing Vincenzo meant nothing. There are lots of ways to fix the OL. Having a QB that can read defenses would be a start. A guy with a quick release wouldn't suck either. You can sign guys in FA and draft them in the later rounds. Places where you won't find a Franchise QB, with a few exceptions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mnb123 Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 I don't see how anyone could be mad at taking a first round QB given who is making the decisions now. If Vinny was drafting, it would be a different story. Both the Old Shanny had a good OL in Denver, and young Shanny has a good line in Houston. They aren't retarded, they aren't Vinny, they understand how a good OL is important. Do you really think it is a huge deal if they decide they can rebuild our line without using our top pick on a LT? We are going to need to take a QB either this year or next year. Why does it matter if they decide that Bradford or Clausen is our future, and take one this year? They know what they are doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RypienUmApart Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 $1000 says he is injured his first year in the NFL facing the Eagles , Giants , and Cowboys No doubt. Which is why we go o-line with the 1st two picks and keep JC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hieverybody Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 There are lots of ways to fix the OL. Having a QB that can read defenses would be a start. A guy with a quick release wouldn't suck either. You can sign guys in FA and draft them in the later rounds. Places where you won't find a Franchise QB, with a few exceptions. Then we'd better not draft Clausen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 There are lots of ways to fix the OL. Having a QB that can read defenses would be a start. A guy with a quick release wouldn't suck either. You can sign guys in FA and draft them in the later rounds. Places where you won't find a Franchise QB, with a few exceptions. Ok your suggestions: "Having a QB that can read defenses would be a start" Doesn't matter if he gets sacked on a 3 step drop. "You can sign guys in FA and draft them in the later rounds." Over 200 players that would have been UFA's are now RFA's with no CBA. RFA's cost draft picks. UFA's are going to be 28+ years old. Any starting caliber OL's that would be UFA's are going to be franchised by their teams this year with little penalty as there is no salary cap. How is this making the team better? So again, what good is a rookie QB with no OL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farbod21 Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 Benglas didnt have the 29th ranked OL when Palmer started his rookie year.Isn't it frustrating arguing without facts? Hows this: The year before drafting Peyton Manning, Colts allowed 3rd highest sacks in the NFL and had a 17th ranked rushing attack, with marshall faulk. Thats a good OL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mnb123 Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 So again, what good is a rookie QB with no OL? You know the draft is 7 rounds, right? And that most starting OLinemen are drawn from rounds 2-6, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Grundle Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 Benglas didnt have the 29th ranked OL when Palmer started his rookie year.Isn't it frustrating arguing without facts? Carson Palmer didn't play a snap his rookie year. He sat and watched Kitna take a beating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hieverybody Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 Hows this:The year before drafting Peyton Manning, Colts allowed 3rd highest sacks in the NFL and had a 17th ranked rushing attack, with marshall faulk. Thats a good OL? Jake Locker is much more likely to become Peyton Manning than either Bradford or Clausen. The Colts drafted Tarik Glenn the year before Manning. Do you think they wish they had chosen Druckenmiller (the first QB taken and still available) instead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.