What makes everyone so sure we take QB early in draft???

[darrelgreenie]

The O-line is being made out to be far worse than it actually was

LoL, wow.

Heyer and Levi our bookends were both close to league worst.

We couldn't run block nor pass block.

The coaching staff admitted they stopped calling 5 znd 7 step drop passes because there wasn't good enough protection.

But, yeah our OL problems are overblown.

Sell crazy somewhere else please.

[THE HAMMER'IN HOG]

LoL, wow.

Heyer and Levi our bookends were both close to league worst.

We couldn't run block nor pass block.

The coaching staff admitted they stopped calling 5 znd 7 step drop passes because there wasn't good enough protection.

But, yeah our OL problems are overblown.

Sell crazy somewhere else please.

Yea like anyone puts any stock in anything you have to say, your supposed to be out of here, remember your little bet at the start of the season in which you lost? And yet here you are backing the loser once again with another excuse, why don't you grow some hair on your B**** honor your word, and disappear until the draft is over!

http://www.extremeskins.com/showpost.php?p=6293083&postcount=1

[Going Commando]

The O-line is being made out to be far worse than it actually was to defend JC plain and simple' date=' yes we had a lot of injuries but I have seen far worse lines in my time, JC's inability to play made the O-line look much worse than it actually was. The CDT refuses to acknowledge how bad the Cardinals O-line was their SB year, or the Steelers O-line that beat them, they excuse it by saying these pro bowl future HOF QB's hold the ball to long, yet that can no how ever be the case when it comes to JC. They don't want to acknowledge the lack of any run game from the Saints who are now reigning champs, nor the numbers, and playoff appearance by Green Bay and Aaron Rogers. Plenty of successful QB's put up great numbers with lousy O-lines, What nobody wants to acknowledge is the fact that JC was this putrid 3 seasons ago when our O-line was very good, but no one would no that until Collins stepped in and rescued the season from JC, and that is something the CDT cannot over come with all their little excuses![/quote']

Really, you've seen offensive lines worse than ours last season? With the Redskins? When an offensive line is so bad that you can't even run a simple 5 step drop, no offense will function. Rodgers and Roethlisberger both ran full offenses last season despite their poor protection while Campbell got hit on 3 step drops.

Regardless of what you remember anecdotally, how do you respond to all of the statistical evidence I quoted? It clearly demonstrates how awful the line was. Maybe he'd be near the top in one of those stats if he had a persistent flaw to his game--a low release for batted passes, indecisiveness and a tendency to hold the ball for sacks, or the opposite of that--impatience or a tendency to go too quickly through his reads for the throw aways. But he doesn't have any of those qualities to a marked degree, and the fact that he's near the league lead in every single one demonstrates pretty clearly that his protection was absolutely awful.

[Going Commando]

Yea like anyone puts any stock in anything you have to say' date=' your supposed to be out of here, remember your little bet at the start of the season in which you lost? And yet here you are backing the loser once again with another excuse, why don't you grow some hair on your B**** honor your word, and disappear until the draft is over!

[url']http://www.extremeskins.com/showpost.php?p=6293083&postcount=1[/url]

You're not fooling anyone by changing the subject and trying to get personal. Your argument is still ridiculous.

[Oldskool]

It's not that hard to figure out what we'll do if you know the answers to a few contingent questions:

1.) Does Shanahan view Sam Bradford as a franchise caliber QB?

2.) Does Shanahan view Jimmy Clausen as one?

3.) Will we be in position to draft either at 4?

4.) Does Shanahan think he can get as much out of a later round QB such as Snead or McCoy as he could from the first two?

The problem is, probably nobody outside the organization knows the answers to 1, 2, or 4 and nobody at all knows the answer to 3. If the answer is yes to the first three questions, then it's a safe bet we'll draft one of them. If it's no, or if the answer to 4 is year, then we'll go with a tackle or defender at 4.

It's a boring answer but it's the only logical one. We won't know our intentions at 4 until we see how the draft unfolds and we actually make the pick.

All those concerns will be mitigated by what happens in FA and the Left Tackle situation. Two things to remember:

1. This team has a serviceable Quarterback. That cannot be said about Left Tackle.

2. Taking a QB high would be a luxury right now. To be logical in a void of where QB is supposedly more important than LT, a void is more important than a desire for an upgrade.

[JoeKnowsBest]

All I know is that I'm a fan. I'm not going to pretend I can see into the future and know how good a player is going to be, or that I'm some super judge of talent. Bruce Allen and Mike Shannahan will pick the player and strategy they feel best will help them begin to build a championship team. What ever they choose, like a good fan, I will cheer those players on and hope for success.

That being said, as a fan, I am partial to Sam Bradford and Trent Williams as a fan of Oklahoma. I also like Jimmy Clausen.

I hope for the Mayock stretegy (get franchise QB at 4 then take one of the remaining top 7 OTs at 37), but like I said, I'm just a fan. Allen/Shanahan knows best.

[JoeKnowsBest]

...although I will say I was exactly right about Suisham all along, as well as aquiring Mike Shannahan's services.

[THE HAMMER'IN HOG]

You're not fooling anyone by changing the subject and trying to get personal. Your argument is still ridiculous.

Come on dude, if I was out to try and fool the CDT how difficult could it be, JC has been doing it for years.

[darrelgreenie]

Yea like anyone puts any stock in anything you have to say' date=' your supposed to be out of here, remember your little bet at the start of the season in which you lost? And yet here you are backing the loser once again with another excuse, why don't you grow some hair on your B**** honor your word, and disappear until the draft is over!

[url']http://www.extremeskins.com/showpost.php?p=6293083&postcount=1[/url]

1) the mods have actually told you and SoCalSkins to quit the childish crying about a bet that you guys weren't involved in which was in a thread i never posted in

2) the person that made the bet agreed via PM that i was no longer obliged to follow the terms of the 'bet'

3) I didn't welch on the bet because the terms of the bet were changed several times after i agreed to be part of it without my consent

4) this post does nothing to support your non-sensical statement about our OL it only support your usual posting tactics after you posit a non-tenable argument

5) People might not put stock in anything i post, but i'm pretty sure they put less stock into anything your post since you

a) mainly post about the QB

are usually over the top negative

c) resort to childish tactics and actually avoid debate

HTTR!

[THE HAMMER'IN HOG]

Really, you've seen offensive lines worse than ours last season? With the Redskins? When an offensive line is so bad that you can't even run a simple 5 step drop, no offense will function. Rodgers and Roethlisberger both ran full offenses last season despite their poor protection while Campbell got hit on 3 step drops.

Regardless of what you remember anecdotally, how do you respond to all of the statistical evidence I quoted? It clearly demonstrates how awful the line was. Maybe he'd be near the top in one of those stats if he had a persistent flaw to his game--a low release for batted passes, indecisiveness and a tendency to hold the ball for sacks, or the opposite of that--impatience or a tendency to go too quickly through his reads for the throw aways. But he doesn't have any of those qualities to a marked degree, and the fact that he's near the league lead in every single one demonstrates pretty clearly that his protection was absolutely awful.

Again it's useless to argue with the delusion that is the CDT, JC was not hit every time he dropped back, this is self propelling nonsense to allow for the excuse that JC is a good QB except for his line, every QB gets hit prematurely at times, JC had enough time over the coarse of a game to make plays, yet even when he had more than sufficient time he still couldn't get the job done, in fact he would find a way to step into the pressure rather than avoid it, pocket presence also allows for extra time, but when you do not posses the ability to avoid the rush that is just as much on the QB as the line.

See you keep trying to contort stats to feed your delusion, stats can be so easily manipulated as we see with JC, so why does the CDT resort to stats that are not realistic to performance? Because that is the only thing they have, we all know JC doesn't pass the eye test on Sunday's, we also know win, lose, [which is the norm for JC] or draw we will be bored out of our minds watching him try and command an offense, and mount a meaningful drive at a crucial time, or for that matter any time.

Obviously you have found some stat, or have some kind of fantasy that some how, some way, Warner, Big Ben, Rogers, all some how had it easier than JC, why? Because we all know that JC is a pro bowl QB waiting to happen, and if other QB's performed under similar circumstances and had monster years that would mean JC really isn't that good, and we can't have that now can we?

Here's what's going to happen, the real football people have arrived in DC, and they are going to kick JC to the curb just as soon as it is feasibly possible, and then you will know whether or not it was someone Else's fault for JC's ineptitude, or his? I myself already know that answer.:pfft:

[THE HAMMER'IN HOG]

1) the mods have actually told you and SoCalSkins to quit the childish crying about a bet that you guys weren't involved in which was in a thread i never posted in

2) the person that made the bet agreed via PM that i was no longer obliged to follow the terms of the 'bet'

3) I didn't welch on the bet because the terms of the bet were changed several times after i agreed to be part of it without my consent

4) this post does nothing to support your non-sensical statement about our OL it only support your usual posting tactics after you posit a non-tenable argument

5) People might not put stock in anything i post, but i'm pretty sure they put less stock into anything your post since you

a) mainly post about the QB

are usually over the top negative

c) resort to childish tactics and actually avoid debate

HTTR!

Anyone who doesn't agree with you is obviously negative, let's face it when you talk about JC there is no positive, unless of coarse you have a school girl crush on the guy and can't see the reality that is JC.

Mods never said a peep to me, but I guess if you cry long and hard enough you can get your way, good luck with that though.

You see in the CDT eye's avoiding debate = not agreeing that JC is a legitimate NFL QB, and counter it with unfounded nonsense. 4-11 against the easiest schedule in NFL history, and has looked no different at the end of this past season than he did the first time he took an NFL snap!

We are going to see sooner rather than later who knew what they were talking about, and who didn't? There's really no sense in conjuring up some kind of bet on that one though, we both know that is rather useless don't we!

[wvtbred]

Your non sequitur regarding Campbell is anything but amusing or on point.

As stated multiple times, Campbell is not the answer but not the biggest issue with this team. We have a starting caliber QB (albeit not a good one). We don't have a starting caliber Left Tackle, Right Tackle, Right Guard, and multiple other spots.

Fans myopic QB fascination is getting tiresome.

We are filling the holes on OL like with Hicks so I am not worried at all. As a matter of fact with Team Shanahan the two positions I am least worried about are OL and RB. No matter what you or I think or want they have a plan to solidify those two positions first and foremost. You should be happy because that is where they are concentrating right now instead of worrying about the draft.

The draft will also play an important part in the future but come opening day I seriously doubt any rooks will be on the OL. That's just my feeling.

Now as far as QB, IMO Jason is not a starting caliber QB. Shanahan has already said there will be a lot of open competition at the QB spot. Maybe that means JC will be here and maybe not. One thing for sure is for the first time Jason isn't getting the starting gig handed to him. Now JC is a VERY solid, dependable back-up. Problem is the rest of the league doesn't seem to believe that because he would already be visiting teams but instead you see things like Feeley visiting and being signed by the Rams, Carr visiting and probably being signed by SF, Pennington being resigned by Miami.

Where has JC visited?

[Chump Bailey]

Where has JC visited?

Of course we do not know for sure, but it appears there is little to zero interest in JC. At least for a 1st round pick as compensation.

I agree with you that JC is not starting caliber QB. I was vocal advocate of his not too long ago, but feel we simply must move on. I also think we place way too much emphasis on stats. I think San Diego's backups are better QB's than JC. I think Miami's backup and starter are better. I also think that Alex Smith is a better QB. Mike Shanahan and LaFleur could get much more out of Smith than they will JC IMO. Smith is more mechanically sound and is a better pure passer.

I also question the pure open competition thing. I doubt that will occur, but we'll see.

The only person IMO in the entire NFL that is capable of getting JC to become a true franchise type of QB and propel his overall skillset is Norv Turner.

[PCS]

Mods never said a peep to me' date=' but I guess if you cry long and hard enough you can get your way, good luck with that though.[/quote']

This mod addressed everyone involved in this,(in general),in a thread a couple of months ago. Obviously you missed it so I'll recap,(and this was as a result of several of you all chasing around other members who had made the bet). This bet was between you the members. It had and has nothing to do with the board specifically. I'm not going to have you guys chase each other around the board spamming threads up with comments about the bet. Especially personal comments. You guys want to make bets,fine. Just realize that times like this are part and parcel of the deal. Again,that's between you all. Handle it or don't,but if you do,take it to pm. That is all.

That and some of you all need to step back from this debate and relax. Take a breath or 20 or maybe even a Valium.

[ChiefPowhatan17]

Watch them surprise everyone and take CJ Spiller with the #4 pick.

[HallsHouse]

Watch them surprise everyone and take CJ Spiller with the #4 pick.

lol thats a heck of a reach for Spiller, who in my opinion may not be the best back in the draft. drafting a rb in the first round would be dumber than taking a qb at 4

[Going Commando]

All those concerns will be mitigated by what happens in FA and the Left Tackle situation. Two things to remember:

1. This team has a serviceable Quarterback. That cannot be said about Left Tackle.

2. Taking a QB high would be a luxury right now. To be logical in a void of where QB is supposedly more important than LT, a void is more important than a desire for an upgrade.

There are very few things that can be considered a luxury on a roster in the midst of this much change. QB is a special position. He has to be the coach's man and if you don't have that guy that the coach trusts, then the position is a need even if there is a serviceable player already on the roster.

Positional debate exists in a void too and the debate of QB versus LT in general isn't fruitful when you need them both. The debate should be kept to specific prospects that are available at your pick. It should be Sam Bradford and Jimmy Clausen versus Russell Okung and Anthony Davis. I think its easy to support a claim that Okung and Davis are better at their position than Bradford and Clausen are. But since QB is a special position, if the coach looks at a prospect and determines him to be his guy, then that increases the prospects value enough to justify taking him ahead of a better player at another position. We don't know if Shanahan thinks this about either of those QBs, we are just assuming he either does or doesn't.

The one thing you can say about the team with certainty is that this rebuild an transition will be a multi-year process. We need both positions filled and both will probably take a first round pick or a hefty amount of luck in the draft with guys falling. Luckily for us, 2011 already looks like a very strong class for both QBs and LTs in the first round so I think we've got some flexibility with our decision at 4. We need to nail this pick--if I was fairly iffy on Bradford or Clausen, then I would go ahead and take Davis or Okung and look to next year's class for my guy since it'll be a good group. BUT, if I felt with confidence that I could turn Bradford or Clausen into a long term starter, then I would just draft them, sit them, and look to 2011 for my LT in a guy like Gabe Carimi, Anthony Costanzo, Clint Boling, or Nate Solder. That seems like the most sensible way to try and build.

My personal feelings are that I don't see how on earth anyone can be certain of their evaluation of Bradford since he didn't play last year and I personally do not like Clausen as a prospect much at all. So I would draft Davis at 4. But Allen has access to all of their tape and interviews so they can get a pretty good picture of the prospects and I'll trust him if he drafts one of those QBs.

[Kindred]

After getting rid of TC, there's a pretty good chance we're either going to pick up another qb in FA or the draft.

[Going Commando]

lol thats a heck of a reach for Spiller, who in my opinion may not be the best back in the draft. drafting a rb in the first round would be dumber than taking a qb at 4

I agree. It's absolutely not Shanahan's style to take a running back that high. I also don't think there is much chance of us taking Dez Bryant because Shanahan seems to want to get Malcolm Kelly involved and Thomas looks like a good fit in the offense as well.

But one thing I don't think is getting enough consideration is a defender at 4. People seem to be OK with taking Suh, but it wouldn't surprise me if we chose Eric Berry at 4 either after what he did at the combine. I think he proved he can play cornerback and that's going to be a need if we trade Carlos since we cut Smoot. Shanahan DEFINTELY understands the value of having a great CB after enjoying Champ Bailey all these years and I think Berry has similar shut down potential (although you want teams throwing the ball at him so he can make plays). Plus Berry has the upside that, if he doesn't work out at corner, you can move him to free safety and move LaRon to strong and have an excellent tandem there.

I wouldn't be surprised or upset if we went:

- Berry at 4,

- a lineman like Cody, Pouncey, Iupati, Saffold, Charles Brown, or Bruce Campbell at 37

- and the a group of front 7 defenders and interior lineman with the rest of our picks.

It's not my favorite plan but I think it could work out all right.

[The Tris]

But since QB is a special position, if the coach looks at a prospect and determines him to be his guy, then that increases the prospects value enough to justify taking him ahead of a better player at another position. We don't know if Shanahan thinks this about either of those QBs, we are just assuming he either does or doesn't.

Again, this is what it all boils down to. QB is worth significantly more than LT, though both are needed for success. My initial position on this before things broke down, was that it is more important to have an elite QB than an elite LT. I would go as far as to say that the best LT in the league is not worth as much as top 10 QB.

If we are trying to find solutions to both our QB and LT issues in this draft -which realistically is probably not feasible - we have a much high chance of doing so going QB 1, LT 2, than waiting on a QB to be around in the 2nd.

9 of the 12 starting QBs in the playoffs were drafted in the 1st round.

2 of the 12 starting LTs in the playoffs were drafted in the 1st round.

But as stevemcqueen said, this is a multiyear process, and we realistically shouldn't expect to solve both holes this year, and we need to make sure the first pick we take is not a bust. I think both Clausen and more so Bradford can be franchise QBs, and I think the Okung is about as clean a LT prospect you can find - clean, not once in a lifetime good, but clean - so either direction we go I think we'll get a player who can make a difference for a while.

But I think there is a higher chance that someone like Staffold or Ducasse will be a solid LT than McCoy or Lefevour will be a solid QB. I feel like I am a broken record, but it is harder to build a winner with a 2nd round QB than a 2nd round LT.

That is why I feel that if Bradford or Clausen checks out, I am sure we take a QB. And when we get a T to pair him with, I will be as happy as I can remember on a Draft Day.

[THEREALTOR1]

Where has JC visited?

Of course we do not know for sure, but it appears there is little to zero interest in JC. At least for a 1st round pick as compensation.

We get it, you guys don't like JC. No big news there. But we cut 10 other players, and tendered another 10.

http://blog.redskins.com/2010/03/04/redskins-release-10-players-tender-10-free-agents/

Where have they visited? How come all the first and second round picks for those players aren't flying in the door?

[bulldog]

In the end result Shanahan is probably going to do what Parcells did in Miami.

Draft a LT with his overall #1 pick and then select a quarterback in Round 2 to learn for a year and then take over.

That is the LOGICAL way to approach the needs of the Redskins which closely mirror the situation on offense that Parcells came into with the Dolphins.

[The Tris]

In the end result Shanahan is probably going to do what Parcells did in Miami.

Draft a LT with his overall #1 pick and then select a quarterback in Round 2 to learn for a year and then take over.

That is the LOGICAL way to approach the needs of the Redskins which closely mirror the situation on offense that Parcells came into with the Dolphins.

Or he could do what Dimitroff did in Atlanta. There is no one logical approach to this. Teams have done it both ways and been successful.

[Oldskool]

Or he could do what Dimitroff did in Atlanta. There is no one logical approach to this. Teams have done it both ways and been successful.

Considering that we "lost" (read: lucked out) on the Pashos sweepstakes, the inevitable conclusion that we are getting at least one tackle in the draft should be sinking in.

I've been saying for months that this year is not like any other year that most Skins fans have even known. We are going to have to rebuild the OL though the draft and a QB may have to wait until 2011.

[The Tris]

Considering that we "lost" (read: lucked out) on the Pashos sweepstakes, the inevitable conclusion that we are getting at least one tackle in the draft should be sinking in.

I've been saying for months that this year is not like any other year that most Skins fans have even known. We are going to have to rebuild the OL though the draft and a QB may have to wait until 2011.

Why is it so hard to imagine that we can draft multiple OL and QB this draft, in some order? I can guarantee you that OL will not be the only position picked this year, and there is good reason to assume that one of those picks will be a QB.