Getting our franchise quarterback

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I hope we identify a QB somewhere in this draft. Since it won't be Luck, I'd prefer it be a late-round pick...we can bring him along slowly.

[Conn]

I hope we identify a QB somewhere in this draft. Since it won't be Luck, I'd prefer it be a late-round pick...we can bring him along slowly.

Agreed. Especially since doing that doesn't hinder our ability to draft a QB high next year, if a great prospect is there.

[Skins199021]

Locker is a perfect guy for this system, Once again I say do not look at his stats, his supporting cast is bad, his O-line is terrible, and his coach is quite stupid (outside of running a pro-style offense)

Very Mobile, Big arm, smart good decision making

[Skin'Em84]

We need to bring the future of our franchise in THIS off season. Every year we delay equals another ~.500 season.

To the people saying plug all the holes and then draft a QB: the NFL doesn't work that way.

Look at Miami, they drafted an incredible LT, but two years later they still suck because they passed on Matt Ryan. The Rams had 3 years straight of top-2 picks, and its only coming together now that they have Bradford (even though they still have alot of holes to fill).

If the FO likes a QB that is available when we pick, we have to pick him. Even with all of our holes on defense QB is still the #1 need for this team.

Miami was doing fine until Pennington's shoulder finally crapped out. Rams also play in the NFC West, but you can say that it's coming together now because they put in the seasons to build up their team around Bradford.

[darrelgreenie]

Look at Miami, they drafted an incredible LT, but two years later they still suck because they passed on Matt Ryan. The Rams had 3 years straight of top-2 picks, and its only coming together now that they have Bradford (even though they still have alot of holes to fill).

Just b/c you draft a QB w/a high pick doesn't guarantee success.

Everyone seems to think Mark Sanchez is a "franchise QB" but if you put his production/stats on another less talented team would his level of production be good enough?

Even if you have a franchise QB (whatever that means) doesn't guarantee success.

You have a very simplistic view of football my friend.

Also, the Rams great coordinators on offense and defense and they have a good OL and a great RB and a good decent lets not pretend that the team sucks except for Bradford they just caught the injury bug at the WR position.

[Drexen Del'Sangre]

Yes, I place my allegance to the GROUP FOR GABBERT

I will volunteer to drive the bus that totes that bandwagon around. Ive had a man crush on Gabbert. And I think our current position puts us in a perfect spot for him if he decides to come out.

[mistertim]

Locker is a perfect guy for this system, Once again I say do not look at his stats, his supporting cast is bad, his O-line is terrible, and his coach is quite stupid (outside of running a pro-style offense)

Very Mobile, Big arm, smart good decision making

I think Locker could be a good fit for this system but it might take some time. I don't rely completely on stats, but the bottom line is that his comp % is just plain poor. And you can't blame it all on his receivers. Every QB has guys who drop balls. I have watched him play this year and he is inconsistent and does make bad/inaccurate throws even when he has time. That is definitely something he is going to have to work on in the NFL and it isn't going to happen overnight. I would be fine with him as maybe a late 1st, but preferably a 2nd round pick.

[Veretax]

First, we don't know for sure that Luck will come out. Everyone assumes he will, but you know what with the labor unrest, he might decide to sit out of this thing and finish that degree of his in architectural engineering. (I'm not 100% sure that Luck is as good as advertised frankly, his father didn't last long in the NFL either, not that that should be a slap against Andrew, but I mean Russel was this phenomenal guy and look what happened with him?

"

Currently, the draft order resembles the following:

Carolina - (2-12) - Quarterback needy

Denver - (4-11)

Cincinnati - (4-11)

Buffalo - (4-11) - Quarterback needy

Detroit - (5-10)

Dallas - (5-10)

Arizona - (5-10) - Quarterback needy

Cleveland - (5-10)

San Francisco - (5-10) - Quarterback needy

Houston - (5-10)

Minnesota - (5-9) - Quarterback needy

Tennessee - (6-9) - (will likely keep VY and discard Fisher)

Washington - (6-9) - Quarterback super-needy

Seattle - (6-9) - questionable - Hasselbeck not long-term answer

Carolina Drafted Jimmy Clausen last year as I recall, and yeah he's looked bad, but very few Rookie QBs look like Big Ben especially given Carolina has holes all over the place. Carolina's problem at QB is no different than us really they have holes all over the place, and other than Steve Smith who is ancient now by NFL standards, who do they have that can catch passes? I'm not convinced they want to take a QB at #1, not unless its in a move to trade down for more picks.

Buffalo has a decent QB in Fitzpatrick, their WRs and Oline really are in not in great shape right now and I think they need more although they may be better than advertised. I think that it just comes down to the fact that they are retooling, and its difficult to do well in a division with Tom Brady and Mark Sanchez in it.

Arizona and SF are the two that I suspect could be needy ahead of us. Question is do they go for it or not. Minny, I think will want to stick with TJax, unless they can trade for an experienced guy. They will be having a lot of trouble signing their UFA given so many contracts come to term at years end. That's my question. Seattle I think would be a good place for McNabb actually.

[#98QBKiller]

I posted this in the draft thread but:

I'm guessing we won't get a straight answer until after the Orange Bowl, but if he does come out, you have to wonder if we'll trade the house to move up and get him.Going on stats, he seems to be the only QB that's really worth drafting.

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/playerbreakingnews.asp?sport=NFL&id=6439&line=196938&spln=1

Andrew Luck: Oliver Luck believes son might go pro

Andrew Luck - QB - CLG - Dec. 27 - 2:07 pm et

Stanford QB Andrew Luck's father, Oliver, indicated that his son may still be strongly considering entering the 2011 NFL draft.

"He'll make his own decisions," said Oliver, who briefly played in the NFL and is now the A.D. at West Virginia. "He's a smart kid, and he's made good decisions in life. ... Ultimately it comes down to a pretty simple question: What does he want to do? I think virtually every college kid, including my son, wants to challenge himself against the best. And the best is the NFL." Dec. 27 - 2:07 pm et

[joe]

I really hope we don't reach on a QB. If we're picking at 6 or 7 and can't trade up for Luck, none of the other guys are worth that pick. IMO the drop off from Luck to the rest of those guys is enormous. All of them have major question marks. Newton may very well go top 10 because some team will fall in love with his athleticism and the numbers he put up. Mallet will probably go relatively high, too, but I have never really been that enthused about him. Right now I think Locker is a late 1st rounder but could slide into the 2nd because he regressed this year and at times just looked absolutely lost.

I would say it is Luck or no QB. I know it might seem like we don't have much hope of getting him, but don't doubt Shanny's tenacity in getting the guy he wants. He missed on Bradford last year and I don't think he will let it happen again, especially on a guy who I think is a better prospect coming out than Bradford was. If we DO miss on him, there will be some very good players that we could draft at that position. Then we would probably have to go with Rex or grab a journeyman QB from someone else on the cheap and see what happens in 2012.

I pretty much agree with you, but if I am not mistaken, Luck may not come out at all, he could still stay in college for another year. Which means that Newton will probably go higher than we are picking. Mallet may be a mid first round pick, which means we would not have to trade up to get him, but I have read of some flaws in his mechanics. And Locker may actually slip to the second round since he has regressed this year, although word was that Shannie was high on him last year.

One thing is certain, there is no way to predict what Shannie will do, although I think it is pretty clear that the chances are that McNabb is not going to be here next year. .

Great! I posted that Luck might not come out right under someone who posted that his dad says he might!!!

[redskins4ever28]

If Luck DOES come out, theres going to be many teams who are going to try and get him. The question is who is going to offer the most. Carolina is loving life right now, because I bet you any money they will be trading down if he comes out. I can only hope we offer them the same, if not more then what we offered the Rams for Bradford. We could even have some type of a 3 team trade. Like Arizona get s Mcnabb for a 3rd pick, and we trade it to Carolina along with our 1st this year, and maybe a 2nd next year, as well as the 3rd from Arizona, and package it in with Cooley and AH. Or trade AH for a 3rd and throw that in there too. So that way were technically only losing 1 pick. If they demand more, then we could go balls to the wall, and offer 1st this yr 1st next yr, and Cooley to give Clausen more weapons. Trade Mcnabb to the Vikings/Cards for a 2nd(maybe?) or a 3rd and go from there.

[Boy1Der]

We will have to wait and see but if we trade donovan and albert than we will use those picks as ammo to mover up in the draft.

[justice98]

It might wind up being in Washington's best interests to unload McNabb before the draft to one of those teams, thus likely taking them out of play for drafting a rookie QB. Or at least reducing the chances that they would.

[texasthunder]

I will volunteer to drive the bus that totes that bandwagon around. Ive had a man crush on Gabbert. And I think our current position puts us in a perfect spot for him if he decides to come out.

Tonights the night, we get to see Gabbert in a pressure situation.

Plus he is facing Ricky Stanzi.

[darrelgreenie]

Tonights the night, we get to see Gabbert in a pressure situation.

Plus he is facing Ricky Stanzi.

I like Stanzi as a later round QB prospect.

[Houston2Taylor2Landry]

Usually if you think you're getting a Franchise QB in the draft, you will most likely not.

---------- Post added December-28th-2010 at 02:58 PM ----------

I like Stanzi as a later round QB prospect.

I think the most of the Starters for Iowa will be good quality pros. Just something about the way they play and carry themselves.

[Crazy Levi]

We will have to wait and see but if we trade donovan and albert than we will use those picks as ammo to mover up in the draft.

The Redskins have proven that throwing away draft picks is a winning formula. I hope you are right about this!

[Dukes and Skins]

I like Stanzi as a later round QB prospect.

This will be fun to watch tonight because Gabbert is the star in the making and I saw today where he's now rated the #2 QB I believe by McShay and Stanzi is the mid round guy who if he puts up a big game can make a huge name for himself

[darrelgreenie]

This will be fun to watch tonight because Gabbert is the star in the making and I saw today where he's now rated the #2 QB I believe by McShay and Stanzi is the mid round guy who if he puts up a big game can make a huge name for himself

It would be great if the both do well and pump up their draft value.(and Gabbert comes out)

The more good QBs coming out the better chance good players at other position fall.

---------- Post added December-28th-2010 at 03:17 PM ----------

I don't work today my wife is out i got all night to watch a smorgasbord of football!

[Mania]

If the FO likes a QB that is available when we pick, we have to pick him. Even with all of our holes on defense QB is still the #1 need for this team.

This is the smartest statement made in this thread and I completely agree.

[texasthunder]

This will be fun to watch tonight because Gabbert is the star in the making and I saw today where he's now rated the #2 QB I believe by McShay and Stanzi is the mid round guy who if he puts up a big game can make a huge name for himself

Saw that same thing on ESPN, and was surprised that McShay had Gabbert as the #2 QB.

That could be bad for us if one of the other teams higher in the draft like him.

Man there is so much up in the air, with head coaching changes, the CBA, maybe a rookie cap, underclassman declaring/or not declaring, and 6 may 8 teams needing qb's.

[Newera]

GM's don't heed McShay.

[Going Commando]

Great post I agree with everything you said and im def with you on cam. Dude is a stud and most importantly a WINNER. He is further along in the passing game than both vick and young were in college. He is more of an athlete but still has the intangibles of tebow. Do people realize what he has done this year? He turned around a average auburn team and has them undefeated in the national title game.

Like you said Luck is the safer pick but I would be thrilled if cam fell to us. He actually reminds me of mcnabb when he was at syracuse. Like I said man great in depth post.

It's just not true that Newton is farther along as a passer than Young was. Young had several hundred more attempts in college than Newton will have if he comes out this year. He had a whole year of experience more than Newton did. He also threw far more than he ran, which isn't the case for Newton. When people make this claim, they usually defend it by saying Newton's throwing motion is better than Young's, as if that makes the entire difference. It's tunnel-visioned. My throwing motion is better than Vince Young's but I'm certainly not a better passer.

Also gorebd, I make comparisons of Newton to Young all of the time. It's not because they are both black. It's because they are very similar prospects. I could maybe see a McNair comparison. But I don't think a Roethlisberger, Young, or McNabb comparison makes any sense for Newton. Maaaybe Roethlisberger makes sense because of the similarity in size and the background in college shotgun spreads, but that's stretching it. They are different athletes. FWIW, I also don't believe a JaMarcus Russell or Michael Vick makes much sense either.

I also don't think Cam Newton is nearly as good a prospect as Gabbert. First off, his arm isn't stronger than Gabbert's. He might show off similar velocity, but he doesn't have Gabbert's elite repertoire covering the entire field. Second, their footwork issues are not the same. You can watch Gabbert go through a game where he has 40-50 attempts and his maybe 7 or 8 times his footwork deteriorates due to pressure. Newton throws the ball 20 times a game or less, and on well over half his passes he's doing something strange with his feet. It's obvious in the disparity in the quality of their placement on passes. Gabbert is far more accurate than Newton is. At this point in time Newton is still a thrower and I still see him aim the ball too much like he was doing at the beginning of the year. As other posters have said, he's a runner who can pass.

And all shotgun spread offenses are not made the same. What Missouri runs is extremely different from what Auburn runs, and quite frankly, it's a better translation to the NFL. Gabbert has shown mastery of a timing based intermediate passing offense where he calls his own adjustments, makes presnap reads, and reads the coverage for the entire field. Newton is making very different types of reads, and most of the time is reading run as his first and second option. Gabbert makes the full assortment of throws in his offense, and has shown a mastery of difficult bucket and stick throws that I just don't see from Newton because he runs so much.

[wildbill1952]

"[so do we try to pull an Eli Manning-type move to acquire the 1st overall pick? (A 2011 1st round pick, 2011 2nd round pick, 2012 fist round pick -- something along those lines. Let it also be known that Carolina doesn't have a 2nd round pick this season). It would absolutely cripple us elsewhere, and means we would -- as of now -- have just one player to show for the first four rounds of the NFL draft. But in all likelihood, we would finally have our long-term answer at quarterback for the next 10-15 years. Would that not be ultimately worth it, even if we have to suffer two more seasons of almost unbearable losses?

Do we try to package players+picks to try to grab the 2nd rated prospect (Cam Newton, perhaps?)

Or do we sit tight and hope one of the more mentally flawed, but physically elite quarterbacks fall -- a Jay Cutler type -- for the Shanahans to groom to fit our system?

Let me check to see if I have the OP's thoughts adequately summarized.

Option 1. Give up our first round pick for two years and our second this year to Carolina to get our choice of all college quarterbacks.

Option 2. We package up a few of our players AND some draft choices to go after the second best quarterback in the draft.

Option 3. We sit still, wait for 4 or 5 other teams to draft the first 4 or 5 best quartebacks, and then draft the next best quarterback, admittedly flawed, with our first round pick.

My thougths on each:

Option 3: So we bypass the best offensive lineman, the best wide receiver, the best of a variety of defensive players we could get to settle for the 4th or 5th best quarterback in the draft, knowing he's flawed, all because we don't like our current three quarterbacks? I realize this idea is a strawman, just thrown out for comment, but sheesh. This is the worst case scenario for those who propose picking by need, blindly picking anyone who fills the position, with little or no regard for talent. Boneheaded is a sufficient description of this idea.. Elevating this idea to other heights of stupidity just makes my comment appear as sarcasm.

Option 2. Package up a few of the players the Skins currently have that are capable of starting for another team, and getting rid of some of our draft picks, with the hope of picking up Cam Newton, someone who could be the next Michael Vick or the next McNabb or the next Vince Young. So, we get a rookie quarterback, make no improvement to the offensive line, get no new receivers, trade away some of the few picks we do have, trade away some of our current players creating more needs on the offense and/or defense and bring in a rookie, saddling him with a one year older Moss, and an offensive line that we already know is bad, with a center that's old enough to be his father. Almost as bneheaded as option 3.

Option 1. Almost the same as option 2, but with this,we get a rookie quarterback, guarantee him we'll have no first round picks for two years to improve either the offensive line, the receiving corps or the defense. So we have our franchise quarterback (theoretically at least) and we wait for two years as his offensive line allows him to be trampled virtually eery game of the season. Even if we're lucky enough to keep him healthy, we have no first round picks to upgrade the receiving vcorps and the Skins will depend on rounds 2 through seven to revamp the entire defense and the offensive line and the receiving corps.

I don't like any of these options. I feel all guarantee a fall from mediocrity to the level of play of the Detroit or Cleveland franchises. And with the Skins there, all those first round picks we gave away will be top 5 picks for the teams we traded them to.

How about this instead:

1. We keep our draft picks where they are: one in the first, one in the second, one in the fifth, the sixth and two in the seventh and we start working on the supporting cast for our quarterback.

2. We don't give away any more draft picks.

3. We draft a speedy wide receiver with pick 8 or 40 and a center with the other pick, assuming we find neither in free agency. Picks after round 4 are usually camp fodder, but maybe the Skins will get lucky, but I don't care.

4. We use Free Agency to get a nose tackle, another stellar guard/center, a wide receiver if we can find one, and a couple of outside linebackers for the 3-4.

5. We keep McNabb and Grossman and Beck, let them fight it out in pre-season, and start the best of them, leaving the second best as someone who is now very familiar with Shanahan's offense if injury occurs.

Now, if my plan is all that bad and the Skins lose even worse, next year we're in the top 5 and we get the franchise quarterback with the players already in place to support him, especially the offensive line to keep him healthy. We only need one more offensive lineman to have done a complete overhaul of the offensive line. We can now use the remaining draft picks on defense. We still have our draft picks, we get the franchise quarterback one year later and we don't go through three years of being compared to Detroit and Cleveland.

The folly of thinking a new quarterback will fix the offense of the Washington Redskins is normal on this board, but is far from practical. What's worse is taking this crippled offense and putting it in even worse shape by trading away the future just so you can get one player, the quarterback, out of the 22 that are needed to make a team. It just doesn't make sense.

[HailSkins83]

I think alot of these QB's will fall to us... I see Carolina taking Luck if he comes out but Im thinking that Buffalo will take the best player available since there current QB is more than servicable. The Vikings have a young prospect already so I see them going after a Veteran(maybe McNabb). the 49ers and Cardinals are interesting but I dont see both teams taking a QB in the first. So they way I see it, we will have a shot at the 2nd or 3rd top QB in the draft. That could be Gabbert, Newton, Mallet, or Locker... Lets just hope the QB Shanny wants slips... If not, we can take BPA.