Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Drafting a franchise QB from the Redskins draft slot: what 25 years of history tells us

Atlanta Skins Fan

By Atlanta Skins Fan
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

mistertim

mistertim

Posted
Posted
I would love it if we found a QB in round 6 like Brady. But damn, think of how much futher along we would be with Bradford today

I don't really get some people who talk about looking for a gem in later rounds for a QB. It hardly ever happens. Ever. The situation with Brady is a complete anomaly. For any one Brady there are probably hundreds of other QBs taken in mid to late rounds that do absolutely zero. Or, at best, end up as decent backups or passable starters after some time.

Yes, you're going to have an anomaly every once in a while ala Brady or Warner (though I wouldn't put Warner in the same catagory at all). Romo sits to pee is a good but not great QB. Look at how many of the top QBs in the league were 1st round picks (many being high 1st rounders). There is a reason for that. If anything you use later rounds to find positions like OL, DL, or sometimes LB as there is more of a chance that they will become quality starters.

Obviously trading multiple picks to move up for a guy is a risk. But I trust that Shanahan knows what he is doing when it comes to QBs. And, sooner or later, you're going to have to take a chance and go for it if you see "the guy". Last year Shanny really wanted Bradford but wasn't able to get him. He has seen that Bradford has played well this year and helped start to really turn that team around. I would be incredibly surprised if he didn't like Luck at least as much as Bradford. If he is convinced Luck is the real deal, I doubt he will let the chance pass again without a serious fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
1972FAN

1972FAN

Posted
Posted
There is no second place in the franchise QB derby, at the top of the draft. Either you win big, or it's a disaster that scars the franchise for years. You don't get 90% of a franchise QB by missing: you get 100% of a 4-year hangover.

using a high #1 pick on wishful thinking has 84% odds of making things much worse.

Thats not necessarily ALWAYS the case

1983 Draft

1. John Elway (#1 pick)

2. Jim Kelly (#14 pick)

3. Dan Marino (#27 pick)

Stating the obvious, I would consider all of them franchise QB's, Buffalo should of won a Superbowl, if not for their stupid kicker and Marino did go to a Superbowl,

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vilandil Tasardur

Vilandil Tasardur

Posted
Posted
Thats not necessarily ALWAYS the case

1983 Draft

1. John Elway (#1 pick)

2. Jim Kelly (#14 pick)

3. Dan Marino (#27 pick)

Stating the obvious, I would consider all of them franchise QB's, Buffalo should of won a Superbowl, if not for their stupid kicker and Marino did go to a Superbowl,

That kind of goes along with my earlier post, which everyone else seems to have ignored.

QBs don't seem to be studs or bust, instead draft classes seem to be studs or bust. For whatever reason, it seems like QBs in a given draft class tend to have similar fates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
1972FAN

1972FAN

Posted
Posted
The problem is everyone and their mother knows Andrew Luck will be a franchise QB for the next decade.

No one is going to pass that up.

I agree Luck is the closest to NFL Caliber Ready out of the gate. Thats why I don't pay any mind to the Heisman winner. Not sure of the percentage of the winner, but I'm sure its a very low percentage that they amount to anything in the NFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mad Mike

Mad Mike

Posted
Posted

Um..... No.

Teams aren't built on statistical probabilities. And they aren't built by giving away two years worth of draft picks.

In fact, I find the irony of your reliance on statistical probabilities based on 25 years of history to argue for something as drastic as you propose a little mind numbing. Tell me. What is the success rate over the last 25 years for teams who give up two entire drafts to get their "franchise QB"? And if drafting the wrong QB can set you back for years, how much worse are you if you have given away all of your draft picks to get him.

:doh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hitmandm

hitmandm

Posted
Posted
I said this in another thread, but there is nothing worse than being really bad but going 5-11, 6-10 or 7-9. If you are going to suck, go big. Go 2-14 or 3-13. It is your best chance to grab a franchise QB. There is nothing worse for a franchise than slowly dying with 7-9 or 8-8 records, drafting 10th through 15th and never being bad enough to grab a game changing franchise player.

OMG...someone who pays attention to the NFL

---------- Post added December-22nd-2010 at 12:08 AM ----------

The problem is everyone and their mother knows Andrew Luck will be a franchise QB for the next decade.

No one is going to pass that up.

I think you can buy Carolina out of that pick. They did spend a 2nd on Claussen. If you give them 5 top picks, they might decide it is worth it.

It is hilarious that everyone here says a QB isnt worth it, but then the discussion is that no one will take this "paying too much package" to give up this QB.

---------- Post added December-22nd-2010 at 12:10 AM ----------

You can't predict that we'll be in a position to get a QB in a couple of years.

thats right. The absolute flaw in every argument regarding getting a QB in a couple of years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
scampbell1975

scampbell1975

Posted
Posted
Which is why we should have started IRing guys and putting in younger guys earlier in the season. As soon as we were mathematically eliminated we should have started tanking.

No one likes to hear that but there is NO reason to keep winning games once you know you won't make the playoffs. I can't root against this team but I don't want us to win these next games because it does zero for the team going forward.

I can NEVER agree with purposely losing games. It's just not in a competitive man's nature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DarrellsMyHero28

DarrellsMyHero28

Posted
Posted
I can NEVER agree with purposely losing games. It's just not in a competitive man's nature.

Trust me, I'm a very competitive person.

But when you're running a franchise, you have to look at the big picture.

Its not the NBA, where you can only get a CHANCE to get the #1 pick. The worse the record, the better the pick, and if anyone believes that this team has the pieces to compete...I laugh at you.

This team is horrid. Bottom 5 in the NFL, talent wise. We're embarrassingly bad. Winning this year just pushed our rebuilding back even further.

Beating the Cowboys and Eagles once was fun and all, but it really hasn't done anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Boy1Der

Boy1Der

Posted
Posted

MARK MY WORDS: After the combine everybody is going to be drooling over Jake Locker and he is most likely going to be our pick. Last year everybody had him being the #1 pick if he came out but he decided to stay an extra year and it didn't go as well as planned due to the lack of talent around him.

Locker is mobile big and has a pretty good arm which is what the skins need with our offensive line and Shanahan like to stretch the field. Watch come draft day Locker will be our pick and he will be around when we pick because someone will jump on Newton before we pick or if both Newton and Locker are on the board Shanny will pick Locker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dark Acre

Dark Acre

Posted
Posted

This isn't the NBA. Game-changing players can readily be round outside the top 9 picks. In fact, to suggest otherwise is an utterly silly statement, born out by: Dan Marino (27th pick in 1983) -- can you imagine if he'd fallen to the Skins 1 pick later? Marino with a running game? Scary. Tom Brady? Oh right, system guy. You can go through the draft lists year after year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Snagletooth

Snagletooth

Posted
Posted

Besides QB, those high first round picks would ideally be used at Left Tackle and for a pass rusher. We are looking pretty good at those positions, so it might not kill us, despite our many holes, to trade our top picks for a QB with as much potential as Luck.

Lets say we do get Luck, and he is on par with Bradford. I don't think the lack of additional picks cripples his ability to develop that talent. We don't have to have those premium picks to fill in the OL interior and I don't think anyone wants to be spending premium picks at RB in the Shanny system anyway.

With FA we can provide the supporting cast for Luck. The defense would likely be stunted, but that won't "ruin" Luck. We would likely be a few years out, still, but we would have the QB in place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mistertim

mistertim

Posted
Posted
MARK MY WORDS: After the combine everybody is going to be drooling over Jake Locker and he is most likely going to be our pick. Last year everybody had him being the #1 pick if he came out but he decided to stay an extra year and it didn't go as well as planned due to the lack of talent around him.

Locker is mobile big and has a pretty good arm which is what the skins need with our offensive line and Shanahan like to stretch the field. Watch come draft day Locker will be our pick and he will be around when we pick because someone will jump on Newton before we pick or if both Newton and Locker are on the board Shanny will pick Locker.

I don't think this is necessarily true. Teams have (generally) gotten smarter over the years about picking a guy high purely based on combines, tons of athletic ability, and "potential". The bottom line is, they will see him at the combine and at his pro day and say "this guy definitely has the tools". Then they will go into the film room and break down his play and see many shortcomings that will likely mark him as a project sort of player. Any time a guy regresses from one year to the next, while in the same system, its a bad sign...especially when his comp % goes down when it wasn't that good before.

Did Locker have elite talent around him? No. But he didn't have the worst players ever like some seem to suggest. Bottom line is that he is inconsistent. Inconsistent in his throws, in his footwork, technique, etc. When I watched him this year he would look great at times then he would suddenly lay an egg after that. I wouldn't mind Locker if Shanny likes him, but NOT with a top 10 pick. You don't draft a QB who will likely be a project in the NFL in the top 10. I'm guessing he falls to the later 1st round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spartacus87

Spartacus87

Posted
Posted
MARK MY WORDS: After the combine everybody is going to be drooling over Jake Locker and he is most likely going to be our pick. Last year everybody had him being the #1 pick if he came out but he decided to stay an extra year and it didn't go as well as planned due to the lack of talent around him.

Locker is mobile big and has a pretty good arm which is what the skins need with our offensive line and Shanahan like to stretch the field. Watch come draft day Locker will be our pick and he will be around when we pick because someone will jump on Newton before we pick or if both Newton and Locker are on the board Shanny will pick Locker.

Nobody but Todd McShay had Locker as some kind of universal 1st overall pick. The NFL Draft Advisory board gave him a 2nd round grade actually.

---------- Post added December-22nd-2010 at 03:59 AM ----------

I can NEVER agree with purposely losing games. It's just not in a competitive man's nature.

That sounds well and good, until you keep going 7-9, 8-8, 6-10, 8-8, 9-7, over and over and over again.

The people arguing for simply tanking it are correct. I don't believe in fully rebuilding and cutting everybody to start from scratch; teams that do that take years to gain talent back, but when you're in need of a QB and your team sort of sucks as a whole, at some point you just start putting guys on IR, testing out young elements of your team, and figure out how you're going to get your top 1st round QB target in the upcoming draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spartacus87

Spartacus87

Posted
Posted
For those wanting to trade up to get Luck, and those last year including myself who wanted Bradford, how much are you willing to give up in draft picks? Every team will trade their pick for the right pick.

You really don't want to know how much I'd be willing to do for the Redskins to land Andrew Luck.

That's a long, dark road that nobody needs to head down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...