Jason Redi (WP): Given the Redskins' needs, drafting a quarterback would be indefensible

[artmonkforHOF]

QB is the last thing this team should be thinking about, remember, we have Sexy Rexy, who is a far better QB than McNabb, at least the coaches see it that way.

You cannot change from a 4-3 defense to a 3-4 defense and then decide to keep the roster you have, it takes at least 2 years, some would argue 3, of drafting, signing and cutting your roster to fit the new system, so yes D is a huge priority this year, and I think anyone who thinks otherwise is a delusional fan who thinks this team is 1 player away from going 15-1 and winning the SuperBowl. find me a team that was ranked 2nd to last in defense one season, and then won the SuperBowl the next year, I'll waith while you look but I won't hold my breathe. Right now, you have a 3-4 with no solid #1 NT, DE's who don't quite fit or if they do are not very good, a hole at ILB and a second one that opens after Fletch is gone and a hole at OLB and you want to draft a QB? yeah that makes a ton of sense.

Draft defense, then fill up with O line help, then next year go after your QB, WR & RB. what good is it to kill a kid behind a patchwork O line? the only way I would take a QB is if I was going to Carson Palmer the kid and sit him for a year while McNabb or Rex starts, which is stupid in it's own right since no fan will tolerate Rexy after a few more Detroit Lion-esque performances and I don't see McNabb resigning his deal to be a 1 year mentor. So in no way does it make any sense to draft a QB this year, in facdt it could be the biggest mistake this franchise makes if it picks a QB who does not turn out to be an elite level, multiple SB winning QB.

[Brotherz]

Actually John Elway won 2 out of the 5 Superbowls he appeared in. and that was in the last millennium. Shanny 3.0 has done jack for the Redskins so this blind assessment that he is a super genius doesn't fly here until there are results here to back it up.

I always enjoy this argument to knock shanny. He had good players when he won a world title. Like it shocks some people that you need talented players to be the best football team on the planet. Can you tell me the coach who won the world championship in any sport without talented players? Does Phil Jackson suck as a coach in the NBA? I suppose he does if you remove the Jordan, Pippen, Kobe, years. I have said this in other threads but I love the quote so I'll repeat it:

There are two types of coaches: Coaches of great players and former coaches.

[Skinsinparadise]

for those interested they are about to talk about J Reid's article in a few minutes on 980 (1:03 pm ish)

[TheLongshot]

Newton will not be there at 10.

Neither will Gabbert.

This article isn't necessary.

Actually, there is no guarantee that neither will be available. It certainly is a possibililty, but we've seen QBs drop in drafts and given the question marks of this draft class, you can see it again.

I always enjoy this argument to knock shanny. He had good players when he won a world title. Like it shocks some people that you need talented players to be the best football team on the planet. Can you tell me the coach who won the world championship in any sport without talented players? Does Phil Jackson suck as a coach in the NBA? I suppose he does if you remove the Jordan, Pippen, Kobe, years. I have said this in other threads but I love the quote so I'll repeat it:

There are two types of coaches: Coaches of great players and former coaches.

I think the real argument here is that Shanahan's record in selecting QBs is somewhat questionable. While he did well with a great QB, the QBs he has selcted since then have been far from great. So, questioning Shanahan's ability to select a QB to run the offense is certainly an argument one can make.

[Hooper]

The only way I would take a QB is if I was going to Carson Palmer the kid and sit him for a year while McNabb or Rex starts, which is stupid in it's own right since no fan will tolerate Rexy after a few more Detroit Lion-esque performances and I don't see McNabb resigning his deal to be a 1 year mentor. So in no way does it make any sense to draft a QB this year, in facdt it could be the biggest mistake this franchise makes if it picks a QB who does not turn out to be an elite level, multiple SB winning QB.

Can't imagine Shanahan would start a rookie QB from day one.

And can't believe how critical people are of Rex and how forgiving they are of McNabb. Rex threw for almost 900 yards and 7 tds in three games. Despite being rusty and playing for his career. He's not anything to get excited over and did turn the ball over too much, but he's better than his reputation. I was in favor of the McNabb trade, but it pains me to admit the guy is done as an effective starter. His legs are going. More importantly, his inability to throw the short stuff accurately killed us on first and second down. That was the biggest difference between him and Rex.

Not sure what you mean by McNabb resigning his deal. He already did that. It pays like him a franchise QB even though he clearly isn't one anymore. It's why we're gonna have a helluva time trading him I fear.

---------- Post added February-23rd-2011 at 06:11 PM ----------

I think the real argument here is that Shanahan's record in selecting QBs is somewhat questionable. While he did well with a great QB, the QBs he has selcted since then have been far from great. So, questioning Shanahan's ability to select a QB to run the offense is certainly an argument one can make.

Who does have a great track record? QB is a crapshoot.

And I'm not saying I think we should take a QB at ten.

Just that I don't think it will be insane if we do.

[The Tris]

The only real risk with Bradford was his surgically repaired sholder and whether or not that showed signs of him not being durable. Considering he made it through his first season healthy has mostly licked that.

The other guys in this draft have more questions.

And the fact that he play in a spread offense, and got all his play calls from the sideline and rarely read defenses and audibled at the line.

Yes, these other prospects have more questions, but Bradford was by no means clean.

[ABSTRACT]

If Quinn, and Miller are gone which defensive player do you think they should take with #10? And why not use your high 2nd round pick on a position that is deep in the draft. I am not opposed to going defense with the first rounder but yeah i don't get why that decision isn't completely based on BPA? We all watch the same team, can any of us really say that we are set on offense? I don't get the whole it has to be defense drill.

Edit: if you read in breaking news the recent articles about Casserly's take about what we should do -- it echos these thoughts, go best player available regardless of whether its offense and defense. It's not like we are the patriots with an explosive offensive and porous defense. That's almost the vibe you get from Reid's article -- offense, come on? yeah our offense has arguably what has kept this team from being competitive for a long time.

Defense should always be addressed first regardless. Our defense was ranked second to last and we are a rebuilding team transitioning into a new defensive scheme. Why wouldn't you want to jumpstart our 3-4 defense by adding a top 10 talent at OLB or DE???? I hope we spend our 1st and second on D actually. We need Phil Taylor and a DE or OLB at #10.

[IrepDC]

You can't take a NT who's a lower-first round value at 10 if a QB who's a high-first round value is there.

And that is a point that the article is trying to make, but the inverse. There are plenty of high grade defensive players worth the number 10 pick. It is debatable whether the QB's are as valuable. It is some people's opinion that these QB's are getting high first round projections simply because of the position they play.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

And that is a point that the article is trying to make, but the inverse. There are plenty of high grade defensive players worth the number 10 pick. It is debatable whether the QB's are as valuable. It is some people's opinion that these QB's are getting high first round projections simply because of the position they play.

Well, to be clear, if Reid's point is that the Redskins should take the highest-rated player on THEIR draft board regardless of position, then I'd agree. Though I personally wouldn't mind reaching a little for a QB (given the importance of the position), I certainly understand the logic of not wanting to. However, I believe that Reid is attempting to use HIS assessment of the players to build his case. I believe anyone's assessment of the players is irrelevant unless you work for the Redskins.

[IrepDC]

My only fear about this team drafting a QB with so many holes to fill is our overall lack of patience. I don't see this franchise letting their shiny new QB sit for two or three years to develop while we develop the rest of the roster. I don't even see our franchise waiting a full season before throwing our shiny new QB into the fire.

We lack discipline, and if we throw that QB out there too early, with this sorry supporting cast, they could be ruined. We haven't even started the rebuilding process on offense OR defense minus Trent Williams. And this year, we're losing even more players that'll have to be replaced(WR? CB? ILB? OLB? DE?). That's on top of the weak interior OL and uncertainty at the RB position.

I just think it would be better to start filling out some of these holes before jumping out there at one of these QB's. They are decent, but not GREAT prospects. I think that if any of these guys were thrown out there with our roster, their potential would be ruined. I wouldn't panic if we did pick a QB this year. I just see how some would think waiting another year would be wise.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

IRep...if the QB can outplay Grossman, why do you care when he starts gaining experience? I realize that behind a horrible OL or something, it would be risky, but I don't think you HAVE to sit someone out for 1-2 years. Bradford played immediately and did fine.

[grantarchy]

I just think it would be better to start filling out some of these holes before jumping out there at one of these QB's. They are decent, but not GREAT prospects.

+1! -- plus, think about next year. Luck will be in the draft which will push every other QB down one. Actually I just looked on Walterfootball and he has us picking Luck in 2012, lol. I hope he's right!

http://walterfootball.com/draft2012.php

Doesn't that sound better than the alternatives we get this year?

But for this year -- also from Walterfootball -- "Speaking of Orakpo, he was the only Washington player to record more than 2.5 sacks in 2010. How pathetic is that? This defense desperately needs help."

So does our OL. So do any number of other positions. This is not the year to reach for a QB!

---------- Post added February-23rd-2011 at 12:34 PM ----------

IRep...if the QB can outplay Grossman, why do you care when he starts gaining experience? I realize that behind a horrible OL or something, it would be risky, but I don't think you HAVE to sit someone out for 1-2 years. Bradford played immediately and did fine.

Just out of curiosity but do you believe that any of these QBs in this draft are nearly as talented and accurate as Bradford? Yeah if we had Bradford I'd want to play him too, but I don't think these guys would have showed what Bradford did his first year. So why draft a question mark when we have other positions of need that can be adequately filled?

[Skinsinparadise]

Defense should always be addressed first regardless. Our defense was ranked second to last and we are a rebuilding team transitioning into a new defensive scheme. Why wouldn't you want to jumpstart our 3-4 defense by adding a top 10 talent at OLB or DE???? I hope we spend our 1st and second on D actually. We need Phil Taylor and a DE or OLB at #10.

Defense should "always" be addressed based on what?, offensive players are picked all the time in the first round. IMO if you think Gabbert is another Rogers or J. Jones is another Calvin Johnson and think that Taylor is nothing special as a NT, IMO you take the players on offense. It's not like we are the Patriots, a great offense, and if only our defense can keep pace. Our offense stinks too, why should that side of the ball not matter as much -- especially if you are rebuilding where you aren't going to be great overnight?

[HailToTheRedskins14]

I agree with the article. I'm perplexed as to why fans want to draft offense with the 1st pick when this draft is full of 3-4 defensive prospects and we had the last ranked defense last year lol. It doesn't make any sense to me. Anyhow, I'm am pretty sure defense will be picked in the 1st round.

Maybe because, if the draft is loaded with 3-4 DL talent, as this one is, we have a much better chance to get a quality starter @ #10 in the second round, so it opens up more possibilities for the 1st round.

[ouvan59]

And that is a point that the article is trying to make, but the inverse. There are plenty of high grade defensive players worth the number 10 pick. It is debatable whether the QB's are as valuable. It is some people's opinion that these QB's are getting high first round projections simply because of the position they play.

I think the point is according to who? Mel Kiper or his draftnik types? None of the people who actually make the decisions on the draft ever really show their hand so all we are left with is speculation. Then when the draft is held the media-types are the ones who proclaim that a guy was a steal or a reach. Then they quickly remove all their predictions or grades from their websites so that they are never held accountable. But the real draft boards are never seen. So while all the media is stating that Blaine Gabbert is or isn't a top 10 pick we have no idea how the people that count grade these guys. So when I say that I think that there is nobody in this draft worth a top 10 pick I have no real idea and nobody else that posts here does either.

Now that being said my amateur eye says I don't think we should draft a QB because I'm not particularly enamored with any of the prospects. But I wasn't particularly enamored with Matt Ryan either.

[Skinsinparadise]

So does our OL. So do any number of other positions. This is not the year to reach for a QB!

Just out of curiosity but do you believe that any of these QBs in this draft are nearly as talented and accurate as Bradford? Yeah if we had Bradford I'd want to play him too, but I don't think these guys would have showed what Bradford did his first year. So why draft a question mark when we have other positions of need that can be adequately filled?

I don't think its worth "reaching" for any position. But i suspect Shanny will have a stronger idea about these QB's than we do from watching youtube highlights. Yeah if any of us thinks we have reached scout status where we should be working for NFL teams, OK, I'll run with that if any of us are that confident in their evaluation skills -- but for those that believe (me included) that we aren't football professionals and aren't experts at judging the most intricate position in sports -- then I'll trust that Shanny will pick or not pick a Qb based on what he projects.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Just out of curiosity but do you believe that any of these QBs in this draft are nearly as talented and accurate as Bradford? Yeah if we had Bradford I'd want to play him too, but I don't think these guys would have showed what Bradford did his first year. So why draft a question mark when we have other positions of need that can be adequately filled?

I'm not really sure. I don't know how to watch players dominate in college and translate that into how they will do in the NFL. I don't mean that to sound snarky...I just don't know how to pick them out. Bradford, Manning, Ryan, Flacco, etc. all did fine immediately. Rodgers, Brady, Stafford, etc. have all done fine after sitting for a while. Half of the QBs drafted are busts. If someone can actually predict those types of things, I'd be in awe.

However, not to sound like a broken record, but if the Redskin organization believes that any of these QBs are in Bradford's league, that's good enough for me.

[The Full Monty]

if the Redskins organization believes that any of these QBs in Bradford's league, that's good enough for me.

See that's the difference between me and others on this board, the credibility that Shanahan has regarding his ability to evaluate talent on offense is not sacrosanct. This whole "well if Coach Shanahan thinks so, then surely it must be good" reminds me of all the "In Gibbs we trust" stuff we heard a few years back.

That's not me saying I know more, I'm an expert, I watch more film, that's me saying wow, if we draft one of the so-called top QBs at #10, that looks like another riverboat gambler reach by Mike Shanahan. He gambled on McNabb, lost. Called Donovan a franchise QB, and made John Elway references left and right. Gambled on Albert to play NT, didn't work. Going back to Denver he gambled in FA and in the draft and lost as much as he won.

[The Tris]

Shanahan's draft record is pretty darn good.

However, I think his carte blanc with QBs took a serious hit with McNabb. And maybe that's more to blame on his inability to properly judge FAs than QBs.

He has been notorious awful in high end FAs, and fairly average on gap filler FA. (one of the reasons I am so angry that the FO is going to be "active" in FA).

[Timmy Smith]

I don't really care about QB or not QB - that's not the question. It's how we can stockpile more picks. I'd like to see us trade down from #10 (easier said than done) and get more mid-round picks. We have so many big holes to fill. Also, with a tough schedule this year (AFC East - Pats, Jets) I hope we treat it as a rebuilding year. We probably won't be bad enough to win the Luck sweepstakes, but a fan can dream...

[Clutch03]

I think the point is according to who? Mel Kiper or his draftnik types? None of the people who actually make the decisions on the draft ever really show their hand so all we are left with is speculation. Then when the draft is held the media-types are the ones who proclaim that a guy was a steal or a reach. Then they quickly remove all their predictions or grades from their websites so that they are never held accountable. But the real draft boards are never seen. So while all the media is stating that Blaine Gabbert is or isn't a top 10 pick we have no idea how the people that count grade these guys. So when I say that I think that there is nobody in this draft worth a top 10 pick I have no real idea and nobody else that posts here does either.

Now that being said my amateur eye says I don't think we should draft a QB because I'm not particularly enamored with any of the prospects. But I wasn't particularly enamored with Matt Ryan either.

I for one have had it up to HERE with your reasonable posts! They have no place here and I would ask you to remove yourself from this discussion. Good day sir!

[TD_washingtonredskins]

See that's the difference between me and others on this board, the credibility that Shanahan has regarding his ability to evaluate talent on offense is not sacrosanct. This whole "well if Coach Shanahan thinks so, then surely it must be good" reminds me of all the "In Gibbs we trust" stuff we heard a few years back.

That's not me saying I know more, I'm an expert, I watch more film, that's me saying wow, if we draft one of the so-called top QBs at #10, that looks like another riverboat gambler reach by Mike Shanahan. He gambled on McNabb, lost. Called Donovan a franchise QB, and made John Elway references left and right. Gambled on Albert to play NT, didn't work. Going back to Denver he gambled in FA and in the draft and lost as much as he won.

Fair enough. I'm not saying that I expect a flawless draft by Shanahan. What I am saying is this:

Shanahan is running the organization. He should pick the best player available at 10 (unlike what Reid is saying that he should limit himself to defense). So, if Shanahan is high on Gabbert and Gabbert is available, I'm perfectly fine with that selection. I won't complain that we should have taken a NT or OLB. All we can really do is hope that the people making decisions are doing so logically. Every team will miss.

[IrepDC]

IRep...if the QB can outplay Grossman, why do you care when he starts gaining experience? I realize that behind a horrible OL or something, it would be risky, but I don't think you HAVE to sit someone out for 1-2 years. Bradford played immediately and did fine.

Thrown into the NFC West fire is different from thrown into the NFC East fire. Not that they would've been great anyways, but you could see the shell shock develop over the years in our last two first round QBs.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Thrown into the NFC West fire is different from thrown into the NFC East fire. Nor that they would've been great anyways, but you could see the shell shock develop over the years in our last two QBs.

You could...but Campbell sat for almost 2 years (all of 2005 and 2/3 of 2006) before playing. I don't think you can pin his shell shock on throwing him into the fire. Ramsey's fire was probably more the scheme, but that's just my opinion. I guess that I believe good QBs will either sink or swim. I'm sure there are outliers to my opinion, but probably not many. Also, I'm not saying that the rookie should play in week 1, but I don't have a problem with allowing him to play once he gives the team the best chance to win or once we're out of contention.

[ouvan59]

See that's the difference between me and others on this board, the credibility that Shanahan has regarding his ability to evaluate talent on offense is not sacrosanct. This whole "well if Coach Shanahan thinks so, then surely it must be good" reminds me of all the "In Gibbs we trust" stuff we heard a few years back.

That's not me saying I know more, I'm an expert, I watch more film, that's me saying wow, if we draft one of the so-called top QBs at #10, that looks like another riverboat gambler reach by Mike Shanahan. He gambled on McNabb, lost. Called Donovan a franchise QB, and made John Elway references left and right. Gambled on Albert to play NT, didn't work. Going back to Denver he gambled in FA and in the draft and lost as much as he won.

The problem for you is that it is going to be Shanahan and Co. making this decision whether you like it or not. And even though you admit that you don't really know jack about these players other than a casual fan's interest you claim that if we draft any of these QBs it would be a reach. How did you come to that conclusion?