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

[Skinsinparadise]

This man has said all that needs to be said. Why has this devolved into a bash Jason Reid because he's a columnist thread? Does his status of not working in the NFL preclude him from making valid and cogent points? I'll give his detractors one point: yes, maybe he's wrong to characterize Shanahan as someone who's tempted to take a QB with the 'Skins' number one pick. That being said, I don't see how anyone can argue that none of the QBs in this draft come with a more-than-comfortable amount of risk.

How many Qb's are billed with can't miss status or players for that matter? Its generally, this player has all of this going for them but... Yeah agree there is some risk. But yeah you don't get Andrew Luck's, John Elways coming out in the draft too often where the assessment is likely bonafide star. Tom Brady, Aaron Rogers, Drew Brees, Brett Favre, Matt Shaub, on and on -- weren't billed as can't miss studs. Do I know if Gabbert is the next Brees, heck no, but I trust shanny has a better chance of figuring that out than we do or Reid.

And as for Jason Reid he went beyond making a point he basically said anyone believing the opposite of his take is taking an "indefensible" position. Pretty much all the draft geeks and scouts talking about the draft couch their opinion with disclaimers but not Reid he has it absolutely figured out. What makes Reid the ultimate evaluator of NFL talent as he implies for at least this context? Reid apparently is the first guy to get the draft down to an absolute science, he should write a book about it then.

[darrelgreenie]

Here's how I frame it: Can we support a rookie QB?

I think there are certain 'pre-reqs' pieces a team needs to have in order to support the success of a young QB that I believe the Redskins have in place:

o at a minimum a solid LT and a good enough OL to execute a full dimesional passing game: 3-5-7 step drop and playaction passing

Trent Williams and #22 pass blocking OL by: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

o at least a couple of viable weapons on offense:

Moss,Armstrong,Cooley,Davis

o good scheme/coaching on offense *(but specifically the QB position)

even w/ lackluster QB play: 8th most productive passing offense in the league

Kyle is a good up and coming OC and this will be his 1st rookie but he has great resource in his dad/HC Mike Shanahan who has as much experience and success gromming QBs as anyone in the league

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why we need a QB:

Long before the phrase 'QB driven league' was en vogue many HC have thought this:

"The quarterback in this league is so, so important. We had a structure (at other places). I would anticipate the vision of this team will be seen through the eyes of the quarterback."

I believe that Mike Shanahan is the type of coach that subscribes to the above belief.

In that repect going into a season without a QB of the future can be viewed as a wasted year.

We all understand that it takes time for a QB to develop and reach maturity.

For a re-building team a year spent without a QB is a year devoid of development.

Its a year of arrested development that hinders the growth of the passing offense which hinders the development of the offense as a unit which hinders the development of the team as a unit.

I don't believe in the mythical savior QB.

I believe in the proper development of a talented QB prospect into championship caliber QB.

I also believe there are talented QBs prospects available in every draft for a teams that know how to develop them.

[Conn]

DG, I just wanted to say: great post. Nothing to add, other than that. I enjoyed reading it, and the part after the Shurmur quote describes my own beliefs perfectly.

[jivelikenice]

My problem is last year all of these columnists were adamant that even Bradford at 4 was the wrong pick and we needed to draft a tackle there. None of them admit to that and now Jason Reid is acting in this column as though Bradford was a slam dunk. This is total revisionist history and they're at it again now. Listen to UnWise Mike in the following video. He's adamant that a tackle was the right selection over Bradford and even though thats what they did its the same broken record from his this year. Gabbert or Newton may stink but they may also become studs. If they stink, these guys like Reid and Wise will say they told you so and if they become stars for other teams you'll never hear them fess up about it. Or you'll hear that after A. Luck, there's no Gabbert in the '12 draft.

Also J Reid should have done the research that shows the miss ratio on 2nd rd qb's is far greater than Rd 1 guys. St. Louis also took Saffold in Rd 2 and he turned into a beast, but thats too late to draft D-Line of O-Line in Washington for some reason according to these clowns.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2010/03/30/VI2010033003465.html?sid=ST2010033104746

[Skinsinparadise]

My problem is last year all of these columnists were adamant that even Bradford at 4 was the wrong pick and we needed to draft a tackle there. None of them admit to that and now Jason Reid is acting in this column as though Bradford was a slam dunk. This is total revisionist history and they're at it again now.

Just watched that excerpt with Reid, yeah he's talking down Bradford's pro day (we all recall Bradford wasn't a consensus 1 pick in the draft until pro day and even Clausen was running neck and neck with him in mocks for a long time) says he played in a spread offense, didn't have stiff competition, fragile and injury prone.

Listen to UnWise Mike in the following video. He's adamant that a tackle was the right selection over Bradford and even though thats what they did its the same broken record from his this year. Gabbert or Newton may stink but they may also become studs. If they stink, these guys like Reid and Wise will say they told you so and if they become stars for other teams you'll never hear them fess up about it. Or you'll hear that after A. Luck, there's no Gabbert in the '12 draft.

Agree, media types do that stuff all the time.

Also J Reid should have done the research that shows the miss ratio on 2nd rd qb's is far greater than Rd 1 guys. St. Louis also took Saffold in Rd 2 and he turned into a beast, but thats too late to draft D-Line of O-Line in Washington for some reason according to these clowns.

True, and as I pointed out in a prior post. Dolphins went O line and decided to get their QB in the 2nd round. Falcons did it the reverse way albeit trading with us to get into the late first round. Rams could have lets say drafted Okung or Williams in the first or maybe Suh and then take Clausen in the 2nd. I wonder how those teams are thinking about their moves now? And look on my end if Shanny thinks a guy like Dalton or Stanzi or whomever is as good or better than Gabbert and grabs them in the 2nd, I'll ride with it. Its simply that yeah there are many more misses with QB's when you go past the first round.

[LD0506]

Some good back-n-forth going here, as opposed to just parroting the views of "experts" :applause: There is better discussion happening here than most of the draftniks offer.

I suscribe to the view stated by DG above, there are viable prospects up and down the draft if coached, groomed and utilized properly. This to me has been our greatest flaw for years, there has been no overall vision of what the team should be and that has crippled the FO's ability to get players to fit it. There was no "it", there was no "right guy for the scheme" because there was no sense of what that was.

I have been a HUGE Vinnie detractor, I lay the bulk of this at his feet, but still believe that those rules have changed. Better? Worse? We don't know yet, we can't know yet because it is just beginning, but it is reasonable to anticipate that we won't see the same mistakes made for the same reasons. Success this season won't flow from the roster, it is all going to be on the FO and coaching staff.

I don't even know if I want to see them take a QB @ 10, the arguments pro and con both have validity, so it has to come down to some sense of trust in this regime's competence to evaluate, choose and groom a young signal caller. That often gets dismissed as starry-eyed KoolAid drinking, yaddayadda, but honestly, what actual hard evidence do we have? I'll roll the dice w/ Allen and Shanny 1 & 2 every time over any permutation that involves Bugeyes in the room.

[Hitman21ST]

Please do not waste a pick on a QB!

That's how you end up not taking a Matthew Stafford or Sam Bradford. Neither of those teams had the pieces in place to take those those players, but they both worked out. If Gabbert is Shanny's guy, then we take Gabbert and turn him into something.

[Skinsinparadise]

DG

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/37131/football-guru-mel-kiper

per previous conversations i recall you asked for a link one time when I was giving you Kiper's recent take on Qb's, here's from yesterday:

On the big board, he still likes Gabbert as a top 10 -- thinks he has good accuracy and has a gun.

He said he'd take Stanzi now over both Mallet and Locker -- he'd pick him in the 2nd. Dalton -- 2nd or 3rd round, Ponder 3rd round.

but then later he ranks them this way in his Q & A: Newton, Gabbert, Mallet, Locker, Stanzi, Dalton.

Cody (St. Louis )

Why isn't Gabbert being considered for the number one pick or at least a lock for the top five? He has all the physical tools to be a franchise quarterback. Teams major concern with him is that he ran a spread offense, which should not be a factor after a year since he has all the intangibles so he will put the necessary work to make the change.

He's got size, arm strength, quick release. The issue for him will be the Missouri offense. Just going to that initial read. Catch and toss. He's deep in that offense in the shotgun, his mobility might be overrated. I thought he got out of that pocket too quickly. He's great at that initial read. When he has to go through his progressions, he has some issues.

Mel Kiper

I think he's a top 10 pick. I could see him very easily going to Washington at 10, Tennessee at 8, Minnesota at 12.

[blindlywewander]

That's how you end up not taking a Matthew Stafford or Sam Bradford. Neither of those teams had the pieces in place to take those those players, but they both worked out. If Gabbert is Shanny's guy, then we take Gabbert and turn him into something.

wait so stafford was a good choice? when was this established? i don't remember him playing much.

[Hitman21ST]

wait so stafford was a good choice? when was this established? i don't remember him playing much.

Stafford was a great choice. Look at how the Lions do when he's playing vs. when he's injured. It's like night and day.

[blindlywewander]

Stafford was a great choice. Look at how the Lions do when he's playing vs. when he's injured. It's like night and day.

I don't argue that he may become a good player, but he's done nothing in this league but throw 20 ints in 10 games. Maybe his injuries have to do with their offensive line? I'm no expert on the Lions though..

[grantarchy]

That's how you end up not taking a Matthew Stafford or Sam Bradford. Neither of those teams had the pieces in place to take those those players, but they both worked out. If Gabbert is Shanny's guy, then we take Gabbert and turn him into something.

Actually, my preference would be "please don't take a QB in this draft @ #10!" ... unless he is the caliber of Matt Stafford or Sam Bradford. Also remember that both of those were #1 picks, so it's not like the Rams or Lions were taking a huge gamble. Are you saying that a Matthew Stafford or Sam Bradford caliber guy is going to be available @ #10? Sign me up! Who is it?

[Son of Gadsden]

Jason Reid is amazing. We should hire him as our head coach. He's putting Shanny in his place and proving us all right on all his inconsistencies and problems. Jason Reid has shown he is a natural charismatic leader, and how his football knowledge surpasses that of Mike Shanahan. Who would have thought such a football genius would be in the media? Why get a superbowl winning coach when you can have an editor! Let's get some young, fresh meat in charge! Down with Shanahan, long live the Editor who lectures a future hall of fame coach on how to run his football team!

[grantarchy]

Jason Reid is amazing. We should hire him as our head coach. He's putting Shanny in his place and proving us all right on all his inconsistencies and problems. Jason Reid has shown he is a natural charismatic leader, and how his football knowledge surpasses that of Mike Shanahan. Who would have thought such a football genius would be in the media? Why get a superbowl winning coach when you can have an editor! Let's get some young, fresh meat in charge! Down with Shanahan, long live the Editor who lectures a future hall of fame coach on how to run his football team!

Why does discussing an opinion about whether to draft a QB with the #10 pick have to mean that anyone is personally attacking Shanahan? I dig Shanahan, but I'm not sure I would want him to pick a QB at number ten. But to be honest, we don't even know what he plans to do, so it's not like we're even in a personal debate with THE Mike Shanahan. Just discussing an opinion based on team needs. I think that guys that want to draft a QB at #10 don't like this article and are saying "well who is THIS guy to say who we draft ... does he think he's Mike Shanahan or something???" ... and the guys who don't want to draft a QB at #10 like the article and are saying "I hope Mike Shanahan agrees with this point of view". There is no personal attack on Shanahan. Lighten up.

And anyways, since when is it not OK to question what a coach does? Or for that matter, what a GM does? Were you OK with Cerrato's drafts just because he was the de facto GM? GM's don't make mistakes because they're in the GM position? That's silly.

[Son of Gadsden]

Why does discussing an opinion about whether to draft a QB with the #10 pick have to mean that anyone is personally attacking Shanahan? I dig Shanahan, but I'm not sure I would want him to pick a QB at number ten. But to be honest, we don't even know what he plans to do, so it's not like we're even in a personal debate with THE Mike Shanahan. Just discussing an opinion based on team needs. I think that guys that want to draft a QB at #10 don't like this article and are saying "well who is THIS guy to say who we draft ... does he think he's Mike Shanahan or something???" ... and the guys who don't want to draft a QB at #10 like the article and are saying "I hope Mike Shanahan agrees with this point of view". There is no personal attack on Shanahan. Lighten up.

And anyways, since when is it not OK to question what a coach does? Or for that matter, what a GM does? Were you OK with Cerrato's drafts just because he was the de facto GM? GM's don't make mistakes because they're in the GM position? That's silly.

Im not saying dont question. Im saying it wouldnt hurt to show a little faith and support in our team for at least one year. Shanny doesnt take us to the SB and the media is already treating him like "My God please just dont **** this up". Shanny knows what he is doing, and it really wouldnt hurt to just trust our coach for once.

[TheLongshot]

wait so stafford was a good choice? when was this established? i don't remember him playing much.

His main issue so far has been the fact that he's injury prone. When he's been in there, he's looked pretty good.

---------- Post added February-24th-2011 at 01:17 PM ----------

My problem is last year all of these columnists were adamant that even Bradford at 4 was the wrong pick and we needed to draft a tackle there. None of them admit to that and now Jason Reid is acting in this column as though Bradford was a slam dunk. This is total revisionist history and they're at it again now. Listen to UnWise Mike in the following video. He's adamant that a tackle was the right selection over Bradford and even though thats what they did its the same broken record from his this year. Gabbert or Newton may stink but they may also become studs. If they stink, these guys like Reid and Wise will say they told you so and if they become stars for other teams you'll never hear them fess up about it. Or you'll hear that after A. Luck, there's no Gabbert in the '12 draft.

Well, personally I thought tackle was the better pick for the Skins, not because Bradford would be bad, but the greater need was for a LT. A rookie QB wouldn't be worth much without the protection.

Then again, you don't always get to choose the order which you get players. Had Bradford been there (and if we didn't trade for McNabb) then it probably would have been a no-brainer to pick him. But, Shanahan knew he wasn't going to be there, which is probably what drove the McNabb trade.

[Conn]

Interesting quote from the Raven's John Harbaugh on drafting Flacco out of a spread scheme, and why they weren't worried:

He also said that Joe Flacco was able to make a smooth transition from a spread offense at Delaware to an NFL pro style because he was able to get rid of the ball quickly after taking a shotgun snap. When they saw that he had that ability, they were confident that he could make a fairly smooth transition

http://www.csnwashington.com/02/24/11/NFL-Combine-Blog-022411/landing.html?blockID=416948&feedID=287

Pretty relevant to Gabbert.

[blindlywewander]

Interesting quote from the Raven's John Harbaugh on drafting Flacco out of a spread scheme, and why they weren't worried:

http://www.csnwashington.com/02/24/11/NFL-Combine-Blog-022411/landing.html?blockID=416948&feedID=287

Pretty relevant to Gabbert.

You think he'll fall to 10? realistically? I can't see that

[Conn]

You think he'll fall to 10? realistically? I can't see that

With the quality of the DL/OLB/CB/WR in the top ten, I can see it, if everything falls correctly. Of course, those chances would skyrocket if this damn CBA would get done, so that trades could happen.

Then you'd see teams like TN and SF possibly acquire a vet.

[Hiro]

I completely disagree. If Shanahan (who has an eye for good to all-pro QBs) thinks either Cam Newton or Blaine Gabbert are guys who fit our system and can transform our offense, and either of them are available at our spot, you take him. Even though football is a team sport, the NFL version is driven by the QBs. Hell, look at St. Louis. It's no coincidence that after they draft Sam Bradford #1 overall, they have their best record in years and almost win their weak division.

The QB is the most important position. You address that correctly, and everyone's job becomes way easier.

[blindlywewander]

I completely disagree. If Shanahan (who has an eye for good to all-pro QBs) thinks either Cam Newton or Blaine Gabbert are guys who fit our system and can transform our offense, and either of them are available at our spot, you take him. Even though football is a team sport, the NFL version is driven by the QBs. Hell, look at St. Louis. It's no coincidence that after they draft Sam Bradford #1 overall, they have their best record in years and almost win their weak division.

The QB is the most important position. You address that correctly, and everyone's job becomes way easier.

I really hope Cam gets picked before we get a chance. No thanks on Auburn QBs...

[Conn]

I really hope Cam gets picked before we get a chance. No thanks on Auburn QBs...

I don't want Cam here.

But not wanting him because he went to Auburn is very narrow-minded. Yes, Jason Campbell went there. No let it go...

[blindlywewander]

I don't want Cam here.

But not wanting him because he went to Auburn is very narrow-minded. Yes, Jason Campbell went there. No let it go...

I'm not narrow minded, thanks. I was just stating that I don't want Cam. He's a one year wonder and too big of a risk in our situation. And the college he went to does matter to me.

[GibbsFactor]

I'm not narrow minded, thanks. I was just stating that I don't want Cam. He's a one year wonder and too big of a risk in our situation. And the college he went to does matter to me.

You should really give him a look.

I like Locker, Gabbert, Newton. I like Barkley and Luck more. Eh... what are you going to do?

I think Ponder, Stanzi, Dalton, Mallet, Kaepernick, etc... can all play. Nothing elite about any of them save maybe Newton, maybe Locker, maybe Mallet, maybe Gabbert. But that's a lot of maybes.

[Conn]

I'm not narrow minded, thanks. I was just stating that I don't want Cam. He's a one year wonder and too big of a risk in our situation. And the college he went to does matter to me.

Again, I have no problem with you not liking or not wanting to draft Newton.

But I'll continue to say that the college he went to shouldn't matter to you. That's ridiculous.