When will we EVER learn? Redskins fans, some of the biggest hypocrites around .....

[The Tris]

And exactly how are you going to guarantee that that high draft pick QB is going to be a franchise QB and not Heath Shuler, Ryan Leaf, Jamarcus Russell, Art Shlichter, Kelly Stouffer, Mike Phipps, etc. , etc, etc. Drafting is a crapshoot. People say we should use the draft only and they conveniently forget that most of the players drafted never make it in the NFL. Recent studies of just the top ten picks show only about 30 percent of the top ten picks can be classified as good or great.

When you have the option to pick any player in the draft, odds are better that the one you pick will be a success than if you have a limited choice of players.

[Boston Skins]

You'll be loving seeing this in B&G

[KCClybun]

I'm just looking at what other football teams had when they drafted franchise quarterbacks, as compared to what we have now. When I look at it, I don't think we have the pieces in pace for a young quarterback to come in and have success. And I certainly don't think we get the pieces we need to hand the keys to the franchise to a young quarterback by ignoring free agency, nor do I buy this notion that if we just play all the young guys, then they'll all be better in year 2.

Some guys just can't play, straight up, and if a young guy cant play, then that's yet another whole that we STILL have to fill. I don't see why we can't have healthier mixture of younger guys and veteran talent is an inherently bad thing. And no, I'm not talking about going after any big name, big priced free agents. Assuming there's four years towards free agency in the new CBA, there's plenty of guys who could pop up under thirty that are just entering their prime that could come in and help improve the football team, and some guys who are thirty or over that could come cheap and provide some solid production while we rotate rookies in and out of the line up to help them out and learn.

And as for not putting some of the young guys we have on the field now on the field...ya ever think it's because they're not that good? That they don't practice well or that they can't execute when it counts? Again, the coaching staff has showed if you put in the work and can perform, you'll get your opportunities to play. If Chris Wilson was any good, the guy would probably be on the field. Instead, somehow he managed to get beat out by ROB JACKSON for playing time. Says more about the player than the coaches.

Food for thought for the "eff free agency, start all the young guys" crowd...

[jflow78]

See, whilst I agree in principle with all you say in the above post, the last line pulls it all down for me. We won't get that feeling again until we have the QB in place IMHO.

Of course there's no guarantee Luck, or the one I really covert the Sooner Jones, will be a success in the pros. that's the chance you take on any rookie pick at any position. And under normal circumstances I'd be 100% behind you in wanting my team to be as successful as possible. But I happen to believe, just as I did with his predecessor at OU Bradford, that Jones has every facet going for him to be a great success in the pros. As does Luck. And hot darn if we don't desperately need someone of their ilk. So, this not being normal circumstances, I'd happily take that chance of being in a position for either one.

I'm beyond sick and tired of having hard work undone by mediocre QB play. WAY beyond sick and tired of it.

Hail.

I agree, but there's no way to know how the next year will go. If we DO tank the season and go 2-14, what's to say another team doesn't go 1-15 and needs a QB just as bad as us, won't trade because they believe in Luck as much as you, and then the other QBs have horrible seasons? We're then ******. We can't guarantee that just because we tank the season that we're going to get the QB of the future.

IMO, the worst situation would be if we don't sign any FAs, they end up performing great for other teams, and our young guys suck and prove they've can't play in the league, then we also don't get the QB we want. This thing can go so wrong in so many ways because there are a million or more moving parts.

I would rather the Skins win and build a winning culture than suck horribly and get one player that is a superstar, regardless of position. Just because you have a QB superstar, or the #1 QB in the draft, doesn't guarantee you're going to win a SB, McNabb, Romo sits to pee, Rivers, or that said QB will be good enough, Mark Sanchez, Alex Smith.

Signing FAs is not my first option, and I don't like signing 30+ y/os, but I don't think fans or teams of the Saints, Texans, Eagles, Chiefs, or even the Cardinals (since Leinhart sucks and Warner is gone) feel that way.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

There is nothing wrong with creating a winning culture. And playing young guys is not mutually exclusive from that.

Just make sure not to win while creating that winning culture lol ...I think it's necessary for all the players to understand right off the bat that they have zero chance of accomplishing anything whatsoever unless Andrew Luck is on the team. :yes:

Signing a bunch of guys to improve from 6-10 to 9-7 doesn't do much for the long term results for this franchise.

Says who? Andrew Luck's agent?

Wouldn't it depend on who the guys are that you sign, how old they are, who the coach is, who the GM is, how well they fit into your scheme and fit in with the players...etc, etc, yadda yadda?

The only thing that does little for your long term success is trading away draft picks. That's it.

In the 21st century NFL you need that QB who has the ability to will you to victory

There are maybe 3-4 guys in the entire league who can do that.

[McD5]

God, I am so sick of hearing about Andrew Luck that I'll be furious if we draft him...

Puff and pass.....friends share.

[jflow78]

When you have the option to pick any player in the draft, odds are better that the one you pick will be a success than if you have a limited choice of players.

But ironically, that doesn't play out in reality:

1st round picks solid starters vs busts since 2000 with at least one season of play post-draft (7:4, or 6:5 if you think Matt Stafford doesn't count as a solid starter, other than that, the line is pretty clear) It's 4:3 with QBs, and if you reach back one more season (Tim Couch) it's 4:4.

2nd round picks solid starters vs busts since 2000 with at least one season of play post-draft (10:1, the Lions being the only ones capable of ******* it up with the #2 pick)

This is definitely a weird stat, but it looks to me, like people have more of a tendency to reach for a need because they have the #1 pick, than that they have their selection of ALL the players.

[CrypticVillain]

I'd take a 2-14 Panther esq season in a freeking heartbeat to get the most important player in place on this or any other team for the next decade and more. And I truly believe Luck and Jones fit that to a tee.

So yes, I think we'd be a better football team if we lost out with young guys. We'd be a year further along in their experience and development, within the second year of two new systems; and we'd have what we so crave, a franchise caliber QB to take this on to a whole other level.

Hail.

So you are willing to throw away a whole season just for one UNPROVEN!!!!!! player? Yet you are complaining about signing aging, but not too much, veterans who are proven. YOU are the one that is sounding hypercritical. Not for drafting Luck, but for the fact you are willing to throw away a whole season for one player when we don't even know what kind of team we have.

I must admit, you all have changed my mind on Asomugha. We don't need him, especially if the cash isn't right. I am split on Jenkins. We need a good end in this 3-4, but the injury things is a huge red flag.

But we have to sure up this defense some how. Bringing in a whole bunch of rookies won't do it, we need a mix. Like I said, a rookie QB best friend is a top-notch defense.

[mossomo]

Wow. Hope the season starts soon. These types of threads are a bit lame and don't serve much purpose.

[Enzo]

I don't think is is bad thing to sign an experienced vet ot 2 that is still considered a good player but for the right price. The problem of course is the price because they or more than likely their agents want them to get hugh long term contracts with guaranteed bonus money regardless of how they perform on the field.

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

Ok so the plan is this I'm guessing

2011- Suck ass by going from 6-10 to like 2-14/3-13 despite "showing improvement" (which makes no sense)

2012- Draft Luck...and be happy because even though we have a 2-14 roster we have our savior

Meanwhile Shanny has to be on the hot seat and the pressure is mounting

So opening day rolls around...do you start or sit Luck??

You start him in front of a Two win roster and you end up with another ****** season

So Shanny has put up three straight suck seasons...but you give him a fourth year because it's all apart of the plan right?

2013- Luck is supposed to magically take a **** team greatness in only his second year

Yeah uh great plan

[SkinsTillIDie]

A few things:

The notion that if we go 6-10 or 8-8, we will miss out on a franchise quarterback, is absolutely ridiculous. If the Falcons can move from 27th to the 6th pick, then moving from let's say the 12th or 14th pick to the 6th or 8th is not out of the realm of possibility. Between Luck, Barkley, Jones, or the inevitable one or two other quarterbacks that come out of nowhere to shoot to the top of the draft boards (i.e. Cam Newton), having a middle-of-the-pack season will NOT prevent us from finally finding a quarterback for the Shanahans to groom. Anyone who hopes for us to 'tank' the season is frankly an idiot.

Going 1-15, 2-14, etc. will be a much bigger detriment to this franchise than going 6-10. You know what happens if we win 2 games? We face 12-20 months of Shanahan-must-go talk, speculation, etc. This means, frankly, that we suck -- and who is accountable? Does this mean Kyle Shanahan's system doesn't work? Does he get fired? (even though in the first season in the offense, a clearly-past-his-prime Santana Moss set a career high in receptions, McNabb would've set his career high for passing yards if he didn't get benched ((even after all those years in Andy Reid's pass-happy offense)), rookie Anthony Armstrong had 871 receiving yards in just 11 starts, Cooley recorded his second-most catches in clearly a down year, etc. etc. etc.).

This means that all of the youngsters that so many seem to want to play 100% of the snaps for us -- Kevin Barnes, Robert Henson, Perry Riley, Leonard Henkerson, Jarvis Jenkins, Chris Neild, etc. etc. etc. -- this means they all suck. It means they couldn't stop the opposition from executing. You know what? Youngsters don't need to play every snap to develop. They DO need to be pushed hard in practice every day, to compete and EARN every snap they receive. They DON'T need to be demoralized by getting their asses handed to them every week. You know how insufferable it is to be a fan during a 5 game losing streak? Being on the team is far, far worse.

A 2-14 season does more to impact the culture, fostering a culture of losing, that we, frankly, cannot afford to have happen to our young players. Like anything, losing becomes a habit. Redskins fans know this all too well. Riley, Henson, Barnes, and all the others -- they need to be eased into the NFL, earning 30 snaps a game, then 40, then 50 and so on. Proving they can execute small responsibilities before being given extraordinary ones.

Who did Kareem Moore have push him in practice? He was given the starting job in training camp. He was in essence the only free safety on the roster until, what, Macho Harris? Likewise, he underperformed all year. It's not like OJ Atogwe is going to ensure that Moore doesn't see the field this year. If anything, Atogwe will push him in practice every day, give him some veteran guidance and teach him some tricks of the trade. And if/when Atogwe goes down, then we have a fairly capable backup to come in and contribute.

Depth? with the Redskins? It's unheard of, I know.

Does anyone really believe that a rookie will come into the meeting room in week 13 coming off a win during a tough 5-7 season with the same enthusiasm coming off another loss in a 2-11 season?

Does anyone really believe that good habits can be developed when you're losing week in and week out? More importantly, does anyone believe that losing won't become easier and easier to accept for their impressionable young the more they are exposed to it?

We need to build off of last season. We need veterans to show our youth how to play the game, how to conduct themselves in and out of the lockerroom, how to study, how to analyze film, and so forth. Coaches can't do everything. And importantly, the youngsters need competition every day in practice as an incentive to continue to get better. Everyone here (myself included) lambasted Shanahan for keeping Galloway and Roydell Williams for as long as he did. But Shanahan's methods clearly were a key reason for the development of Anthony Armstrong. If many of the posters had it their way, Armstrong would've been handed the keys from Week 1 and perhaps never have developed -- look how Armstrong was treated versus Malcolm Kelly and Devin Thomas in the Cerrato/Zorn era. And even when Zorn wouldn't start one of them, fans trashed Zorn.

Because starting equals developing!!! :doh::doh:

Frankly, it's nonsense. Veterans are essential for any successful franchise, and we have very, very few on the roster. And if you look closely, we have a surprising amount of youth (youth with potential!), for the first time in a long time. Let them earn their stripes, rather then have it handed to them. That does no one any good. If they're good enough, they'll see the field -- Shanahan won't hold back because of money, prestige, reputation, fan/media desire, whathaveyou (see Dockery vs Lichensteiger; Galloway vs anyone; etc.)

[KCClybun]

What SkinsTillIDie said. Times infinity. Nothing gets accomplished by losing except everyone, including us fans, being miserable for the next year and change.

I just don't understand the "even if we lose, we win!" mentality. If we lose, we lose.

[B55Green]

I've been saying this for quite some time. Hell of a write up Gibbs, Hell of a write up. Enjoyed reading every bit of it.

[KCClybun]

I don't see how can one can say "if we go 0-16 but we see improvement and we look like we're going in the right direction"...it's a contradiction of terms. If you go 0-16, you CAN'T be going in the right direction. When's the last time you saw a football team go 0-16 or 4-12 or even 5-11 after a 6-10 season and said "yup, that's franchise heading in the right direction"?

Never, right?

I mean...the mind boggles at this concept that we shouldn't try to get better...because by not trying to get better...we'll play a bunch of rookies who probably won't play well...but they'll make get better, and we might have a top three pick...and then we'll be better because some player we get will make us better...

...It's like some sort of insane backwards logic.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

A few things:

Very nicely put :applause: :thumbsup:

[NewCliche21]

SkinsTillIDie just won Extremeskins.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

Ok, this high pick/ QB is taking on a whole new sub thread, so let's address some points on this page alone.

As it happens, I don't think we'll intentionally tank the season. Not under this HC. And nor should we. I'd accept it if that was the case, to get a Luck or Jones, but that's personal born out of years and years and years of frustration at having sub standard signal callers. Personal want aside, no way should this team go into a season with the intention of tanking. But, thankfully to me for those personal feelings, I don't think it will make a jot of difference if that isn't our intention. We aren't good enough, particularly without a competent pro QB, to do anything else but end up with a high pick. And yes, if the youth, and mid-age vets that will be here for the long haul get played again for the majority of the time and we still suck results wise, but their out there getting on field experience, taking their licks and growing together, both as a pro and within their team, that IS progress. It's a year further ahead in progress by doing it whilst you've zero chance of any glory than waiting a year or two to then throw them in with little to no experience. In a situation such as ours, there's a lot to be said for youngsters learning on the fly with invaluable on-field experience. Something all the hours you could wish to put in on the practice field and film room can't fully prepare you for in the pros.

We're in a perpetual vicious circle. Losing accomplishes nothing huh? And what has winning the odd meaningless end of season game to augment a record to under 10 wins accomplished in 17 of the last 19 seasons for us again? (Bar costing us the chance recently of the best prospect to come out to since Peyton IMHO in Bradford and the Rams.). What "winning culture" has that fostered exactly? What "momentum" has that given going into the next season? To say having one of the worst records in the league fosters a losing culture is utter hogwash. We already HAVE that losing culture in place. And one of the biggest reasons we can't get out of it is we never quite have enough to snag the single most important person on the team.

Will taking Luck or Jones or whomever be a guaranteed saviour and magically make things right in Redskins land over night? Absolutely not. But it sure as Hell would put us in a lot better chance than battling bravely to a 5/6/7 win season and STILL being without the most important piece for yet another year.

I get that some don't agree. "You play to win the game" etc. And that POV is fine and admirable. But when you've not had a franchise QB since, IMHO, Sonny, who hung it up back in '74; and with that combined dross you've had a whopping SIX winning seasons in the last 19, with only TWO producing double figure win seasons; with a majestic THREE playoff trips in that time never going beyond the divisional round; you bet your sweet ass there's many long suffering fans prepared to go through another season of being amongst the leagues worst to get the missing piece we so crave.

That gamble, if you want to call it that on a guys potential, has to be better than being in the same vicious circle we've been in for WAY too many years now.

Hail.

[Oldfan]

Califan ~ The only thing that does little for your long term success is trading away draft picks. That's it.

Those rookies need a chance to play, and the good ones need to be re-signed which means that unless you want some of them to be cap casualties, you had better avoid high-priced free agents.

I counted 13 drafted players among the starters for the Patriots in 2010, 11 for Green Bay, 10 for Pittsburgh -- 6 for the Redskins. Green Bay and Pittsburgh are two small market teams that can't afford the high priced free agents. Belichick, who has a degree in Economics, won't pay big money to anyone because he understands that, given the constraints of the salary cap, it amounts to economic foolishness. He uses cheap free agents as gap fillers, but that's all they are.

Most of that reported 45 million we need to spend now should be used for re-signing the few good young players we have on the roster. It should not be spent on free agents over 27 (QB can be 30).

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

Double post. My bad, sorry.

Continue on.

Hail.

[Burgold]

There are two practical pressures at work here. The first is that the Redskins need to develop their youth and be smart about developing the team. The second is that if we believe the stories, we must spend 45 million. That means we will have to acquire some free agents.

More, everyone keeps saying that we are a team that really lacks talent. So, who are you going to lock up to a mega deal to use up most of that 45? Carlos Rogers? The man is a slightly above average cb who gave up on his team last year, refused to try to come back from a minor injury for fear that it could hurt his "value" and couldn't catch a hand off. Laron Landry? He had a spectacular season developing before he got hurt? The season before that though he was abysmal. Do you really want to give him a mega contract based on one partial very good season? He hasn't been consistantly great. He hasn't even been consistantly good. Yes, I'd like to lock him up, but he doesn't deserve to be treated as a top safety because he is still more about potential than production. Who else are you going to use that 45 million to re-sign? Davis? Okay, but then you're really banking on potential. Armstrong? Currently one of my favorites, but he needs to prove it more than a year unless he'd be happy with a nice multi year mid level contract. If he'll take a five year ten million dollar contract give it to him. Moss. Since we have the money I'd bring him back. He's a good receiver, who's a little hot/cold, but I wouldn't break the bank for him.

We don't have many players deserving to be locked up and have their contracts renegotiated. We don't have the talent level to adopt that strategy yet. So, within that 45 million we need to address holes. We still have an o-line made of overcooked pasta. Other than Trent is there a line position that you wouldn't be happy to upgrade? We don't have a pup ready and eager to go unless Capers has made huge leaps and bounds. I thought Montgomery looked better out there, but with the mess of line play we had who can really tell?

So, the premice of the thread makes it a failure. If we had no cap floor I'd agree. Build with the draft, develop from within, renegotiate with the few nice players we have to give them extentions, but frankly, that may not be the reality. If the reality is we have to spend 45 million dollars or more, then we darn well ought to fill some holes, especially at positions where we don't have viable options, and not break the bank on players who still are best on paper and not on the field.

[LD0506]

Personally I enjoyed this thread just as a reminder that there are some in the fanbase that come with a clue as standard equipment.

We're coming out of detox, broke the daily crackerrato cycle, served our time in the halfway house and just stepped back out on the street. This is precisely when some start gettin' the shakes, old patterns try to reassert themselves, the old crowd comes around croonin in your ear "C'mon, just one splashy big name FA signing, it'll feel goooooood, you know you want to...". Gotta stay strong and walk away from temptation.

Said it before, this year will tell us something fundamental about this regime. Not having some attention hungry wannabe calling the shots and telegraphing every overreaction to see his name in the media makes more of a difference that some can grasp. The fact that Shanny the Elder quite conspicuously doesn't give a rats ass what the fans whine about warms my heart.

[Darrell Green Fan]

Can we please stop with this 2-14 draft Andrew Luck nonsense? Look at last year's team. It was pathetic. Holes everywhere, horrible QB play, bad skill players, and we still managed to get to 6-10. There is no way, with the moves they will have made by the time training camp resumes, that this team will be worse than last year. Sure we go into next year with an unproven QB but does anyone actually think the play of Beck will be much worse than what McNabb and Grossman gave us?

Shanny will not go 2-14. Not even close. They will be around the same as last year or maybe a game better IMO.

[Wyvern]

It's reasonable to consider how free agency can supplement who we draft and develop. Free agents tend to have a proven track-record; a front office can see how they perform at the NFL level and project how they might fit in their teams system. If the front office does its job, it's a good fit. (New England comes to mind but even they've whiffed a few times).

Bottom line is that the Skins are starting from a shallow talent pool and while in 2011 they did pick up a lot more draftees than usual -- it's not clear how many gaps in the roster were filled with front line talent. A well-thought out approach to free agency, particularly going after affordable 2nd-tier players with a track record of reliability will help bring the Skins out of the hole Cerrato created. And there may be journeymen FAs who coiuld be better than those the Skins drafted to replace Skins talent possibly leaving. (McIntosh, Rogers, Moss?, Haynesworth?...) ...or older starters slated to retire in a year or so (Fletcher, Daniels, Rabach, Sellers, ...)

I suspect the Skins FO will try to pick up some experience (and depth) on the front line primarily at tackle (maybe some combination of Jammal Brown, Marshall Yanda, and Ryan Harris) -- depending on the fit in the ZBS and the cost of signing.. They have other guards-in-training, and centers in training --- but tackles are still a definite need. If the Skins FO is planning to draft a 'franchise QB' in 2012 they need to stablilize their line first. (Frankly, if they wind up re-signing Grossman -- he makes fewer game-killing errors when he's behind a decent line.)

I also feel that defensively --- the biggest areas of concern will be ILB and possibly CB and NT. London Fletcher can't play forever, McIntosh is likley gone -- and it's not certain how well Blades and Riley stack up talent-wise versus other experienced journeymen or 2nd tier FAs who could be brought in reasonably. Same for CB -- do Buchanon and Barnes fill the void left by Rogers? Or can the Skins find someone else who's both adequate and affordable? Haslett's system puts pressure on the CBs so the #2 CB can't be a weak link, and the team will still need depth. As for NT -- there are two jouneymen FAs already in the fold, and one, maybe two, new rookies who could play the role. So FAs Franklin or C. Jenkins might be a stop-gap measure for a deficiency at a key pivot point in the 3-4 defense.

WRs? The Skins have a bunch -- but Rice looks to be a game-changing player and bona-fide #1 receiver coming into his prime. Signing Rice (assuming the Skins don't break the bank) would give him a year to accomodate to the Shanahan offense -- just in time to be a primary weapon for whoever the Skins bring in at QB in 2012.

As for the win-loss record and drafting a 'premier' QB in 2012 -- I suspect the team does way better than 2-14/4-12 --- and winds up in the middle of the draft. Just speculation -- let's see and worry about that when it happens. ----Right now, there are plenty of other spots on the team that need upgrading -- and it's going to take a mix of draftees, FAs, re-signings, trades, and walkons to find the right folks who can do that.

[Chump Bailey]

Belichick, who has a degree in Economics, won't pay big money to anyone because he understands that, given the constraints of the salary cap, it amounts to economic foolishness. He uses cheap free agents as gap fillers, but that's all they are.

Belichick is the best in the business with regard to manipulating the draft. He's always five steps ahead of everyone else. It's a model we will never be able to duplicate. Belichick and Kraft are simply light years ahead in just about every facet of the draft process to that of Shanahan, Allen and Snyder. They're just that good. I'm agreeing with you, but we will never be in their league in the draft regard.