You say it now, but you're a liar.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

the giants didnt come by eli all fair and square style.

True, but I doubt San Diego would of entertained that trade if they were a lot lower down the list.

Just curious as to another perspective, but he's gone so it's irrelevant, lol.

Hail.

[onedrop]

True, but I doubt San Diego would of entertained that trade if they were a lot lower down the list.

Just curious as to another perspective, but he's gone so it's irrelevant, lol.

Hail.

i understand your point and perspective. the whole eli thing still bothers the hell out of me. just like when elway pulled his "ill just go play baseball" BS.

[s0crates]

I am so tired of this nonsense.

I have grown to hate Andrew Luck, and tanks too.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

i understand your point and perspective. the whole eli thing still bothers the hell out of me. just like when elway pulled his "ill just go play baseball" BS.

Oh, Manning, and his father who the media love, were complete jack ass's at the time to engineer their own move. Couldn't agree more with you. And I actually don't rate Eli as a top echelon QB. He's very good on his day, but his consistency leaves a lot to be desired.

But the Giants have him as their franchise QB for the long haul, so there ya' go.

And thank you NLC1054. I personally think your selling Luck way short, but I appreciate where your coming from on him.

Hail.

[SpacePenguin]

QB prospects are all about translatable attributes - the more they have, the higher probability of success.

No prospect is guaranteed (a cliche that is in the same category of obviousness as there's no "i" in team), but the more attributes a prospect has, the higher the probability of success.

You want to draft a QB that has the highest probability of success - Andrew Luck probably has the most NFL ready attributes since Peyton Manning and thus the highest probability of success since Manning as well.

This doesn't alone guarantee success (many external variables, as well as intangibles that are not easily identifiable play a part), but it does mean that the likelihood that he will succeed is greater than any other QB in a decade, all other factors (team, injury luck, coaching, etc) being equal.

That is why there is hype about Luck.

Of course, he is part of a very talented class of QBs himself, and is far from the only QB with a higher than average probability for success. He's not the only answer, but he is a very, very good one.

As usual, I agree with your entire post. Luck seems to be the consensus franchise QB at this point, but as you said it's supposedly a strong QB class.

If they're drafting a QB, of course I'd rather have the best prospect available. Just not at the cost of a wasted year.

Now some people will counter this saying that Grossman/Beck at QB is already a wasted year. In that case, why even play the games? If the mainstream perception is all that matters, then NFL seasons may as well be simmed through a computer program, using the consensus perception of player talent. In reality, players fade in and out of the media's hype sphere every year. Beck or Grossman would not be the first to succeed despite lacking positive name recognition.

I think a lot of Lucksters would rather win 2 games and draft Luck, than win 9 with Beck/Grossman and lose in the wildcard. This is contrary to the nature of sport, and it's this idea I'm against, not getting a good QB prospect next year.

[onedrop]

Oh, Manning, and his father who the media love, were complete jack ass's at the time to engineer their own move. Couldn't agree more with you. And I actually don't rate Eli as a top echelon QB. He's very good on his day, but his consistency leaves a lot to be desired.

But the Giants have him as their franchise QB for the long haul, so there ya' go.

And thank you NLC1054. I personally think your selling Luck way short, but I appreciate where your coming from on him.

Hail.

heres to the Skins D punishing eli opening day, all day.

[KCClybun]

Oh, Manning, and his father who the media love, were complete jack ass's at the time to engineer their own move. Couldn't agree more with you. And I actually don't rate Eli as a top echelon QB. He's very good on his day, but his consistency leaves a lot to be desired.

But the Giants have him as their franchise QB for the long haul, so there ya' go.

And thank you NLC1054. I personally think your selling Luck way short, but I appreciate where your coming from on him.

Hail.

To that end, I get where the guys who want Luck are coming from. It's hard when you haven't had a franchise quarterback since the 1980's, and when your options are Rex and Beck, to not want what you see as the biggest and brightest. But history has proven that you don't need to have a top 5 pick to get your franchise quarterback. Theoretically it should help your odds, but again...Alex Smith and Jason Campbell went before Aaron Rodgers. McNabb went after Tim Couch and Akili Smith. You don't need to lose to get your guy.

Heck, I think part of the reason Andrew Luck went back to school was because he didn't want to play for the Panthers, and he knew the Panthers were going to take him.

I think your best bet is always to put a young quarterback in a situation where he can come in and have some success early. We still have some work to do to get to that point..

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

my gosh, from the talks of it you would think Andrew Luck changed water in to wine. Does he get his own cult thread on here like Colt did?

not a cult at all man, he just happens to be the best current NFL QB prospect, and i want my hometown team to have the best current NFL prospect. why is that so nuts?

[The Tris]

If they're drafting a QB, of course I'd rather have the best prospect available. Just not at the cost of a wasted year.

It depends on your definition of a wasted year.

For me, as we mostly ignored win now moves, and the signing of aging veterans, I hope we are highly competitive and are in every game we play.

This will help us identify what areas of the team are improved/improving, and which areas still need work. Part of developing a franchise QB is ensuring a stable environment with solid support systems (players and coaches). The more questions we answer with long term solutions this year, the better environment we will be able to create for a QB to develop in.

This is vastly different that winning with a core of veterans and highly paid free agents on the down side of their career.

The goal of this season should not be to simply win, but to win with youth. Winning with players who won't be here in 2-3 years is pointless.

And if we happen to lose a game simply because the other team was better (which will happen) or because we didn't get a few bounces (which will also happen) - so what. We aren't jockeying for a playoff seed here. As long as we are seeing meaningful, competent reps from our young players, I could care less what the final score was, if we are competitive with youth.

One thing is clear to me - there is a very slim likelihood we are getting Andrew Luck, which is bittersweet. We are an improved team, and should be competent and professional at the very least. Despite the casual fan's mockery of our QB position (who's value is vastly overrated by the same casual fan), we are not a horrible constructed team. We have holes and questions and will suffer an adjustment period and growing pains. But if we get league average play out of the QB position, we're going to be around a .500 team. Again, a bittersweet outcome to this season.

The important thing, though, is that for the first time since I can remember, the team building strategy is in line with the team itself, and if we continue to build heavily through the draft, and prudently through FA, the QB position will work itself out. Even when we don't get Andrew Luck.

But goddamn it would be nice if we did.

[BigMike619]

not a cult at all man, he just happens to be the best current NFL QB prospect, and i want my hometown team to have the best current NFL prospect. why is that so nuts?

well, im not saying its nuts but you can never tell how a kid is going to translate from college to the pros. everyone is acting like he is a sure thing and you just never can tell. he could be the next ryan leaf for all we know.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

well, im not saying its nuts but you can never tell how a kid is going to translate from college to the pros. everyone is acting like he is a sure thing and you just never can tell. he could be the next ryan leaf for all we know.

and he could be joe montana, who knows. the point is:

A. we need a QB

B. we will most likely be bad this season giving us a very high draft pick

C. hes the most touted prospect in god knows how long

D. its always a gamble, and if were hitching our wagon to a rookie, i think its best to stick with him

[SpacePenguin]

It depends on your definition of a wasted year.

For me, as we mostly ignored win now moves, and the signing of aging veterans, I hope we are highly competitive and are in every game we play.

This will help us identify what areas of the team are improved/improving, and which areas still need work. Part of developing a franchise QB is ensuring a stable environment with solid support systems (players and coaches). The more questions we answer with long term solutions this year, the better environment we will be able to create for a QB to develop in.

This is vastly different that winning with a core of veterans and highly paid free agents on the down side of their career.

The goal of this season should not be to simply win, but to win with youth. Winning with players who won't be here in 2-3 years is pointless.

Nice post, I agree with this part especially. I like the more long-term approach to FA this season, with a few exceptions. The team is younger and has better depth, which were the biggest problems with the roster.

My definition of a wasted year would be either bringing in big name veterans in mass, or tanking intentionally. This roster actually gives me some hope, not to simply win 7-9 games yearly, but to become a yearly superbowl contender over a longer timeframe, like the Patriots or Steelers of the last decade.

I also agree about the importance of QB being overstated in general. Teams that are built well can win games with pretty much any servicable QB that fits the system. See Matt Cassell.

I actually like everything this offseason, aside from the OL. I guess Shanny's counting on continuity there. Can't fill every need either way.

[Big Will]

It seems like for the past 10 or so years some Skins fans enjoy the draft and the off-season more than the actual season. It's understandable given how God awful we have been.

But, the season is about to start and people are actually talking and giving a hoot about next years draft? Draft boards will change throughout the season as some players play well as expected and some don't. Some college players will get injured. And some top prospects actually suck in the NFL. That is the flaw in the "tanking the season" philosophy.

I really can't wait for a day when this organization is at the tops again. When rooks have to fight to earn a spot on the team and the fans are actually looking forward to the season rather than the draft. We used to believe in winning and I'm glad I got to see and live it in the 80's. I can't blame anybody for the negative attitude given recent history, I just don't want to drink a beer or watch a game with you.

[KCClybun]

and he could be joe montana, who knows. the point is:

A. we need a QB

B. we will most likely be bad this season giving us a very high draft pick

C. hes the most touted prospect in god knows how long

D. its always a gamble, and if were hitching our wagon to a rookie, i think its best to stick with him

Andrew Luck is highly touted now. Like Jake Locker was highly touted before him.

Locker had a bad season and people starting grading him as a third rounder.

The thing about it is, no one really starts to break down film on a quarterback until he declares. They turned the tape on with Jake Locker, and they find all sorts of holes in his game. From a tangibles standpoint, Luck is highly touted, but we won't know how people really feel about him until next season, when evaluators and scouts turn on the film and really study him.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

Give it time Will man.

If Shanahan and Allen stick to this plan, as I fully believe they will, 2 or 3 years down the line we'll all be able to hoist a beer together in acknowledgement of totally having our Redskins back.

Just gota' ride out a few more tough years to get back to where we so crave to be,

Hail.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

Andrew Luck is highly touted now. Like Jake Locker was highly touted before him.

Locker had a bad season and people starting grading him as a third rounder.

The thing about it is, no one really starts to break down film on a quarterback until he declares. They turned the tape on with Jake Locker, and they find all sorts of holes in his game. From a tangibles standpoint, Luck is highly touted, but we won't know how people really feel about him until next season, when evaluators and scouts turn on the film and really study him.

graded as a 3rd rounder by espn, and he went 8th overall lol.

i would have been happy as a pig in **** with locker, i liked him a lot and wasnt super worried about his accuracy issues, but the titans screwed that for us.

point is, luck isnt gonna slip, just like bradford didnt slip. guys dont just forget how to play QB, and the only thing luck can have go wrong is a career threatening injury.

[Oldfan]

While I believe that delayed gratification is a trait that most Americans no longer have, I have to disagree with you completely. It's primarily a semantic argument, but I feel as thought it still valid. Whether the Redskins lose in the first round of the playoffs or go 2-14, it doesn't determine our chance of winning in the future with any certainty.

Since NFL rules on the draft order reward failure, you are wrong. The odds of hitting on a good QB are increased. Is it certain we will hit? No, but a sound strategy is only expected to give you a better chance.

There is no such thing as delayed gratification in the NFL; you always play for this season, because as in life, you are only guaranteed this season (and sometimes not even that). If Mike Shanahan goes 2-14, he might not be here next year. So for him, there is no delayed gratification: it's just a wasted year. However if he goes 6-10 or better or so, he will live for sure to fight another day. Coaches don't do what's best for the franchise, they do what's what's best for their huge salaries and their huge egos.

Do you think Shanahan would rather build a team on the cusp, lose 14 games, but give Luck or Jones to the next head coach? I think he'd rather take a slightly worse prospect with a top 10 or 12 pick (rather than top 3) and keep his job. That would be better for this team anyway. Getting a new coach would require his own coaches and his own players....

I’m debating this from the POV of the team’s best interests.

I’m not in interested in the decision from the point of view of the coach’s welfare. If the coach’s welfare and the team’s best interests are in conflict, then we need another coach as soon as possible.

[BigMike619]

and he could be joe montana, who knows. the point is:

A. we need a QB

B. we will most likely be bad this season giving us a very high draft pick

C. hes the most touted prospect in god knows how long

D. its always a gamble, and if were hitching our wagon to a rookie, i think its best to stick with him

im not saying he couldnt be montana. im saying he is getting called out like a savior when he has never even done a thing.

A. yes, we do.

2. Possibly. There will most likely be teams worse than us who need a QB too.

Next. So was Ryan Leaf. Remember the debate of him possibly going before Manning?

Lastly. I agree. But when I gamble I like to at least know what Im going in to.

Im not saying the kid couldnt be the next best thing but "16 games until we draft our future QB" is a BIG gamble. I watched Leaf out here firsthand and saw him go from the highest rated QB in the pre-season to a major bust. Bradford was called weak because of the shoulder surgeries and look at him.

If we're gonig to hitch our wagon to anything I want it to be a team. Lots of teams can win without a major franchise QB. Heck, we did it 3 times.

[NattyBo]

It doesn't have to be Luck, but I'd be willing to bet anything on here that we draft a QB with our first round pick next year. The higher it is, the better chance we have of getting our 1st choice, though.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

If we're gonig to hitch our wagon to anything I want it to be a team. Lots of teams can win without a major franchise QB. Heck, we did it 3 times.

sorry, this is the kind of mentality that has to stop around here. this isnt 1985 anymore, teams do not win without legit QBs. look at history, i think since we won our last superbowl, only 2 mediocre QBs have won superbowls, and thats in 20 years. the ravens did it with the best defense of the decade (and one of the best ever) and the bucs did it with a vet having a great year, also with maybe the best tampa 2 defense ever. we have neither and are not going to have either. so we need to find a stud QB, its the only way we're even going to contend.

---------- Post added August-3rd-2011 at 07:09 PM ----------

It doesn't have to be Luck, but I'd be willing to bet anything on here that we draft a QB with our first round pick next year. The higher it is, the better chance we have of getting our 1st choice, though.

100% agree. id rather have the choice to select what we truly want for our future than have our QB selection dictated by a team that lost 2 more meaningless games than we did.

[Oldfan]

I... I can't blame anybody for the negative attitude given recent history, I just don't want to drink a beer or watch a game with you.

How can a debate over which strategy is best for the team be negative no matter which side you pick?

[HOGnificent]

the bottom line is we are not going to a super bowl and there not trying to put together a super bowl team in 1 season like they have tried in the past. its going to be a while before we are competitive to the point that high profile players would even want to play for us partly because when its time to be free agents alot of these guys are willing to take a pay cut for the probability of playing for the championship. No one should tank a season or play half A! But we should understand that for now our coaching staff is trying to find the good players in what we have. the ones are going to give it 100% will be here in better days. keep in mind that you have to start somewhere!

[anar-k21]

i absolutely agree...i wouldnt want to lose a season on purpose for a rookie QB that probably wont make it anyway ya know?? jimmie Clausen was supposed to be '"nfl ready" so theres that

and i dont think the team will do that either i think theyll give it the best shot we can

[NattyBo]

i absolutely agree...i wouldnt want to lose a season on purpose for a rookie QB that probably wont make it anyway ya know?? jimmie Clausen was supposed to be '"nfl ready" so theres that

Jimmie Clausen wasn't even drafted in the first round.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

i absolutely agree...i wouldnt want to lose a season on purpose for a rookie QB that probably wont make it anyway ya know?? jimmie Clausen was supposed to be '"nfl ready" so theres that

and i dont think the team will do that either i think theyll give it the best shot we can

jimmy clausen fell all the way to middle of the 2nd round, nobody outside of espn thought he was worth that much.

the draft tells you which teams value guys and where they value them. its again why locker was supposed to fall to day 2 and went 8th overall.