The Official(ish) 2012 Quarterback Prospect Thread

[Rufus T Firefly]

Well, at this juncture, we're going to have to move up to get Griffin now. I gotta check Forehead's awesome thread for our current draft position once its updated... But... We probably lost some position with that absolute thumping we put on the Giants yesterday. What an awesome game to be a 'Skins fan!

We're 7th right now.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I would love getting Bradford in the secondary QB market assuming the price is no more than one pick (even our first). To me, the ability to grab a young veteran like that who still has 10 years to play at a high level would be incredible. He's taken his lumps for another team and could probably come in and immediately improve our QB play while he still continues to personally improve.

In some ways, we'd benefit if the Rams decide to draft a QB with their choice (assuming we're the ones who could secure the trade for him).

[wysknz1]

I really don't know why Kellen Moore has been written off. Same size as drew Breese and I'd take him any day. I've watched Kellen play for 4 years. He's smart and accurate and takes care of the ball well. I guess the only argument is he didn't play in an elite conference. Just saying that I'd rather go for him than trade everything for one guy like Luck, RG3 etc. We need a lot of help and trading the bank to move up would be unwise. All his (few) losses they were outscored not because of him. I'm not against the "top" QBs coming out, I just think it's a gamble to trade too much on any one guy when too much is needed.

Just depends on what we have to give up to move up and what falls to us.

[Lavarleap56]

Speculation from the St Louis media started when there was reported Rams interest in Barkley. It fueled to reasons like - needing to retool area's like Oline/WR and wanting more 1st round picks, cap issues like LL mentioned - trading a 6-year $78 mil for a 4-year $22 mil like Newton got, probability of new coaching staff, etc.

Now, it could also be the Rams bluffing on the Barkley thing to generate a trade offers.

I had this very same discussion on twitter a month or two ago in regards to rams possibly could move Bradford. Looking over everything it actually is similar to that discussion which is strange but makes some sense. St.Louis IF it unloads Spags would be bringing in a new coach and usually new assistants which would mean 3 years and 3 offenses for Bradford which as we know is not that great for the development of your QB. The contract is also another issue that ST.Louis just might want to get out off regrdless of what they do with the coaching situation and that makes sense for their market and owner being a small market. The other opinion is a mixed bag of both in that Bradford is taking a pounding and his eyes have strated going from downfield to watching the rush which is never good and the rams just could be in a good position early to make a switch when sams value is still high.

I dont really know what to think yet but do to the majority of talk focused on rams wanting Kalil pretty bad i could see the posturing starting early.

[Rufus T Firefly]

I would love getting Bradford in the secondary QB market assuming the price is no more than one pick (even our first). To me, the ability to grab a young veteran like that who still has 10 years to play at a high level would be incredible. He's taken his lumps for another team and could probably come in and immediately improve our QB play while he still continues to personally improve.

In some ways, we'd benefit if the Rams decide to draft a QB with their choice (assuming we're the ones who could secure the trade for him).

I really like Bradford and would be thrilled to get him. However, if we give up our 1st for him that feels like we've been absolutely suckered. You can't draft a guy and dump him after 2 years and get back a top 10 pick. It just doesn't work that way. No matter how much you like him, you just don't pay thatmuch above market value for a player. Add in his rough season, his injury and the fact that his huge contract is so much higher than current 1st round QBs and there is just no way they can command that much.

If we were giving up our 1st for him, at absolute minimum I'd want back their 2nd and some other considerations (mid round picks or young players).

[GibbsFactor]

I really don't know why Kellen Moore has been written off. Same size as drew Breese and I'd take him any day. I've watched Kellen play for 4 years. He's smart and accurate and takes care of the ball well. I guess the only argument is he didn't play in an elite conference. Just saying that I'd rather go for him than trade everything for one guy like Luck, RG3 etc. We need a lot of help and trading the bank to move up would be unwise. All his (few) losses they were outscored not because of him. I'm not against the "top" QBs coming out, I just think it's a gamble to trade too much on any one guy when too much is needed.

Just depends on what we have to give up to move up and what falls to us.

He's a late rounder. He's not the "same size as Drew Brees" either.

[skinzplay]

The Colts will not select Andrew Luck, whether they're picking 1st, 2nd, or 3rd. Doesn't matter.

[Lavarleap56]

im pretty confident it will remain RG3 at the top.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I really like Bradford and would be thrilled to get him. However, if we give up our 1st for him that feels like we've been absolutely suckered. You can't draft a guy and dump him after 2 years and get back a top 10 pick. It just doesn't work that way. No matter how much you like him, you just don't pay thatmuch above market value for a player. Add in his rough season, his injury and the fact that his huge contract is so much higher than current 1st round QBs and there is just no way they can command that much.

If we were giving up our 1st for him, at absolute minimum I'd want back their 2nd and some other considerations (mid round picks or young players).

Well, admittedly I'm not a shrewd NFL GM. If we had to pay less than a first for him, that's great too. I was just speaking from a fan's perspective in saying that I wouldn't be tossing and turning at night if I read that we traded our first round pick for a 24-year old potential franchise QB. That's all. You might very well be right that St. Louis will have zero leverage when it comes to dealing him (presumably due to already drafting his replacement). Then again, there could be a handful of teams interested...and if we had to sweeten the deal to get him, I'd be fine with that. I just want 6-7 picks in next year's draft to continue adding talent to the roster.

---------- Post added December-19th-2011 at 01:58 PM ----------

im pretty confident it will remain RG3 at the top.

At the top of the NFL draft board or our draft board? To me, if someone gets Andrew Luck with anything less than the #2 pick, that's a ridiculous steal. I'm not saying he's definitely going to be better than Griffin, but anytime guys climb in the draft between the end of the college season and April, I become skeptical.

[darrelgreenie]

At the top of the NFL draft board or our draft board? To me, if someone gets Andrew Luck with anything less than the #2 pick, that's a ridiculous steal. I'm not saying he's definitely going to be better than Griffin, but anytime guys climb in the draft between the end of the college season and April, I become skeptical.

Draft stock is/has always been hard to judge because:

o the media opinions aren't actual scout opinions

o the media opinions are often driven by misinformation purposefully put out there by GMs/execs/officials for the express purpose of disguising their intentions, gathering information about other teams, and manipulating the draft stock of prospects they like

But with that being said players stock can rise based on Senior Bowl and combine because the decision makers get to see the prospects up close and meet them in person.

The personal contact is huge in the draft process.

Also, players can rise because coaches typical don't start breaking down film to after the season.

---------- Post added December-19th-2011 at 02:16 PM ----------

im pretty confident it will remain RG3 at the top.

'It' being whom?

Of course its likely that the scouts won't change their ranking.

But, when Mike and Kyle start breaking down film for themselves.

Who knows what they'll think?

[TD_washingtonredskins]

But, when Mike and Kyle start breaking down film for themselves.

Who knows what they'll think?

I'm almost hoping, given our draft position, that they somehow love someone who isn't Luck or Griffin. Wouldn't it be awesome if they grade some unknown guy as just slightly below a consensus top-pick and we can grab him with one of our picks? I realize that's not likely, but I might as well hope for it until it doesn't happen.

[Lavarleap56]

Draft stock is/has always been hard to judge because:

o the media opinions aren't actual scout opinions

o the media opinions are often driven by misinformation purposefully put out there by GMs/execs/officials for the express purpose of disguising their intentions, gathering information about other teams, and manipulating the draft stock of prospects they like

But with that being said players stock can rise based on Senior Bowl and combine because the decision makers get to see the prospects up close and meet them in person.

The personal contact is huge in the draft process.

Also, players can rise because coaches typical don't start breaking down film to after the season.

---------- Post added December-19th-2011 at 02:16 PM ----------

'It' being whom?

Of course its likely that the scouts won't change their ranking.

But, when Mike and Kyle start breaking down film for themselves.

Who knows what they'll think?

I feel confident it wont change when mike dives into the film room.

[GaryGreenMonk]

I feel confident it wont change when mike dives into the film room.

Situation has changed.

There's a strong likelyhood that we win this Saturday and we might even beat the Eagles too.

We are going to have to trade up for anyone that isn't named Tannehill, Weeden, or Foles.

That may or may not be possible.

I think rank overall should be Luck, RGIII, Weeden, Tannehill, Barkley, Foles.

But we aren't talking about rank anymore, now we are talking about who we have the opportunity to trade into.

[darrelgreenie]

I'm almost hoping, given our draft position, that they somehow love someone who isn't Luck or Griffin. Wouldn't it be awesome if they grade some unknown guy as just slightly below a consensus top-pick and we can grab him with one of our picks? I realize that's not likely, but I might as well hope for it until it doesn't happen.

I hope Griff is terrible at the Senior Bowl, but he won't be.

I hope he's terrible at the combine, but he's gonna light it up.

I hope he stinks in his bowl game, slim chance.

The above gives us the best chance to land Griff w/o trading up.

[GaryGreenMonk]

The above gives us the best chance to land Griff w/o trading up.

No other option now. We will beat Minny. Even if we lose to Philly, we'll have to trade up.

Our QB fate is unfortunatley no longer in our own hands, we now must hope that someone is willing to trade back with us to get what we want.

EDIT: I also want to be clear that I like us beating the Giants and I like seeing this team perform at a high level at this point in the season and I think it's something to build off of.. but we will now have to trade up for a QB.

[darrelgreenie]

I feel confident it wont change when mike dives into the film room.

Me too.

Its the other one I worry about but we've already been over that.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Speculation from the St Louis media started when there was reported Rams interest in Barkley. It fueled to reasons like - needing to retool area's like Oline/WR and wanting more 1st round picks, cap issues like LL mentioned - trading a 6-year $78 mil for a 4-year $22 mil like Newton got, probability of new coaching staff, etc.

Now, it could also be the Rams bluffing on the Barkley thing to generate a trade offers.

That is an interesting factor here. Bradford is the last of the first rounders who got massive contracts. I still think he is pretty good, but would you rather have Luck or Bradford at 4x the price?

---------- Post added December-19th-2011 at 05:23 PM ----------

I really don't know why Kellen Moore has been written off. Same size as drew Breese and I'd take him any day.

At the combine, you are going to find out that he is 5'10 and weighs 175, which will make him 35 pounds lighter than Mike Vick (who is arguably too small to take the pounding that NFL quarterbacks take).

[Newera]

I feel confident it wont change when mike dives into the film room.

That's what's going to be most interesting. Is when Mike and Kyle break down film of the quarterbacks and make their assessments and how they rank them. Wouldn't we all love to know. I think with a win against Minny we are going to put ourselves out of the running for Griffin or Barkley without a trade up. If one of them was to fall, it's more likely to be Barkley. I'm more in favor of doing what we did last year. Stockpile picks. We already have eight I think. Trade down and accumulate picks and target guys like Cousins or Moore later. I think Tannenhill is risky based on projections and upside. He's only been playing quarterback less then a couple of years, whereas Cousins and Moore are three and four year starters. Tannenhill is intriquing, but to me, Cousins and Moore are safer picks. Two guys I think could be sleepers.

[GWinSkins83]

That's what's going to be most interesting. Is when Mike and Kyle break down film of the quarterbacks and make their assessments and how they rank them. Wouldn't we all love to know. I think with a win against Minny we are going to put ourselves out of the running for Griffin or Barkley without a trade up. If one of them was to fall, it's more likely to be Barkley. I'm more in favor of doing what we did last year. Stockpile picks. We already have eight I think. Trade down and accumulate picks and target guys like Cousins or Moore later. I think Tannenhill is risky based on projections and upside. He's only been playing quarterback less then a couple of years, whereas Cousins and Moore are three and four year starters. Tannenhill is intriquing, but to me, Cousins and Moore are safer picks. Two guys I think could be sleepers.

If we pick Cousins we will be looking for a QB next draft. Moore won't be ready for 2 years. You NEVER settle for a QB. NEVER. We can stockpile picks 2013.

[HigSkin]

That is an interesting factor here. Bradford is the last of the first rounders who got massive contracts. I still think he is pretty good' date=' but would you rather have Luck or Bradford at 4x the price?

[/quote']

I think Shanny would rather have Bradford given the info from LL56 about the teams draft order of QB's (RGiii, Luck, Barkley). I thought I remember Shanny saying something like this kind of QB only comes around once every 10 years. Unless he was blowing smoke, cause I think at the time he said it there was not chance of getting Bradford, I think he loves the kid.

Also, some of the bonus has been paid. According to Rotoworld he has a small salary and $17mil due in 2012. Then his cap gets real reasonable.

[KCClybun]

Bradford's not getting cut or traded.

Anyone want to talk about the quarterbacks we'll actually have a chance at? Because I can come up with a zillion hypothetical reason why Jay Cutler could get traded here, but that's not going to happen. It's a long shot, and then some.

Bradford is not getting bought here, and the Rams would be even dumber than it appears they are if they did traded him. And even if Bradford WAS put on the trading block, if Cleveland really wants a quarterback, there's a better chance of THEM trading for him to match him up with his old offensive coordinator in Pat Shumer.

Let's stick to some scenarios that are more likely to happen instead of less likely to happen. There's this weird "worse case scenario unless this highly unlikely thing happens" thing going on here.

[FrFan]

But, when Mike and Kyle start breaking down film for themselves.

Who knows what they'll think?

It seems that Shanahan doesn't give any clue. Link

[HailSkins83]

Movement in qb rankings at Redskins Park from the scouts... 1.RG3,2.Luck,3.Barkley

Do you get the feeling they are prepared and ready to make a move and trade up?

Also,who would be the #4QB and #5QB inthe Scouts eyes?

[Rufus T Firefly]

Also, some of the bonus has been paid. According to Rotoworld he has a small salary and $17mil due in 2012. Then his cap gets real reasonable.

That's not at all accurate. The 17 mil signing bonus has already been paid, and those salaries Rotoworld lists are all much higher than that. He had to get a certain amount of playing time (which he did) and then the amount of those salaries went way up.

[HigSkin]

That's not at all accurate. The 17 mil signing bonus has already been paid, and those salaries Rotoworld lists are all much higher than that. He had to get a certain amount of playing time (which he did) and then the amount of those salaries went way up.

Yep, just looked at another source, you're right. Usually Rotoworld is pretty accurate.