Alexa Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 But literally none of those guys are better than Griffin at the moment with the exception of Luck, Newton and Wilson. Luck and Newton were the first overall picks in the draft which we never had a shot at and Wilson is on a ridiculously stacked team. You can continue acting like our situations are the same as those but they aren't and never were. Right now Foles is better than RG3 and he was a 3rd rounder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThomasRoane Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 Right now Foles is better than RG3 and he was a 3rd rounder. And what gets me about that is that the Shannahan's had Foles on their team in the Senior bowl team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor703 Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 Right now Foles is better than RG3 and he was a 3rd rounder. I disagree but that's just my opinion dude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 Until Griffin proves not to be the answer, we've won the trade, imo. St. Louis hasn't done anything with their picks, do not have a QB, and are nearly as bad as we are. He doesn't even have to be Elite, just the answer for the position so we can stop guessing and praying about it like so many other teams in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 And what gets me about that is that the Shannahan's had Foles on their team in the Senior bowl team. So who decided to trade all those picks for RGIII? Shan? Allen? Snyder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rufus T Firefly Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 So who decided to trade all those picks for RGIII? Shan? Allen? Snyder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThomasRoane Posted September 29, 2014 Share Posted September 29, 2014 So who decided to trade all those picks for RGIII? Shan? Allen? Snyder? Same person who thought getting Donovan McNabb was a good deal. My money's on Snyder. Look at the buzz he got from McNabb and then RG III. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted September 29, 2014 Share Posted September 29, 2014 So who decided to trade all those picks for RGIII? Shan? Allen? Snyder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diesel Hog Posted September 29, 2014 Share Posted September 29, 2014 Off topic, but love the new avatar there Boss_Hogg. Also, I'm pretty sure it was indeed Satan who made the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sempre_victrix Posted September 29, 2014 Share Posted September 29, 2014 Whether or not you were for the trade, I'm not sure how anyone can argue that trading all these picks to move up 4 spots was good for the organization. I agree that because of the Portis and Hall contracts and the ridiculous Haynesworth deal, we would have struggled to pay those players. But arguing that the picks we gave up haven't amounted to much is weak, considering that it is highly unlikely that we would have made the same choices in the draft. Mortgaging your future for one player when you have so many glaring needs almost never works out. Let's hope we get lucky with some of the recent picks or we are going to be doomed for a while longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mursilis Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 So who decided to trade all those picks for RGIII? Shan? Allen? Snyder? Same person who thought getting Donovan McNabb was a good deal. My money's on Snyder. Look at the buzz he got from McNabb and then RG III. I think the "Snyder made the calls for McNabb/RG3" spin is just Shanahan's revisionist history/BS he's now selling because those moves didn't work out (really, too early to tell on RG3, but it wasn't looking good last year when these stories first started coming out). My understanding has always been that when Shanahan came here, he would have the final say in player acquisition and that Snyder would just sign the checks and handle the non-football side of things. It seems that now, after the Shanahan years turned into a disaster and his chance for the Hall of Fame and/or a new HC job have been severely damaged, he's trying to spin it that Snyder's meddling caused all the problems, and Shanny's hands were tied while he was here. I don't believe it; I can't imagine Shanahan would come here unless he got control over personnel, yet immediately be forced into making a trade he didn't want to make (the McNabb deal), and still stick around. Until better evidence comes out, I'm still putting responsibility for all player decisions, good and bad, on Shanahan for the time he was here (with Allen just handling the negotiation/contract side of things). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacoah Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 While I agree that we may have given up a deal much to draft RGIII, we were still in a position to make some moves after the draft before the cap hit. The timing by the league to collude and then penalize us ham-stringed our ability to build further in 2012. But, with that said, the injuries to RGIII seemingly prove that this is and has been for the last two decades one of the most cursed teams in the league. Maybe we'll see a change in the next few years. But, like many fans who are suffering like I am, somehow I doubt this ship is going to right itself any time soon. Still, I'm in it win or lose. HTTR! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 While I agree that we may have given up a deal much to draft RGIII, we were still in a position to make some moves after the draft before the cap hit. I love the ol cap hit argument. This franchise under Snyder shown an ability to create a great team using free agents. The cap hit didn't cause us anything but mad fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 Until Griffin proves not to be the answer, we've won the trade, imo. St. Louis hasn't done anything with their picks, do not have a QB, and are nearly as bad as we are. He doesn't even have to be Elite, just the answer for the position so we can stop guessing and praying about it like so many other teams in the NFL. The trade was a failure. I think that is pretty obvious at this point. And I don't know why people keep bringing up what the Rams did with our picks. That is IRRELEVANT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexa Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 Yeah I don't get this..."well the Rams haven't done squat with those picks!" WHO CARES!!!! We have a player that is basically lost for the year, and the year before played below average. We need RG3 to be a great QB, he isn't. The book isn't closed on him but I'd be willing to bet that the front office is having buyers remorse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Robert Griffin Experience Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 The trade was a resounding, spectacular success until Shanahan left a limping RGIII to die at FedEx then proceeded to engage in one of the great victim blaming jobs of all time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandyHolt Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 One could argue... that we might as well trade the picks in a roll of the dice, since lord knows we struggle to make proper use of them internally Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nelsonal Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 Well, Rinehart was the regime before Shananhan's pick and is starting. The problem was that he didn't fit Shanahan's zone blocking scheme. That is one problem with changing regimes on a consistent basis. Out of curiosity, what is the success rate on OL taken in the 3rd round? I did 2013. 4 out of 6 are starting, and I think the starting rate last year was the same making it seem like that out of Leribs, Morgan, and Long we should have at least on starter. Anybody want to do 2012 or 2014? Over the 25 years from 1980 to 2005, 3rd round o-linemen: Were all-pros or perrenial pro bowlers 4% of the time (6 of 135 drafted) went to the pro bowl at least once 1% of the time (2 of 135) started 3 years (not always with the drafted team, I didn't put a check in for this) 35% of the time (47 of 135) or washed out of the league 59% of the time (80 of 135) So one would expect to need to use a couple of 3rd round picks to fill a line. In the first round: 28 of 126 were all pros/perennial pro bowlers (22%) 21 of 126 were pro bowlers at least once (17%) 54 of 126 were starters for at least 3 years (43%) 23 of 126 didn't start at least 54 games before leaving the league (18%) So the hit rate (of at least getting a starter) is about 80% (or the hit rate of getting a recognized success is substantially higher in the first round 22% vs 4% for all pros) for o-line (O line has one of the highest hit rates, of all positions, Quarter-backs, wide receivers, and d-line have some of the lowest). However, he drop off in historic success of quarterbacks from pick #2 to pick #96 (end of the modern 3rd round) for QBs is one of the lowest of any position in football, suggesting that the way to get a good QB on the cheap is to draft several 3rd rounders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
commyderm2 Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 Remember when the Redskins got six picks for Ricky Williams? How many Superbowls did we win when we made that deal? Remember when the Giants sold the farm to move up one spot to nap Eli Manning. Two Superbowls later, it's an afterthought. Oh, and the Saints won a Super Bowl since 1999 and the Chargers, despite having some extremely talented teams haven't won dick. This whole thread doesn't account for a million variables and that is it's most fatal flaw. It's like arguing about religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenDavis Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 The only thing that hurt about the trade was RGIII getting hurt. IMO we had to take that risk and it payed off in year one. Can you imagine if RGIII would never have gotten hurt???? By now he would have had complete command of playing the QB position. There is still a chance he will get there. If he comes around, our organization will come around as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hail4Life Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 If Griffin can come back and be the leader of this team and be a good or great QB - which he is certainly capable of, then the trade will have been worth it. Although I'm disappointed just like everyone else is up to this point I do not regret the team making the trade to draft him. I still have faith and that isn't just the homer in me. He is a very talented QB and in no way is the RG3 experiment over. I hope he can play again this season and win us a few games and head into next season with some positivity around him. The guy just can't catch a break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theTruthTeller Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 Over the 25 years from 1980 to 2005, 3rd round o-linemen: Were all-pros or perrenial pro bowlers 4% of the time (6 of 135 drafted) went to the pro bowl at least once 1% of the time (2 of 135) started 3 years (not always with the drafted team, I didn't put a check in for this) 35% of the time (47 of 135) or washed out of the league 59% of the time (80 of 135) So one would expect to need to use a couple of 3rd round picks to fill a line. In the first round: 28 of 126 were all pros/perennial pro bowlers (22%) 21 of 126 were pro bowlers at least once (17%) 54 of 126 were starters for at least 3 years (43%) 23 of 126 didn't start at least 54 games before leaving the league (18%) So the hit rate (of at least getting a starter) is about 80% (or the hit rate of getting a recognized success is substantially higher in the first round 22% vs 4% for all pros) for o-line (O line has one of the highest hit rates, of all positions, Quarter-backs, wide receivers, and d-line have some of the lowest). However, he drop off in historic success of quarterbacks from pick #2 to pick #96 (end of the modern 3rd round) for QBs is one of the lowest of any position in football, suggesting that the way to get a good QB on the cheap is to draft several 3rd rounders. Thanks for doing this - I wanted to do something similar, but didn't have the energy. I think you must have the first two lines of your conclusions switched - you can't have more all-pros/perennial pro bowlers than you do at least one-time pro-bowlers, unless you intended those categories to be mutually-exclusive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mursilis Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 The only thing that hurt about the trade was RGIII getting hurt. IMO we had to take that risk and it payed off in year one. It paid off in year one? You'd trade 3 first-rounders and a second for a division championship (without a playoff win)? For the price this team paid for RG3, I'd expect at least a SB appearance, if not a win. If all RG3 does is elevate this team from bad to mediocre, then that trade was a bust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooleyfan1993 Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 It paid off in year one? You'd trade 3 first-rounders and a second for a division championship (without a playoff win)? For the price this team paid for RG3, I'd expect at least a SB appearance, if not a win. If all RG3 does is elevate this team from bad to mediocre, then that trade was a bust. a mediocre team wouldn't have pulled off that 7 game winning streak. i think it paid off in year one as well. he got us to the playoffs, didn't he? and he definitely had us winning that playoff game 14-7 in the first quarter. thats about as much as you ca ask from a rookie qb. but you are free to think whatever you want. it is your opinion. hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hail2skins Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 a mediocre team wouldn't have pulled off that 7 game winning streak. i think it paid off in year one as well. he got us to the playoffs, didn't he? and he definitely had us winning that playoff game 14-7 in the first quarter. thats about as much as you ca ask from a rookie qb. Think the posters you are addressing are misinterpreting each other. At the end of 2012 folks would've rated the trade as worth it based on the trajectory we appeared to be on after making the playoffs in Griffin's rookie year. However, after last year's disaster and Robert getting hurt again this year, we have really veered off that trajectory. Would be fair to ask the question as to what will be required for people to consider the trade to have been worth it. Will it require the Skins to win a SB under Griffin? A SB appearance? What about us making the playoffs the large majority of the years he is our QB? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.