You are what you draft (if you draft, which we don't)

[chipwhich]

I think what SF has done, even in spite of their bad years, is that they stuck with coaches. Erickson got 2 years. Nolan got 3 years. Singletary got 3 years. None of those were good coaches, but they got an opportunity to build something so that the players they drafted could at least have the GMs determine if those players had NFL talent.

 

For the Skins, with all the turnover, each coach decides to bring in his own guys and we're seeing a lot of guys who could possibly be contributors here get let go because they haven't been developed yet.

 

No, what they did was hit on their high draft picks.  It had nothing to do with sticking with coaching (I don't call 3 years sticking anyways).

 

Pro Bowlers.

 

By the time the current coach came in, they had a pretty impressive roster.

Frank Gore, Vernon Davis, Patrick Willis, Joe Staley Dashon Goldson, Mike Lupati, Navarro Bowman, Aldon Smith, Eric Reid

[Thinking Skins]

But when I go back the past 5 years, what I see is a failure to develop players.  No one really gets much better than they were when we drafted them.  Is it because they were never that great, or is it that we didn't have coaches that could help them be better players?  Given that other teams seem to have guys who can sit a couple of years and then come in and play at a high level, I tend to lean towards the latter.

I agree with this to an extent. I think we saw some exceptions with players like Young, or Lorenzo Alexander, or Paulsen, or (cough) TyPo, or Baker as guys who we've developed pretty nicely. Obviously the call this year goes to Niles Paul. But I think part of the problem in general has been that the guys we've had under Snyder (and the jury's still out on Gruden) is that we haven't hired "teachers" as our coaches. And that may be one of the reasons that in a draft under Gibbs, we were looking for either complete players, or players with a particular skillset, but not really players that we could develop. With Shanny, we seemed to be going for some players we could develop, but he just doesn't have the personality to develop players. But whether you want to credit Paul to Gruden or Shanny (I'd rather give it to Gruden), that's a positive.

[chipwhich]

I agree with this to an extent. I think we saw some exceptions with players like Young, or Lorenzo Alexander, or Paulsen, or (cough) TyPo, or Baker as guys who we've developed pretty nicely. Obviously the call this year goes to Niles Paul. But I think part of the problem in general has been that the guys we've had under Snyder (and the jury's still out on Gruden) is that we haven't hired "teachers" as our coaches. And that may be one of the reasons that in a draft under Gibbs, we were looking for either complete players, or players with a particular skillset, but not really players that we could develop. With Shanny, we seemed to be going for some players we could develop, but he just doesn't have the personality to develop players. But whether you want to credit Paul to Gruden or Shanny (I'd rather give it to Gruden), that's a positive.

 

Well most of those picks for San Fran I listed were first and second rounders.  That means they were quality graded players that they drafted and hit on.  What you are talking about is low rated players which a lot of teams miss on.  Until we can draft well in rounds 1-3, it all doesn't matter.  It's not about training those in the high rounds, it's been that they have mostly been busts.  Which is why we are where we are.

[Thinking Skins]

No, what they did was hit on their high draft picks.  It had nothing to do with sticking with coaching (I don't call 3 years sticking anyways).

 

Pro Bowlers.

 

By the time the current coach came in, they had a pretty impressive roster.

Frank Gore, Vernon Davis, Patrick Willis, Joe Staley Dashon Goldson, Mike Lupati, Navarro Bowman, Aldon Smith, Eric Reid

Well, my baseline is that any coach (other than one who is an absolute embarrassment) should get at least 3 years, and after the third year they should be re-assessed. That seems to be what SF did with Erickson who was fired after 9 wins in his first 2 years, Nolan who had 4 wins then 7 wins and was showing promise before collapsing back down to 5 wins in his third year, and Singletary who got 7 wins and was again showing promise with 8 wins his second year but won only 6 wins his third year.

I think you have two separate arguments, hitting on high draft picks, which they have done, but so have we. But even the picks they didn't hit on still wound up being contributors for years, and many even wind up being starters for the team for a while. I look at Mike Singletary's 2010 team and that team only had 15 players that were drafted by a team other than the 49ers, only 4 of the remaining players that weren't in their first 5 years. Only 5 of their 15 UDFAs weren't in their first 3 years. That team went 6-10. You can talk about how great the first rounders were, but they were able to build system where they could hold onto their players, which allowed them to evaluate players better and set the up for the Harbaugh success.

[Thinking Skins]

Well most of those picks for San Fran I listed were first and second rounders.  That means they were quality graded players that they drafted and hit on.  What you are talking about is low rated players which a lot of teams miss on.  Until we can draft well in rounds 1-3, it all doesn't matter.  It's not about training those in the high rounds, it's been that they have mostly been busts.  Which is why we are where we are.

Looking at that 2010 SF team, they had on their final roster,

- 8 first rounders they drafted

- 4 second rounders

- 6 third rounders

- 2 fourth rounders

- 2 fifth rounders

- 6 sixth rounders

- 4 seventh 4rounders

- 10 UDFAs in their first 3 years.

Fast forward to the 2011 roster that went 13-3, they had

- 8 first rounders

- 3 second rounders

- 6 third rounders

- 3 fourth rounders

- 3 fifth rounders

- 6 sixth rounders

- 4 seventh rounders

- 7 UDFAs in their first 3 years.

That's roster continuity that comes from both knowing how to find good players, how to keep good players, and how to develop good players.

[chipwhich]

I think you have two separate arguments, hitting on high draft picks, which they have done, but so have we. But even the picks they didn't hit on still wound up being contributors for years, and many even wind up being starters for the team for a while. I look at Mike Singletary's 2010 team and that team only had 15 players that were drafted by a team other than the 49ers, only 4 of the remaining players that weren't in their first 5 years. Only 5 of their 15 UDFAs weren't in their first 3 years. That team went 6-10. You can talk about how great the first rounders were, but they were able to build system where they could hold onto their players, which allowed them to evaluate players better and set the up for the Harbaugh success.

 

I didn't even list the non pro bowlers which are names you would know.  The point is they had core players at key positions, high draft picks at key positions.  QB, Running Back, Receiver, Tight End.  They had a foundation of real NFL stock to build from.

I would love to know of any person, given the choice when Harbaugh took over the niners, to pick Redskins or Niners strictly based on talent, who would even think about the Redskins.  It's not even close.

Looking at that 2010 SF team, they had on their final roster,

- 8 first rounders they drafted

- 4 second rounders

- 6 third rounders

- 2 fourth rounders

- 2 fifth rounders

- 6 sixth rounders

- 4 seventh 4rounders

- 10 UDFAs in their first 3 years.

Fast forward to the 2011 roster that went 13-3, they had

- 8 first rounders

- 3 second rounders

- 6 third rounders

- 3 fourth rounders

- 3 fifth rounders

- 6 sixth rounders

- 4 seventh rounders

- 7 UDFAs in their first 3 years.

That's roster continuity that comes from both knowing how to find good players, how to keep good players, and how to develop good players.

 

So compare that to us

[Thinking Skins]

So compare that to us

Exactly.

I think the problem with us is goes beyond just things like the McNabb trade, or even a low priority on the draft like Gibbs had. Don't get me wrong, I think those are both contributors to our failure over this time. And I'd add to that the philosophy of this front office that the grass is always greener with free agents, and we see a continuation of this with the signing of Lauvao instead of playing LeRib / Long, and the playing of Chester over the other. But we should have known more about a guy like Dockery being quality or not without cutting him because he didn't fit our new scheme. We should have been able to develop Rinehart like Indy and SD did. McIntosh was a young player when we let him go. Same goes for Jackson, HB Blades, Betts, Rock, and a number of other lesser known players who could have had their times extended had coaches not been so quick to bring in their own guys.

[Voice_of_Reason]

I think that the problem is not that the 'Skins haven't drafted well recently, it's that they are getting virtually NOTHING from the drafts from 2007 through 2009.  Those players should be in their prime, 5-8 years experience, players between the ages of 27-31, which is generally the prime age for most players in the league.  Teams that are really good will have solid contributors if not blue chip players from these drafts as cornerstones of their franchises.

 

0 players remain from the 2007 draft (5 picks).  (Landry, Sartz (who?), HB Blades, Jordan Palmer (I forgot about that pick), Tyler Eckert. I believe only Landry is even still in the league, and he's just been busted for Roids.

These guys are probably at their peak now. 

 

0 players remain from the Draft Never to be Mentioned. Devin Thomas, Fred Davis, the player never to be named, Rinehart, Tryon, Durant Brooks, Kareem Moore, Colt Brennan, Rob Jackson, Chris Horton.  I think Rinehart has caught on somewhere, but I think that's about it.  

 

1 player from the 2009 draft (7 picks): Orakpo, Kevin Barns, Cody Glenn, Robert Henson, Eddie Williams, Marko Mitchel. Jarmon was also selected, which cost the team a 2010 3rd.  Orakpo is the only guy from this draft who is on the team, and he probably is in the last year with the 'Skins.  If he leaves next year, that will take the 2009 draft to 0 players.

 

Enter Shanahan/Allen.  Things improve somewhat:

 

2010: 2 players, and starters out of 6 picks, though they had only a 1, 4, 2 6ths, and 3 7ths becasue of the Jarmon suppliemental draft pick, the McNabb trade and the 5th went for somebody else.  But Trent Williams and Perry Riley are the only 2 on the team.

Now, Williams is a stud, and Riley is a starter (though he couldn't cover a bed with a sheet. 

 

2011: 6 out of 12 picks are still on the team: Kerrigan *, Jenkins *, Hankerson *, Helu *, Gomes, (Swiss Army) Niles Paul*, Royster, Aldrick Robinson, Brandyn Thompson, Maurice Hurt, Markus White, Chris Neild*.  Though 2 of the picks, Hank and Neild are on PUP and IR respectively.  They did get something out of Royster for a few years, so probably got something out of that 6th round pick.  

 

2012: 7 out out of 9 picks are still on the roster: Griffin*, Ribs*, Cousins*, Robinson*, Gettis, Morris*, Compton*, Crawford*, Bernstein.  

Griffin had the remarkable rookie season, but got hurt, and the book is still out on him.  Ribs spent a year out of shape, and we'll see. Cousins looks like a capable backup, maybe starter, who knows.  Robinson and Morris are great late round finds.  Compton provides some depth, and Crawford was just re-signed.

 

If the 2013 draft turns out like the 2012 draft, and they put 3 or 4 more of those together, then they'll be in good shape in a few years.

 

The problem is currently that they've gotten NOTHING out of drafts prior to 2010, and the 2010 draft, they only got 2 guys.

 

The core of your team, the blue chip players entering their prime, the 5-7 year guys, they would have come from those drafts.  To get nothing from them is why the 'Skins are where they are.  

[chipwhich]

Exactly.

I think the problem with us is goes beyond just things like the McNabb trade, or even a low priority on the draft like Gibbs had. Don't get me wrong, I think those are both contributors to our failure over this time. And I'd add to that the philosophy of this front office that the grass is always greener with free agents, and we see a continuation of this with the signing of Lauvao instead of playing LeRib / Long, and the playing of Chester over the other. But we should have known more about a guy like Dockery being quality or not without cutting him because he didn't fit our new scheme. We should have been able to develop Rinehart like Indy and SD did. McIntosh was a young player when we let him go. Same goes for Jackson, HB Blades, Betts, Rock, and a number of other lesser known players who could have had their times extended had coaches not been so quick to bring in their own guys.

 

You are just arguing my point for me that Bruce Allen is a failure.  This years roster assembly is a consolidation of all of the issues from the past.

[dsciambi]

I think that the problem is not that the 'Skins haven't drafted well recently, it's that they are getting virtually NOTHING from the drafts from 2007 through 2009.  Those players should be in their prime, 5-8 years experience, players between the ages of 27-31, which is generally the prime age for most players in the league.  Teams that are really good will have solid contributors if not blue chip players from these drafts as cornerstones of their franchises.

 

I don't know if you can hold the 2009 draft against the Redskins. Go back and look at it. It was an abysmal draft for every NFL team. Seriously, it's got to be the worst draft class the NFL has ever had.

[Thinking Skins]

You are just arguing my point for me that Bruce Allen is a failure.  This years roster assembly is a consolidation of all of the issues from the past.

Thats where I disagree with you. I'm putting the failure on the Skins organization for the past 15 years. Yeah, Bruce has a part of that, but I'm more mad at Shanny for simply getting rid of every player from before he got here. I think Bruce signed off on that, but that its a Shanny move. I fault Bruce (and the scouting dept) more for not having quality drafts with the picks we've had, as well as he and Shanny being responsible for the bad trades. But I give Bruce credit that we've taken a stronger approach towards the draft recently.

Like Murphy or not, he was able to get the guy many wanted with our original second rounder (Moses) in the third and got a freebie in Long. Those are the kind of teams that he needs to continue making to build this team.

 

Washington has now selected 36 players in the past four drafts, the franchise’s largest four-year total since the institution of the seven-round draft in 1994. The team last posted a four-year total of 36 across the 1991-94 NFL Drafts, a time frame which included two 12-round drafts, one eight-round draft and one seven-round draft.

And if we're going to criticise Allen and the front office for the RG3 trade and the McNabb trade (which was bad), then we need to give credit for

- trading McNabb for a sixth rounder (wound up being Morris)

- The pos-RG3 trades that gave us players like Robinson and Compton (to go along with Cousins and Morris)

- Trading a second rounder down 3 times to get a bunch of other picks that wind up being Hankerson, Gomes, Helu, Hurt, and Robinson.

- Trading Kevin Barnes for a conditional draft pick

That's off the top of my mind, but I'm sure there are some more. I'm definitely not saying that Allen is without flaw, but it is nice to see us at least looking respectable in this regard. We actually value the draft. And as we improve our scouts (as many have said - that's not Allen's specialty), and improve on Campbell and Brown (and now Brown's replacement), hopefully we'll get better in this regard.

[Voice_of_Reason]

I'm still not sold that the RGIII trade was bad. It cost them 3 players, and maybe they hit on a couple picks and get a few starters.  but they still wouldn't have a QB.  And the caveat to that point is that I still believe that Robert has it in him to be a franchise QB.  I think he's got to stay healthy, but if he does, he'll be fine.  I could be wrong about that.  Hope I'm not.  If I am, he'll go down as a huge bust, even with the spectacular rookie season.  

 

And I'm the only person in the universe that completely understands what Shanahan/Allen were thinking when they made the McNabb trade.  I wouldn't have done it, but McNabb was coming off of 2 pretty good years, in 2009 he played 14 games, 3553 yards, 22 TDs, 10 INTs, 92.9 QB Rating.  2008 he played 16 games, 3916 yards (his career high), 23 TD, 11 INTs, 86.4 rating.  Nothing to really indicate he was completely and totally done.  

 

The other QBs on the market were Rex Grossman, Matt Moore, Derek Anderson, Kyle Orton, Marc Bulger, Chad Pennington, Jake Delhomme, Marc Bulger, Charlie Batch.

 

So, when Shanahan was looking at who was going to be able to play and keep the team competitive during a rebuild, the best of any of those guys was clearly McNabb, without the benefit of hindsight.  He also had the mobility that Shanahan liked in his QBs.  It looked like a pretty good fit.

 

It wasn't.  In the end it turned into a catastrophe of epic proportions.  McNabb had completely lost interest, wasn't coachable, didn't learn the playbook, and was just generally a miscreant.  

 

Hindsight being 20/20, the best thing to have done was probably keep JC and sign Rex Grossman, and just concede the season.  

 

Shrug. I wouldn't have made that particular trade, but I also completely understand that of all the available options, they all stunk like last weeks trash.  

[Thinking Skins]

The McNabb trade could have been for Shanny what the Brunell trade was for Gibbs. I mean, in both situations we had QBs under the previous regime who we weren't sold on: Ramsey and Cambell. Brunell was for a third and McNabb was for a third and a 6th. Problem is that at least Gibbs had done some kind of scouting on Brunell or knew that he could work with the guy, and didn't wind up benching Brunell because they couldn't get along. The years of production we got out of Brunell made the trade sting less, although as many pointed out - jacksonville was going to cut Brunell and we could have gotten him (or another QB of similar pedigree) for nothing at all.

 

I think people are way too harsh on the RG3 trade though. I keep pointing to what we did as a previous regime because we were getting EMBARASSED in trades under Vinny.

 - Brunell trade

 - Champ / Portis trade (extra SECOND rounder?)

 - Trade a pick for JAMES THRASH?

 - A THIRD for Brandon Lloyd (who we subsequently didn't use

 - A THIRD AND A FOURTH for TJ Duckett (WHO??)

 - A pick for ERASMUS JAMES?

 - A SECOND ROUNDER for Jason Taylor?

 

That's a lot of prime picks to be giving up for players who did almost nothing for us.

 

I was a fan of keeping Campbell and letting him learn under Shanny, but I could understand letting him go. I wouldn't have minded just bringing in Grossman (who himself had a decent resume at the time) and just doing a rebuilding year like we wound up doing in 2011. But they went for the quick fix.

 

The RG3 trade was costly in terms of high picks as well. And if we would have known beforehand that, say Allen and Shanny would have taken a Russell Wilson over a Tannehill or Weeden, or even Cousins. But hindsight is 20/20. I was definitely on the RG3 bandwagon and felt (feel) like its going to pay off, and judged it as different than the trades of the past because we were trading for a young franchise QB, which is the single most important position on the field, and he had the chance to turn the whole franchise around for the next 10-15 years. If you look at what we were able to do With Champ, Lavar and Samuels - even with three high picks at three of the four arguably most important positions, we still were a bad team. So I was glad to see us try this out.

[TheLongshot]

I'm still not sold that the RGIII trade was bad. It cost them 3 players, and maybe they hit on a couple picks and get a few starters.  but they still wouldn't have a QB.  And the caveat to that point is that I still believe that Robert has it in him to be a franchise QB.  I think he's got to stay healthy, but if he does, he'll be fine.  I could be wrong about that.  Hope I'm not.  If I am, he'll go down as a huge bust, even with the spectacular rookie season.  

 

And I'm the only person in the universe that completely understands what Shanahan/Allen were thinking when they made the McNabb trade.  I wouldn't have done it, but McNabb was coming off of 2 pretty good years, in 2009 he played 14 games, 3553 yards, 22 TDs, 10 INTs, 92.9 QB Rating.  2008 he played 16 games, 3916 yards (his career high), 23 TD, 11 INTs, 86.4 rating.  Nothing to really indicate he was completely and totally done.  

 

The other QBs on the market were Rex Grossman, Matt Moore, Derek Anderson, Kyle Orton, Marc Bulger, Chad Pennington, Jake Delhomme, Marc Bulger, Charlie Batch.

 

So, when Shanahan was looking at who was going to be able to play and keep the team competitive during a rebuild, the best of any of those guys was clearly McNabb, without the benefit of hindsight.  He also had the mobility that Shanahan liked in his QBs.  It looked like a pretty good fit.

 

It wasn't.  In the end it turned into a catastrophe of epic proportions.  McNabb had completely lost interest, wasn't coachable, didn't learn the playbook, and was just generally a miscreant.  

 

Hindsight being 20/20, the best thing to have done was probably keep JC and sign Rex Grossman, and just concede the season.  

 

Shrug. I wouldn't have made that particular trade, but I also completely understand that of all the available options, they all stunk like last weeks trash.  

 

Well, about the RG3 trade, the choice you need to think about is that would you rather have RG3, or Ryan Tannehill and the picks?  Not really an easy thing to think about.  Obviously, the team had to pick a QB after the mess they had, and I couldn't see them using their first pick on anything other than a QB.  Trading up was expensive, but they had to get someone they liked.  Problem is, Shanahan's record at developing QBs is not that great, and looking back on it, I was disappointed in how they treated RG3 with some very short term thinking.

 

I understand what they were going with with McNabb, and maybe if the team was just a QB away from being successful, maybe I could have gotten behind it, but after Zorn and Vinny, the roster was a mess.  The OL needed a complete rebuild and way too many parts were old and over the hill.  Given that, it probably would have been better to have Campbell and Grossman fight it out while you rebuilt the core of the team for the time when it was ready to get that guy at QB.  Instead, we are still waiting for the OL to get rebuilt.  That being said, Bruce did seem to make it a priority by drafting a couple of guys in the third round to be the future.  While it doesn't help this year, it does give me hope for the future.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

Had we torn it down and rebuilt in 2010, there's a very good chance we're drafting #2 in 2012. Keep in mind that 2010 and 2011 were VERY strong drafts.

 

Imagine a 2010 draft where we take Trent Williams, Carlos Dunlap, and Jimmy Graham? We go 6-10 with Campbell and Grossman and get the #10 pick.

Then a 2011 where we take J.J Watt, Torrey Smith and Justin Houston. We go 3-13 because the first year buys us a stronger schedule and a full rebuild would have gutted our talent (no Cofield, Bowen, Hall, maybe no Fletcher, maybe Carriker because he's cheap but that's it)

Then 2012 we draft RGIII, Cordy Glenn, and Donald Stephenson.

 

these are just the top 3 picks btw.

 

This is sort of a hindsight draft but it's just to show the kind of position we'd be in if we had rebuilt the right way in 2010.

 

Mike Shanahan screwed this franchise in so many ways it's not even funny.

[RedBeast]

What I don't understand is that winning equals more money for the owner. More seats, more jerseys, more concessions, more everything. So why do we not have THE BEST scouting team in the league? I mean seriously. There are no "scouting dept." cap rules. How many we can have, or how much we can pay. Why dont we hire a very competent department and hold them accountable?

 

It's like the same thing with the fields, indoor practice bubble, staph infections in the locker room, workout room, cafeteria/food, medical staff, etc...What the hell took them so long to get those things improved/fixed/replaced? Running all of those support functions at low budget just screams cheap.

 

If you are going to do it? DO IT RIGHT. Go all out. Hell the money we paid Fat Albert alone could have greatly improved some of those amenities. Or built one hell of a scouting department. I would think Dan (not necessarily blaming him, but kinda I guess) would have gotten sick of this by now and said "Damn it. I want everything done right. No more short cuts. Build this organization into the best damn franchise on the planet. Now get it done"

 

Hell I would have said that 10 years ago...but I just dont have the bank to back that type of statement!

[abdcskins]

 - Brunell trade

 - Champ / Portis trade (extra SECOND rounder?)

 - Trade a pick for JAMES THRASH?

 - A THIRD for Brandon Lloyd (who we subsequently didn't use

 - A THIRD AND A FOURTH for TJ Duckett (WHO??)

 - A pick for ERASMUS JAMES?

 - A SECOND ROUNDER for Jason Taylor?

 

 

So so so true.

 

That TJ Duckett trade has to be the worst in the history of football.

 

Redskins don't value draft picks.  And that's why we have no depth and suck.

[TheLongshot]

So so so true.

 

That TJ Duckett trade has to be the worst in the history of football.

 

Redskins don't value draft picks.  And that's why we have no depth and suck.

 

Unfortunately, the Duckett trade was mostly on Gibbs.  It was a panic move on his part.  Even his running backs coach didn't want the trade.

[abdcskins]

Unfortunately, the Duckett trade was mostly on Gibbs.  It was a panic move on his part.  Even his running backs coach didn't want the trade.

 

Yeah, I rememeber that.  Someone got hurt, pretty sure it was Portis yeah?  And we had a perfectly good backup (Ladell Betts I'm pretty sure).  I remember thinking wow was that really necessary?  Then Duckett never played.

 

Redskins just waste draft picks.  McNabb, RG3....the list goes on and on.  Regardless of what you think about those players, you have to admit we treat draft picks like candy.  Those are valuable things we are giving away.  And we typically get garbage in return.

[NewCliche21]

Unfortunately, the Duckett trade was mostly on Gibbs.  It was a panic move on his part.  Even his running backs coach didn't want the trade.

 

I heard that a big part of it was to make sure that he didn't go to another division team.

[Voice_of_Reason]

Well, about the RG3 trade, the choice you need to think about is that would you rather have RG3, or Ryan Tannehill and the picks?  Not really an easy thing to think about.  Obviously, the team had to pick a QB after the mess they had, and I couldn't see them using their first pick on anything other than a QB.  Trading up was expensive, but they had to get someone they liked.  Problem is, Shanahan's record at developing QBs is not that great, and looking back on it, I was disappointed in how they treated RG3 with some very short term thinking.

 

I understand what they were going with with McNabb, and maybe if the team was just a QB away from being successful, maybe I could have gotten behind it, but after Zorn and Vinny, the roster was a mess.  The OL needed a complete rebuild and way too many parts were old and over the hill.  Given that, it probably would have been better to have Campbell and Grossman fight it out while you rebuilt the core of the team for the time when it was ready to get that guy at QB.  Instead, we are still waiting for the OL to get rebuilt.  That being said, Bruce did seem to make it a priority by drafting a couple of guys in the third round to be the future.  While it doesn't help this year, it does give me hope for the future.

I'd take Ryan Tannehill's wife + the picks we gave up.  

 

And again, hindsight being what it is, they might have been able to not use the first pick on a QB, and get Cousins or Wilson later.  I believe that it came out that Shanahan really liked Wilson also.   Would I take Wilson + the picks?  Sure.  Did I know that back then? Absolutely not.

 

Still, I'm ok with the RGIII trade.  Unless the team/him are determined to have him be a 1 dimensional player. In which case it was a complete waste.

 

I also was never as down on JC as others were. I didn't love trading up to pick him, but that said, I think when surrounded by reasonable talent, he was "ok." Not great.  Maybe not even good.  But ok.  

 

When Shanahan was hired, I immediately thought that we were in a 2 year rebuilding mode anyway, and there was only 1 QB of note in the 2010 draft, which was Bradford, and we couldn't get him.  So, build as much as you can from the inside out, and then get the QB later.  I was all in for stinking for a couple years if they acquired players well.  And Grossman/JC would have been fine caretakers for the team to go 6-10 and 5-11, which is what they did anyway. 

[Thinking Skins]

My only ONLY problem with Jason Campbell is that if we wanted a QB we should have taken Rodgers instead of Rogers. I thought Campbell was a bronze metal when the top two QBs in the draft were Smith and Rodgers and Rodgers fell into our lap. Part of me believed that Gibbs wanted Rodgers too and if he had gotten past GB that he would have taken Rodgers instead of Campbell, but I may just be revising history to make Gibbs look better because IMO thats kinda a black eye for his drafting.

[Taylor703]

My only ONLY problem with Jason Campbell is that if we wanted a QB we should have taken Rodgers instead of Rogers. I thought Campbell was a bronze metal when the top two QBs in the draft were Smith and Rodgers and Rodgers fell into our lap. Part of me believed that Gibbs wanted Rodgers too and if he had gotten past GB that he would have taken Rodgers instead of Campbell, but I may just be revising history to make Gibbs look better because IMO thats kinda a black eye for his drafting.

Didn't we make the trade to 25 after Gibbs attended the auburn pro day to see carlos Rogers and then fell in love with Campbell? I'm fairly certain we would've picked Campbell even if Rodgers was there...

[Thinking Skins]

Didn't we make the trade to 25 after Gibbs attended the auburn pro day to see carlos Rogers and then fell in love with Campbell? I'm fairly certain we would've picked Campbell even if Rodgers was there...

Yeah, probably. I just don't want to believe it.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

What I don't understand is that winning equals more money for the owner. More seats, more jerseys, more concessions, more everything. So why do we not have THE BEST scouting team in the league? I mean seriously. There are no "scouting dept." cap rules. How many we can have, or how much we can pay. Why dont we hire a very competent department and hold them accountable?

 

Dan really isn't a good manager so he hires people to do it for him. But if you're not good at something, how can you identify who else is? A good organizational president is the beating heart of a business - no matter how much money you throw at somethign, a bad leadership structure is like having a heart with clogged arteries - more blood isn't going to make the circulation more efficient right?

 

 

That's why you get Vinny, then Marty running the show (Marty is a great great coach but Marty with full control likely ends in disaster), Spurrier didn't give a ****, Gibbs, really the same deal as Marty except better (Imagine if we sign Brees that year instead of trading for Bruinell, oh my god, and we were possibly a dropped Carlos Rogers pick 6 from playing for the title as it was, great coach but bad personnel guy), then the Zorn/Vinny show. Bruce Allen is the first guy he's brought in that is a true, professional, manager/administrator that every good organization needs, regardless of who's picking the players. We just need to find some kind of "Director of Player Personnel" from the Seahawks or Ravens or Steelers or Eagles (i hate that the eagles draft so ****ing well)  and have him focus 100% on getting the players.

 

Bruce Allen on paper was a good candidate - lots of experience with dysfunctional franchises and still managing to win, family history, excellent at cap management and financials, excellent at day to day management. How we got through Capgate was nothing short of miraclulous. He's just not a great personnel guy, average at best, but we need better than average.