Poll: Draft Grade?

[champ2424us]

Big Big B

[roboas]

this draft should have been idiot proof with us picking early (because we suck) but from Rogers on, we blew it. WHY didn't we get that reciever out of hampton? This is nuts. Plus we have about 6 guys on the roster that are potential H-backs, but nobody that actually is one, so I can't see why we keep trying to make them.

How about replacing a thin O line?

[SkinFaninOKC]

I gave the draft a C. I am happy we got one of the Top 3 corners but I am disappointed in the Campbell pick. The offense needed some help elsewhere. Like WR and OL.

The LB from Louisville, McCune, was a steal IMO. He is mature and will make the team AND see bunches of playing time.

The FB from UCLA was a decent pick too.

I do hope in the 7th Gibbs and Co. draft an O-lineman.

[herrmag]

Originally posted by skin-n-vegas

At a minimum, so far it's a B.

You are incorrect on all points and you show that you are actually comparable to a dead blade of grass or possibly a bowl of hair in your football IQ.

That;s my opinion of your opinion.

I see you have now added enough posts to upgrade you to rookie.

Can you point out 5 specifics of positive or even neutral posts to us that would prove that you arent simply a troll?

Seems to me he was representing his opinion of the draft. Not sure why you feel the need to attack him, but ok, might as well attack me too. I agree with him on pretty much every point that he made. Especially the Rogers pick. He is a GOOD pick at #9, but with Williams still on the board, it was a mistake.

[DJCrash34]

I'd give us a B-

I like picking Rogers with the 9, even though I was torn between Williams and him. As far as Campbell I'm still in shock I thought for sure we would go WR or DE at 25, but I like our pick up of McCune in the 5th. The pricetag for him won't be bad and he has a shot to come in and contribute right away next year

[jimster]

Originally posted by Gibbs4Life

I got a better idea lets draft players on the basis of need and not guys that will sit on the sideline. that would be great.

If you rely on drafted players to all be immediate starters on your team, you're not going to have a very good team.

[SkinFaninOKC]

Originally posted by herrmag

Seems to me he was representing his opinion of the draft. Not sure why you feel the need to attack him, but ok, might as well attack me too. I agree with him on pretty much every point that he made. Especially the Rogers pick. He is a GOOD pick at #9, but with Williams still on the board, it was a mistake.

I am glad Rogers was drafted over Williams. The CB issue was addressed and there were enough WR's that Williams didn't matter. Too bad we didn't draft Roddy White at #25. Sometimes the best player available isn't the best pick for a team with other needs.

[BlitzFiftySix]

The reason I posted this poll was to silence all those who were blasting some us "chicken little's" who didn't feel all warm and fuzzy about the draft.

I'm glad to see that after almost 100 votes 44 have the opinion that the draft was below expectation and only 29 feel as though the draft was a success. 24 being in the middle.

[roboas]

another FB? We need to get RID of this archaic offense and build something that works, not put in the single wing.

[MumboSauce]

gave it a C..some good picks..but not much improvement or help for this season. I might venture as far as a C+ if that were an option. Just kinda wish they went for a DT or DE ..or even a TE. oh well. Gibbs and Williams dream, eat, sleep and everything else football so I trust what they are doing here, it's thier job/livelyhood.

[omerwig]

I gave it a D, and I think that I was being generous. Passing on Mike Williams was the dumbest thing I've seen since Ditka traded away his whole draft for Ricky Williams...granted, that was good for us but horrible for the Saints. We could've had the best WR in the draft and grabbed someone like Marlin Jackson at #25. Trading next years' first rounder for a gamble like Cambell (rhyme unintended) is freakin' ridiculous.

[xe101]

I am very confused... I did not think that the draft would go in this manner... what a way to go... DAM... very confused I am... Help me understand why there was no picks used for O-lineman???

[Buck812]

Originally posted by omerwig

I gave it a D, and I think that I was being generous. Passing on Mike Williams was the dumbest thing I've seen since Ditka traded away his whole draft for Ricky Williams...granted, that was good for us but horrible for the Saints. We could've had the best WR in the draft and grabbed someone like Marlin Jackson at #25. Trading next years' first rounder for a gamble like Cambell (rhyme unintended) is freakin' ridiculous.

I couldnt of said it better myself

[The Sisko]

The Rogers/McCune picks are perhaps the best two we made followed closely by White. Campbell may turn out to be a very productive QB for us as well.

I'd have to give it a solid B.

[flexxskins]

I had us at c- but now that we have just picked up Nehemiah Broughton I have us at B+.

[omerwig]

Originally posted by flexxskins

I had us at c- but now that we have just picked up Nehemiah Broughton I have us at B+.

Yeah, great. Another fullback. Yaaaayy....

[W. Unseld]

I give the first day a "D." I have not had an opportunity to examine the second day picks. Here is why I gave the first day a "D"--even though I was fine w/the Carlos Rogers pick. The Campbell pick bugs me because of how it was done. I don't know that Campbell won't be the next saviour but I do know that:

1. There was no reason to make that trade before draft day. What happens if you make that trade and your guys isn't there? People actually defended the Skins and said that Campbell was a smokescreen b/c no one would be dumb enough to make that trade before draft day.

2. Campbell was projected to go in the second round. This is a lesser complaint b/c this can't be predicted but everything I read had him in the middle to bottom of the second round and it would have been much cheaper to trade up to the second round. Again, the bigger complaint is not doing this trade on draft day.

3. Trade value: We have 4 qb's now. Hasselback had some value before yesterday, it's less now that everyone knows we have to dump him.

4. If Hasselback is a decent back up (and he is, at least other NFL personel think so) why trade 3 picks to get your back up qb??? You could have easily waited a year or even a couple of rounds to groom a guy as a quarterback.

That's my dos centavos. I'm a HUGE skins fan but I don't blindly call everything a victory like some politic for the dems or the republicans. I think day one was Bill Walton horrrrrible based on the second pick, what was given up for it and most of all how it was handled.

[celj]

c-

[Thiebear]

So is your name like "Tiny" when the guy is 6'7 400pds.

Gibbs4Life and you cant wait one day till after the draft to destroy it?

What has Gibbs said about all the players drafted vs. the current players and the future of all of them together?

[Ron Mexico]

Originally posted by skin-n-vegas

At a minimum, so far it's a B.

You are incorrect on all points and you show that you are actually comparable to a dead blade of grass or possibly a bowl of hair in your football IQ.

That;s my opinion of your opinion.

I see you have now added enough posts to upgrade you to rookie.

Can you point out 5 specifics of positive or even neutral posts to us that would prove that you arent simply a troll?

First of all, you can't judge someone's opinion off of how many posts they have. You might have a million posts but it doesn't mean that your opinion weighs more, or that you have more knowledge than anyone else, it just means you have known about this site longer or that you have stated your opinion more frequently. That being said I love the redskins as much as anyone here but I too think that some poor selections were made in this draft (2 fullbacks) come on? Do we really need to upgrade our special teams through the draft, isnt that what free agency and undrafted rookies are for? Anyone think common sense would tell someone in charge to perhaps pick a D lineman with one of our picks? Some people on this site need to understand that just because you criticize your teams picks doesnt mean that you arent loyal or that you arent a "real fan" it just means that you care about what happens with your team. That's what being a "real fan" is all about.

That being said C-

[SonnyRules]

Half the picks, I liked. The other half, I didn't.

Grade "C+"

:point2sky

[coachreiter]

Not only would I give a grade D, but it is somewhat inexplicable to me. Picking Carlos Rodgers at 9 was a safe pick, nothing eye opening but necessary. Why would we sacrifice a number of picks to move up to 25 and select a quarterback when we have more pressing needs? What is so special about Cambell? We have a young and progressing starter, a mature (OK, too mature) vet and another youngster who won't shine but seemed to be servicable in his brief stints on the field. I thought we were going to pick-up a fast defensive end as ours are aging, but no, FBs are more important? I was here for Gibbs first go-round, so I have to presume he knows what he is doing, but I just can't see it with these picks.

[Prosperity]

B-

if you would have asked me this morning I would have said D, but looking back on it I have to say that all of our picks made sense and none were obvious mistakes.

This was a solid draft. With our #9 we went with our obvious need at CB because of the departure of Smoot. Even though Pac Man was gone I think Carlos Rodgers is a very good CB prospect. He may not have the speed that Pac Man had but he has better size and won't committ as many personal fouls.

The #25 pick will be the most controversial because of how much we gave up for it. A 1st and 4th next year with this year's 3rd was a little much for a player who won't contribute immediately, but if FO office thought that Campbell was special enough to be our #2 QB (or #1 in the future) then I will trust them until I am proven wrong.

Our late picks were less important but they did address our need at LB and a short yard back. I also have a feeling the McCune will turn out to be a good football player.

[omerwig]

Originally posted by coachreiter

Not only would I give a grade D, but it is somewhat inexplicable to me. Picking Carlos Rodgers at 9 was a safe pick, nothing eye opening but necessary. Why would we sacrifice a number of picks to move up to 25 and select a quarterback when we have more pressing needs? What is so special about Cambell? We have a young and progressing starter, a mature (OK, too mature) vet and another youngster who won't shine but seemed to be servicable in his brief stints on the field. I thought we were going to pick-up a fast defensive end as ours are aging, but no, FBs are more important? I was here for Gibbs first go-round, so I have to presume he knows what he is doing, but I just can't see it with these picks.

I totally agree. Rodgers was a great corner in college, but did he warrant the 9th pick when Mike Williams was available? We have a need at WR too, and he's clearly a playmaker. With the speed of Moss and the size of Williams, Ramsey would've had a pair of great go-to weapons...not to mention Chris Cooley. Opening up the air attack and having a healthy offensive line back would mean more big runs for Portis. Walt Harris played well last year, and having Sean Taylor back there makes the entire defensive backfield better. We could've settled for a corner like Marlin Jackson (Mich) or Corey Webster (LSU) rather than trade a future 1st rounder for a QB with "potential." I personally think that Ramsey has what it takes to be the man in DC. I lived in New Orleans while Ramsey QB'd for Tulane and I've watched him pick apart defenses in real life. I now live in LA and have personally watched Mike Williams make corners look like idiots. So I think the whole draft was wasted.

[ATCRedskin82]

Great that we stayed away from the super sexy picks as they like to call them. We filled some needs, but obviously some of the picks will be a work in progress so who knows. I give the skins draft a solid C.