Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;882449]All of that's true but none of that means that they weren't necessarily still the best team in the AFC. By the end of the season, the Texans defense was almost surely the premier defense in the conference, and that whole limping in thing happened, in large part, because Andre Johnson was limping.

As well as the Schaub thing. The debate as to who is more important to the Texans was not solved. But if you had thought before that Arian Foster was just reaping the benefits of Schaub/Johnson, that was proven wrong.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, that must be it. I mean, Johnson was a non-factor all year, but it didn't matter until the end of the year. They were the top seed and cruising until Schaub went down and once he did they couldn't beat Indy and Jacksonville. But that's a coincindence.

I've been through arguments with guys like you before. Every Super Bowl is being won by franchise QBs. Most are lost by franchise QBs. Most divisions are won by the teams with the best QBs.
Bad defenses, bad lines, bad special teams, bad running games. They have all won SBs lately.

But you're gonna tiwst yourself around to come up with excuses for it. Non franchise QBs who coulda/woulda/shoulda won the title. Oh, it almost happened. It will happen. They wuz robbed. etc etc.

Well, have at it. I think it's ridiculous, but keep fighting that fight, brother.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=biffle;882464]Yeah, that must be it. I mean, Johnson was a non-factor all year, but it didn't matter until the end of the year. They were the top seed and cruising until Schaub went down and once he did they couldn't beat Indy and Jacksonville. But that's a coincindence.

I've been through arguments with guys like you before. Every Super Bowl is being won by franchise QBs. Most are lost by franchise QBs. Most divisions are won by the teams with the best QBs.
Bad defenses, bad lines, bad special teams, bad running games. They have all won SBs lately.

But you're gonna tiwst yourself around to come up with excuses for it. Non franchise QBs who coulda/woulda/shoulda won the title. Oh, it almost happened. It will happen. They wuz robbed. etc etc.

Well, have at it. I think it's ridiculous, but keep fighting that fight, brother.[/quote]Look, to put it politely, you don't know what you are talking about.

There's a reason the best quarterbacks win a lot of games and populate the playoff field. It has nothing to do with why you think it does. When two quarterbacks play in the super bowl and the second best quarterback wins, it makes your argument bunk. The second best quarterback in this super bowl won it. The second best quarterback two years ago won it. The second best quarterback three years ago won it. The second best quarterback four years ago won it.

Obviously, there's something there as to why Tom Brady has lost two super bowls to Eli Manning, but beat Kurt Warner in one. Some would even suggest that just maybe, other players on the field matter.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=GTripp0012;882478]Look, to put it politely, you don't know what you are talking about.

There's a reason the best quarterbacks win a lot of games and populate the playoff field. It has nothing to do with why you think it does. When two quarterbacks play in the super bowl and the second best quarterback wins, it makes your argument bunk. The second best quarterback in this super bowl won it. The second best quarterback two years ago won it. The second best quarterback three years ago won it. The second best quarterback four years ago won it.

Obviously, there's something there as to why Tom Brady has lost two super bowls to Eli Manning, but beat Kurt Warner in one. Some would even suggest that just maybe, other players on the field matter.[/quote]

Yeah, none of that really has anything to do with anything.

Don't worry, man. One of these years a team without a franchise QB will win a Super Bowl again, and then at least you'll have something to crow about while you're pretending that franchise QBs aren't really that important.

It'll happen. You just have to wait. Keep the faith.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=biffle;882480]Yeah, none of that really has anything to do with anything.

Don't worry, man. One of these years a team without a franchise QB will win a Super Bowl again, and then at least you'll have something to crow about while you're pretending that franchise QBs aren't really that important.

It'll happen. You just have to wait. Keep the faith.[/quote]I don't think a team without a franchise QB will EVER win it again. The reasoning is easy, for those who know how to use it: franchise QB is a meaningless term roughly used on players who have lead their team deep into the playoff or have won super bowls. I mean, think about Eli Manning in 2007. No one knew he was a franchise quarterback. BUT HE WAS!!!!!11!!

So if Joe Flacco's pass to Lee Evans gets caught, BOOM! You call him a franchise quarterback. And the observation holds. T.J. Yates? Franchise quarterback. Mark Sanchez? Franchise quarterback. Alex Smith? Franchise quarterback.

You can do whatever you want with labels. How would you like to be "Einstein?" Labels are meaningless, so I'd have no problem calling you that if you'd like.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=GTripp0012;882485]I don't think a team without a franchise QB will EVER win it again. The reasoning is easy, for those who know how to use it: franchise QB is a meaningless term roughly used on players who have lead their team deep into the playoff or have won super bowls. I mean, think about Eli Manning in 2007. No one knew he was a franchise quarterback. BUT HE WAS!!!!!11!!

So if Joe Flacco's pass to Lee Evans gets caught, BOOM! You call him a franchise quarterback. And the observation holds. T.J. Yates? Franchise quarterback. Mark Sanchez? Franchise quarterback. Alex Smith? Franchise quarterback.

You can do whatever you want with labels. How would you like to be "Einstein?" Labels are meaningless, so I'd have no problem calling you that if you'd like.[/quote]

I'd like you to call me Akbar Shabazz Jenkins-Robinson III.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=EARTHQUAKE2689;882486]I'd like you to call me Akbar Shabazz Jenkins-Robinson III.[/quote]That's too long. How about Shabby?

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=GTripp0012;882487]That's too long. How about Shabby?[/quote]

How about Shabby JR III? Kinda like a rap name.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

I think I'm just going to call you killer.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

or "sport" "captain" "governor" any will do.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=GTripp0012;882485]I don't think a team without a franchise QB will EVER win it again. The reasoning is easy, for those who know how to use it: franchise QB is a meaningless term roughly used on players who have lead their team deep into the playoff or have won super bowls. I mean, think about Eli Manning in 2007. No one knew he was a franchise quarterback. BUT HE WAS!!!!!11!!

So if Joe Flacco's pass to Lee Evans gets caught, BOOM! You call him a franchise quarterback. And the observation holds. T.J. Yates? Franchise quarterback. Mark Sanchez? Franchise quarterback. Alex Smith? Franchise quarterback.

You can do whatever you want with labels. How would you like to be "Einstein?" Labels are meaningless, so I'd have no problem calling you that if you'd like.[/quote]

What's funny is that I think you believe you've made some kind of point here.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

Look Einstein, I have made a point. You may be a lost cause. Or not. I don't know you well, just that you like to typecast people and try to tell them what they think.

Maybe when you're older, we will revisit this, mk?

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=GTripp0012;882496]Look Einstein, I have made a point. You may be a lost cause. Or not. I don't know you well, just that you like to typecast people and try to tell them what they think.

Maybe when you're older, we will revisit this, mk?[/quote]

No you haven't. You've wrapped nonsense in insults and pretended that equals something intelligent.

What you're trying to do is create a situation where you can claim you're right no matter what. As soon as some non-great QB wins a title you'll be screaming "Told ya! Told ya!". But, until then, you'll just claim that the QBs who do win are only considered great [I]because[/I] they won. Wow, look at that. Whatever happens, you're completely hollow argument can't be wrong. How brilliant.

So, go ahead and make an argument why Brady, the Mannings, Brees, Rodgers or Roethlisberger haven't really proven themselves elite. Because that is the whole recent history of title QBs.

That's all that matters. I really don't care what nonsense or what insults you want to attach to it. The facts are there, no matter how much you stomp your feet and stick your fingers in your ears.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=GTripp0012;882478]Look, to put it politely, you don't know what you are talking about.

There's a reason the best quarterbacks win a lot of games and populate the playoff field. It has nothing to do with why you think it does. When two quarterbacks play in the super bowl and the second best quarterback wins, it makes your argument bunk. The second best quarterback in this super bowl won it. The second best quarterback two years ago won it. The second best quarterback three years ago won it. The second best quarterback four years ago won it.

Obviously, there's something there as to why Tom Brady has lost two super bowls to Eli Manning, but beat Kurt Warner in one. [B]Some would even suggest that just maybe, other players on the field matter.[/B][/quote]

Obviously that's very important. For instance, some would argue without the Giants d-line, there's no way they win the SB because their defense is largely predicated on getting pressure, which they were able to do most of the game despite minimal blitzing. I definitely agree with you in that aspect that the rest of the team around the qb is just as important as the qb itself. My whole point re: franchise qb's is that the better the qb, the better your odds of winning the SB, at least in the last 7 years. I think that's a trend that's going to continue in the NFL for a while.

Which is why I don't want a guy who [I]might[/I] be able to get the job done. I want the guy that gives us the best chance of it happening. Whether that's a healthy P. Manning, Luck, RG3, Tannehill, whomever, it doesn't matter. But I honestly don't think Shanny will last here that long if he has to sit Tannehill for a couple of seasons while he learns. We're going into year 3 of the regime. If it looks like we're not improving by the end of year 4, there's no telling what Snyder might do.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

I thought about this OP while watching the game.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=mooby;882506]Which is why I don't want a guy who [I]might[/I] be able to get the job done. I want the guy that gives us the best chance of it happening. Whether that's a healthy P. Manning, Luck, RG3, Tannehill, whomever, it doesn't matter. [B]But I honestly don't think Shanny will last here that long if he has to sit Tannehill for a couple of seasons while he learns.[/B] We're going into year 3 of the regime. If it looks like we're not improving by the end of year 4, there's no telling what Snyder might do.[/quote]

Which is why the two years wasted on McNabb, Rex, and Beck are such a big deal IMO. But I suspect we may be heading in that direction, that of having a 2nd rounder drafted to sit behind a FA QB.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=Ruhskins;882549]Which is why the two years wasted on McNabb, Rex, and Beck are such a big deal IMO. But I suspect we may be heading in that direction, that of having a 2nd rounder drafted to sit behind a FA QB.[/quote]

I'm starting to warm up to that idea too, if that FA qb is a healthy Manning.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;881888]The key to winning in the NFL is having a great pass rush/DL, Good OL, and Good QB. WR's RBs aren't as crucial as your QB is.[/quote]The Skins have all but ignored the DL and OL in the draft for the last 10 years. There's a reason why the Giants and the 49ers are so stout in the trenches - they have invested heavily there for years. If I've said it once, I've said it dozens of times on this board - great teams are built from the inside out. The Snyder Era has clung to a completely opposite draft philosophy, trading away picks on top of that. I would be perfectly happy if two of the first three picks were linemen. The Skins have been the 110 lb weaklings of the NFC East, and it's time to change that!!!

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=skinsfan69;881896]49ers and Texans have an identity. Strong o-line and running game, tough defense. Jim Harbaugh gave the 49ers exactly what they needed... an identity. I think that formula won 3 Super Bowls around here. What's the identity here?????????????? Let Kyle call his silly pass plays with a below average QB and swiss cheese o-line so he can turn the ball over? What's the identity of the defense? This team needs an identity in the worst way.[/quote]

:goodjob:

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=SouperMeister;882679]The Skins have all but ignored the DL and OL in the draft for the last 10 years. There's a reason why the Giants and the 49ers are so stout in the trenches - they have invested heavily there for years. If I've said it once, I've said it dozens of times on this board - great teams are built from the inside out. [B]The Snyder Era has clung to a completely opposite draft philosophy, trading away picks on top of that. [/B] I would be perfectly happy if two of the first three picks were linemen. The Skins have been the 110 lb weaklings of the NFC East, and it's time to change that!!![/quote]

I would disagree and argue that the Snyder Era's primary "draft strategy" was precisely trading away mid- and high-round picks for vets or trade ups. Yes, neglecting the Oline and Dline was a problem, but the team's FO not recognizing the value of having picks was [I]the[/I] largest issue out of many.

[url=http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/was/draft.htm]Washington Redskins All-Time Draft History - Pro-Football-Reference.com[/url]
From 2003 all the way to 2007, our drafts were either lean in number or in "value"(a bunch 6th and 7th rounders aren't going to help that much).

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

The main problem with Snyderatto was they were incredibly terrible at talent evaluation and drafting players period. Regardless of how many picks they gave away or at which potion(s) they concentrated on. The players they did get were awful. The amount of [B][U]quality[/U][/B] starters, and I emphasize 'Quality' starters they drafted was very low. I m not talking about players that started for the Redskins. I am talking about players we drafted that could have started for other teams. Nearly non-existent. Quality and quantity were both an issue, regardless of postilion or quantity of draft picks.
The good teams like Ravens, Texans, Packers, Niners and Patriots have one thing in common, great talent evaluation and great draft classes.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=Defensewins;883143]The main problem with Snyderatto was they were incredibly terrible at talent evaluation and drafting players period. Regardless of how many picks they gave away or at which potion(s) they concentrated on. The players they did get were awful. The amount of [B][U]quality[/U][/B] starters, and I emphasize 'Quality' starters they drafted was very low. I m not talking about players that started for the Redskins. I am talking about players we drafted that could have started for other teams. Nearly non-existent. Quality and quantity were both an issue, regardless of postilion or quantity of draft picks.
[B]The good teams like Ravens, Texans, Packers, Niners and Patriots have one thing in common, great talent evaluation and great draft classes[/B].[/quote]The other thing that they have going for them is their common philosophy to stockpile draft picks, so even if they miss on a few players, when you're drafting 10-12 a year, there is a better chance on hitting on more players. Of course having 10 picks in the 2008 draft resulted in abject failure due to poor talent and character evaluation by Vinny. Having top-notch talent evaluators is the most important factor, and the book is still out on Shanny. He had a spotty draft record toward the end of his Denver run.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

Aren't the Giants a model of success? Maybe we can get Oliver Luck to force a trade that will send Andrew to the Skins.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=biffle;882497]So, go ahead and make an argument why Brady, the Mannings, Brees, Rodgers or Roethlisberger haven't really proven themselves elite. Because that is the whole recent history of title QBs.[/quote]There's a wide range of quarterback play in there. From the all-time greats to some guys who sometimes don't even get voted to the pro bowl. The average recent super bowl winning quarterback is usually an excellent player. This surprises no one. Sometimes, it's Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, or a first round pick in the infancy of his career. This surprises just you.

I mean, your Schaub argument kind of said everything I needed to say before. You continue to ignore the seasons that the Texans, Jets, 49ers, or Ravens had this year, even though they disprove the idea that only a team with a Manning, Brady or Rodgers can go deep in the playoffs.

And then you tried to set up a false idea that someday, one of those teams win the super bowl, and then that someone is going to gloat that you're wrong and they are right. My whole idea is: why wait? If you're going to admit that you're going to be proven wrong in the future, I don't see what is so awful about calling you on that after a season where Alex Smith, Joe Flacco, and T.J. Yates won playoff games while Ben Roethlisberger and Aaron Rodgers did not.

I mean, you have just an awful argument.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=mooby;882506]Which is why I don't want a guy who [I]might[/I] be able to get the job done. I want the guy that gives us the best chance of it happening. Whether that's a healthy P. Manning, Luck, RG3, Tannehill, whomever, it doesn't matter. But I honestly don't think Shanny will last here that long if he has to sit Tannehill for a couple of seasons while he learns. We're going into year 3 of the regime. If it looks like we're not improving by the end of year 4, there's no telling what Snyder might do.[/quote]Let me try to rephrase the question: what about guys like Tony Romo and Philip Rivers? San Diego and Dallas are clearly not the deep organizations that Baltimore, Pittsburgh, New York, Philadelphia, and New England are, and that San Francisco and Houston are close to being. With that said, do you have any doubt that those guys can get it done? What about Matt Schaub?

I think there are two ways to look at this conundrum.

1) The idea that you don't know if someone can get it done until they actually do. Eli Manning is trying to save the Giants from a super bowl 42 loss where the Giants score just 10 points against the Patriots, and he throws a ball into the flat that lands right into the hands of Asante Samuel. Eli is who we thought he was. Then Eli escapes a sack, and ends up throwing the game winning touchdown pass. And Eli is who we thought he was! I always knew he could do that!

2) The idea that you do know your guy can get it done, but you realistically understand that not everyone gets the opportunity. When Drew Brees left New Orleans, it seemed certain that Philip Rivers would get first crack at winning the super bowl. But sometimes, circumstances change. And right now, it seems more likely that Brees will get ring No. 2 before Rivers gets to the big game.

But is there any reason to doubt Rivers? 20 INTs and missed the playoffs by a game? Well, last year, Eli threw 25 picks and missed the playoffs by a game. So I'm finding it really hard to doubt Philip Rivers. And while I don't typically have a good pulse on the opinions of the masses, the popular opinion seems to be that Rivers will get his sooner rather than later.

But if he never does, were we wrong to NOT doubt him? That doesn't make sense to me.

Ultimately, I agree with you that the clock is ticking and if you're ever going to get it right, going bold at QB might be your only option. But if it is, it is only because Plans A through G failed already. And the gap between failing spectacularly and failing like the Redskins have been I don't think has ever been smaller.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=Defensewins;883143]The main problem with Snyderatto was they were incredibly terrible at talent evaluation and drafting players period. Regardless of how many picks they gave away or at which potion(s) they concentrated on. The players they did get were awful. The amount of [B][U]quality[/U][/B] starters, and I emphasize 'Quality' starters they drafted was very low. I m not talking about players that started for the Redskins. I am talking about players we drafted that could have started for other teams. Nearly non-existent. Quality and quantity were both an issue, regardless of postilion or quantity of draft picks.
The good teams like Ravens, Texans, Packers, Niners and Patriots have one thing in common, great talent evaluation and great draft classes.[/quote]You cannot discount the importance of draft class size, aka having more picks. Increasing pick quantities softens the blow of a "miss" because you get another chance to pick a "hit". [I]All[/I] the teams you mentioned usually had a bigger number of picks than us for a given year.

You cannot discount the importance of draft position. Draft Position matters because later round prospects generally trash relative to the earlier round ones. Or as an example, having 10 1st rounders is going to net you a better team on average than having 20 7th rounders. Most 6th and 7th rounders WILL FAIL, and we had plenty of picks in the 6th and 7th rounds. Drafting crappy players in the 6th and 7th round is a "natural" part of the biz and not specific to the Redskins. You cannot expect to draft Pro Bowler after Pro Bowler with 7th rounders even with Bill Walsh's ghost assisting you.

Quality starters are usually found in rounds 1-3. We actually weren't [I]that [/I]bad in the first round, but we were virtually nonexistent in rounds 2 and 3(2 especially) for the most part precisely because we did not have picks in those rounds and instead had low round picks, which are usually doomed to failure.

And our 1st rounders being that bad is NOT BS, even if they would have remained mediocre here. JC started in Oakland, Carlos Rogers started in San Fran, Sean(RIP) would have been a great one, Chris Samuels proved his worth for us, Champ was a bargaining chip for a blockbuster trade. Hell, Derrick Dockery got overpaid in Buffalo and Rock Cartwright is still in the league.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=SouperMeister;883146]The other thing that they have going for them is their common philosophy to stockpile draft picks, so even if they miss on a few players, when you're drafting 10-12 a year, there is a better chance on hitting on more players. Of course having 10 picks in the 2008 draft resulted in abject failure due to poor talent and character evaluation by Vinny. Having top-notch talent evaluators is the most important factor, and the book is still out on Shanny. He had a spotty draft record [B]toward the end[/B] of his Denver run.[/quote]
The middle and beginning of his tenure in Denver had worse drafts. 2006 and 2008 were probably his two best drafts in Denver.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;883155]You cannot discount the importance of draft class size, aka having more picks. Increasing pick quantities softens the blow of a "miss" because you get another chance to pick a "hit". [I]All[/I] the teams you mentioned usually had a bigger number of picks than us for a given year.

You cannot discount the importance of draft position. Draft Position matters because later round prospects generally trash relative to the earlier round ones. Or as an example, having 10 1st rounders is going to net you a better team on average than having 20 7th rounders. Most 6th and 7th rounders WILL FAIL, and we had plenty of picks in the 6th and 7th rounds. Drafting crappy players in the 6th and 7th round is a "natural" part of the biz and not specific to the Redskins. You cannot expect to draft Pro Bowler after Pro Bowler with 7th rounders even with Bill Walsh's ghost assisting you.

Quality starters are usually found in rounds 1-3. We actually weren't [I]that [/I]bad in the first round, but we were virtually nonexistent in rounds 2 and 3(2 especially) for the most part precisely because we did not have picks in those rounds and instead had low round picks, which are usually doomed to failure.

And our 1st rounders being that bad is NOT BS, even if they would have remained mediocre here. JC started in Oakland, Carlos Rogers started in San Fran, Sean(RIP) would have been a great one, Chris Samuels proved his worth for us, Champ was a bargaining chip for a blockbuster trade. Hell, Derrick Dockery got overpaid in Buffalo and Rock Cartwright is still in the league.[/quote]

I was not discounting draft position or amount of picks. But if you do not know how to evaluate talent correctly and use the large amount of great picks you can collect, you end up the like the Detroit Lions of 1999 thru 2009, the worst Franchise of that decade. Matt Millen had no prior player development or front office experience before being hired 2001. Vinny Cerratto is boderline retarded. You have to have a good F.O.
More important then having a ton of great picks.

Re: How the 49ers/Texans changed my view on Football and how to build the redskins
 

I am diehard 49ers fan. I talk 49ers all year long and a lot of draft. The thing about the 49ers is that is a team thats been mostly drafted by them.

1 starter on the offense wasnt drafted by them(Jonathon Goodwin)
4 starters on defense werent drafted by them(Justin Smith Carlos Rogers, Ahmed Brooks, Donte Whitner)
and their kicker wasnt drafted by them(David Akers)

so 6/24 starters came from different teams thats pretty damn good in my opinion.

Build through the draft and i am happy to see washington finally having plenty of picks in the draft.