Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=SkinzWin;810778]Or either you are oblivious to everyone else's comments except your own. Nothing is impossible in this league. You have no way of saying with absolute certainty that Beck could not take us to the super bowl. Football is a team sport. Yes the quarterback is important but how many teams have made it deep in the playoffs and even won the super bowl without a franchise QB, and by using a strong defense to get them there?

I guess in the end nothing anyone can say can sway you to your opinion, which you are legitimately entitled to have. However, you are outnumbered greatly in opinion, which most definitely counts for something. I know there is not a whole lot to talk about during the lockout, but this constant back and forth bickering is growing tiresome. Can we just agree to disagree and move on? Unless, of course, everyone else on here enjoys reading these parlays, then I yield of course.[/quote]

I am 21 years old, and since the year I was born in 1989, there have been 22 superbowls. 3 have been won with teams that didn't have a franchise qb, the ravens (dilfer-barely made the playoffs in a weak year, beat a weak team in the sb, and had statistically the greatest defense of all time), bucs (johnson-who was a pro bowler, and had one of the best defenses of all time), and redskins (rypien in the strike year).

More importantly in the last few years, it has become increasingly important to have a qb. With rule changes (physical rules and emphasis of enforcement of rules) that make the game more offensive, as well as the advancement and development of the strategy of the game, within the last 5 years a franchise qb has become more relevant than ever before.

Warren Sapp, a member of one of the 3 outliers I mentioned, said on NFLN that offense is more important than defense, and that a qb is what wins a superbowl.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

I would love to have luck. It would be a terrific future for us. But i would not say by any means that the Redskins future hinges upon one college student. For all we know, Landry Jones or Matt Barkley could be even better. IMO we have utilized this off-season to get young, talented depth, something that has been missing for years now, back to when Joe Gibbs II was in charge.

Our defense is a few pieces away at worst right now, as we have two good OLB's, and have strengthened our defensive linemen. If we add Kris or Cullen Jenkins like rumors are saying, the front 7 goes from a blatant flaw to a talented group with promising upside. Adding OJ Atogwe will do wonders for our secondary, as Landry now has less pressure to make every play. He moves back to SS where he is comfortable and can build on last seasons progress. If all goes well, our only defensive needs next year are ILB and a CB.

On the offensive side, adding Santanio Holmes could be a very big pick-up. He is similar to Santana Moss, but a few years younger, so that he will be around while we start to improve. He and Hankerson could form a really strong combination with Armstrong in the Slot. Cooley and Davis can still contribute largely for this offense. Torain and Helu should form a nice duo of speed and power, like the Giants Jacobs and Bradshaw, and neither are very expensive or old. Parts of the line will still need repair, which can be done over FA these next two years. If all goes well, we can draft our QB of the future some time in the first round next year.

If all goes well, after next year, with the addition of our new QB of the future, I could see us having a 08 Falcons/Ravens or 09 Jets season, with a playoff berth.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=Lotus;810772]I was not joking, I was logical.

It appears that you like logic until it makes your position look bad. When logic makes your position untenable, you ditch it.[/quote]

I really don't know how to respond to that. I don't think your as familiar with logic as you think. Both of your examples had so many holes in them its ridiculous. Also logic isn't tied down to your middle/high school geometry teachings, it gets more complex than that.

For the record, I still think you were joking, there is no way anyone who knows what a syllogism is can fail so badly at their attempts at a modus ponen and a modus tollen.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=cdskins26;810792]I would love to have luck. It would be a terrific future for us. But i would not say by any means that the Redskins future hinges upon one college student. For all we know, Landry Jones or Matt Barkley could be even better. IMO we have utilized this off-season to get young, talented depth, something that has been missing for years now, back to when Joe Gibbs II was in charge.

Our defense is a few pieces away at worst right now, as we have two good OLB's, and have strengthened our defensive linemen. If we add Kris or Cullen Jenkins like rumors are saying, the front 7 goes from a blatant flaw to a talented group with promising upside. Adding OJ Atogwe will do wonders for our secondary, as Landry now has less pressure to make every play. He moves back to SS where he is comfortable and can build on last seasons progress. If all goes well, our only defensive needs next year are ILB and a CB.

On the offensive side, adding Santanio Holmes could be a very big pick-up. He is similar to Santana Moss, but a few years younger, so that he will be around while we start to improve. He and Hankerson could form a really strong combination with Armstrong in the Slot. Cooley and Davis can still contribute largely for this offense. Torain and Helu should form a nice duo of speed and power, like the Giants Jacobs and Bradshaw, and neither are very expensive or old. Parts of the line will still need repair, which can be done over FA these next two years. If all goes well, we can draft our QB of the future some time in the first round next year.

If all goes well, after next year, with the addition of our new QB of the future, I could see us having a 08 Falcons/Ravens or 09 Jets season, with a playoff berth.[/quote]

For all we know, Danny Obrian is the best nfl qb of all time. Its best to go with the odds. The odds say Luck is where its at. And Barkley probably isn't going to come out next year. I doubt he wants to compete against Luck for the number 1 spot.
Also for the record (a side argument that I'm not going to get into, I'll just post links to what I've said previously if you disagree), I don't believe Flacco or Sanchez are truly franchise qbs. Maxing out at getting to the playoffs on strong defense isn't what I have in mind for our team. Offense wins superbowls, and in todays nfl, an offense is no better than its qb that's leading it. (I don't see Chris Johnson, Adrian Peterson, MJD, Larry Fitzgerald, Brandon Marshall, etc... leading any high powered offenses. ) I think Phillip rivers, Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, (younger) Donovan McNabb, (and I'd argue Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, and Big Ben have accomplished this when their teams have injuries, but I don't want to get into that) have proven that all you need is a QB and your offense will always be capable of producing.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

So...back to free agency. I think I agree with Matt Williamson about our defense. We could be a few moves away from having a really good defense. Hopefully the team has been able to learn the new scheme well, and I think it would be great to bring a couple of more veterans who have 3-4 experience.

Also, I do agree with what he said about Shanahan needing to work his offensive coaching magic with the offense, since it is not the most talented group. I think there are a few players in free agency that are worth spending a ton of money on, so he needs to work with what he has.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=skinster;810793]I really don't know how to respond to that. I don't think your as familiar with logic as you think. Both of your examples had so many holes in them its ridiculous. Also logic isn't tied down to your middle/high school geometry teachings, it gets more complex than that.

For the record, I still think you were joking, there is no way anyone who knows what a syllogism is can fail so badly at their attempts at a modus ponen and a modus tollen.[/quote]

There is nothing wrong with my logic. You just don't like the results.

You continue to confuse two different propositions:
A) That Luck is the best choice for a franchise QB in next year's class
and
B) Getting Luck is the only way for us to win

These are two different propositions which should not be confused in the way that you confuse them.

I'm done with this issue.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=skinster;810791]I am 21 years old, and since the year I was born in 1989, there have been 22 superbowls. 3 have been won with teams that didn't have a franchise qb, the ravens (dilfer-barely made the playoffs in a weak year, beat a weak team in the sb, and had statistically the greatest defense of all time), bucs (johnson-who was a pro bowler, and had one of the best defenses of all time), and redskins (rypien in the strike year).

More importantly in the last few years, it has become increasingly important to have a qb. With rule changes (physical rules and emphasis of enforcement of rules) that make the game more offensive, as well as the advancement and development of the strategy of the game, within the last 5 years a franchise qb has become more relevant than ever before.

Warren Sapp, a member of one of the 3 outliers I mentioned, said on NFLN that offense is more important than defense, and that a qb is what wins a superbowl.[/quote]

OF those franchise QB's...........how many were drafted as such?

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

1991 wasn't a strike year.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

Interesting article about a how it would work out (or not) if the Redskins were to get Nnamdi...

[url=http://redskins.espn980.com/bloggers/chris-russell/item/78-will-the-redskins-reel-in-nnamdi]Will the Redskins reel in Nnamdi?[/url]

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

Ok so if we get the Jenkins brothers and start Jarvis Jenkins what shall we call our D-Line the Jenkins Jihad. The Jenkins Platoon. Anyone else have any ideas

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=musicmaster45;810812]Ok so if we get the Jenkins brothers and start Jarvis Jenkins what shall we call our D-Line the Jenkins Jihad. The Jenkins Platoon. Anyone else have any ideas[/quote]

The Jenkins Wall, with Adam Carriker as honorary member.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=musicmaster45;810812]Ok so if we get the Jenkins brothers and start Jarvis Jenkins what shall we call our D-Line the Jenkins Jihad. The Jenkins Platoon. Anyone else have any ideas[/quote]

Jenkins Juggernaut. :)

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

Jenkins Wall sounds bad cause just a few years ago the Williams Wall was super dominant. I do like juggernaut and Jihad

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=musicmaster45;810821]Jenkins Wall sounds bad cause just a few years ago the Williams Wall was super dominant. I do like juggernaut and Jihad[/quote]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkCNJRfSZBU]‪Leeroy Jenkins‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

Abrayo Franklin
Antonio Cromartie
Cullen Jenkins
Randy Moss
Brian Westbrook

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=diehardskin2982;810826]Abrayo Franklin
Antonio Cromartie
Cullen Jenkins
[B]Randy Moss
Brian Westbrook[/B][/quote]

There garbage. Especially Westbrook, No need for him what so ever. Moss I dont think is that healthy either, and I don't care what his agent says.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=skinster;810609]I just want to say that I am a logical person, and a fan of the[B] tank for luck[/B] strategy. However, I am red in the face with excitement right now about all the free agents we are looking to pick up. The fan in me is overtaking what I know is in the best longterm interest of our team and is totally on board with buying every free agent mentioned. I wonder how long my excitement will last? I'll probably complain about how this was the dumbest thing we could possibly do at the end of the season (which it probably is) but I'm just so excited to see us (hopefully) signing all these guys. My emotions are taking over my better thinking.[/quote]

I'd be so happy if I never had to hear this again. Not only do you not guarantee yourself getting him but it would put a huge black mark on the sport and especially the franchise. How do you tell 53 guys that we need to lose for the potential of getting 1 guy? Or do you not tell them, just use them incorrectly and lose the entire locker room?

Then you get all giddy about potential free agent signings. Danny, is that you?

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=skinster;810690]Lol, I'd say throwing away one season for 10 years of greatness is a pretty logical move.

Its like so many other things in life, alot of the time to get to where you want to be, you have to go through some hard times and do things you don't want to do, but you do that because you know it is in your best interest overall.

I wish we could look into the future 13 years down the road so you can see how beneficial to all redskins fans getting luck (without trading up) would be. Then you wouldn't give two shits that we had that one bad season because the last 10 were amazing.

You think the colts fans would have preferred to do better in 97 and not get manning? Don't think so. And if in 7 years if I ask whoever gets luck in the 2012 draft if they could go back in time and do better in 2011, would they?, they would slap me silly for asking such a stupid question.[/quote]

You can't guarantee greatness. Luck could get hurt this year... or in any year in the NFL. And will still need a good team to be built around him.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=skinster;810789]

4. A few [B]predictable[/B] franchise qb's get drafted late (aaron rodgers, drew brees), but that is a rarity and we can't wait around forever and hope for one of these guys to slip to us (look at 2nd round and late 1st round qbs drafted in the last 15 years, most of these guys slip for a reason, they have a very low hit rate)

[/quote]

How were Rodgers and Brees predictable? Especially Brees...

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=tryfuhl;810841]How were Rodgers and Brees predictable? Especially Brees...[/quote]

If you draft a guy 33, there is enough talent to predict he will be good. Rodgers went 24. Like if Dalton pans out, that is predictable. Maybe not very predictable, but if the bengals didn't view it as a real possibility that he can be a franchise qb, they wouldn't have drafted him that high. And I know there are analysts and scouts that predict him to be a franchise qb, and go significantly higher than he did.

To clarify, I'm not saying that we should have seen Rodgers or Brees pan out as they did, but rather I'm saying that it was simply predictable by someone. The packers predicted Rodgers for sure, and I didn't follow football back in 2000 but I'm sure a percentage of scouts/analysts were able to predict Brees as a franchise qb with him going at 33.

Nobody predicted Brady being that good. If someone thought it was even a possibility there is no shot he escapes the third, or fourth, or fifth, or most of the 6th.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

Aren't all QB's essentially predictable? I mean they say a few numbers, words, and colors, then have the ball handed to them, and they step backwards a few steps, then they either hand the ball to someone else or they decide to toss it up for grabs. The main goal is to keep getting 1st downs in order to keep the ball so they can move the ball the length of the field and hopefully score.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=tryfuhl;810838]You can't guarantee greatness. Luck could get hurt this year... or in any year in the NFL. And will still need a good team to be built around him.[/quote]

I can't guarantee greatness, but I can put [B]very[/B] high odds on it. Yes we need a good team around him, but lets get real, plug rex grossman in on the colts and are they going to do much better than we just did last year? QB is SO huge.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=tryfuhl;810836]I'd be so happy if I never had to hear this again. Not only do you not guarantee yourself getting him but it would put a huge black mark on the sport and especially the franchise. How do you tell 53 guys that we need to lose for the potential of getting 1 guy? Or do you not tell them, just use them incorrectly and lose the entire locker room?

Then you get all giddy about potential free agent signings. Danny, is that you?[/quote]

lol I'm sorry, my brain conflicts with my heart. My brain tells me that the best thing to do for our franchise would be to get luck. My heart wants to sign every high profile free agent and at least have more hope that we win now.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=Lotus;810803]There is nothing wrong with my logic. You just don't like the results.

You continue to confuse two different propositions:
A) That Luck is the best choice for a franchise QB in next year's class
and
B) Getting Luck is the only way for us to win

These are two different propositions which should not be confused in the way that you confuse them.

I'm done with this issue.[/quote]


lolzies. i wish i had the time to correct you. I already waste so much of it on this site, but to dissect what you've been saying would take wayyyyyy too long. I guess were both done with the issue.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=Mattyk;810805]1991 wasn't a strike year.[/quote]

hmmm, coulda sworn my dad told me rypien won in a strike year. I guess I should have double checked that. My mistake.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=skinster;810868]lolzies. i wish i had the time to correct you. I already waste so much of it on this site, but to dissect what you've been saying would take wayyyyyy too long. I guess were both done with the issue.[/quote]

Aw heck, we're in a lockout. Entertain us

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

Didn't we all have the world figured out at 21?! For realz

:)

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=Lotus;810816]Jenkins Juggernaut. :)[/quote]

[YT]ECf2CEusUFU[/YT]

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=mattyk;810875][b]didn't we all have the world figured out at 21?! [/b]for realz

:)[/quote]

true words, so true.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

lol hey there, there are some people on here who's early 20's.. I'm 22 and I don't think tanking the season for Luck is the way to go. Everyone have their own opinions of dealing with a team, we just cannot agree on everything together forever.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=skinster;810789]1. A franchise qb is our only ticket to contederhood. Not just anybody is capable this status, you can't just developed anybody, these players have it the capability (intangibles included) or they don't. [/quote]

"Franchise QB" is an amorphous term. But I grant you that a top flite QB is a guarrantee of conterderhood. I disagree that you need a P. Manning to win it all. With a solid team, a B. Roethlisberger, Matt Schaub or a J. Flacco will do.

[quote=skinster;810789]2. Franchise qb's are very hard to find, and there are very true franchise qbs capable of producing a winning team year in and year out. [/quote]

Okay, I am with you. QB's who lift mediocre teams and turn them, a' la P. Manning, into great teams are rare. However, very good QB's who can make super bowl contenders out of good teams, a' la Aaron Rogers or B. Rothlesburger, are less rare.

[quote=skinster;810789]3. It is even more rare that a once in a generation talent is coming out of college. A guy that is [B]almost guaranteed [/B]to be a true franchise qb is even more rare. Luck isn't just any qb we're gambling on, he's practically a shoe in to lead us to success as long as he is at the helm.[/quote]

The only two in that fit this, that I can think of, are Elway and Manning. Even Manning was not thought to be a "guarrantee" at the time - his arm strength and "upside" were questioned. Given the number of "sure things" who have failed to pan out, I disagree with your assumption that any QB can be "almost guarranteed". As I said, who, other than Elway do you consider an almost guarrantee? Remember, in the year Elway was drafted number 1, Dan Marino was drafted 27 and Jim Kelly at 14. (Look at that, Hall of Famers for teams that didn't tank.)

[quote=skinster;810789]4. A few [B]predictable[/B] franchise qb's get drafted late (aaron rodgers, drew brees), but that is a rarity and we can't wait around forever and hope for one of these guys to slip to us (look at 2nd round and late 1st round qbs drafted in the last 15 years, most of these guys slip for a reason, they have a very low hit rate).[/quote]

The hit rate on highly drafted QB's is not particurlary great either. In the last 10 years, QB's in the number 1 slot: Alex Smith, Tim Couch, David Carr, JaMarcus Russell misses. Palmer, Vick, E. Manning hits. With the jury out on Stafford and Bradford (both likely hits with the injuries being a question for Stafford). First pick QB's are simply not a given no matter how highly rated out of college.

[quote=skinster;810789]5. Please don't mention Tom Brady, that is luck, it could happen to us that we get a franchise qb later, but it is unlikely and it is never good to rely on luck (please don't mention the pun).).[/quote]
How about I mention Carr, Couch, Russell, V. Young, Matt Lienhardt, Harrington as high pick/highly rated QB's who failed and Matt Ryan, Phillip Rivers, and Sanchez as non-first-pick QB's of contending teams.

[quote=skinster;810789]6. Please don't mention Warner/favre/any other free agent vet that has had success and could have won a superbowl. It is better to have a shot every year for 10 years than have a window of 2 (look at where the cardinals and vikings are now). Plus it is rare to find one of these guys).[/quote]

So, in essence, please don't highlight anyone who might sabotage your "Suck for Luck" campaign or highlight how you have reached your conclusion and will only accept facts which agree with your hypothesis.

[quote=skinster;810789]Luck is [B]almost a sure thing[/B]. If you have a bank account of 10,000 dollars and there was a magic machine that you could give 10,000 dollars to today and you'd have a 90% chance of the machine giving you 50,000 dollars every year for 10 years, would you do it? I ****in would. Yea your year will suck, but your life will be much better for it. (I can't wait for people to make fun of this metaphor. Say what you want, as cheesy as it seems, it makes sense.)[/quote]

Your flaw is the 90%. It's at best 50%. Sorry, 10 years from now, and in hindsight - as people do with P. Manning - it may seem like a no brainer. but this belief that Luck is a sure thing is so ludicrous that it is laughable. The linchpin of your [I]entire[/I] argument is the "near" surety that Luck is a generational franchise QB. An argument so speculative and counter to historicial precedent as to beyond belief that a reasonable person could accept it. Let me use your analogy - If you had a 60/40 shot that if you put up your last 50K you would get a 100k/year return for 10 years [B]but, if you miss,[/B] you and your family would be homeless for the next five years, would you take that risk? Not me bud.

Your analogy doesn't make sense, not b/c it is cheesy, but b/c it fails to take into account any of risk of failure, is unrealistic in its projected success, and ignores that you can achieve a similar level of success risk with a substantially lower level of failure risk.

Bottom line, your being obtuse.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=skinster;810862]If you draft a guy 33, there is enough talent to predict he will be good. Rodgers went 24. Like if Dalton pans out, that is predictable. Maybe not very predictable, but if the bengals didn't view it as a real possibility that he can be a franchise qb, they wouldn't have drafted him that high. And I know there are analysts and scouts that predict him to be a franchise qb, and go significantly higher than he did.

To clarify, I'm not saying that we should have seen Rodgers or Brees pan out as they did, but rather I'm saying that it was simply predictable by someone. The packers predicted Rodgers for sure, and I didn't follow football back in 2000 but I'm sure a percentage of scouts/analysts were able to predict Brees as a franchise qb with him going at 33.

Nobody predicted Brady being that good. If someone thought it was even a possibility there is no shot he escapes the third, or fourth, or fifth, or most of the 6th.[/quote]
whats the excuse for all of the guys who didn't even become starters, much less winners?

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=skinster;810867]lol I'm sorry, my brain conflicts with my heart. My brain tells me that the best thing to do for our franchise would be to get luck. My heart wants to sign every high profile free agent and at least have more hope that we win now.[/quote]Congrats, you've spent a whole thread and have only identified a non-plan, and a bad plan. You're qualified to run for congress.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=tryfuhl;810913]whats the excuse for all of the guys who didn't even become starters, much less winners?[/quote]

I'm not sure your getting what I'm saying. I'm not even sure what you think I'm trying to justify.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=skinster;810917]I'm not sure your getting what I'm saying. I'm not even sure what you think I'm trying to justify.[/quote]

That's a "clever" way out of having you explain yourself. You don't even get what you're saying, you're just saying shit.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;810915]Congrats, you've spent a whole thread and have only identified a non-plan, and a bad plan. You're qualified to run for congress.[/quote]

:lol:

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote]JoeRedskin;810911]"Franchise QB" is an amorphous term. But I grant you that a top flite QB is a guarrantee of conterderhood. I disagree that you need a P. Manning to win it all. With a solid team, a B. Roethlisberger, Matt Schaub or a J. Flacco will do. [/quote]

I don't think you need a P. Manning, but a manning will ensure that you are great year in and year out. I do think that Flacco is close but on the wrong side of the line. Schaubs on my line (I can't decide where he is), and I think big ben doesn't get the credit he deserves. I don't think he's working with too many weapons and I think he produces well.
[quote]
Okay, I am with you. QB's who lift mediocre teams and turn them, a' la P. Manning, into great teams are rare. However, very good QB's who can make super bowl contenders out of good teams, a' la Aaron Rogers or B. Rothlesburger, are less rare.[/quote]

IMO less than a third of the league has a qb that can make them a superbowl contender. That's rare. But Aaron Rogers is elite IMO.
[quote]
The only two in that fit this, that I can think of, are Elway and Manning. Even Manning was not thought to be a "guarrantee" at the time - his arm strength and "upside" were questioned. Given the number of "sure things" who have failed to pan out, I disagree with your assumption that any QB can be "almost guarranteed". As I said, who, other than Elway do you consider an almost guarrantee? Remember, in the year Elway was drafted number 1, Dan Marino was drafted 27 and Jim Kelly at 14. (Look at that, Hall of Famers for teams that didn't tank.)


The hit rate on highly drafted QB's is not particurlary great either. In the last 10 years, QB's in the number 1 slot: Alex Smith, Tim Couch, David Carr, JaMarcus Russell misses. Palmer, Vick, E. Manning hits. With the jury out on Stafford and Bradford (both likely hits with the injuries being a question for Stafford). First pick QB's are simply not a given no matter how highly rated out of college.[/quote]

Bradford is a studdddddddd. Take away injury concerns and I thought he was a can't miss prospect as well....but then again, you can't do that in reality, he had those injury concerns and was not a can't miss coming out of college.
[quote]
How about I mention Carr, Couch, Russell, V. Young, Matt Lienhardt, Harrington as high pick/highly rated QB's who failed and Matt Ryan, Phillip Rivers, and Sanchez as non-first-pick QB's of contending teams. [/quote]

Teams reach for qbs all the time. Teams need one so they reach, and the qb ends up not good. I had no complaints with us not taking a qb high this draft. If you are not sold on him don't draft him because he's a qb. Also, most of those qb misses at 1 overall were taken in drafts with no good predictable prospects.

I think that depending on the year it is realistic to draft a franchise qb in the top third of the first round. But I believe this years draft will mirror 2004 when Eli was the "bar of gold." Unless we draft 1 overall, I believe we will have to get into a bidding war to get him. There very well might be another prospect that comes out this year's draft (landry, barkley) that has what it takes to be a franchise qb that we can get without having luck, but I doubt barkley will come out this year and I'm not sold on landry. I think landry is at best your average 50-50 success or flop first round talent while luck is a special once in a generation 90-10 guy.
P.S I don't believe in Sanchez either.
[quote]
So, in essence, please don't highlight anyone who might sabotage your "Suck for Luck" campaign or highlight how you have reached your conclusion and will only accept facts which agree with your hypothesis. [/quote]

My hypothesis isn't based on facts. Its based on my belief in luck. If someone believes he is a can't miss prospect like I do, then yea I do think it is short sighted to not be on board with the "Suck for Luck" campaign.
[quote]
Your flaw is the 90%. It's at best 50%. Sorry, 10 years from now, and in hindsight - as people do with P. Manning - it may seem like a no brainer. but this belief that Luck is a sure thing is so ludicrous that it is laughable. The linchpin of your [I]entire[/I] argument is the "near" surety that Luck is a generational franchise QB. An argument so speculative and counter to historicial precedent as to beyond belief that a reasonable person could accept it. Let me use your analogy - If you had a 60/40 shot that if you put up your last 50K you would get a 100k/year return for 10 years [B]but, if you miss,[/B] you and your family would be homeless for the next five years, would you take that risk? Not me bud.[/quote]

Here is the real discrepancy in out opinions. I think luck is Elway, a once in a generation can't miss prospect. You think its 50-50, I think this is a rare opportunity and Luck is a special can't miss prospect.
[quote]
Your analogy doesn't make sense, not b/c it is cheesy, but b/c it fails to take into account any of risk of failure, is unrealistic in its projected success, and ignores that you can achieve a similar level of success risk with a substantially lower level of failure risk. [/quote]

Like I said, I believe the risk of failure to be different than you do.

[quote]Bottom line, your being obtuse.[/quote]

That's an acute statement!

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

Isn't there a thread to talk about college QBs? Just saying.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=tryfuhl;810918]That's a "clever" way out of having you explain yourself. You don't even get what you're saying, you're just saying shit.[/quote]

or instead of insulting me, you could clarify by explaining what you think I'm justifying so I can respond. Unless your looking for a "clever" way out.

Re: Redskins ready to $pend?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;810873]Aw heck, we're in a lockout. Entertain us[/quote]

If I ever settle the rest of my side bouts, and nothing is still going on, remind me and I'll get back to that one night or weekend. I'd much spend my time on this site talking football than explaining the rules of logic, but like you said its a slow summer, so maybe one day soon I'll get back to this.