Not drafting a QB a mistake?

[NYCskinfan82]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I think McCloughan thought highly of Halliday but he flaked.

I'd rather see us establish the trenches a bit so that no matter what QB we use he'll have a fighting chance.

Well said, IMO games are won in the trenches.

[skinsfaninok]

Griffin will be fine with this Line

[HailGreen28]

The best chance to get a great QB is when you pick high. Obviously the team won't be doing well when you are able to do so.

We had a decent line, and a running game that a lot of QBs would have killed for the last couple years. Hardly anyone has 5 studs at OL. We have a HC that did very well as Cincinatti's OC.

We are ready for a good QB. Whether it's Griffin or Cousins that steps up, or we bring in someone else.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

...We are ready for a good QB. Whether it's Griffin or Cousins that steps up, or we bring in someone else.

Agreed.

What's your take on not drafting a QB?

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Agreed.

What's your take on not drafting a QB?

In Scot I trust. We have two QBs that might work out. I can only go on what others say about how good the draftees were, that there wasn't a really good prospect out there for us. Glad we got Scherff, whether he plays G or OT.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

In Scot I trust. We have two QBs that might work out. I can only go on what others say about how good the draftees were, that there wasn't a really good prospect out there for us. Glad we got Scherff, whether he plays G or OT.

In Scot we trust goes without saying.

Sure we have 2 QBs that might work out. But those same 2 QBs might fail and if they fail we start next season back at square one with no QB and quite possibly no HC.

Garrett Grayson was considered by many, including Jay's own brother, as a pro-ready plug and play QB in this system. There were positive comments about all of the QBs. Its easy to say well the QBs weren't good that's why we didn't draft them but we don't know.

What we do know is that we have question marks at our QB spot and no QB signed for the 2016 season not even a development QB. I can't think of why that's not a mistake.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Agreed.

What's your take on not drafting a QB?

We took best player available, so at anytime in the draft a qb was not a good pick. So I feel fine.

Let's talk this year qb crop, maybe d- on a good day. Wasn't a lot out there.

As someone mentioned before, next year class will most likely be stacked. Maybe 4 first rounders right now...so if this years goes bad, Jay is probably gone and McC will get to chose his coach. With his new coach will get to pick his new qb. I think that's the route this is going if cousins and rg3 don't pan this year.

[CRedskinsRule]

I believe that when the line is right, then you spend draft pick(s) on the qb. The more so when you have two potential boom/bust guys already on the roster.

So no, i don't think it was a mistake, regardless of how this year's batch of qb's do.

There will be more qbs available next year.

Sent from my S6 Edge

[30gut]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

....So no, i don't think it was a mistake, regardless of how this year's batch of qb's do.

There will be more qbs available next year.

But you can say that about any position: "there will be more _______ available next year."

If both Griffin and Colt fail wouldn't you rather have a QB hand picked by the HC then not? I don't understand the logic that both QB can fail yet NOT having a draft pick QB waiting in the wings is okay.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by 30gut

But you can say that about any position: "there will be more _______ available next year."

If both Griffin and Colt fail wouldn't you rather have a QB hand picked by the HC then not? I don't understand the logic that both QB can fail yet NOT having a draft pick QB waiting in the wings is okay.

Look at Seattle as the basic concept. They spent the first two years I believe strengthening their team before investing in matt Flynn and Russell Wilson.

Or from another perspective, any late qb would start at best as 3rd string with very little chance to play. Every draft pick we took likely has atleast the shot to play ST. A drafted qb would simply be a wasted roster spot/draft pick this season

Sent from my S6 Edge

[Hog1]

I don't think very many coaches were..... Thrilled with any of the qb's in this years draft. Was there any team that really tried to go up and get one?
As has been intimated, fix the line and some other things
Then......

[30gut]

Originally Posted by Hog1

I don't think very many coaches were..... Thrilled with any of the qb's in this years draft. Was there any team that really tried to go up and get one?.

Like with any prospects in any draft some coaches and scouts will like them and some wont. Only time will tell.

For me its as simple as this:

Would you agree that QB is a position that needed to be addressed?

Was that area addressed?

[DYoungJelly]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Like with any prospects in any draft some coaches and scouts will like them and some wont. Only time will tell.

For me its as simple as this:

Would you agree that QB is a position that needed to be addressed?

Was that area addressed?

If McLovin spent two or three picks on QBs to address the issue at QB and none of them make the roster, the QB position would still need to be addressed.

Instead, he invested in guys that have a legit shot at making the roster and immediately contributing on special teams. His picks simultaneously (through BPA) build depth on a very thin team.

I'm in favor of BPA even if it doesn't address an immediate need such as QB.

I don't think it was a mistake if our picks were higher on our draft board than the QBs still available.

I would like to see how the QBs on our roster play with upgraded pass protection combined with running the ball effectively while not playing from behind by two touchdowns.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Like with any prospects in any draft some coaches and scouts will like them and some wont. Only time will tell.

For me its as simple as this:

Would you agree that QB is a position that needed to be addressed?

Was that area addressed?

Not quite so simple for me:
QB needs to be addressed? TBD
Was that area addressed? insufficient info at this time

I personally think like many others the SB winning QB of the Redskins may not be in Burgundy and Gold. Furthermore....regardless of the QB, this team had no hope of real success as it had to many holes in the supporting cast. Still have plenty of holes and upgrades to be done, but it's a start.
I don't really think our guys were impressed at any of the top qb prospects (at least at the top) enough to consider going after one. I cannot disagree with their moves to date as they have filled some holes.......added good depth......upgraded special teams.
As has been stated, our qb's will all look better with the personnel changes we have made.
Fill all the obvious holes you can and see how the remainder looks....

[30gut]

...So the consensus seems to be that not drafting a QB, despite the need, wasn't a mistake because they all suck?