McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

[Beemnseven]

Now that it's done, I'm 90% in favor. But the one thing that's been on my mind is pick #37 this year. In the long run, wouldn't it have been better to take the two best offensive tackles in the 1st and 2nd knowing how horrific the line was last year?

Doesn't matter anymore though.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Now that it's done, I'm 90% in favor. But the one thing that's been on my mind is pick #37 this year. In the long run, wouldn't it have been better to take the two best offensive tackles in the 1st and 2nd knowing how horrific the line was last year?

Doesn't matter anymore though.

The OT at #37 may not have been worth selecting at #37. In other words, we may have just been taking an OT just to take an OT in that scenario

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

The OT at #37 may not have been worth selecting at #37. In other words, we may have just been taking an OT just to take an OT in that scenario

I'm thinking the value pick there probably would have been a defensive guy, if not one of the three first-round RBs.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

The OT at #37 may not have been worth selecting at #37. In other words, we may have just been taking an OT just to take an OT in that scenario

I just don't get it. I understand the assigned value for players, but if you need an OL why not pick the next best one on the list or which ever one you think will do well in zone blocking. Instead you want to wait till the next round then said OL get picked by someone else. Then we decide on another OL and again we are too high to draft the OL or the value doesn't fit. So we wait then someone else gets him.

In the long run we get no OL cause when it's time for us to pick we don't like the value. Just fill our needs and stop with the BPA BS.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

I just don't get it. I understand the assigned value for players, but if you need an OL why not pick the next best one on the list or which ever one you think will do well in zone blocking. Instead you want to wait till the next round then said OL get picked by someone else. Then we decide on another OL and again we are too high to draft the OL or the value doesn't fit. So we wait then someone else gets him.

In the long run we get no OL cause when it's time for us to pick we don't like the value. Just fill our needs and stop with the BPA BS.

Exactly. I just don't see the horror that others do in picking what you need. Especially after the first round when the talent starts to level out and it's basically hit or miss.

With the BPA strategy, you theoretically could go round after round ignoring obvious needs -- like Vinny did for years with the O-line.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Now that it's done, I'm 90% in favor. But the one thing that's been on my mind is pick #37 this year. In the long run, wouldn't it have been better to take the two best offensive tackles in the 1st and 2nd knowing how horrific the line was last year?

Doesn't matter anymore though.

Doubt we would have gone tackles back to back though. Shanahan definitely wanted a QB and one of those picks would have probably gone that way.

[NYCskinfan82]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Now that it's done, I'm 90% in favor. But the one thing that's been on my mind is pick #37 this year. In the long run, wouldn't it have been better to take the two best offensive tackles in the 1st and 2nd knowing how horrific the line was last year?

Doesn't matter anymore though.

That's what i was thinking word for word.

[Audi]

Originally Posted by NYCskinfan82

That's what i was thinking word for word.

Remember when we had Chris Samuels and Jon Jansen, a first rounder and second rounder respectively, as bookend tackles?

Quarterback is the most important position, period.