The "Inside Word" on the QB Search

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Can you imagine trying to sell Matt Flynn to your owner a year after selling Beck and Grossman as two guys you can count on? I mean, here's a guy who is less accomplished than Grossman.

That would be the punchline of the Snyder era. I know generally you don't want the owner to meddle in the personnel decisions, but I don't see how you could get the check-writer to sign off on that without tranquilizers.

So you'd rather him (snyder) sign off on a guy who's never taken a single snap in NFL or attended one camp, yet pay him even more money as well as costing a draft pick?

You were saying?...lol

[MTK]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

So you'd rather him (snyder) sign off on a guy who's never taken a single snap in NFL or attended one camp, yet pay him even more money as well as costing a draft pick?

You were saying?...lol

I thought you weren't a fan of the idea of signing him?

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I thought you weren't a fan of the idea of signing him?

I'm not so much (well, depending on the amount). Merely questioning Tripp's logic on this.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I thought you weren't a fan of the idea of signing him?

Forgot the thread you posed this question, but I meant to answer it. Been away for the past week.


Would I be ok with signing Flynn and drafting a developmental QB in the draft.



See, there are two issues I have with the "signing flynn" portion of this.

1) Is he even better than the guys we have?

2) What type of coin is he wanting?


Flynn was graded as a low end QB, in the draft, based on his skills and collegiate performance. I personally think the guy has just flourished in the current system he's in and will most likely end up being the type of QB he was graded as. (low end) That's just my opinion. He very well could be the next coming of Tom Brady, but you won't know that until he plays in another system with different players.

I would be fine with bringing Flynn in only if the contract was modest and he actually beat the competition in training camp. I'm not willing to say "let's bring this guy in as the unquestioned starter".

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

So you'd rather him (snyder) sign off on a guy who's never taken a single snap in NFL or attended one camp, yet pay him even more money as well as costing a draft pick?

You were saying?...lol

I think your logic is broken. I can't think of anywhere in the draft it would cost more money to sign the pick than it would to add Matt Flynn. Maybe first overall would be close. I'd have to look it up.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Can you imagine trying to sell Matt Flynn to your owner a year after selling Beck and Grossman as two guys you can count on? I mean, here's a guy who is less accomplished than Grossman.

That would be the punchline of the Snyder era. I know generally you don't want the owner to meddle in the personnel decisions, but I don't see how you could get the check-writer to sign off on that without tranquilizers.

I guess I'm the clueless one. Cause I see a huge selling point.... the fact Flynn has not been cut or fired from any organization, the fact he has had stability at coaching, the fact he has played in only a couple or few games and managed them well with out throwing INT's like Grossman and Beck. He has not been on the field that much taking hits so he's relatively healthy. and he's proven he can be accurate and has a strong arm.

What did I miss?

Oh..... he has not taken a team to a SB.

I still want the Skins to draft a Rookie and whoever plays better gets the job, I just want Grossman and Beck gone.

[FRPLG]

No I meant an abortion...his mechanics are that bad.

Sorry for the bad taste there.

[CultBrennan59]

I think we should bring in flynn, because of the sudden weakness of QB's in this years class. I think we should sign flynn to a what look likes a lengthy deal, but really is a 2-3 year guaranteed money deal, with the other years like 4-6 being an option which we our he could get out of without much of a cap hit.

During those 2-3 years we have him we, obviously, draft our future QB, whether thats Foles Tannehill this year, or Barkley, Wilson, Glennon, Logan Thomas, Renner, whoever next year.

[SkinzWin]

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

I think we should bring in flynn, because of the sudden weakness of QB's in this years class. I think we should sign flynn to a what look likes a lengthy deal, but really is a 2-3 year guaranteed money deal, with the other years like 4-6 being an option which we our he could get out of without much of a cap hit.

During those 2-3 years we have him we, obviously, draft our future QB, whether thats Foles Tannehill this year, or Barkley, Wilson, Glennon, Logan Thomas, Renner, whoever next year.

Drafting Barkley next year would most likely suggest we would have a top pick again or would bet the farm to trade up. Barkley is going to go high next year. Probably #1 overall if I had to guess.

[skinsfaninok]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Forgot the thread you posed this question, but I meant to answer it. Been away for the past week.


Would I be ok with signing Flynn and drafting a developmental QB in the draft.



See, there are two issues I have with the "signing flynn" portion of this.

1) Is he even better than the guys we have?

2) What type of coin is he wanting?


Flynn was graded as a low end QB, in the draft, based on his skills and collegiate performance. I personally think the guy has just flourished in the current system he's in and will most likely end up being the type of QB he was graded as. (low end) That's just my opinion. He very well could be the next coming of Tom Brady, but you won't know that until he plays in another system with different players.

I would be fine with bringing Flynn in only if the contract was modest and he actually beat the competition in training camp. I'm not willing to say "let's bring this guy in as the unquestioned starter".

Agreed

[GTripp0012]

Everyone on that list but Eli had their formative years prior to the passing explosion of the middle of the decade. And Eli was kind of a rare bird. He was accurate in college, but couldn't drive the football at all his first four-ish years in the league. Really looked like a bust. Since then, he's had no problem throwing the ball accurately to any part of the field.

Eli will still have days where he can't keep the ball from diving every which way on him, but for the most part he throws one of the better footballs in the league. It's clear now that the fluke was the early part of his career.

I wouldn't be shocked if Tebow developed into one of the more accurate passers in the league. Right now, he has a comfort issue from the pocket. If the pocket and throwing lanes are clean, Tebow drives the football really well. If he's about to take a hit, he loses focus and strides away from the target, and the ball comes out erratically.

[SBXVII]

I saw this Mock and although I really don't have a problem with the #1 pick... I think the rest suck.

2012 NFL Mock Draft 7 Round Washington Redskins: Robert Griffin III a Lock - NFL Mocks - Covering the 2012 NFL draft, Mock Draft Database, Scouting Reports, and Fantasy Football

[SBXVII]

More P.Manning talk... Colts will probably trade or cut him and 4 teams should be interested... one being the Skins.

Peyton Manning Trade Rumors: 4 Plausible Destinations for the MVP Quarterback | Bleacher Report

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

More P.Manning talk... Colts will probably trade or cut him and 4 teams should be interested... one being the Skins.

Peyton Manning Trade Rumors: 4 Plausible Destinations for the MVP Quarterback | Bleacher Report

Quoting the Bleacher Report is like using your UPS man as an unnamed source. Until it comes from the mouth of Schefter, Mort or Glazer, I'm not buying it.

[mbedner3420]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Quoting the Bleacher Report is like using your UPS man as an unnamed source. Until it comes from the mouth of Schefter, Mort or Glazer, I'm not buying it.

I agree. There should be a rule that BR is not allowed to be cited in anyway as a source for potential personnel moves.