QB Apocalypse: The Seventh Sign

[skinsguy]

I keep going back and forth on this QB stuff. I'm such a passionate Redskins fan, that I'm ready to defend whatever move they make in securing a quarterback. I've had to defend the move for Peyton Manning to a couple of friends who are Ravens fans. One said, "I hope they do get Peyton Manning, it will be very "Redskin" of them. They are too many players away from making it to the big dance" When I tried to explain to him how this is NOT the same as signing Deion Sanders or Bruce Smith, he goes on to say, "It's EXACTLY the same. Peyton is old and the Redskins will overpay to get him like they always do."

In every article I have read, it seems more times than not, the columnist has to put in this line, "The Redskins are always the obvious choice because they like making the big splash in the offseason." Burns me up because, nobody outside of Redskins Park or this close knit family of 'skins fans realize that Vinny Cerrato is no longer employed with the Redskins. The 'skins are under "new management" and Dan Snyder has pretty much delegated himself to stepping out of the spotlight. The last "big name" guy we signed was McNabb, but his contract was not really an outlandish contract.

But anyways, everybody and their brother has said that the Redskins MUST land a quarterback this year, or it's curtains for Shanahan. Those same people will say, "It's the same old Redskins if they pick up Peyton Manning." If the Redskins don't pick up Manning and don't trade up for RGIII, those same people will say, "The Redskins had to settle for another stop gap until they can truly find their guy. <Insert Name Here> just isn't a franchise quarterback." And yet, the same people who say the Redskins are too many players away from making the playoffs are the ones suggesting the 'skins MUST trade up to land RGIII. Doesn't make sense to me, personally. If you're going to argue that the Redskins are several players away from being a good team, then you'd support a move in landing Peyton, because you keep your draft picks and can still draft a good quarterback who could take over in a couple of years. You also have other picks to address those other areas of need.

Yet, when I explain this to them, it's like they all take an ignorant pill. So honestly, I'm so tired trying to explain and defend whatever move we all think the Redskins are going to make. Honestly, I see the sense in getting Peyton, and I see the sense in moving up for RGIII. I'm just like a lot of you guys....tired of not having that franchise QB. I don't think I can wait another season to get him.

[CultBrennan59]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

I keep going back and forth on this QB stuff. I'm such a passionate Redskins fan, that I'm ready to defend whatever move they make in securing a quarterback. I've had to defend the move for Peyton Manning to a couple of friends who are Ravens fans. One said, "I hope they do get Peyton Manning, it will be very "Redskin" of them. They are too many players away from making it to the big dance" When I tried to explain to him how this is NOT the same as signing Deion Sanders or Bruce Smith, he goes on to say, "It's EXACTLY the same. Peyton is old and the Redskins will overpay to get him like they always do."

In every article I have read, it seems more times than not, the columnist has to put in this line, "The Redskins are always the obvious choice because they like making the big splash in the offseason." Burns me up because, nobody outside of Redskins Park or this close knit family of 'skins fans realize that Vinny Cerrato is no longer employed with the Redskins. The 'skins are under "new management" and Dan Snyder has pretty much delegated himself to stepping out of the spotlight. The last "big name" guy we signed was McNabb, but his contract was not really an outlandish contract.

But anyways, everybody and their brother has said that the Redskins MUST land a quarterback this year, or it's curtains for Shanahan. Those same people will say, "It's the same old Redskins if they pick up Peyton Manning." If the Redskins don't pick up Manning and don't trade up for RGIII, those same people will say, "The Redskins had to settle for another stop gap until they can truly find their guy. <Insert Name Here> just isn't a franchise quarterback." And yet, the same people who say the Redskins are too many players away from making the playoffs are the ones suggesting the 'skins MUST trade up to land RGIII. Doesn't make sense to me, personally. If you're going to argue that the Redskins are several players away from being a good team, then you'd support a move in landing Peyton, because you keep your draft picks and can still draft a good quarterback who could take over in a couple of years. You also have other picks to address those other areas of need.

Yet, when I explain this to them, it's like they all take an ignorant pill. So honestly, I'm so tired trying to explain and defend whatever move we all think the Redskins are going to make. Honestly, I see the sense in getting Peyton, and I see the sense in moving up for RGIII. I'm just like a lot of you guys....tired of not having that franchise QB. I don't think I can wait another season to get him.

Preach it man!

I was feeling the same way during the super bowl this year saying to myself 'God the Skins aren't going to be here for a long, long time'

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

But anyways, everybody and their brother has said that the Redskins MUST land a quarterback this year, or it's curtains for Shanahan. Those same people will say, "It's the same old Redskins if they pick up Peyton Manning." If the Redskins don't pick up Manning and don't trade up for RGIII, those same people will say, "The Redskins had to settle for another stop gap until they can truly find their guy. <Insert Name Here> just isn't a franchise quarterback." And yet, the same people who say the Redskins are too many players away from making the playoffs are the ones suggesting the 'skins MUST trade up to land RGIII. Doesn't make sense to me, personally. If you're going to argue that the Redskins are several players away from being a good team, then you'd support a move in landing Peyton, because you keep your draft picks and can still draft a good quarterback who could take over in a couple of years. You also have other picks to address those other areas of need.

Yet, when I explain this to them, it's like they all take an ignorant pill. So honestly, I'm so tired trying to explain and defend whatever move we all think the Redskins are going to make. Honestly, I see the sense in getting Peyton, and I see the sense in moving up for RGIII. I'm just like a lot of you guys....tired of not having that franchise QB. I don't think I can wait another season to get him.

Ha, Ha. I'm 100% in the same frame of mind. and your right the same people who say the Skins are rebuilding or need to are the same people who say the Skins need to throw as many draft picks needed to land RGIII. If we are more then 1 player away from the playoffs or SB then why waist the picks on one player.... pick up a FA QB, trade back for more picks, get a QB and some weapons and start the season.

I don't get it either. Personally the only reason I want PM is so he can help out any Rookie brought in. Will he? everyone thinks not but if and or when he finds out he can't play I'd like to be the team to offer him some form of coaching job simply because of his knowledge. But my dream scenario is Flynn, Blackmon (won't happen cause he'll be gone by #6) or Floyd, and Weeden.

Last year the team went: Defense, Defense, Offense. I hope this year they go Offense, Offense, Defense. The first two could be any order QB/WR or WR/QB, the defense I'd like to see them take a FS only cause the two last year were DL plus Jenkins will be coming back which will be similar to having a draft pick.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Ha, Ha. I'm 100% in the same frame of mind. and your right the same people who say the Skins are rebuilding or need to are the same people who say the Skins need to throw as many draft picks needed to land RGIII. If we are more then 1 player away from the playoffs or SB then why waist the picks on one player.... pick up a FA QB, trade back for more picks, get a QB and some weapons and start the season.

No. No they are not the same people. They are in fact, different people.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

No. No they are not the same people. They are in fact, different people.

In any event I find it weird how everyone has a totally different idea of where the Skins are at and how far they need to go.

1- we are way off and need to save our draft picks and trade back.
2- we are so close we just need a quality QB.
3- we need a Vet lets get PM.
4- lets not get PM cause he's never going to play again.
5- lets get Orton cause he's 100x better then Grossman.
6- lets go all in for RGIII. because it's all about the QB position.

AAAAHHHHH. Again I don't think we are far away from the play offs but I'm tired of being the Offseason SB team only to struggle during the season. A lot of us fans were wanting the Skins to follow the N.E. example of using the draft to build a team. Did they ever throw two or three yrs worth of top picks away for any one player? I don't recall them doing so.

A- will PM be healthy? who knows but he's a FA and we keep our draft picks. His knowledge is invaluable and could help the team.

B- Orton to me is not much of an upgrade over Grossman.

C- Flynn although a backup is healthy, showed he can make all the throws, and did fairly well against arguably one of the better defenses Detroit.

D- RGIII. I get it. he's awesome. but who will he be throwing to? Moss is getting old, and Hankerson has not proven himself yet. Gaffney and AA?

E- Luck? I can actually see him falling to #6. If the Colts take RGIII then Luck is very similar to what the other teams already have maybe slightly better. I see the reason RGIII won't fall is because he is not like the others, he does so much with his own legs like Vick back in the day.

F- 2nd round QB's? I think they are closer then people give them credit for. Tannehill, Cousins, Wilson, Weeden, I belive could all start as long as they have a decent OL to provide protection and giving them time to find a target. Just like Andy Dalton.

and "F" is why I'm saying lets save our picks, trade back to aquire more picks, get a QB and some weapons and continue to build the OL. Defensively I'm confused about the talk of needing a CB because we have a ton of them. We need a FS who can cover sideline to sideline and help break up passes or make the tackle. I can buy the ILB a little bit for developement for when Fletcher retires. Otherwise OL, and WR's and QB's.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

In any event I find it weird how everyone has a totally different idea of where the Skins are at and how far they need to go.

1- we are way off and need to save our draft picks and trade back.
2- we are so close we just need a quality QB.
3- we need a Vet lets get PM.
4- lets not get PM cause he's never going to play again.
5- lets get Orton cause he's 100x better then Grossman.
6- lets go all in for RGIII. because it's all about the QB position.

AAAAHHHHH. Again I don't think we are far away from the play offs but I'm tired of being the Offseason SB team only to struggle during the season. A lot of us fans were wanting the Skins to follow the N.E. example of using the draft to build a team. Did they ever throw two or three yrs worth of top picks away for any one player? I don't recall them doing so.

A- will PM be healthy? who knows but he's a FA and we keep our draft picks. His knowledge is invaluable and could help the team.

B- Orton to me is not much of an upgrade over Grossman.

C- Flynn although a backup is healthy, showed he can make all the throws, and did fairly well against arguably one of the better defenses Detroit.

D- RGIII. I get it. he's awesome. but who will he be throwing to? Moss is getting old, and Hankerson has not proven himself yet. Gaffney and AA?

E- Luck? I can actually see him falling to #6. If the Colts take RGIII then Luck is very similar to what the other teams already have maybe slightly better. I see the reason RGIII won't fall is because he is not like the others, he does so much with his own legs like Vick back in the day.

F- 2nd round QB's? I think they are closer then people give them credit for. Tannehill, Cousins, Wilson, Weeden, I belive could all start as long as they have a decent OL to provide protection and giving them time to find a target. Just like Andy Dalton.

and "F" is why I'm saying lets save our picks, trade back to aquire more picks, get a QB and some weapons and continue to build the OL. Defensively I'm confused about the talk of needing a CB because we have a ton of them. We need a FS who can cover sideline to sideline and help break up passes or make the tackle. I can buy the ILB a little bit for developement for when Fletcher retires. Otherwise OL, and WR's and QB's.

If we're not far off that only means there are multiple ways to get there.

You need depth and a quarterback. You need a quarterback and depth. Or maybe you need a stud running back with a young tight end to pair with Davis (while still having Cooley to run most of the under-center stuff), and the rest should go into the defense.

You can pair Chad Henne with Justin Blackmon and try to get your passing offense that way. That's probably not going to work as well as pairing RG3 with Joe Adams, Leonard Hankerson, and Josh Morgan. But it will probably work better than going with Ryan Tannehill, Dwayne Bowe, and Santana Moss.

But the thing is: none of that matters unless the Redskins improve across the board. They can still trade up for RG3 and improve across the board. It's possible. If you get rid of the players who are holding you back, it might even be considered easy. You can improve the entire roster through free agency, and get your QB in the draft. You can also get your QB in free agency and improve the depth of your roster through the draft.

The only problem is: none of that wasn't true in 2010 or 2011 as well. My biggest takeaway from the offseason to date is that the Redskins are trying to use the same approach as the last two years. Kyle and Mike still disagree on who can work in this offense, and they aren't going to arrive on consensus. They still want to trade up, but they don't want to pay too much. Kyle Orton is being thrown around as a solution.

The only thing that is different about this offseason is the Peyton Manning thing. Otherwise, it is business as usual.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

But anyways, everybody and their brother has said that the Redskins MUST land a quarterback this year, or it's curtains for Shanahan. Those same people will say, "It's the same old Redskins if they pick up Peyton Manning." If the Redskins don't pick up Manning and don't trade up for RGIII, those same people will say, "The Redskins had to settle for another stop gap until they can truly find their guy. <Insert Name Here> just isn't a franchise quarterback." And yet, the same people who say the Redskins are too many players away from making the playoffs are the ones suggesting the 'skins MUST trade up to land RGIII. Doesn't make sense to me, personally. If you're going to argue that the Redskins are several players away from being a good team, then you'd support a move in landing Peyton, because you keep your draft picks and can still draft a good quarterback who could take over in a couple of years. You also have other picks to address those other areas of need.

It is really a remarkable conundrum that Mike Shanahan has built for himself.

Ultimately what people say doesn't matter. If he trades up for RG3 and doesn't have enough depth to win, he's gone. If he sits tight at the quarterback position and builds depth and can't win close games because he doesn't trust the fifth quarterback he handpicked, he's gone. If he goes after Peyton Manning and bypasses a QB in the draft again and Peyton doesn't work out, he's gone.

And yet, if he completely and totally screws up the offseason but leads the team into a 10-6 finish in the regular season, then he gets his contract extended and everybody loves him. Because that's how the NFL works.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

It is really a remarkable conundrum that Mike Shanahan has built for himself.

Ultimately what people say doesn't matter. If he trades up for RG3 and doesn't have enough depth to win, he's gone. If he sits tight at the quarterback position and builds depth and can't win close games because he doesn't trust the fifth quarterback he handpicked, he's gone. If he goes after Peyton Manning and bypasses a QB in the draft again and Peyton doesn't work out, he's gone.

And yet, if he completely and totally screws up the offseason but leads the team into a 10-6 finish in the regular season, then he gets his contract extended and everybody loves him. Because that's how the NFL works.

This is another topic. Everyone is on the bandwagon that if he has another bad year he's gone. No matter what. Personally I think after 10 yrs of whatever D.Snyder was doing not working out I think he's trying something different. Consistancy. I think there was a huge improvement from year one with our WR's and OL this year. Other point to yards and points and say otherwise but the team looked more like a team. I think given his full 5 years I think we all will be impressed and he can sign his new contract then.

The problem is there was so much to fix/change. I think the defense did very well last year and with an offensive infusion this year and a better understanding of the blocking the OL will be much improved, the WR's will hopefully be much improved with atleast 1 FA WR, 1 drafted WR, and Hankerson. Our RB's played admirably but I might draft 1 big bull dozing RB for short yardage unless they are happy with the Fullback. I don't think we are 1 player away but I think we are closer then everyone thinks when it comes to making the playoffs and making a run for the SB.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

This is another topic. Everyone is on the bandwagon that if he has another bad year he's gone. No matter what. Personally I think after 10 yrs of whatever D.Snyder was doing not working out I think he's trying something different. Consistancy. I think there was a huge improvement from year one with our WR's and OL this year. Other point to yards and points and say otherwise but the team looked more like a team. I think given his full 5 years I think we all will be impressed and he can sign his new contract then.

The problem is there was so much to fix/change. I think the defense did very well last year and with an offensive infusion this year and a better understanding of the blocking the OL will be much improved, the WR's will hopefully be much improved with atleast 1 FA WR, 1 drafted WR, and Hankerson. Our RB's played admirably but I might draft 1 big bull dozing RB for short yardage unless they are happy with the Fullback. I don't think we are 1 player away but I think we are closer then everyone thinks when it comes to making the playoffs and making a run for the SB.

The problem I have with acknowledging the improvement from year one to year two of the Shanahan clan is that you have to ignore how much the team (offense and defense) declined from year one B.S. (before Shanahan) to the first year of the Shanahan clan. If you understand statistical regression, it makes what was accomplished this year sort of expected.

And giving him credit for tearing apart any established talent on the team before heroically leading the offense back to where Jim Zorn and Steve Spurrier had gone before just seems like an aggressive ploy to give meaning to an era of Redskins football that has been pretty meaningless. But that's just me.

With that said, I don't have a huge problem with how Mike Shanahan has attempted to solve the problem he got handed in 2010. It's just that I think that both the execution and results have been clumsy. I believe that Shanahan's model could have been replicated by about 27 other coaches in this league with more success. Of course, those 27 are employed by other teams and it's not like we could have just hired them away, so this is probably just sour grapes on my part. Might as well live with what we have.

And if what we have next year is Rob Chudzynski, I think we'll all be better for it.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

The problem I have with acknowledging the improvement from year one to year two of the Shanahan clan is that you have to ignore how much the team (offense and defense) declined from year one B.S. (before Shanahan) to the first year of the Shanahan clan. If you understand statistical regression, it makes what was accomplished this year sort of expected.

And giving him credit for tearing apart any established talent on the team before heroically leading the offense back to where Jim Zorn and Steve Spurrier had gone before just seems like an aggressive ploy to give meaning to an era of Redskins football that has been pretty meaningless. But that's just me.

With that said, I don't have a huge problem with how Mike Shanahan has attempted to solve the problem he got handed in 2010. It's just that I think that both the execution and results have been clumsy. I believe that Shanahan's model could have been replicated by about 27 other coaches in this league with more success. Of course, those 27 are employed by other teams and it's not like we could have just hired them away, so this is probably just sour grapes on my part. Might as well live with what we have.

And if what we have next year is Rob Chudzynski, I think we'll all be better for it.

I have to agree with you. But I think this team had soo much change going on year in and year out nothing could get done. and to top it off the changes were not condusive to what they wanted to do. Gibbs1 used big heavy OL who were slow. Turner got rid of that and tried to get smaller faster OL. By the end of his career I think he was reverting back to the heavy OL. Marty didn't have a chance. Spurrier was an idiot. Gibbs2 meant bringing in big OL again and by year 2 Saunders wanted smaller faster OL. Zorn wanted to start using the WCO which needs smaller OL and using the zone blocking would have been better but he had OL who were used to man blocking.

MS came in and basically thought he could get by with what we had and it didn't work. So year 2 he sheds some of the aged players and brings in young healthy players. Now they need to get expierence. I think yr3 will look a lot better since these guys will know the system better. WR is definitly a need. I'd keep Gaffney and AA, lose Moss(age), Austin, Banks, and bring in a couple FA WR's if possible and draft another to compliment Hankerson.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

...And if what we have next year is Rob Chudzynski, I think we'll all be better for it.

If everything hits the fan this year we would be lucky, very lucky to land to Rob Chudzinksi.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

It is really a remarkable conundrum that Mike Shanahan has built for himself.

Ultimately what people say doesn't matter. If he trades up for RG3 and doesn't have enough depth to win, he's gone. If he sits tight at the quarterback position and builds depth and can't win close games because he doesn't trust the fifth quarterback he handpicked, he's gone. If he goes after Peyton Manning and bypasses a QB in the draft again and Peyton doesn't work out, he's gone.

And yet, if he completely and totally screws up the offseason but leads the team into a 10-6 finish in the regular season, then he gets his contract extended and everybody loves him. Because that's how the NFL works.

Sad, but very true!