Peyton Manning or RGIII your choice

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 44Deezel

They would have won 4 with Rivers and those picks they traded to San Diego

I think they would have been better with Rivers, but if you believe the reports, the guy they were going to take at no. 4 was Roethlisberger.

[Bubba305-ST21-]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

Fact is Eli didn't flop, they won two Super Bowls, so they don't regret it. There comes a time when you gotta take the risk. If you never take the risk, your reward will never be as high as you want. Sure the higher the risk the higher the potential failure, but that's better than hovering in mediocrities your whole life.

I feel ya, I completely agree. If we keep up what we have been doing and not draft a young stud, all of our key/young players will be past their prime and have to be replaced by the time we do. Not much reward comes with no risk

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Now is not the time. We are in the middle of a rebuild. Sure you take risks, but you have to know when to take them.

If the time isn't now to get our QB then when is the time?

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

If the time isn't now to get our QB then when is the time?

Next years class [Always]> This Years Class

Why don't you guys read my BLOG?!?!11

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

If the time isn't now to get our QB then when is the time?

When we can afford to give up a bunch of draft picks. Right now, it's draft picks that infuse your team with young talent and keeps your salary cap down.


This was Vinny's main problem. He pissed away those draft picks that would have kept the salary cap down and the talent level young and fresh. No, he though he'd piss the picks away for "proven" players, throw a ton of cash on them. So when these players didn't pan out, not only was he out of the young talent he could have had from the draft picks, but now his salary cap is ruined due to signing guys like this. Vinny's team had absolute 0 depth to them, which is why you saw the team take a dive in 2009 when a couple starters went down. Not only that, but he had to make up for the loss of draft picks via free agency which further killed the salary cap, and he had to keep renegotiating these old contracts just to fit under the cap each year.

That's exactly what happens when you gamble and have nothing to back it up. Right now, teams that have a 50/50 record in the draft are considered incredible and downright geniuses. This is the primary reason why you need all the draft picks you can get. The more you have, the higher the chances you'll land more productive players. Bill Belicheck isn't a dummy. There is a reason he keeps trading his picks away for more picks. It's a numbers game. More picks mean more chances.

Right now. We need all the chances we can get.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

When we can afford to give up a bunch of draft picks. Right now, it's draft picks that infuse your team with young talent and keeps your salary cap down.


This was Vinny's main problem. He pissed away those draft picks that would have kept the salary cap down and the talent level young and fresh. No, he though he'd piss the picks away for "proven" players, throw a ton of cash on them. So when these players didn't pan out, not only was he out of the young talent he could have had from the draft picks, but now his salary cap is ruined due to signing guys like this. Vinny's team had absolute 0 depth to them, which is why you saw the team take a dive in 2009 when a couple starters went down. Not only that, but he had to make up for the loss of draft picks via free agency which further killed the salary cap, and he had to keep renegotiating these old contracts just to fit under the cap each year.

That's exactly what happens when you gamble and have nothing to back it up. Right now, teams that have a 50/50 record in the draft are considered incredible and downright geniuses. This is the primary reason why you need all the draft picks you can get. The more you have, the higher the chances you'll land more productive players. Bill Belicheck isn't a dummy. There is a reason he keeps trading his picks away for more picks. It's a numbers game. More picks mean more chances.

Right now. We need all the chances we can get.

The reason Belichick keeps trading away picks for more picks in future years is because he knows if he has a year where he cashes in and makes 12 draft picks and five in the first two rounds, he's just going to have to cut young talent for someone else to pick up. So he pushes the draft value into future years so it's not wasted by roster constraint.

I disagree that trading draft picks for other draft picks is somehow costing you value in the long run. It shouldn't be. I agree that the Redskins should be looking to trade up on the Redskins own terms. Not the Rams terms. Not the Browns terms. Exploring all options means that if you're willing to move up and name your own price to do so, and you can get a trade you like, you do it. What would be wrong is trading up to no. 2 without negotiating the price just to ensure you get RG3. That's not good business.

If the value of moving up is worth an additional pick, then sometimes it makes sense to trade that additional pick. If the value is an additional pick, and the other side wants three picks, then you have a negotiation, not a deal.

[los panda]

that is a sick car. i'm still far off from getting my dream car on the road, 1969 chevelle ss

[Ruhskins]

Unless there is something wrong that MS sees in RG3, I really don't see why he wouldn't go after him. There is always the risk of any rookie to not work out. But I just feel that if for some reason RG3 is a bust, it would be hard to get on MS' case for taking a risk on a highly touted QB of the future.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Unless there is something wrong that MS sees in RG3, I really don't see why he wouldn't go after him. There is always the risk of any rookie to not work out. But I just feel that if for some reason RG3 is a bust, it would be hard to get on MS' case for taking a risk on a highly touted QB of the future.

Especially one with no obvious red flags. Whats not to love about a genius with world class athletic ability and leadership skills not to mention experience turning joke of a football program into a contender?

[Ruhskins]

Would this team be able to win more games than this past season's team:

QB: RG3(starter), Clausen (backup)
RB: Helu, Hightower, Royster
FB: Young
TEs: Cooley, Davis, Paulsen
WR 1: (VJax, Bowe, or Colston) WR 2: Hank WR 3: Moss or Gaffney
OT: T. Williams, Free Agent RT
OG: Chester, Grubbs
C: Montgomery

[los panda]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Would this team be able to win more games than this past season's team:

QB: RG3(starter), Clausen (backup)
RB: Helu, Hightower, Royster
FB: Young
TEs: Cooley, Davis, Paulsen
WR 1: (VJax, Bowe, or Colston) WR 2: Hank WR 3: Moss or Gaffney
OT: T. Williams, Free Agent RT
OG: Chester, Grubbs
C: Montgomery

yes

[Son Of Man]

I keep hearing the "we can't afford to take risks"...."let's stockpile our picks" arguement.

It's like a guy who gets his undergrad degree...gets offered a high paying job with big bonus incentives (performance based of course)...and turns it down because he doesn't want to risk not getting his MBA before hitting the field. He takes more years, gets his MBA, and comes out making the same money he was offered after undergrad...then he realizes that he could have "taken a risk", took the job, earned his MBA part-time, built up his resume and would have been making more $$$$.


Long and corny way to say....get our QB of the future and build around him while we develop him. Don't be afraid to multi-task.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Son Of Man

Long and corny way to say....get our QB of the future and build around him while we develop him. Don't be afraid to multi-task.

Well you wouldn't be able to surround the young QB with a lot of new talent this season (since you'd be giving up picks), but possibly the next season.

[Son Of Man]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Well you wouldn't be able to surround the young QB with a lot of new talent this season (since you'd be giving up picks), but possibly the next season.

...and the season after that...and the season after that....and

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Son Of Man

...and the season after that...and the season after that....and

Not to step on Dirtbag's toes because this is kind of his territory, but you can do it either way. Sure you can give up one draft and try to land the best QB, because eventually, if the player pans out, you will make up for it in the long run.

That's never not true. You can also do what NC_Skins is suggesting, and build up your roster this season...and the season after that...and the season after that, until you find the QB of your future is already on your roster. That happens sometimes.

Most teams prefer to do it your way: get the quarterback, fill in the rest later. The Parcells/Belichick model is really the only one that suggests you can find your quarterback internally if you keep picking intriguing guys that one else believes in, which is why Brady is where he is and Romo is where he is.

Getting RG3 and building around him later isn't a wrong move, but you still have to be VERY comfortable with the player, if the actual return on the investment isn't going to be noticeable for five or six years. If you're comfortable with the player, I say go for it. But then don't try to trade for Jay Cutler three years in when you haven't yet received ROI.