Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by celts32

I have a RG3 man crush at the moment but Manning/Tannehill has always made a hell of a lot of sense also.

What if it's Manning/Status Quo vs. RG3?

Like suppose we couldn't/didn't make any QB move this year other than make Manning our new starter? So we don't add any young QB prospect this year

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

What if it's Manning/Status Quo vs. RG3?

Like suppose we couldn't/didn't make any QB move this year other than make Manning our new starter? So we don't add any young QB prospect this year

Plan B should be trading for Hoyer on draft day if you ask me for a 3rd round pick.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

What if it's Manning/Status Quo vs. RG3?

Like suppose we couldn't/didn't make any QB move this year other than make Manning our new starter? So we don't add any young QB prospect this year

Blegh. That's a crappy scenario. I prefer RG3 right now, because the only way Manning makes sense is if we take someone to groom behind him.

What if he goes down 3 quarters into the season, having led us to a 9-3 season, and our only other options are Rex and Beck? And we get into the playoffs but get destroyed in our first game and we end up with a late first round draft pick, thus making the cost to move up and get our guy even greater?

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

What if it's Manning/Status Quo vs. RG3?

Like suppose we couldn't/didn't make any QB move this year other than make Manning our new starter? So we don't add any young QB prospect this year

No can do. We should protect the short- and long-term by having both PM and a real developmental (i.e., not Curtis Painter) QB.

[Chief X_Phackter]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

What if it's Manning/Status Quo vs. RG3?

Like suppose we couldn't/didn't make any QB move this year other than make Manning our new starter? So we don't add any young QB prospect this year

Not a fan of status quo. I think it has to be all in on either RG3 or Luck --- or Manning/Tannehill (or other rookie the staff feels comfortable to groom for 2-3 years down the road).

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

What if it's Manning/Status Quo vs. RG3?

Like suppose we couldn't/didn't make any QB move this year other than make Manning our new starter? So we don't add any young QB prospect this year

we have to add a young QB, the status quo has been the problem.

When you get down to Manning vs RG3, its all about the cost of RG3. It the cost is greater than our 6th and next years 1st, Manning is the way to go. But the thing is even if you get Manning you still have to add young QBs this year. Combo of Tannehill, Cousins, Foles, Clausen, Hoyer, Johnson, Quinn...

[celts32]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

What if it's Manning/Status Quo vs. RG3?

Like suppose we couldn't/didn't make any QB move this year other than make Manning our new starter? So we don't add any young QB prospect this year

It would be horrible and short sighted. If they sign Manning...IMO they need to draft Tannehill at #6 and not even fool around with it.

This is part of why i just want them to get RG3 and be done with it. I think signing Manning will take away all their aggressiveness to secure a long term QB upgrade. And that is one position that never just falls to you...teams routinely draft QB's higher then they are projected to go.

[REDSKINS4ever]

In looking at college games from last year, I was impressed with most of the QBs coming out last year. Luck, Rg3, Foles, Weeden, Tannehill. I've seen them all play and they all have the potential to be good quarterbacks at the next level. I was especially impressed with RG3 simply because he competed in a Big 12 conference that had Texas and Oklahoma as the heavy weights. That performance he showed against Oklahoma was one of the most impressive displays of quarterbacking that I had seen on the college level in a long time. I knew then that he would win the Heisman Trophy. And Baylor actually pulled off the upset against the Sooners in that game.

RG3 is the real deal. I don't see how he can bust like Russell or Andre Ware.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by REDSKINS4ever

In looking at college games from last year, I was impressed with most of the QBs coming out last year. Luck, Rg3, Foles, Weeden, Tannehill. I've seen them all play and they all have the potential to be good quarterbacks at the next level. I was especially impressed with RG3 simply because he competed in a Big 12 conference that had Texas and Oklahoma as the heavy weights. That performance he showed against Oklahoma was one of the most impressive displays of quarterbacking that I had seen on the college level in a long time. I knew then that he would win the Heisman Trophy. And Baylor actually pulled off the upset against the Sooners in that game.

RG3 is the real deal. I don't see how he can bust like Russell or Andre Ware.

There are a few other QB's from the big 12 ...Texas QB's....Simms and Young,how did they turn out?

[SmootSmack]

I hear Peter King is now also talking about the Seahawks' interest in Osweiller. 12 seems high for me, but its not my call

[celts32]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I hear Peter King is now also talking about the Seahawks' interest in Osweiller. 12 seems high for me, but its not my call

That's outlandish. QB's go higher then they should though routinely. only need to impress one team.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I hear Peter King is now also talking about the Seahawks' interest in Osweiller. 12 seems high for me, but its not my call

They took a guy last year that was projected to be a 3rd or 4th round Guard in the first as a tackle in James Carpenter with guys like Gabe Caremi, Derek Sherrod, Orlando Franklin, and a whole host of other tackle prospects on the board. Their interest in Osweiller at 12 doesn't surprise me in the least.

[skinster]

Earlier I heard a 3 way trade was possible with the vikings moving to 6, and the rams moving to 3. I thought of something that I don't think has been discussed yet. Supposedly we wanted Ponder last year with the 16 pick. What if we straight up traded the 6th overall pick for ponder and the vikings traded their 3rd overall and some more of whatever to get griffin? If the rams really want kalil (or someone else) and the vikings fell in love with griffin, I could definitely see this happening.

[Pigskins]

Originally Posted by skinster

Earlier I heard a 3 way trade was possible with the vikings moving to 6, and the rams moving to 3. I thought of something that I don't think has been discussed yet. Supposedly we wanted Ponder last year with the 16 pick. What if we straight up traded the 6th overall pick for ponder and the vikings traded their 3rd overall and some more of whatever to get griffin? If the rams really want kalil (or someone else) and the vikings fell in love with griffin, I could definitely see this happening.

dude no way we give up the 6th pick for ponder

[skinsguy]

If the idea is to trade up to draft RGIII, and to deal Orakpo to replace one or two of those high round draft picks, then I really don't see the big deal to be so critical on moving up. Even if we didn't deal Orakpo away to recover what we'd give up for RGIII, I'd say while it's a gamble, it's one that needs to happen. I'm certainly fine with picking up Peyton Manning and drafting a Tannehill or Nick Foles. That might still happen, but I would not be upset if the Redskins did what they could to get RGIII or even Luck.