Mark Sanchez at 13th?

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

How many superbowls did he win again? What team did he become a franchise QB for? what team was able to build around him for continued long-term success?

If you want to luck into a "one hit wonder" superbowl appearance and have a career of mediocrity, thats what Jason Campbell may give you. If you want continued success, we need to look elsewhere.

I think the better question, or atleast what I feel like has been said repeatedly. Is how many SB's did the Hogs, and the Coach's system give us. Most of us look at the 80s era as the glory of the Skins, a TEAM that won consistently year in year out, no "franchise" player but rather OL/DL's that were physical and renowned and home grown.

And yes I would take the 80s - early 90s over hunting and pecking changing coaches/qbs/systems every two years when the current golden child is no longer so golden.

New England isn't having this decade due to Brady, but because of the system-stability- and smart long term patient moves. Same with Pittsburgh. Same with Philly.
Build the TEAM, not grab the current hot babe.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

If we draft Sanchez I might have to take a step back from being a Skins fan for a while. That's how ticked I will be, I'll have one foot out the door.

I agree. I mean, I always be a fan, but I just wonder how many times Danny and Co have to fall flat on their face before they realize their methods are broken. I wonder if the fact that McDaniels didn't want Campbell has Danny so intent on finding his replacement. That impulsive little idiot will never get it. I'm convinced. We have so many holes, and QB is not one of them. We already know we have a solid QB. Why mortgage the future (and the present given our needs)? Sanchez could just as easily be Joey Harrington, Alex Smith, or Heath Shuler as he could be Matt Ryan.

It's frustrating that the team I've loved my whole life is run by one of the youngest owners in the league who is intent on repeating the same behavior over and over and expecting different results. Danny isn't going anywhere for a long, long time. If he doesn't change his ways, I guess I better get used to the fact that I won't see consistent success for the rest of my life, literally.

How can such a sharp business man be so friggin dumb? He covets all these big names, and I'm sure he covets the success of the premier franchises these days (NE, Pitt, etc). So why on earth can't he take a page from their book? Build from the inside out, Napoleon.

[drew54]

Originally Posted by GMScud

Sanchez could just as easily be Joey Harrington, Alex Smith, or Heath Shuler as he could be Matt Ryan.

Didn't we end up trading back for Ramsey after we failed to trade up for Joey Harrington. Anyone else remember Dan talking outside of the War Room on draft day that year.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

1) Does it bother you at all that you're alone in the assumption that Jason Campbell's skill set doesn't play in the WCO? You're okay assuming that your assessment is sufficient to warrant dismissal?

No, it doesnt, because i'm not alone. Multipe sources were sited as saying this a year ago. Every paid professional that i can recall reading questioned the move, and JCs ability to transiton. While no one on this forum seems to share my view, its a common belief in other forums i visit and amongst my friends. So really, the only place where i go that i don't find anyone beleiving this simple fact is here. It doesnt bother me at all, but i do wonder why you cant see something thats clear as day to me. I guess everyone is entitled to beleive what they want some people are convinced in a God, others are convinced the mere notion is completely idiotic. Both views can't be right, but staunch supporters of either position will never be convinced that the other side is right. I view it as a similar situation here. From my POV, you have blind faith in Campbells success in this system. In my view, all the evidence points to the contrary. Im open to every possibility, but i won't beleive it until i see it.

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

2) It's a legitimate question regarding Heyer, but I'm not sure I'd say we've seen steady improvement. He came into the league with good pass blocking fundamentals, and he still has no idea how to properly execute a toss play.

Ultimately though, Heyer is a different issue altogether, because Jason Campbell was a well polished first round quarterback out of college, and Stephon Heyer was a developmental tackle who went undrafted.

I agree with what you say about Heyer vs Jason based on their starting point (Campbell-High, Heyer-Low) but for those same reasons, i feel the ceiling is lower for Campbell than it is for Heyer. Campbell clearly showed what he was capeable of, which is why he was drafted so high. With Heyer, he has much more room to improve, if that makes sense.

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I'm all for playing the young guys on this team, but he has to at least prove he can be the best option first. Jason Campbell has already proven he's the best option we have right now. There's no veteran, established QB on the trading block who would be a significant upgrade over Campbell. Therefore, improving on him is a non-issue.

Excluding the draft, i dont think we could make significant improvements over either Heyer or Campbell, so improving on either of them prior to the drafu is a non-issue.

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Again, nobody thinks that Sanchez would be an improvement over Campbell. I do think some people are suggesting we start rebuilding with a QB in this draft, and go all-young...except we just signed a 28-year old DT to an 100 million dollar contract, so, it's a little late for that.

"No one" on this forum seems to think Sanchez would be an upgrade over Campbell... but that doesnt mean "no one." Obviously, there arent alot of people making direct comparisons out there, but most teams have Sanchez rated as the best QB in the draft. The Lions are the only team that seems to prefer Stafford and i'm not really sure why... oh, thats right - they're the Lions. Anyway, with Campbell, we know what we're getting. He's a classy mild mannered guy who doesnt make mistakes. With Sanchez, we're getting a guy who has all the physical tools Campbell has, but with the "it" factor. He also has had the advantage of being in only one system the past 3 years.... as opposed to the 7? Campbells been in in the past 9?.

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I'll throw a question back at you: If the Redskins draft Sanchez with the 13th pick and they cut Todd Collins (and not Jason Campbell), who would you start on opening day: Campbell, Brennan, or Sanchez?

Interesting you bring that up, since CP was just talking about that.
Clinton Portis Talks Sanchez in Interview with NFL Live crew - Hogs Haven

I've rambled on enough, but suffice to say, I'd be thrilled in that scenario: Let them compete for it, let them both make eachother better, and let the best man win.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Every paid professional that i can recall reading questioned the move, and JCs ability to transiton.

Many did prior to the season and by game 5 or 6 were speaking about JC as playing at a Pro Bowl or potential MVP level.

I view it as a similar situation here. From my POV, you have blind faith in Campbells success in this system. In my view, all the evidence points to the contrary. Im open to every possibility, but i won't beleive it until i see it.

Here's the problem, you won't accept the evidence that supports the point that JC is getting better. QB rating improvements, etc. provided by many on this forum in response to your posts. The main reason I come to this forum is because in general the folks here make their points with more than anecdotes to back them up (and that includes you, on any other issue than JC, your posts are normally well thought out)

"No one" on this forum seems to think Sanchez would be an upgrade over Campbell... but that doesnt mean "no one." Obviously, there arent alot of people making direct comparisons out there, but most teams have Sanchez rated as the best QB in the draft.

"Many" had Ryan Leaf rated as the best QB in his draft and above Peyton Manning. Even if Sanchez is the best QB in this draft, he only has one year of starting experience at USC which is stockpiled with talent and overmatches almost every team they play against with shear talent. How can you truly evaluate him in that environment? Hell, if you put me on the field with the talent at USC I'd put up numbers.

Interesting you bring that up, since CP was just talking about that.
Clinton Portis Talks Sanchez in Interview with NFL Live*crew - Hogs Haven

Yes, and he said he believed JC would win the job. (and I generally do not cite CP as a talent evaluator)

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

No, it doesnt, because i'm not alone. Multipe sources were sited as saying this a year ago. Every paid professional that i can recall reading questioned the move, and JCs ability to transiton. While no one on this forum seems to share my view, its a common belief in other forums i visit and amongst my friends. So really, the only place where i go that i don't find anyone beleiving this simple fact is here. It doesnt bother me at all, but i do wonder why you cant see something thats clear as day to me. I guess everyone is entitled to beleive what they want some people are convinced in a God, others are convinced the mere notion is completely idiotic. Both views can't be right, but staunch supporters of either position will never be convinced that the other side is right. I view it as a similar situation here. From my POV, you have blind faith in Campbells success in this system. In my view, all the evidence points to the contrary. Im open to every possibility, but i won't beleive it until i see it.


I agree with what you say about Heyer vs Jason based on their starting point (Campbell-High, Heyer-Low) but for those same reasons, i feel the ceiling is lower for Campbell than it is for Heyer. Campbell clearly showed what he was capeable of, which is why he was drafted so high. With Heyer, he has much more room to improve, if that makes sense.


Excluding the draft, i dont think we could make significant improvements over either Heyer or Campbell, so improving on either of them prior to the drafu is a non-issue.


"No one" on this forum seems to think Sanchez would be an upgrade over Campbell... but that doesnt mean "no one." Obviously, there arent alot of people making direct comparisons out there, but most teams have Sanchez rated as the best QB in the draft. The Lions are the only team that seems to prefer Stafford and i'm not really sure why... oh, thats right - they're the Lions. Anyway, with Campbell, we know what we're getting. He's a classy mild mannered guy who doesnt make mistakes. With Sanchez, we're getting a guy who has all the physical tools Campbell has, but with the "it" factor. He also has had the advantage of being in only one system the past 3 years.... as opposed to the 7? Campbells been in in the past 9?.


Interesting you bring that up, since CP was just talking about that.
Clinton Portis Talks Sanchez in Interview with NFL Live*crew - Hogs Haven

I've rambled on enough, but suffice to say, I'd be thrilled in that scenario: Let them compete for it, let them both make eachother better, and let the best man win.

You're a smart guy, BHA. You're just sufficiently been beaten at this QB discussion, and hardly just by myself, to the point where you are left clinging to non-points and non-realities in the hope that someone might join in soon.

But seriously, clinging to arguments like "it" factor and "ceiling space" are best left to those other fourms you speak of and the friends who will back your opinions no matter what you say. Here, you know, we tend to see that as less of a difference of opinion, and more of a "he's grasping for straws" kind of thing. I like to poke fun at myself and other people when things are said, but once you start using phrases like "can't handle the pressure" and "doesn't have 'it'" and "just a bad fit here", you are no longer making a reasonable argument.

I understand you may rationalize Campbell's continued presence under center as a poor scheme fit, but we can all see through it as a weak cop out because you obviously don't like the guy. We're not stupid, BHA. We've seen you suggest that we should bring in Chris Simms, trade multiple first round picks for Jay Cutler, and now trade up for Mark Sanchez. You can see as clearly as we can how much these things would hurt the team and you've even suggested that we'd be better off losing a ton of games in the short term than not improving the team for the next 5 years or so.

Obviously, that's indicitive of an inconsistent value system. Empircially, whether you like him or not, Jason Campbell is by far the best option for the short term health and possibly long term health of the franchise. Any move that pushes him to the side of the road hurts the team in the short term for sure, and likely the long term as well. The fact that you've been a proponent of not just one, but pretty much all ideas that do this makes it plain as day to me that you are less concerned about the success of this team the next two years than you are that we go at it with someone else than Campbell.

Basically once you perceive the VERY WORST POSSIBLE OUTCOME FOR ALL THINGS CAMPBELL'S FUTURE, your position becomes defensable. And by the same token, you've pretty much wished the worst on the team you choose to root for. I can't understand how you and your buddies can sit around pontificating about how much better things will be when we get rid of JC, and that's not a philosophical difference.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

It amazes me that some still can't see the writing on the wall. Last year through the first 8 games JC was getting the protection he needed and the rest of the offense was playing well, and what do you know JC was playing well. In the final 8 games he was under pressure and the rest of the offense crumbled around him, and surprise surprise he struggled. It doesn't get any more obvious to me what the issues were.

First of all, during the first half of the season, JC wasn't doing all that great. He was still just averaging 1 TD per game. The only thing JC wasnt doing was throwing picks. I'd take a QB who throws 3 TDs and 2 INTs per game over a guy who doesnt make mistakes any day of the week - TDs = 7Points. INTs just mean you turn the ball over - they dont always result in points and probably wouldnt result in too many TDs with this defense.

Secondly, how JC fared in the 2nd half of the season says all we need to know about him - he can't handle pressure.

The O-line declined in the 2nd half of the year, but barring the game where our backup center was playing Left Tackle and blocking one of the best pass rushers in the league, it was still one of the better O-lines in the league (and by that i mean top 16). Yes, the line declined, but JC didnt adapt. He didnt step up. He didn't get rid of the ball faster and he didnt become more accurate with his short passes. JC, like alot of "good" QBs out there are only considered good because they have a GREAT supporting cast.

I guess there are two different philosophies:
1) Have a GREAT suppoting cast so you can get by with a GOOD QB, or
2) HAVE a GREAT QB so you can get by with a GOOD supporting cast.

IMO its easier to get one GREAT player than it is to get 21 others.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

First of all, during the first half of the season, JC wasn't doing all that great. He was still just averaging 1 TD per game. The only thing JC wasnt doing was throwing picks. I'd take a QB who throws 3 TDs and 2 INTs per game over a guy who doesnt make mistakes any day of the week - TDs = 7Points. INTs just mean you turn the ball over - they dont always result in points and probably wouldnt result in too many TDs with this defense.

The most important stat in determining W-L in the NFL is turnover ratio. I'll take an efficient QB over a gunslinger every day of the week and twice on Sunday. As long as the offense is putting up TDs, last I checked a Rush TD was scored the same as a pass TD. INTs aren't "just" a turnover. They are a momentum swing and a potential point change of 10 to 14 points in many cases.

The O-line declined in the 2nd half of the year, but barring the game where our backup center was playing Left Tackle and blocking one of the best pass rushers in the league, it was still one of the better O-lines in the league (and by that i mean top 16).

Our OL was statistically performing in the bottom third of the league the second half of the season. Kind of hard to step into a pocket when it is collapsing in your face.

2) HAVE a GREAT QB so you can get by with a GOOD supporting cast.

Did you check out Peyton Manning's numbers early in the season while Indy was having OL issues?

IMO its easier to get one GREAT player than it is to get 21 others.

What if you miss on Sanchez and he isn't great? Then we're in a world of doo-doo as I mentioned in an earlier post.

[cochise]

USC made Sanchez and not the other way around. He's a career back-up at best.

[Dirtbag59]

So the real question is this. When we send Seattle or Kansas city this years first and next years first and draft Mr. USC will you support Sanchez?

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag359

So the real question is this. When we send Seattle or Kansas city this years first and next years first and draft Mr. USC will you support Sanchez?

Of course some would, but then they would bust the FO's chops for it later if he fails to produce. Please let this be a smoke screen, or even just due diligence.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Please let this be a smoke screen, or even just due diligence.

Agreed 100%, one glimmer of hope, we did bring in J. Russell an nothing happened there.

[Chico23231]

Sanchez isnt that good, I never saw a game or hightlight where he impressed me (UVA game does not count). He is, for sure, not close to be ready to be under center at least for 2-3 more years in the NFL. Pete Carrol begged him to come back because he was not ready. We have been building with Jason and I feel we could be a good O-Linemen away from a serious playoff run. If Jason fails this year, there are better QBs, NFL ready QBs, coming out next year. Or who knows, Colt did show a little bit last year, maybe he will be ready to lead next year. The draft is such a crap shoot, and I will support who ever we get, but the best direction for this draft is to get a beast O-lineman and OLB.

[53Fan]

BHA. Sometimes a wise man just has to realize his folly and stop pursuing it.

[CRedskinsRule]

BHA, do you think Sanchez will be "Franchise" great, or great because he is the best in this draft?
Another way to phrase it, If Sanchez had taken Carrol's supposed advice and stayed in till next year, would you be advocating wait for him next year, or get the next best one after Stafford?
I think you want a Superstar qb so bad, and you know in your heart JC isn't it, that you are willing to take just about any qb out there and proclaim him the next "Franchise".

My answers to my questions:
Sanchez is not a sure hit franchise player.
If he came out next year he might be the 4th best behind Tebow and others.

Further, he knows that, and knows that this year he can get top 10 money and like a smart business man, he is catching the cash now.