Commanders Post at The Warpath  

Home | Forums | Donate | Shop




Go Back   Commanders Post at The Warpath > Commanders Football > Locker Room Main Forum

Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion


Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

Locker Room Main Forum


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-29-2012, 10:50 PM   #1
GTripp0012
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 38
Posts: 15,994
Re: Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirtbag59 View Post
I can't believe we would pass up the chance to pick a once in a decade QB because we weren't happy with our current situation at RT and LG. It is infinity easier to fill those positions then it is to fill the QB spot.
This easily falls in the category of nitpicking, but I have a tough time seeing how a once in a decade QB would be available with the second pick in his own draft. And how the team with the second pick would then trade the pick because "you know what, we're good!"
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline  
Old 02-29-2012, 10:54 PM   #2
Dirtbag59
Naega jeil jal naga
 
Dirtbag59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Atlanta, Georgia From: Silver Spring, Maryland
Age: 40
Posts: 14,750
Re: Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
This easily falls in the category of nitpicking, but I have a tough time seeing how a once in a decade QB would be available with the second pick in his own draft. And how the team with the second pick would then trade the pick because "you know what, we're good!"
The last QB with his physical skill-set was Vick in 2001. It's been 11 years since an athlete at the QB position like RG3 has come along so thats what I meant by once in a decade. Of course unlike his predecessor he can actually complete passes especially the deep ball as I'm learning from watching his game against TCU. Being in the same draft as Luck is just a crazy coincidence.
__________________
"It's nice to be important, but its more important to be nice."
- Scooter

"I feel like Dirtbag has been slowly and methodically trolling the board for a month or so now."
- FRPLG
Dirtbag59 is offline  
Old 03-01-2012, 01:04 AM   #3
CultBrennan59
Pro Bowl
 
CultBrennan59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 6,526
Re: Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GusFrerotte View Post
Why are you ready to give up the bank for one player? I wouldn't give up the bank for Luck either. This team has no depth and most of our starting O line would be backups for the better teams in the league. Yeah go ahead and break the bank for RG III and with no O line to block for him he will result to being Vick in ATL. No thanks. Build the team right for a change. We have broken the bank trying to get the "sexy" pick only to have it blow up in our face all the time. Not knocking RG III, but we have serious holes on our fav team, and giving up mulitple first rounders or even multiple second round picks would be detrimental. Go for Tannehill or Weeden, or even Moore if it means keeping picks or gaining them. We need fresh young talent. What happens to our D if Fletcher leaves, or other stalwarts decide to bolt? Then you are in a big hole without picks in the future. RG III is a very talented guy, but so is Cam Newton and I am not sure Cam is going to win a SB in the near future if at all. A QB can't win a game on his own.
I'm ready to give up the bank for one player, because that one player just doesn't simply come out every year. I would give up the bank for Luck, because the risk is way smaller with the reward. Theres a reason why he's been talked about as a first overall pick since day one when he got to Stanford. Theres a reason why scouts can't find a negative on him. But anyway back to RG3.

True, we have holes in our whole team, and yeah we should start thinking more of the worst case scenarios like if London and LaRon leave, then that top 10 defense goes bye bye. Our OL has holes, yes, but keep this in mind; Our LT is considered a top ten LT by a lot of football analysts. Our LG tore his ACL last year, but he was considered to be our best OL up to that point. Our Center surprised a lot of people and played very well. Our RG was probably the most consistent player on the whole OL. Our RT is where we suck. We have depth at Guard with Hurt, Polumbus/Smith could easily be good back ups for us. Really, and this is IMO, we just need to get another guard FA or draft, and a RT which we can draft. There is a LOT of great tackles in this years draft, and RT's are easier to find then LTs.

But back to the QB, keep this in mind:

If you hit on the right QB, then suddenly all those holes on your team will disappear.

Players on your defense start playing at a higher level because they know mentally "hey if we just make a stop here, we can put our great QB back on the field to get us some points." instead of "crap, whether we make a stop or not, Rex is just gonna put us back on the field in two snaps anyway."

And on offense players try harder when they have a good QB. And OL, they look a lot better when they have a good QB who has good awareness and pocket prescience. Look at Big Ben, he, like RG3, makes plays with his feet and buys time in the pocket. There is absolutely no way you can tell me that his OL is better than ours. NO WAY. Peytons OL in Indy for many years wasn't as good as ours, but they won games because their QB was smart.

RG3 is athletic, fast, has a good pocket prescience, is smart, and is a quick passer. He's the kind of player that makes teams put 8 in the box respecting his running game, then Bam! he throws a beautiful dart downfield on play action, which forces the other team to put 7 in the box now, which gets the running game and RG3 rollouts going again.
__________________
"Anyones better than Madieu Williams"
CultBrennan59 is offline  
Old 03-01-2012, 06:59 AM   #4
44Deezel
The Starter
 
44Deezel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Davidsonville
Posts: 1,783
Re: Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

Quote:
Originally Posted by CultBrennan59 View Post
I'm ready to give up the bank for one player, because that one player just doesn't simply come out every year. I would give up the bank for Luck, because the risk is way smaller with the reward. Theres a reason why he's been talked about as a first overall pick since day one when he got to Stanford. Theres a reason why scouts can't find a negative on him. But anyway back to RG3.

True, we have holes in our whole team, and yeah we should start thinking more of the worst case scenarios like if London and LaRon leave, then that top 10 defense goes bye bye. Our OL has holes, yes, but keep this in mind; Our LT is considered a top ten LT by a lot of football analysts. Our LG tore his ACL last year, but he was considered to be our best OL up to that point. Our Center surprised a lot of people and played very well. Our RG was probably the most consistent player on the whole OL. Our RT is where we suck. We have depth at Guard with Hurt, Polumbus/Smith could easily be good back ups for us. Really, and this is IMO, we just need to get another guard FA or draft, and a RT which we can draft. There is a LOT of great tackles in this years draft, and RT's are easier to find then LTs.

But back to the QB, keep this in mind:

If you hit on the right QB, then suddenly all those holes on your team will disappear.

Players on your defense start playing at a higher level because they know mentally "hey if we just make a stop here, we can put our great QB back on the field to get us some points." instead of "crap, whether we make a stop or not, Rex is just gonna put us back on the field in two snaps anyway."

And on offense players try harder when they have a good QB. And OL, they look a lot better when they have a good QB who has good awareness and pocket prescience. Look at Big Ben, he, like RG3, makes plays with his feet and buys time in the pocket. There is absolutely no way you can tell me that his OL is better than ours. NO WAY. Peytons OL in Indy for many years wasn't as good as ours, but they won games because their QB was smart.

RG3 is athletic, fast, has a good pocket prescience, is smart, and is a quick passer. He's the kind of player that makes teams put 8 in the box respecting his running game, then Bam! he throws a beautiful dart downfield on play action, which forces the other team to put 7 in the box now, which gets the running game and RG3 rollouts going again.

Every team has holes, by the way. The Giants were dead last in rushing and the Pats had one of the worst Defenses in the league. Our O line was producing 100 yard rushers on a regular basis late in the season and our QBs were hardly running for their lives all year. The O line being crap is an outdated argument.

I'm not saying that we should or shouldn't make the move for RGIIi. I'm just saying that the argument about our O line being in shambles and having holes everywhere doesn't compute and shouldn't deter us from making bold moves. Good QB play makes up for a lot of deficiencies and QB is clearly our biggest need.
__________________
I am a system poster.
44Deezel is offline  
Old 02-29-2012, 08:20 PM   #5
MTK
Hail Raiser
 
MTK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 53
Posts: 100,050
Re: Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

Peter Schrager of Fox Sports has little doubt the Redskins will "end up making the most aggressive (and fruitful) play for RG3" in the draft.

Schrager: Post-NFL Scouting Combine mock draft - NFL News | FOX Sports on MSN
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
MTK is offline  
Old 02-29-2012, 09:27 PM   #6
Mahons21
Camp Scrub
 
Mahons21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 56
Re: Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

Draft Breakdown — Search Results — Kirk Cousins

Some good footage of cousins for those of you with some spare time on their hands.
Mahons21 is offline  
Old 02-29-2012, 09:55 PM   #7
GusFrerotte
Registered User
 
GusFrerotte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Detroit area
Posts: 4,153
Re: Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahons21 View Post
Draft Breakdown — Search Results — Kirk Cousins

Some good footage of cousins for those of you with some spare time on their hands.

No to any MSU QB plain and simple. I am a Michigander and a Big Ten guy, and see MSU often. I like Cousins, but I don't see him any higher than the rest of the MSU Qbs in the NFL now, backups at best. MSU QBs do well because the program always seems to recruit TO type guys at WR.
GusFrerotte is offline  
Old 03-01-2012, 01:43 AM   #8
30gut
Playmaker
 
30gut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,323
Re: Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahons21 View Post
Draft Breakdown — Search Results — Kirk Cousins

Some good footage of cousins for those of you with some spare time on their hands.
Check this out too:

Haven't had time to digest the whole thing but even early you can see flashes of NFL level arm talent that some may doubt:

o deep out @55s mark
30gut is offline  
Old 02-29-2012, 09:34 PM   #9
EARTHQUAKE2689
You did WHAT?!?
 
EARTHQUAKE2689's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In The Kitchen With Dyna.
Age: 37
Posts: 14,189
Re: Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

For Tannehill and Kaepernick to be equal or surperior athletes to Luck they would have to be equal or surperior to Cam Newton right?
__________________
https://open.spotify.com/artist/1NG9zNxqMP8cYNP72QqUQT

Shameless self-promotion. It is what it is.
EARTHQUAKE2689 is offline  
Old 02-29-2012, 09:39 PM   #10
30gut
Playmaker
 
30gut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,323
Re: Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

Quote:
Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689 View Post
For Tannehill and Kaepernick to be equal or surperior athletes to Luck they would have to be equal or surperior to Cam Newton right?
Nope.
But I guess you would have to think that if you think Luck is an equal or superior athlete to Newton.
I know that is what they tried to push in the media at the combine by touting Luck's unofficial 40 vs Newton's official 40 and forgetting that Newton is also taller, bigger, stronger.
But, to each there own.

Scratching my head as to whether we're all talking about the same Tannehill that was the leading WR for the Aggies 2 years in a row?
30gut is offline  
Old 02-29-2012, 09:46 PM   #11
redskins5044
Playmaker
 
redskins5044's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Schertz, Tx
Age: 46
Posts: 3,224
Re: Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 30gut View Post
Nope.
But I guess you would have to think that if you think Luck is an equal or superior athlete to Newton.
I know that is what they tried to push in the media at the combine by touting Luck's unofficial 40 vs Newton's official 40 and forgetting that Newton is also taller, bigger, stronger.
But, to each there own.

Scratching my head as to whether we're all talking about the same Tannehill that was the leading WR for the Aggies 2 years in a row?
I agree, and even RG3 combine results were overhyped. We already knew he was going to run a fast 40 time, have a good vertical, broad jump, and interview well. The kid is a smart with a good head on his shoulders, nothing new was learned at the combine, just the media needing something to talk about.
redskins5044 is offline  
Old 02-29-2012, 10:04 PM   #12
30gut
Playmaker
 
30gut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,323
Re: Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

Quote:
Originally Posted by redskins5044 View Post
I agree, and even RG3 combine results were overhyped. We already knew he was going to run a fast 40 time, have a good vertical, broad jump, and interview well. The kid is a smart with a good head on his shoulders, nothing new was learned at the combine, just the media needing something to talk about.
Flame suit on: I was actually dissappointed in Griffin's 40 time considering what he's capable of running.
We're talking about a rare specimen here.
A true to life Olympic caliber sprinter.

Now this has nothing to do with football, its not coming from that persepective at all but from a track prospective.
Marshall Faulk hinted at it but stopped short of explaining it.
I have a little bit of background in track myself and knowing that Griffin ran a 21.46/200m (IIRC) 2 years ago when he was a finalist for the Olympic trials, suggests using simple track logic that he should be around around a low 4.4 without breaking a sweat really.
If Griff really wanted to (i.e. trained) he could/should be capable of a lower 40 time, I'm talking low 4.3's.
And who knows he might put up that number at Baylor's pro day where the track will undoubtedly be faster.
BTW Vick's 4.33 was not ran at the combine so I'm not sure why he gets credit for that as his 'official' time.

end track specific rant back to football....

Last edited by 30gut; 02-29-2012 at 10:06 PM.
30gut is offline  
Old 02-29-2012, 10:41 PM   #13
44Deezel
The Starter
 
44Deezel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Davidsonville
Posts: 1,783
Re: Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 30gut View Post
Flame suit on: I was actually dissappointed in Griffin's 40 time considering what he's capable of running.
We're talking about a rare specimen here.
A true to life Olympic caliber sprinter.

Now this has nothing to do with football, its not coming from that persepective at all but from a track prospective.
Marshall Faulk hinted at it but stopped short of explaining it.
I have a little bit of background in track myself and knowing that Griffin ran a 21.46/200m (IIRC) 2 years ago when he was a finalist for the Olympic trials, suggests using simple track logic that he should be around around a low 4.4 without breaking a sweat really.
If Griff really wanted to (i.e. trained) he could/should be capable of a lower 40 time, I'm talking low 4.3's.
And who knows he might put up that number at Baylor's pro day where the track will undoubtedly be faster.
BTW Vick's 4.33 was not ran at the combine so I'm not sure why he gets credit for that as his 'official' time.

end track specific rant back to football....
How fast is Eli? I'll take some of that
__________________
I am a system poster.
44Deezel is offline  
Old 03-01-2012, 12:15 AM   #14
tryfuhl
Gamebreaker
 
tryfuhl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Waldorf, MD
Age: 42
Posts: 12,514
Re: Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 30gut View Post
Flame suit on: I was actually dissappointed in Griffin's 40 time considering what he's capable of running.
We're talking about a rare specimen here.
A true to life Olympic caliber sprinter.

Now this has nothing to do with football, its not coming from that persepective at all but from a track prospective.
Marshall Faulk hinted at it but stopped short of explaining it.
I have a little bit of background in track myself and knowing that Griffin ran a 21.46/200m (IIRC) 2 years ago when he was a finalist for the Olympic trials, suggests using simple track logic that he should be around around a low 4.4 without breaking a sweat really.
If Griff really wanted to (i.e. trained) he could/should be capable of a lower 40 time, I'm talking low 4.3's.
And who knows he might put up that number at Baylor's pro day where the track will undoubtedly be faster.
BTW Vick's 4.33 was not ran at the combine so I'm not sure why he gets credit for that as his 'official' time.

end track specific rant back to football....
yeah I was gonna say a track will be faster. His time is still fast.. he doesn't NEED to be faster.. I imagine a lot of his preparation was just maintaining physically.. but mostly mental prep
tryfuhl is offline  
Old 02-29-2012, 09:41 PM   #15
SmootSmack
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,256
Re: Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

Are we talking QB skillset or just pure athlete skillset? And will I regret asking this question?
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
We have no official affiliation with the Washington Commanders or the NFL.
Page generated in 1.10179 seconds with 11 queries