Rumor from Denver

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by celts32

You can definitely win a Super bowl with Eli every season...he's clearly a franchise QB. Even if Rivers and Ben are better then him that doesn't mean he is not a franchise QB. That draft was very unusual in that the top 3 QBs were all franchise QBs. I guess you can say the gmen fkd up by giving up extra picks for Manning when ben and Rivers were as good or better...but i hope to live to see the day when the redskins can fk up and end up with a player like Eli...

Okay. Not sure why I am so biased against the guy - but I think you are right, with a solid team Eli can (and has) won the SB. On the other hand, I think it pretty clear that they would be a better team if they had stuck with Rivers (I, for one, am glad they didn't). Eli was an interception machine last year. I just think we have seen his best stuff and it's all downhill from here. [Now watch, next year's SB Eli v. Sanchez with each carrying their respective teams to championship with clutch performances in the play-offs.]

Would my feelings about him be different if he were in the B&G? Most assuredly so.

[JoeRedskin]

And by "transformational" I mean a guy who makes the team significantly better (i.e. A. Rodgers, M. Ryan).

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by celts32

A couple things...we did win without great QB's in the past but it was a different league then. There was no free agency and it was possible to build truely great teams and keep them together which we did. We also had the greatest coach in NFL history then. I believe in todays NFL more then ever the consistent winners are the teams that have great QB's. Just look at the recent Super Bowl winners...almost all of them have a franchise QB. Obviously there are many ways to get one and the scenario that most teams seem to have used is getting lucky, but regardess of how you go about it, all the consistent winners have one. So far in my life we have not been so lucky in this department. And since luck is not on our side that is why i said that if i knew Shanny loved a QB so much I would take luck out of the equation and just go get him. but lets be clear...I am not advertising that the only way to get a QB is to trade up and I am not even saying that i want them to do it regardless. The best scenario for me would be that Shanny loves Locker and we draft him at #10 and call it a day. That's what i want but what i want doesn't much matter down at Redskins park...

Fair enough. I think I understand what you are saying - if Shanny absolutley loves someone and can get him, then he should do so. I just think, despite possible Shanny love, we have too many holes to go chasing rookie QB's in the draft given the inherent risks and the historical lack of success for teams doing so. We simply disagree as to the advisability of trading up and I am good with that.

Your comment: "Obviously there are many ways to get one and the scenario that most teams seem to have used is getting lucky." I thought particularly insightful. It really sums up my team by team analysis pretty well. Lots of teams have traded up and failed, traded down and failed, or stuck to their guns and failed.

Hopefully, one of these days, we get "The Guy" - an era defining QB who's name is linked to Championships. Of course, we did have one of those - Unfortunately for us, it was Sammy Baugh.

As to this draft, my preference would be to pull something off like what the Ravens did to get Flacco. If a good QB that Shanny likes is there at 10, however, by all means grab him.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Fair enough. I think I understand what you are saying - if Shanny absolutley loves someone and can get him, then he should do so. I just think, despite possible Shanny love, we have too many holes to go chasing rookie QB's in the draft given the inherent risks and the historical lack of success for teams doing so. We simply disagree as to the advisability of trading up and I am good with that.

Your comment: "Obviously there are many ways to get one and the scenario that most teams seem to have used is getting lucky." I thought particularly insightful. It really sums up my team by team analysis pretty well. Lots of teams have traded up and failed, traded down and failed, or stuck to their guns and failed.

Hopefully, one of these days, we get "The Guy" - an era defining QB who's name is linked to Championships. Of course, we did have one of those - Unfortunately for us, it was Sammy Baugh.

As to this draft, my preference would be to pull something off like what the Ravens did to get Flacco. If a good QB that Shanny likes is there at 10, however, by all means grab him.

Thank you for taking the time to understand what I am saying. So many people on here read one sentence of your posts and then fire off responses that have nothing to do with what you said. A couple pages after i said I would consider trading up if i knew for a fact that shanny loved a particular QB...it has been twisted into me having a man crush on Gabbert and preparing to throw our next 5 years of draft picks at him.

And I will say it again it was hypothetical...I don't even like Gabbert or Newton...I like Locker who does not even require a trade up at all.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by celts32

Thank you for taking the time to understand what I am saying. So many people on here read one sentence of your posts and then fire off responses that have nothing to do with what you said. A couple pages after i said I would consider trading up if i knew for a fact that shanny loved a particular QB...it has been twisted into me having a man crush on Gabbert and preparing to throw our next 5 years of draft picks at him.

Well, I have been known to make a post or two that require the reader to do more than read one sentence - I figure I should try to return the courtesy.

[gridironcharlie]

Never sure bet on rumors

[sportscurmudgeon]

Same source that told me about Denver's interest in trading out of the #2 slot in the first place - - and started this thread - - told me this morning that one of the teams that has recently "inquired" about the availability of the pick is:

The Philadelphia Eagles.

Folks, it is still a rumor and nothing more than that. But it would be interesting to see what the Eagles might want to do with a pick that high. My guess would be a cornerback

[skinsfaninok]

The eagles don't need to trade up to 2 lol that wouldn't make any sense IMO. Look how often do picks 1-3 ever get traded? Not very often so I still expect Denver to draft at 2. As for wsh we literally have nothing to give up unless it's our 2nd rounder And a 1st or 2nd again in 2012! Sorry but Gabbert isnt that good IMO

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

The eagles don't need to trade up to 2 lol that wouldn't make any sense IMO. Look how often do picks 1-3 ever get traded? Not very often so I still expect Denver to draft at 2. As for wsh we literally have nothing to give up unless it's our 2nd rounder And a 1st or 2nd again in 2012! Sorry but Gabbert isnt that good IMO

I guess to take Patrick Peterson.

[skinsfaninok]

^ yeah I guess but they can draft the kid from Colorado IMO or go get Nnamdi in FA

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

The eagles don't need to trade up to 2 lol that wouldn't make any sense IMO. Look how often do picks 1-3 ever get traded? Not very often so I still expect Denver to draft at 2. As for wsh we literally have nothing to give up unless it's our 2nd rounder And a 1st or 2nd again in 2012! Sorry but Gabbert isnt that good IMO

Yes it would actually. Philly has been okay defensively, but nothing like they were in the early 2000's when teams feared them. Back then they were loaded with talent, which included among others, two high level DT's in Corey Simon and Darwin Walker. Today they only have one in Peterson. I have to imagine they'd relish the chance to add a Marcell Dareus or even a Nick Fairley.

They would also possibly be interested in adding Von Miller as one of the most common complaints I hear from Eagle fans comes from the teams weak linebacking corps. Still I don't think that OLB is the type of position that entices a team to trade up from 23 to 2 unless they're a 3-4 team with no one to rush the passer.

Still in considering their ammo they wouldn't have enough to move up, even if they wanted to. Plus Philly likes quantity and value when it comes to the draft.

[skinsfaninok]

What if Denver drafts Gabbert at 2, then trades Orton to us for a 2012 2nd round pick, we take Quinn at 10 or trade down then also pick a rookie QB in the late 1st or early 2nd? Thatd be a great scenario imo

[GTripp0012]

What I may argue, if I was going to support the "we need a QB at all costs argument" is that the last couple of years (2009 and 2010), the only teams to even make it to the super bowl had franchise QBs having elite years. The last time teams met in the super bowl on the strength of their defenses was 2008.

[Hog1]

Is it necessary to have...Francise QB's with rare pedigree's?
Or just QB's that play like it on the field? There are of course....MANY variables that lead to stellar play on the part of the QB that are not actually the...QB.

[53Fan]

Fran Tarkenton, Dan Fouts, Trent Dilfer, Dan Marino.

3 Of these 4 QB's are in the HOF and 1 of the 4 has a SB Winners ring.

What's my point?

I haven't a freakin' clue.