Calvin Johnson entering NFL draft

Pocket$ $traight · 01-12-2007, 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FRPLG

I agree. If they wouldn't take Leinart why would they take Quinn? Russell seems like a guy they'd die for. I don't get that warm fuzzy feeling from Russell. I think he looks like a bust to me. Actually not really a bust but more of a Campbell type (Ie: solid guy who could turn out good, most likely will be decent, but could be a total disaster). And we got skewered for trading up and taking him. I don't get the love for Russell.

Since Russell can throw 40 yards sitting on his butt (as he will display regularly if the Raiders take him) I would give him three plays:

A. "Chuck it up there, dog" 1. A bomb to Randy Moss on the right side.
B. Tuck it in, run up the middle and slide.
C. "Chuck it up there, dog" 2. A bomb to Randy Moss on the left side.

There is one reason why Culpepper had monster seasons and it wasn't the purple uniforms...

GhettoDogAllStars · 01-12-2007, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FRPLG

I don't get the love for Russell.

I don't really get it either. I guess everyone's so high on him because he's SO big and strong -- not many QBs like that in the NFL.

Bill B · 01-12-2007, 10:55 AM

Wouldn't it be more prudent to trade the pick down anyway so the Skins can address 2 needs:

1.) Acquire more draft picks because the defense has too many holes that one pick cannot address.
2.) By trading down they will not have to pay as much in up front bonus money and this will aid in the salary cap - since we have to re-sign Dockery I would think not having to fork over a huge signing bonus (which a 6th pick will require) will help the Redskins deal with their cap. Yes we can restrucutre contracts but I would think this will help the Redskins deal with future cap situations - specifically dealing and lowering the dead cap hits the team has so we have more flexibility.

By having more lower round picks you have more chances of acquiring a good player or two and it will be a much better bargain compared to a high first round pick. If I remember correctly didn't the Detriot Lions in 2003 take a can't miss reciever at number 2 with Charles Rogers? Whatever happened to that guy - is he even in the NFL anymore? He also got a huge signing bonus too.

Schneed10 · 01-12-2007, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill B

Wouldn't it be more prudent to trade the pick down anyway so the Skins can address 2 needs:

1.) Acquire more draft picks because the defense has too many holes that one pick cannot address.
2.) By trading down they will not have to pay as much in up front bonus money and this will aid in the salary cap - since we have to re-sign Dockery I would think not having to fork over a huge signing bonus (which a 6th pick will require) will help the Redskins deal with their cap. Yes we can restrucutre contracts but I would think this will help the Redskins deal with future cap situations - specifically dealing and lowering the dead cap hits the team has so we have more flexibility.

By having more lower round picks you have more chances of acquiring a good player or two and it will be a much better bargain compared to a high first round pick. If I remember correctly didn't the Detriot Lions in 2003 take a can't miss reciever at number 2 with Charles Rogers? Whatever happened to that guy - is he even in the NFL anymore? He also got a huge signing bonus too.

Word. If you whiff on one of those top 10 picks, especially a top 5 pick, you really hurt your salary cap situation.

I hardly ever see a team that's about to draft in the top 5 who I don't think should try to trade down. Your odds are much better by taking more selections in the lower portions of the first round, and the second and third rounds.

Bill B · 01-12-2007, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Word. If you whiff on one of those top 10 picks, especially a top 5 pick, you really hurt your salary cap situation.

I hardly ever see a team that's about to draft in the top 5 who I don't think should try to trade down. Your odds are much better by taking more selections in the lower portions of the first round, and the second and third rounds.

I guess finding a trade partner is harder than it sounds. I wouldn't want the Skins to trade just to trade and not getting equal value for the pick - but my hope is to acquire multiple lower picks at a fair deal - I belive there is a point system used for this.

What was ironic was the draft that the Redskins used to acquire Patrick Ramsey - they made multiple trades to get more picks and still got the qb that they wanted. Wasn't Synder involved in this decision?

bigmarley4 · 01-12-2007, 12:05 PM

I say we take Adams or Anderson at DL if either are available at 6, otherwise trade down and go CB with first pick, DL/OL with whatever 2nd or 3rd rounder we get in the trade down. If we get a decent FA corner, which I am in favor of, definitely stick with #6 and get a stud DL.

A lot of experts have CJ as #1 prospect in draft, no way he's there at 6, in my opinion. Also, in Kiper's ESPN.com chat the other day he had Skins taking DL at #6, for what it's worth.

offiss · 01-12-2007, 02:52 PM

I believe Dwayne Jarrett will be better than CJ.

GTripp0012 · 01-12-2007, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by offiss

I believe Dwayne Jarrett will be better than CJ.

Maybe so, but I wouldn't touch either of them in the top 10 picks if I'm a GM.

offiss · 01-12-2007, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Maybe so, but I wouldn't touch either of them in the top 10 picks if I'm a GM.

I hear that, all depends on a teams needs, I just feel Jarrett's best ball is yet to come, although CJ is bigger, Jarrett has more quickness to get off the line and room to fill out, he has also continued to work and get better, CJ seems like a class act as well, but give me the quicker WR every time.

GTripp0012 · 01-12-2007, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I see JaMarcus Russell going to Oakland. But TB might go for a QB too. I would not rule that out by any means.

Russell will be a pretty solid NFL QB...but anyone arguing that hes a better NFL prospect than Brady Quinn needs to get their credentials checked.

It's like arguing that Byron Leftwich is a better QB than Carson Palmer.

Not saying that Oakland won't make that mistake.

SKINSnCANES · 01-12-2007, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Russell will be a pretty solid NFL QB...but anyone arguing that hes a better NFL prospect than Brady Quinn needs to get their credentials checked.

It's like arguing that Byron Leftwich is a better QB than Carson Palmer.

Not saying that Oakland won't make that mistake.

Mabye Ill be wrong, but Im going to go on record right now in saying that Brady Quinn will be an average NFL QB, at best. He isnt any good against good defenses, at the college level. Heres the difference IMO opinion between Quinn and other QBS, since he played under Weiss, hes already reached a lot of his potential, and the last few games of the year he did little to impress me.

Beemnseven · 01-12-2007, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SKINSnCANES

Mabye Ill be wrong, but Im going to go on record right now in saying that Brady Quinn will be an average NFL QB, at best. He isnt any good against good defenses, at the college level. Heres the difference IMO opinion between Quinn and other QBS, since he played under Weiss, hes already reached a lot of his potential, and the last few games of the year he did little to impress me.

Your prediction will definitely hold true if he winds up in Oakland. In fact, as a Raider, it could be a struggle getting to 'average'.

GTripp0012 · 01-12-2007, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Your prediction will definitely hold true if he winds up in Oakland. In fact, as a Raider, it could be a struggle getting to 'average'.

Oaklands offense is downright awful, but it could be a good situation for a young QB. That defense was downright nasty this season and appears to be getting better. As far as getting wins goes, a QB wouldn't have to come in and play lights out, just better than Aaron Brooks or Andrew Walter.

GTripp0012 · 01-12-2007, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SKINSnCANES

Mabye Ill be wrong, but Im going to go on record right now in saying that Brady Quinn will be an average NFL QB, at best. He isnt any good against good defenses, at the college level. Heres the difference IMO opinion between Quinn and other QBS, since he played under Weiss, hes already reached a lot of his potential, and the last few games of the year he did little to impress me.

He carved up USC's D last season with a much better team around him. This year Notre Dame had pass protection issues, and consequently any time they played a team with a good pass rush, Quinn got knocked around.

Looking at college production is useless unless you consider the entire body of work. He's put up nasty stats the last two seasons playing a pretty hard schedule in an NFL style offense. He's got the expierence; he was a 4 year starter, and Weis says his tools remind him of Tom Brady...

Beemnseven · 01-12-2007, 09:55 PM

Yeah, I guess you never know. As woeful as the Raider franchise is, just look at the Saints.

I don't really have any predictions of Brady Quinn either way. I hate Notre Dame though. I know that.

Playing teams like the Salvation Army, McHale's Navy and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police doesn't exactly get you warmed up for life in the NFL.

01-12-2007, 10:55 AM	#48
Bill B Impact Rookie Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 721	Re: Calvin Johnson entering NFL draft Wouldn't it be more prudent to trade the pick down anyway so the Skins can address 2 needs: 1.) Acquire more draft picks because the defense has too many holes that one pick cannot address. 2.) By trading down they will not have to pay as much in up front bonus money and this will aid in the salary cap - since we have to re-sign Dockery I would think not having to fork over a huge signing bonus (which a 6th pick will require) will help the Redskins deal with their cap. Yes we can restrucutre contracts but I would think this will help the Redskins deal with future cap situations - specifically dealing and lowering the dead cap hits the team has so we have more flexibility. By having more lower round picks you have more chances of acquiring a good player or two and it will be a much better bargain compared to a high first round pick. If I remember correctly didn't the Detriot Lions in 2003 take a can't miss reciever at number 2 with Charles Rogers? Whatever happened to that guy - is he even in the NFL anymore? He also got a huge signing bonus too.

01-12-2007, 12:05 PM	#51
bigmarley4 Special Teams Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 219	Re: Calvin Johnson entering NFL draft I say we take Adams or Anderson at DL if either are available at 6, otherwise trade down and go CB with first pick, DL/OL with whatever 2nd or 3rd rounder we get in the trade down. If we get a decent FA corner, which I am in favor of, definitely stick with #6 and get a stud DL. A lot of experts have CJ as #1 prospect in draft, no way he's there at 6, in my opinion. Also, in Kiper's ESPN.com chat the other day he had Skins taking DL at #6, for what it's worth.

01-12-2007, 02:52 PM	#52
offiss Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: sparta, new jersey [ northern jersey ] Age: 60 Posts: 3,097	Re: Calvin Johnson entering NFL draft I believe Dwayne Jarrett will be better than CJ.

01-12-2007, 09:55 PM	#60
Beemnseven Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Virginia Beach Age: 50 Posts: 5,311	Re: Calvin Johnson entering NFL draft Yeah, I guess you never know. As woeful as the Raider franchise is, just look at the Saints. I don't really have any predictions of Brady Quinn either way. I hate Notre Dame though. I know that. Playing teams like the Salvation Army, McHale's Navy and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police doesn't exactly get you warmed up for life in the NFL.

Calvin Johnson entering NFL draft

Locker Room Main Forum