Rumor from Denver

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by celts32

First off...if you assume no QB this year then you can consider him 2 years in with no QB. How long in your estimate will it take to get a 1st or 2nd round QB ready to play on average? 1 full year maybe 2 is probably a fair estimate. So assume we get the QB next year and then he spends year 3 and part of Shannys year 4 learning. Year 5 is probably the earliest we can expect him to be ready to actually play well enough for us to win with him.

Throwing picks at Luck is not going to work. At this point he is such a highly rated prospect that I doubt the team holding the pick will even entertain offers. Only chance of him being on the market would be if somehow a team with a young established QB somehow has a rash of injuries and ends up going 1-15. Not at all likely.

Also...I am not saying i want them to force a QB pick on a guy they don't love. All I am saying is that if there is a QB in this draft that they love...I believe they should be aggressive about getting him. I don't get why every Redskins fan would not think the same way...

Wow, ok

1st para; It is common knowledge that it takes about 3 yrs for any new HC to get his team back to playing well and into the playoffs... thats rebuilding. Were not rebuilding. But.... if MS gets his QB in next yrs draft then they would essentially have 3 yrs to prove something. The whole team would know the offense and only the QB would have to be on the fast track or don't play him and let him sit the 1st year and learn the offense. Then MS has 2 yrs to actually play him and get to the playoffs and hopefully a SB. If after all this the team is in the SB or close then my money is on that DS resigns MS if MS is willing to keep being the HC.

2nd para; "Throwing picks at Luck is not going to work?" are you making this stuff up? Supposedly according to all the experts had Luck come out this year he would be labled the best QB of the bunch and been expected to go first. Over all the QB's in this yrs draft. Yet you seem to think Gabbert is worthy of a team moving up to take or "throwing picks at?" Ok. I'm at a loss for words almost. All I'm suggesting is the Skins should try to trade out of the #10 spot ... if feasable, and get more picks in the first two rounds or three rounds. Build up the OL and DL some more and next year when we can afford to throw away picks go after the top ranked QB. I'd still go after Dalton or Ponder this year in the second round though. Then we would have two young QB's who can hopefully step up to the occassion.

3rd para; I see what your saying. I don't agree with it but I see what your saying. I will say that I think everyone here would feel almost the same way and that is "IF" MS see's a QB that he absolutely thinks is the right QB for this scheme and will become great or can be coached to greatness then I don't think any one of us would have a problem with him going after said QB. The problem is all the QB's have some sort of issue, not a one is standing so far out there that they should be looked at, and we all know any position is a 50/50 crap shoot. Simply look at Thomas and Kelly, both rated high and expected to do well over time. Thomas looks more like a bust and Kelly can't stay healthy long enough. How about Campbell, were his issue's QB developement or a team reaching too high for him? or both.

I'll agree we have a better chance of getting a franchise QB by moving closer to the #1 pick but all I'm saying is lets do it when the team has more picks to work with vs. handicapping us further by throwing two more picks away just to get 1 player and not get any other quality players until the following year because some here would believe the only quality players are between the 1st and 4th round.

[SBXVII]

^ Also....

Year 5 is probably the earliest we can expect him to be ready to actually play well enough for us to win with him.

Is there something wrong with this thought process? I think your exagerating to the extreme of not having quality QB play until yr 5, and I might be exagerating to the extreme in thinking that the Rookie QB could start next year after being drafted. Somewhere in the middle the truth lies. Is it wrong to say we draft frachise QB next year to learn the system, he plays year 4 and gets us to the playoffs/SB year 5? I'll except that. or are you expecting the team to draft Gabbert this year and go to the SB... this year?

[celts32]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Wow, ok

1st para; It is common knowledge that it takes about 3 yrs for any new HC to get his team back to playing well and into the playoffs... thats rebuilding. Were not rebuilding. But.... if MS gets his QB in next yrs draft then they would essentially have 3 yrs to prove something. The whole team would know the offense and only the QB would have to be on the fast track or don't play him and let him sit the 1st year and learn the offense. Then MS has 2 yrs to actually play him and get to the playoffs and hopefully a SB. If after all this the team is in the SB or close then my money is on that DS resigns MS if MS is willing to keep being the HC.

2nd para; "Throwing picks at Luck is not going to work?" are you making this stuff up? Supposedly according to all the experts had Luck come out this year he would be labled the best QB of the bunch and been expected to go first. Over all the QB's in this yrs draft. Yet you seem to think Gabbert is worthy of a team moving up to take or "throwing picks at?" Ok. I'm at a loss for words almost. All I'm suggesting is the Skins should try to trade out of the #10 spot ... if feasable, and get more picks in the first two rounds or three rounds. Build up the OL and DL some more and next year when we can afford to throw away picks go after the top ranked QB. I'd still go after Dalton or Ponder this year in the second round though. Then we would have two young QB's who can hopefully step up to the occassion.

3rd para; I see what your saying. I don't agree with it but I see what your saying. I will say that I think everyone here would feel almost the same way and that is "IF" MS see's a QB that he absolutely thinks is the right QB for this scheme and will become great or can be coached to greatness then I don't think any one of us would have a problem with him going after said QB. The problem is all the QB's have some sort of issue, not a one is standing so far out there that they should be looked at, and we all know any position is a 50/50 crap shoot. Simply look at Thomas and Kelly, both rated high and expected to do well over time. Thomas looks more like a bust and Kelly can't stay healthy long enough. How about Campbell, were his issue's QB developement or a team reaching too high for him? or both.

I'll agree we have a better chance of getting a franchise QB by moving closer to the #1 pick but all I'm saying is lets do it when the team has more picks to work with vs. handicapping us further by throwing two more picks away just to get 1 player and not get any other quality players until the following year because some here would believe the only quality players are between the 1st and 4th round.

1st paragraph: What your saying makes sense...i agree that it could unfold the way you are laying it out. the logic is sound but the only potential problem is that the longer you wait on the qb the more pressurer there is to find him as each year passes.

2nd paragraph: You clearly did not read my 2nd paragraph based on your reply. I said Luck was rated very high and the team that drafts #1 would likely not entertain offers on the pick. I was simply saying that we should not bank on having a shot at Luck next year. And also i never said i like or dislike Gabbert and i never said I would trade up for him. What i said was that if Shanny has a very high grade on him i would be aggressive about moving up for him.

3rd paragraph: this is essentially all i am saying and you just said you agreed with me. The stuff you said at the end about all these qbs having this or that wrong with them...that is all irrelivant and based on what we are hearing in the media. The only evaluation of these QBs that matters is Shannahan and the the Redskins scouting department.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

^ Also....


Is there something wrong with this thought process? I think your exagerating to the extreme of not having quality QB play until yr 5, and I might be exagerating to the extreme in thinking that the Rookie QB could start next year after being drafted. Somewhere in the middle the truth lies. Is it wrong to say we draft frachise QB next year to learn the system, he plays year 4 and gets us to the playoffs/SB year 5? I'll except that. or are you expecting the team to draft Gabbert this year and go to the SB... this year?

I may have exagerated a bit on the year 5 thing, but my point is that the longer we wait to identify the QB the less time he has to develop. This team is not going to the super bowl this year no matter what moves they make. This discussion is only about rebuilding and what priority we should place on finding the young QB.

[celts32]

Essentially my point is this:

Hypothetically, Lets say you had access to the Redskins scouting reports on all the draft prospects and their big board rankings. Thier #1 overall prospect was for the sake of argument Blane Gabbert. The report on him was glistening to the point that there was no doubt in the Redskins eyes that Gabbert had franchise QB potential in thier eyes.

Which course of action would you want the Redskins to take based on this information?

A. Draft Gabbert if he falls to #10...otherwise if Gabbert is off the board fill another need with the next highest rated prospect left on your board.

B. Trade up from #10 to #2 to ensure getting Gabbert. This would require 1300 points or lets just say it would cost our #10 pick plus this years #2 and next years #1 pick.

I hate giving up draft picks, but knowing how strongly they felt I would easily choose option B.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by celts32

The rest doesn't just fall in to place but look at the teams that win consistently. How many of them have average QB's? ... The best example of this is the Colts who have a 4 win roster without Manning.

...

Suppose like most fans want, the redskins improve the overall roster but ignore QB...maybe they even improve enough to win 9 or 10 games with one of their retread QB's. Now they are ready to add that franchise QB and become an actual super bowl contender...only now they are drafting in the low 20's instead of the top 10 and it's that much harder to find this QB. Not to mention the fact that then he needs his year or 2 to get up to speed and he does not have the luxury of the extra time while we are rebuilding because we are good now and we need him to step right in and play at a high level so we can make a super bowl run.

Well, let's look at last year's playoff teams and see how those "non-average" QB's were acquired - Had those teams made drastic moves to get to the top of the draft in order to reach up and grab QB? hmmm.....

Philly: Vick (Not Drafted By Team)
Green Bay: A. Rodgers (1st Rnd/24th pick)
Chicago: Cutler (Not Drafted By Team)
Atlanta: Ryan (1st Rnd/3rd Pick)
New Orleans: Brees (2nd Rnd/1st pick)
Seattle - Hasselback (Not Drafted By Team)
New England - Brady (6th Round)
New York Jets - Sanchez (1st Rnd/5th pick)
Indianapolis - P. Manning (1st Rnd/1st pick)
Baltimore - Flacco (1st Round/18 pick)
Pittsburg - Roethlesburger (1st Rnd/11th pick)
Kansas City - Cassell (Not Drafted By Team)

In addition, I am going to throw out a couple other teams that have been solid winners recently or are otherwise relevant to this analysis:

New York Giants: E. Manning (1st Rnd/1st Pick)
San Diego: P. Rivers (1st Rnd/4th Pick)
Dallas (bear with me folks!): T. Romo (undrafted)

First, I want to look at the “Not Drafted By Team” and "Non-First Rounder" categories:

Brady: Let’s start with the guy who wrecks the curve. Look, guys like this happen once in a blue moon. At the same time, Brady had huge advantages by coming to the Patriots. Remember, his first year they were a playoff team with Bledsoe at QB. That said, you simply can’t base your team’s future by betting that lightning will strike. BUT, if you build a solid team, when lightning does strike, that's when you have the makings of a dynasty.

Brees: New Orleans spent how much on one of the most prolific passers of recent years? Oh, that’s right. He was a free agent. On top of that, when Brees was drafted, San Diego actually traded back from taking Vick and then Brees fell into their lap in the second round after they got Tomlinson in the 1st – let’s see, trade down from a drafting highly rated QB, draft amazing RB who will take heat off rookie QB and get more picks.

Vick: Pretty unique situation. Regardless of baggage, and realizing there is a lot of back and forth on his ability to “Win the Big One”, it is pretty clear that a “Franchise QB” fell into their lap who was able to take advantage of all the draft picks spent on “supporting cast” players.

Cutler: I think you have to say the jury is still out on this one. For this analysis, not sure Chicago’s acquisition of him is relevant as he was a known commodity going to a mediocre team for a high cost. Will he be worth what Chicago gave up for him? I doubt it.

Cassell: Much like Cutler, the jury is still out on this one. He didn’t come cheap and he didn’t do much. But he is younger than Cutler. Less of a known quantity and Chiefs were in a state of transition when he was acquired. At the same time, prior to obtaining Cassel, the Chiefs had some fairly good drafts, obtaining a lot of quality young players.

Romo: Look, I don’t particularly like the guy. I certainly don’t think he is an all time elite QB like Manning or Brady. I am not even convinced he is a “short-term” elite QB like Rivers or Brees is right now. BUT, he is a solid starting QB and, w/ a good team around him, he could probably (gagging as I say this) win a SB. Again, he cost them nothing. As with us, the ‘pukes big problem is their O-Line which they ignored (like us) for years. Unlike us, they found a (quasi) starting QB and didn’t trade the farm to get him. (McNabb, Campbell)

Hasselback: umm, okay, whatever … moving on.

Okay, let’s look at those first rounders and, yes, there are a lot. But wait --- did these playoff teams spend tons of picks to get those 1st Round QB's? The Magic 8 Ball says “Very Doubtful”.

Sanchez: The Jets traded their 17th place pick, their 2nd round pick and 3 back-ups to move to the 5th spot. When they did it, they had a team that had been to the play-offs three years earlier and was 9-7 the prior year. Additionally, as it turned out, in Sanchez's rookie year, the Jets had a punishing ground attack, a fantastic O-line and a killer defense. Even so, Sanchez has not exactly lit up the world. In recent years, he is your best case scenario for trading up. I would humbly suggest, we are not nearly as good as the 2009 Jets were when they drafted him and, further, he has yet to show he can take this team to the promised land rather than be the guy who simply drives the bus.

P. Manning: You say he is the best example of a QB transforming a team. Okay. I grant you he does so. BUT - very simply, did the Colts trade to get him? Nope. He landed in their laps and they built around him. On the other hand, the same year Indi drafted Manning, San Diego spent big time draft points to move up one slot (trading two first round picks, a second round pick, and four time Pro Bowler Eric Metcalf) to move from the 3rd to the 2nd pick to grab that all-time great bust (and absolute proof of my argument against trading up) Ryan Leaf. A move that crippled their team for the near future.

Flacco: Again, a solid team builds defense and offense line through smart drafting and, when a solid QB prospect falls to them, they take him. Does anyone doubt the Ravens could win it all with Flacco?

A. Rodgers: Green Bay drafts QB’s well. They take’em where they can get them and trade’em away for picks. Yes, he had time behind Farve. But you know what? They knew Farve time was coming to an end and waited for the right opportunity. No panic mode drafting - Just keep drafting solid supporting cast and, again, when a highly rated QB falls to you, grab him.

Ryan: Solid pick. A team two years from the Michael Vick trauma and one year from the Bobby Petrino debacle. In terms of picks, he was just the right guy in the right place and it worked for them. Given the flux in Atlanta at the time of his pick, I am not sure he really adds anything to either of our positions except that you just don't know when a quality QB’s will “happen” (they were a mediocre team that had a bad year, creating the lucky break of being in the right place at the right time). In light of that, you just don’t need to go reaching for QB's.

OKAY, THAT BRINGS US TO THE 2004 DRAFT. Three QB’s all solid. One team traded up and won a SB, one team traded down and got a truly franchise QB but no SB, and one team stuck to its guns waited for a QB and has since won two SB’s, been to a third and is easily posed to win more.

The Trade DOWN -- Rivers: Yes, he was a first rounder – BUT San Diego traded down, to get him and got S. Merriman and N. Kaeding out of the deal. He hasn’t won a SB, but is there any doubt that he is an elite QB? In getting Rivers, San Diego not only got a franchise QB by trading down, they passed up the highest rated QB in the draft. Which brings us to …

The Trade UP – E. Manning: [Yes, SD drafted Manning but it was clearly a “raft and trade scenario”] Hard to knock a team that grabs a SB winning QB (but don’t worry, I will). In 2004, Eli was the top rated QB coming out of college – easily. The Giants wanted him and sold the farm to get him. As you now argue, they believed he was “the guy” and went after him. Contrary to what we have in place, however, the Giants were a solid team before he showed up. It’s not like Eli transformed the team. Yes, he threw the miracle pass - But what got that team to the SB? The Giants amazing D-Line which featured multiple draft picks from recent years. And finally ....

The Non-Trade: Roethlesburger: In the years leading up to 2004, the Steelers had won 6 (03), 10 (02) and 13 (01) games. In addition, they had Bettis and Hines Ward. Unfortunately, they had a retread XFL player at QB (Tommy Maddox). So, with several highly rated QB’s did they go chasing anyone? Nope. They had a solid team and let the QB come to them.

I WOULD CONCEDE that Eli is a solid QB. The Giants gave up a lot to get him. They did exactly what you suggest we do now. BUT - Let me ask you something, if you had your choice today – Would you take Manning, Rivers or Roethlesburger? Or, better yet and more accurately, would you take (1) Manning; (2) Roethlesburger; or (3) Rivers and Kaeding & the past 4 years of Merriman? I suggest that, in any reasonable poll, Eli is the last choice. Further, and more importantly, which of these teams are built for longer term success? Again, I think the Giants rank 3rd.

IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS, only one team that was in the play-offs last year (the Jets) traded up to get a highly rated rookie QB and Sanchez has a long way to go (IMHO) before I would classify him as more than "the driver of the bus". The Jets often won despite Sanchez, rarely because of him.

MY POINT through all of this (yes, I get there eventually) is that the best teams in the league didn’t reach for QB’s or trade away lots of picks. They built solid teams and let the QB position come to them. The Patriots, the Steelers, Ravens, Green Bay, San Diego, New Orleans, Philadelphia all have franchise QB’s b/c they created a team where a good QB could thrive.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by celts32

Essentially my point is this:

Hypothetically, Lets say you had access to the Redskins scouting reports on all the draft prospects and their big board rankings. Thier #1 overall prospect was for the sake of argument Blane Gabbert. The report on him was glistening to the point that there was no doubt in the Redskins eyes that Gabbert had franchise QB potential in thier eyes.

Which course of action would you want the Redskins to take based on this information?

A. Draft Gabbert if he falls to #10...otherwise if Gabbert is off the board fill another need with the next highest rated prospect left on your board.

B. Trade up from #10 to #2 to ensure getting Gabbert. This would require 1300 points or lets just say it would cost our #10 pick plus this years #2 and next years #1 pick.

I hate giving up draft picks, but knowing how strongly they felt I would easily choose option B.

For the Skins - as their roster exists today? I would choose (A) everyday of the week and twice on Draft Day. For the Minnesota Vikings (a much more complete team), I would choose B in a heartbeat. First round QB's are boom/bust bets. Best thing to do is to build so you can hedge that bet as best as you can.

[mlmdub130]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Well, let's look at last year's playoff teams and see how those "non-average" QB's were acquired - Had those teams made drastic moves to get to the top of the draft in order to reach up and grab QB? hmmm.....

Philly: Vick (Not Drafted By Team)
Green Bay: A. Rodgers (1st Rnd/24th pick)
Chicago: Cutler (Not Drafted By Team)
Atlanta: Ryan (1st Rnd/3rd Pick)
New Orleans: Brees (2nd Rnd/1st pick)
Seattle - Hasselback (Not Drafted By Team)
New England - Brady (6th Round)
New York Jets - Sanchez (1st Rnd/5th pick)
Indianapolis - P. Manning (1st Rnd/1st pick)
Baltimore - Flacco (1st Round/18 pick)
Pittsburg - Roethlesburger (1st Rnd/11th pick)
Kansas City - Cassell (Not Drafted By Team)

In addition, I am going to throw out a couple other teams that have been solid winners recently or are otherwise relevant to this analysis:

New York Giants: E. Manning (1st Rnd/1st Pick)
San Diego: P. Rivers (1st Rnd/4th Pick)
Dallas (bear with me folks!): T. Romo (undrafted)

First, I want to look at the “Not Drafted By Team” and "Non-First Rounder" categories:

Brady: Let’s start with the guy who wrecks the curve. Look, guys like this happen once in a blue moon. At the same time, Brady had huge advantages by coming to the Patriots. Remember, his first year they were a playoff team with Bledsoe at QB. That said, you simply can’t base your team’s future by betting that lightning will strike. BUT, if you build a solid team, when lightning does strike, that's when you have the makings of a dynasty.

Brees: New Orleans spent how much on one of the most prolific passers of recent years? Oh, that’s right. He was a free agent. On top of that, when Brees was drafted, San Diego actually traded back from taking Vick and then Brees fell into their lap in the second round after they got Tomlinson in the 1st – let’s see, trade down from a drafting highly rated QB, draft amazing RB who will take heat off rookie QB and get more picks.

Vick: Pretty unique situation. Regardless of baggage, and realizing there is a lot of back and forth on his ability to “Win the Big One”, it is pretty clear that a “Franchise QB” fell into their lap who was able to take advantage of all the draft picks spent on “supporting cast” players.

Cutler: I think you have to say the jury is still out on this one. For this analysis, not sure Chicago’s acquisition of him is relevant as he was a known commodity going to a mediocre team for a high cost. Will he be worth what Chicago gave up for him? I doubt it.

Cassell: Much like Cutler, the jury is still out on this one. He didn’t come cheap and he didn’t do much. But he is younger than Cutler. Less of a known quantity and Chiefs were in a state of transition when he was acquired. At the same time, prior to obtaining Cassel, the Chiefs had some fairly good drafts, obtaining a lot of quality young players.

Romo: Look, I don’t particularly like the guy. I certainly don’t think he is an all time elite QB like Manning or Brady. I am not even convinced he is a “short-term” elite QB like Rivers or Brees is right now. BUT, he is a solid starting QB and, w/ a good team around him, he could probably (gagging as I say this) win a SB. Again, he cost them nothing. As with us, the ‘pukes big problem is their O-Line which they ignored (like us) for years. Unlike us, they found a (quasi) starting QB and didn’t trade the farm to get him. (McNabb, Campbell)

Hasselback: umm, okay, whatever … moving on.

Okay, let’s look at those first rounders and, yes, there are a lot. But wait --- did these playoff teams spend tons of picks to get those 1st Round QB's? The Magic 8 Ball says “Very Doubtful”.

Sanchez: The Jets traded their 17th place pick, their 2nd round pick and 3 back-ups to move to the 5th spot. When they did it, they had a team that had been to the play-offs three years earlier and was 9-7 the prior year. Additionally, as it turned out, in Sanchez's rookie year, the Jets had a punishing ground attack, a fantastic O-line and a killer defense. Even so, Sanchez has not exactly lit up the world. In recent years, he is your best case scenario for trading up. I would humbly suggest, we are not nearly as good as the 2009 Jets were when they drafted him and, further, he has yet to show he can take this team to the promised land rather than be the guy who simply drives the bus.

P. Manning: You say he is the best example of a QB transforming a team. Okay. I grant you he does so. BUT - very simply, did the Colts trade to get him? Nope. He landed in their laps and they built around him. On the other hand, the same year Indi drafted Manning, San Diego spent big time draft points to move up one slot (trading two first round picks, a second round pick, and four time Pro Bowler Eric Metcalf) to move from the 3rd to the 2nd pick to grab that all-time great bust (and absolute proof of my argument against trading up) Ryan Leaf. A move that crippled their team for the near future.

Flacco: Again, a solid team builds defense and offense line through smart drafting and, when a solid QB prospect falls to them, they take him. Does anyone doubt the Ravens could win it all with Flacco?

A. Rodgers: Green Bay drafts QB’s well. They take’em where they can get them and trade’em away for picks. Yes, he had time behind Farve. But you know what? They knew Farve time was coming to an end and waited for the right opportunity. No panic mode drafting - Just keep drafting solid supporting cast and, again, when a highly rated QB falls to you, grab him.

Ryan: Solid pick. A team two years from the Michael Vick trauma and one year from the Bobby Petrino debacle. In terms of picks, he was just the right guy in the right place and it worked for them. Given the flux in Atlanta at the time of his pick, I am not sure he really adds anything to either of our positions except that you just don't know when a quality QB’s will “happen” (they were a mediocre team that had a bad year, creating the lucky break of being in the right place at the right time). In light of that, you just don’t need to go reaching for QB's.

OKAY, THAT BRINGS US TO THE 2004 DRAFT. Three QB’s all solid. One team traded up and won a SB, one team traded down and got a truly franchise QB but no SB, and one team stuck to its guns waited for a QB and has since won two SB’s, been to a third and is easily posed to win more.

The Trade DOWN -- Rivers: Yes, he was a first rounder – BUT San Diego traded down, to get him and got S. Merriman and N. Kaeding out of the deal. He hasn’t won a SB, but is there any doubt that he is an elite QB? In getting Rivers, San Diego not only got a franchise QB by trading down, they passed up the highest rated QB in the draft. Which brings us to …

The Trade UP – E. Manning: [Yes, SD drafted Manning but it was clearly a “raft and trade scenario”] Hard to knock a team that grabs a SB winning QB (but don’t worry, I will). In 2004, Eli was the top rated QB coming out of college – easily. The Giants wanted him and sold the farm to get him. As you now argue, they believed he was “the guy” and went after him. Contrary to what we have in place, however, the Giants were a solid team before he showed up. It’s not like Eli transformed the team. Yes, he threw the miracle pass - But what got that team to the SB? The Giants amazing D-Line which featured multiple draft picks from recent years. And finally ....

The Non-Trade: Roethlesburger: In the years leading up to 2004, the Steelers had won 6 (03), 10 (02) and 13 (01) games. In addition, they had Bettis and Hines Ward. Unfortunately, they had a retread XFL player at QB (Tommy Maddox). So, with several highly rated QB’s did they go chasing anyone? Nope. They had a solid team and let the QB come to them.

I WOULD CONCEDE that Eli is a solid QB. The Giants gave up a lot to get him. They did exactly what you suggest we do now. BUT - Let me ask you something, if you had your choice today – Would you take Manning, Rivers or Roethlesburger? Or, better yet and more accurately, would you take (1) Manning; (2) Roethlesburger; or (3) Rivers and Kaeding & the past 4 years of Merriman? I suggest that, in any reasonable poll, Eli is the last choice. Further, and more importantly, which of these teams are built for longer term success? Again, I think the Giants rank 3rd.

IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS, only one team that was in the play-offs last year (the Jets) traded up to get a highly rated rookie QB and Sanchez has a long way to go (IMHO) before I would classify him as more than "the driver of the bus". The Jets often won despite Sanchez, rarely because of him.

MY POINT through all of this (yes, I get there eventually) is that the best teams in the league didn’t reach for QB’s or trade away lots of picks. They built solid teams and let the QB position come to them. The Patriots, the Steelers, Ravens, Green Bay, San Diego, New Orleans, Philadelphia all have franchise QB’s b/c they created a team where a good QB could thrive.

dude...

[Swarley]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

For the Skins - as their roster exists today? I would choose (A) everyday of the week and twice on Draft Day. For the Minnesota Vikings (a much more complete team), I would choose B in a heartbeat. First round QB's are boom/bust bets. Best thing to do is to build so you can hedge that bet as best as you can.

Exactly my thoughts. This team is not at the point where we can throw everything into one single player, even if that player is a QB. We've seen it all too often with teams that aren't a QB away from the SB/Playoffs breaking the bank to get the QB and a few years later that team has a new coach, and a new QB.

[JoeRedskin]

BTW:

Cutler: Chicago traded two firsts, a third and Kyle Orton for Cutler and a 5th. Definitely not worth it IMHO.

Cassel: Kansas City gave up the 34th pick in the draft for Cassel and Mike Vrabel. I thought they had given up much more.

[GTripp0012]

Re: Cassel, still a bad deal for KC. His value to the Chiefs for this season alone will exceed everything he offers the Chiefs over his time there.

In games where Cassel is beaten by the defensive scheme, he just melts down in front of everyone. He's a one to two read guy.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Well, let's look at last year's playoff teams and see how those "non-average" QB's were acquired - Had those teams made drastic moves to get to the top of the draft in order to reach up and grab QB? hmmm.....

Philly: Vick (Not Drafted By Team)
Green Bay: A. Rodgers (1st Rnd/24th pick)
Chicago: Cutler (Not Drafted By Team)
Atlanta: Ryan (1st Rnd/3rd Pick)
New Orleans: Brees (2nd Rnd/1st pick)
Seattle - Hasselback (Not Drafted By Team)
New England - Brady (6th Round)
New York Jets - Sanchez (1st Rnd/5th pick)
Indianapolis - P. Manning (1st Rnd/1st pick)
Baltimore - Flacco (1st Round/18 pick)
Pittsburg - Roethlesburger (1st Rnd/11th pick)
Kansas City - Cassell (Not Drafted By Team)

In addition, I am going to throw out a couple other teams that have been solid winners recently or are otherwise relevant to this analysis:

New York Giants: E. Manning (1st Rnd/1st Pick)
San Diego: P. Rivers (1st Rnd/4th Pick)
Dallas (bear with me folks!): T. Romo (undrafted)

First, I want to look at the “Not Drafted By Team” and "Non-First Rounder" categories:

Brady: Let’s start with the guy who wrecks the curve. Look, guys like this happen once in a blue moon. At the same time, Brady had huge advantages by coming to the Patriots. Remember, his first year they were a playoff team with Bledsoe at QB. That said, you simply can’t base your team’s future by betting that lightning will strike. BUT, if you build a solid team, when lightning does strike, that's when you have the makings of a dynasty.

Brees: New Orleans spent how much on one of the most prolific passers of recent years? Oh, that’s right. He was a free agent. On top of that, when Brees was drafted, San Diego actually traded back from taking Vick and then Brees fell into their lap in the second round after they got Tomlinson in the 1st – let’s see, trade down from a drafting highly rated QB, draft amazing RB who will take heat off rookie QB and get more picks.

Vick: Pretty unique situation. Regardless of baggage, and realizing there is a lot of back and forth on his ability to “Win the Big One”, it is pretty clear that a “Franchise QB” fell into their lap who was able to take advantage of all the draft picks spent on “supporting cast” players.

Cutler: I think you have to say the jury is still out on this one. For this analysis, not sure Chicago’s acquisition of him is relevant as he was a known commodity going to a mediocre team for a high cost. Will he be worth what Chicago gave up for him? I doubt it.

Cassell: Much like Cutler, the jury is still out on this one. He didn’t come cheap and he didn’t do much. But he is younger than Cutler. Less of a known quantity and Chiefs were in a state of transition when he was acquired. At the same time, prior to obtaining Cassel, the Chiefs had some fairly good drafts, obtaining a lot of quality young players.

Romo: Look, I don’t particularly like the guy. I certainly don’t think he is an all time elite QB like Manning or Brady. I am not even convinced he is a “short-term” elite QB like Rivers or Brees is right now. BUT, he is a solid starting QB and, w/ a good team around him, he could probably (gagging as I say this) win a SB. Again, he cost them nothing. As with us, the ‘pukes big problem is their O-Line which they ignored (like us) for years. Unlike us, they found a (quasi) starting QB and didn’t trade the farm to get him. (McNabb, Campbell)

Hasselback: umm, okay, whatever … moving on.

Okay, let’s look at those first rounders and, yes, there are a lot. But wait --- did these playoff teams spend tons of picks to get those 1st Round QB's? The Magic 8 Ball says “Very Doubtful”.

Sanchez: The Jets traded their 17th place pick, their 2nd round pick and 3 back-ups to move to the 5th spot. When they did it, they had a team that had been to the play-offs three years earlier and was 9-7 the prior year. Additionally, as it turned out, in Sanchez's rookie year, the Jets had a punishing ground attack, a fantastic O-line and a killer defense. Even so, Sanchez has not exactly lit up the world. In recent years, he is your best case scenario for trading up. I would humbly suggest, we are not nearly as good as the 2009 Jets were when they drafted him and, further, he has yet to show he can take this team to the promised land rather than be the guy who simply drives the bus.

P. Manning: You say he is the best example of a QB transforming a team. Okay. I grant you he does so. BUT - very simply, did the Colts trade to get him? Nope. He landed in their laps and they built around him. On the other hand, the same year Indi drafted Manning, San Diego spent big time draft points to move up one slot (trading two first round picks, a second round pick, and four time Pro Bowler Eric Metcalf) to move from the 3rd to the 2nd pick to grab that all-time great bust (and absolute proof of my argument against trading up) Ryan Leaf. A move that crippled their team for the near future.

Flacco: Again, a solid team builds defense and offense line through smart drafting and, when a solid QB prospect falls to them, they take him. Does anyone doubt the Ravens could win it all with Flacco?

A. Rodgers: Green Bay drafts QB’s well. They take’em where they can get them and trade’em away for picks. Yes, he had time behind Farve. But you know what? They knew Farve time was coming to an end and waited for the right opportunity. No panic mode drafting - Just keep drafting solid supporting cast and, again, when a highly rated QB falls to you, grab him.

Ryan: Solid pick. A team two years from the Michael Vick trauma and one year from the Bobby Petrino debacle. In terms of picks, he was just the right guy in the right place and it worked for them. Given the flux in Atlanta at the time of his pick, I am not sure he really adds anything to either of our positions except that you just don't know when a quality QB’s will “happen” (they were a mediocre team that had a bad year, creating the lucky break of being in the right place at the right time). In light of that, you just don’t need to go reaching for QB's.

OKAY, THAT BRINGS US TO THE 2004 DRAFT. Three QB’s all solid. One team traded up and won a SB, one team traded down and got a truly franchise QB but no SB, and one team stuck to its guns waited for a QB and has since won two SB’s, been to a third and is easily posed to win more.

The Trade DOWN -- Rivers: Yes, he was a first rounder – BUT San Diego traded down, to get him and got S. Merriman and N. Kaeding out of the deal. He hasn’t won a SB, but is there any doubt that he is an elite QB? In getting Rivers, San Diego not only got a franchise QB by trading down, they passed up the highest rated QB in the draft. Which brings us to …

The Trade UP – E. Manning: [Yes, SD drafted Manning but it was clearly a “raft and trade scenario”] Hard to knock a team that grabs a SB winning QB (but don’t worry, I will). In 2004, Eli was the top rated QB coming out of college – easily. The Giants wanted him and sold the farm to get him. As you now argue, they believed he was “the guy” and went after him. Contrary to what we have in place, however, the Giants were a solid team before he showed up. It’s not like Eli transformed the team. Yes, he threw the miracle pass - But what got that team to the SB? The Giants amazing D-Line which featured multiple draft picks from recent years. And finally ....

The Non-Trade: Roethlesburger: In the years leading up to 2004, the Steelers had won 6 (03), 10 (02) and 13 (01) games. In addition, they had Bettis and Hines Ward. Unfortunately, they had a retread XFL player at QB (Tommy Maddox). So, with several highly rated QB’s did they go chasing anyone? Nope. They had a solid team and let the QB come to them.

I WOULD CONCEDE that Eli is a solid QB. The Giants gave up a lot to get him. They did exactly what you suggest we do now. BUT - Let me ask you something, if you had your choice today – Would you take Manning, Rivers or Roethlesburger? Or, better yet and more accurately, would you take (1) Manning; (2) Roethlesburger; or (3) Rivers and Kaeding & the past 4 years of Merriman? I suggest that, in any reasonable poll, Eli is the last choice. Further, and more importantly, which of these teams are built for longer term success? Again, I think the Giants rank 3rd.

IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS, only one team that was in the play-offs last year (the Jets) traded up to get a highly rated rookie QB and Sanchez has a long way to go (IMHO) before I would classify him as more than "the driver of the bus". The Jets often won despite Sanchez, rarely because of him.

MY POINT through all of this (yes, I get there eventually) is that the best teams in the league didn’t reach for QB’s or trade away lots of picks. They built solid teams and let the QB position come to them. The Patriots, the Steelers, Ravens, Green Bay, San Diego, New Orleans, Philadelphia all have franchise QB’s b/c they created a team where a good QB could thrive.

First off let me say that you did a real nice job on this post. I think you gave examples of teams finding diffferent ways to get a franchise QB. however, I dont think I ever said trading up was the only way to get. What I do know is that I am 39 years old and fan for about 34 years and I am still waiting to see a franchise QB fall into the Redskins lap. I think we will just agree to disagree.

One thing though...didnt Baltimore trade up to get Flacco?

[SmootSmack]

Yes they did...this after trading up for Boller failed on them

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Yes they did...this after trading up for Boller failed on them

Say what you want about Lockers accuracy but at least he was over 50% for 3 years. In 3 years at Cal Boller had 2 years throwing under 50%. Of course he still threw for 28 TD's against 10 Int's his last year but still. Plus Billick lost his QB mojo after leaving Minnesota.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

Say what you want about Lockers accuracy but at least he was over 50% for 3 years. In 3 years at Cal Boller had 2 years throwing under 50%. Of course he still threw for 28 TD's against 10 Int's his last year but still. Plus Billick lost his QB mojo after leaving Minnesota.

Did you hear Billick the other day talking about Boller? It was pretty interesting, he basically said they kept making excuses for Boller leading up to the draft to convince themselves he was the guy to take because they wanted to take a QB.

Easy to say in hindsight, but I never-even in college-saw what the big deal about Boller was. I thought the Ravens were making a big mistake in drafting him, and an even bigger one in trading up for him.