Bulldogs52 484 Report Share Posted March 11, 2012 Three first rounders and a second rounder. That's really two firsts and a second because we upgraded with one of those first rounders. So we have ENTIRE drafts in tact, aside from first rounders in 2013 and 2014. Our scouting department has done an absolutely fantastic job in finding guys who fit the Shanahan mold and fit what the Redskins are trying to do offensively and defensively. The guys are pros. I have no doubt that Mike Shanahan and Bruce Allen believe in those guys tenfold. It's one of the reasons making this sort of deal doesn't cripple the franchise. Also keep in mind, that there are ways to recoup draft choices (maybe not a first, but we can others to acquire large amounts of talent to bring in, if deemed necessary from Shanahan/Allen). What were we doing with our first rounders anyways? Now, under Shanahan/Allen it's been a bit different, I said so above and I meant it. But, let's think about some of the people we've drafted in the first round in the last ten years that didn't work out. Guys like LaRon Landry, who likely won't be back in a Redskin uniform. Carlos Rogers, Jason Campbell, Patrick Ramsey, Rod Gardner. Granted, our last three drafts have been filled with excellent draft choices: Rak, Williams and Kerrigan. I can't argue that and won't. But my point isn't necessarily that our current regime wouldn't find a solid player, but that we've been through tons of first rounders in the last ten years alone that didn't pan out. Giving up two players (sorry, three, including the 2nd this year) is not the end of the world. We have a pretty solid foundation in place on this roster at this point: Helu, Royster, Davis, RG3/Luck, Williams, Rak, Kerrigan, Riley, Wilson, Hank, Jenkins, Paul, Hurt, and I'm sure I left some guys out. Free agency will need to come into play, and we can't overreach for aging guys yet, we need young(ish) guys that fit the Shanahan mold. But we can build our roster to be formidable even without the first rounders. And we can still build a fairly young roster to build on. Quarterback is the position that makes things go in the NFL. I believe that QB and OL/DL fuel teams successes or failures. With the addition of Luck/RG3, 2/3 of that equation are taken care of. A few tweaks in free agency to the OL and we can have 3/3, and then all we're going to need is time to gel, time to fill in the blanks with our remaining draft choices and free agency (SMART free agency moves, not stupid, splash moves). I can't argue that we gave up a lot. We certainly did. And I understand why some are apprehensive. What if RG3/Luck bust out of the league? We gave up a lot for nothing. But it was time this franchise grew some balls and took a risk. And for that, whether Shanahan and Allen are successful or not, I thank them. We broke the trend of being safe and toiling in mediocrity. We've averaged 6.8 wins per season since 1992. We can stay in mediocrity and not take a chance on finding a true franchise QB and continue to win 6.8 games per year, or we can take a risk. Take a chance. Climb out of purgatory. I don't know about you, but we've proven we can stink without a quarterback, I think it's about time to prove we can flourish with one. We haven't had a homegrown franchise quarterback since the 1930's in Sammy Baugh. Hell, I don't even know if Theismann, Williams or Ryp can even count for being "franchise" quarterbacks due to how short a time they were here. I'd say Theismann was close as hell, though. Now we have an opportunity to get our own Cam Newton. Matt Stafford. Matt Ryan. I for one, am excited. And legit excited. Not just "wooo! we made a big splash" excited. But legit "we have a chance" excited. I understand concerns and pessimism. It's been bad here over the last 20 years. But take solace in the fact that we will no longer encounter the status quo as 'Skins fans. Buckle up, it's going to be a bumpy ride, but one that I'm so freakin' happy that we're on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted Account 5,203 Report Share Posted March 11, 2012 If you're using arguments such as "we've crapped away several first rounders, so what's so bad about giving away 3 more" to justify how horrible a trade this is, then you're just putting lipstick on a pig at this point. There are many other awful arguments to address here, including but not limited to: (1) 2/3 of our problem is taken care of! (1 QB, compared to 5 OL and 4 DL). (2) Comparing RGIII to COMPLETELY different QBs stylistically (Stafford, Ryan) (3) We've sucked for 20 years, so what's another gamble?! (4) Finding players to fit the mold of a coach who has yet to have a winning season in DC. RGIII is VERY far from a sure thing, and you don't trade multiple first rounders unless you're VERY sure that RGIII is the solution to the franchise's problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueTornadoFan 17 Report Share Posted March 11, 2012 RGIII is VERY far from a sure thing, and you don't trade multiple first rounders unless you're VERY sure that RGIII is the solution to the franchise's problems. Exactly. What if RGIII turns out to be another Ryan Leaf? That'd be real bad. This guy is not tested in the NFL, same with the other NCAA prospects. Here's some of RGIII's stats while in college. 1) He ran an unofficial sub 4.40 at the Combine 2) He completed 72% of his passes, granted this number if a little inflated due to the system; nevertheless, it is remarkable... 3) 36 TD to 6 INT... That is incredible... 4) He is an extremely high character guy 5) He has a rocket arm All of this while in a horrible conference in the Big 12 apart from Oklahoma, Ok. State. Here are stats from an inferior QB in the NFL today to compare. 1. Completed about 67% of his passes in college. 2. His Heisman year he threw for 30+ TD's and only 6 Interceptions. 3. These numbers are almost exactly like RGIII's except that his running numbers were better, and that he led his school to a National Championship. At this point, I see no reason to believe that RGIII is going to be anything more than another overhyped highly prolific college athlete. An incredible college athlete (ex. RYAN LEAF) can, and sometimes, will turn out to be a bust. Andrew Luck could very well be the same thing. An impressive player coming out of college, only to turn out to be a bust. I hope nothing but the best for the Redskins and to see them to be good, I would say again, but I cannot hold the thought that they have been good before.... Lol. If it were up to me, I would have not done this trade.... Daniel Snyder, you remind Redskins fans of the late Raider Al Davis, or heck, Jerry Jones of the Cowboys. Even though we have Irsay, thank God we don't have Daniel Snyder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legend11 32 Report Share Posted March 11, 2012 Three first rounders and a second rounder. That's really two firsts and a second because we upgraded with one of those first rounders. So we have ENTIRE drafts in tact, aside from first rounders in 2013 and 2014. Our scouting department has done an absolutely fantastic job in finding guys who fit the Shanahan mold and fit what the Redskins are trying to do offensively and defensively. The guys are pros. I have no doubt that Mike Shanahan and Bruce Allen believe in those guys tenfold. It's one of the reasons making this sort of deal doesn't cripple the franchise. Also keep in mind, that there are ways to recoup draft choices (maybe not a first, but we can others to acquire large amounts of talent to bring in, if deemed necessary from Shanahan/Allen). What were we doing with our first rounders anyways? Now, under Shanahan/Allen it's been a bit different, I said so above and I meant it. But, let's think about some of the people we've drafted in the first round in the last ten years that didn't work out. Guys like LaRon Landry, who likely won't be back in a Redskin uniform. Carlos Rogers, Jason Campbell, Patrick Ramsey, Rod Gardner. Granted, our last three drafts have been filled with excellent draft choices: Rak, Williams and Kerrigan. I can't argue that and won't. But my point isn't necessarily that our current regime wouldn't find a solid player, but that we've been through tons of first rounders in the last ten years alone that didn't pan out. Giving up two players (sorry, three, including the 2nd this year) is not the end of the world. We have a pretty solid foundation in place on this roster at this point: Helu, Royster, Davis, RG3/Luck, Williams, Rak, Kerrigan, Riley, Wilson, Hank, Jenkins, Paul, Hurt, and I'm sure I left some guys out. Free agency will need to come into play, and we can't overreach for aging guys yet, we need young(ish) guys that fit the Shanahan mold. But we can build our roster to be formidable even without the first rounders. And we can still build a fairly young roster to build on. Quarterback is the position that makes things go in the NFL. I believe that QB and OL/DL fuel teams successes or failures. With the addition of Luck/RG3, 2/3 of that equation are taken care of. A few tweaks in free agency to the OL and we can have 3/3, and then all we're going to need is time to gel, time to fill in the blanks with our remaining draft choices and free agency (SMART free agency moves, not stupid, splash moves). I can't argue that we gave up a lot. We certainly did. And I understand why some are apprehensive. What if RG3/Luck bust out of the league? We gave up a lot for nothing. But it was time this franchise grew some balls and took a risk. And for that, whether Shanahan and Allen are successful or not, I thank them. We broke the trend of being safe and toiling in mediocrity. We've averaged 6.8 wins per season since 1992. We can stay in mediocrity and not take a chance on finding a true franchise QB and continue to win 6.8 games per year, or we can take a risk. Take a chance. Climb out of purgatory. I don't know about you, but we've proven we can stink without a quarterback, I think it's about time to prove we can flourish with one. We haven't had a homegrown franchise quarterback since the 1930's in Sammy Baugh. Hell, I don't even know if Theismann, Williams or Ryp can even count for being "franchise" quarterbacks due to how short a time they were here. I'd say Theismann was close as hell, though. Now we have an opportunity to get our own Cam Newton. Matt Stafford. Matt Ryan. I for one, am excited. And legit excited. Not just "wooo! we made a big splash" excited. But legit "we have a chance" excited. I understand concerns and pessimism. It's been bad here over the last 20 years. But take solace in the fact that we will no longer encounter the status quo as 'Skins fans. Buckle up, it's going to be a bumpy ride, but one that I'm so freakin' happy that we're on. You poor thang. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluefieldRocks 14 Report Share Posted March 11, 2012 lol Redskins that's something i'd think my Dolphins would do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpdub95 10 Report Share Posted March 11, 2012 i agree, they gave up way too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redtiger 1,742 Report Share Posted March 11, 2012 GREAT move by the Rams! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhschamps04 15 Report Share Posted March 11, 2012 Just think the rams probably would not have chosen RGIII and the vikings asking price would have been a waterboy and a benchwarmer lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted Account 5,203 Report Share Posted March 11, 2012 Just think the rams probably would not have chosen RGIII and the vikings asking price would have been a waterboy and a benchwarmer lol. A very valid, very underrated part of the equation. STL has their "QB of the Future". Why not trade with the Vikings? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhschamps04 15 Report Share Posted March 12, 2012 Exactly that is what i did not understand the Rams are not going to draft a QB and the vikings have been known time after time for either overpaying for a draft pick or underselling there own draft pick if i was a GM i would always go to them first LOL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueTornadoFan 17 Report Share Posted March 12, 2012 Exactly that is what i did not understand the Rams are not going to draft a QB and the vikings have been known time after time for either overpaying for a draft pick or underselling there own draft pick if i was a GM i would always go to them first LOL. I think that the Vikings already have the QB that they are looking for in Christian Ponder, he just needs time to adjust. And he needs help around him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulldogs52 484 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2012 Only time will tell if it was a bone head idea to give up that much, the Skins are $45 million under the cap, that's enough to bring in the needed help with FA.... The NFC East is weak, yeah the Super Bowl Champs are from the East but they won nine game last season and lost to the Skins twice! I think with RG 3 we can contend right away if they make the right moves in FA as well! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhschamps04 15 Report Share Posted March 12, 2012 I think that the Vikings already have the QB that they are looking for in Christian Ponder, he just needs time to adjust. And he needs help around him. thats my point the rams did not need a qb neither did the vikings the rams asked for a kings ransom and the vikes would have asked for a basicly nothing in return. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted Account 5,203 Report Share Posted March 12, 2012 Only time will tell if it was a bone head idea to give up that much, the Skins are $45 million under the cap, that's enough to bring in the needed help with FA.... The NFC East is weak, yeah the Super Bowl Champs are from the East but they won nine game last season and lost to the Skins twice! I think with RG 3 we can contend right away if they make the right moves in FA as well! Finally, a good point. Yes, Washington is $45M under the cap. We need every bit of it. However, that good point does not excuse a stupid move. It's like saying "don't worry about the bank foreclosin' on mah house, I done paid off mah car, so I can live in it fer a while." Why foreclose on your future, and why do it with the justification that you've got a little wiggle room? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legend11 32 Report Share Posted March 12, 2012 Finally, a good point. Yes, Washington is $45M under the cap. We need every bit of it. However, that good point does not excuse a stupid move. It's like saying "don't worry about the bank foreclosin' on mah house, I done paid off mah car, so I can live in it fer a while." Why foreclose on your future, and why do it with the justification that you've got a little wiggle room? Well, so much for that cap space: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/12/league-strips-cowboys-redskins-of-millions-in-cap-space/ Well, it wasn’t just a rumor. We explained an hour ago that there has been talk of the NFL taking action against teams that deliberately dumped salaries into the uncapped year of 2010. The two primary violators were the Cowboys and Redskins, according to Adam Schefter of ESPN. Per Schefter, the league will punish the teams by removing millions in cap dollars? How many millions? Schefter reports that the Cowboys will lose more than $10 million — and that the Redskins will lose $36 million. (And now we know why the Redskins got the Griffin deal done last week; the Rams likely would have wanted even more for the second overall pick now.) The teams can divide the cap losses between 2012 and 2013 in any portion they want. As of Sunday, the Redskins more than $30 million in cap space in 2012. The Cowboys had less than $5 million. The money will be reallocated to the other teams, with every franchise except the Saints and Raiders picking up $1.6 million in extra cap space. (The Saints and Raiders presumably don’t get the extra money as their own punishment for engaging in similar tactics in 2010.) So, for the second time in 10 days, the NFL has acknowledged cheating. Though this isn’t as serious as the Saints’ bounty system, it’s still cheating. And the consequence demonstrates what the league thinks of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted Account 5,203 Report Share Posted March 12, 2012 Well, so much for that cap space: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/12/league-strips-cowboys-redskins-of-millions-in-cap-space/ Well, it wasn’t just a rumor. We explained an hour ago that there has been talk of the NFL taking action against teams that deliberately dumped salaries into the uncapped year of 2010. The two primary violators were the Cowboys and Redskins, according to Adam Schefter of ESPN. Per Schefter, the league will punish the teams by removing millions in cap dollars? How many millions? Schefter reports that the Cowboys will lose more than $10 million — and that the Redskins will lose $36 million. (And now we know why the Redskins got the Griffin deal done last week; the Rams likely would have wanted even more for the second overall pick now.) The teams can divide the cap losses between 2012 and 2013 in any portion they want. As of Sunday, the Redskins more than $30 million in cap space in 2012. The Cowboys had less than $5 million. The money will be reallocated to the other teams, with every franchise except the Saints and Raiders picking up $1.6 million in extra cap space. (The Saints and Raiders presumably don’t get the extra money as their own punishment for engaging in similar tactics in 2010.) So, for the second time in 10 days, the NFL has acknowledged cheating. Though this isn’t as serious as the Saints’ bounty system, it’s still cheating. And the consequence demonstrates what the league thinks of it. Daniel Snyder, you are worthless. WORTHLESS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frito gonzales 103 Report Share Posted March 12, 2012 "Daniel Snyder, you are worthless. WORTHLESS." Agreed 110%!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futbolking 766 Report Share Posted March 12, 2012 If you're using arguments such as "we've crapped away several first rounders, so what's so bad about giving away 3 more" to justify how horrible a trade this is, then you're just putting lipstick on a pig at this point. There are many other awful arguments to address here, including but not limited to: (1) 2/3 of our problem is taken care of! (1 QB, compared to 5 OL and 4 DL). (2) Comparing RGIII to COMPLETELY different QBs stylistically (Stafford, Ryan) (3) We've sucked for 20 years, so what's another gamble?! (4) Finding players to fit the mold of a coach who has yet to have a winning season in DC. RGIII is VERY far from a sure thing, and you don't trade multiple first rounders unless you're VERY sure that RGIII is the solution to the franchise's problems. Then you get Andrew Luck... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoughRider97 10 Report Share Posted March 13, 2012 I just hope RGIII doesnt blow out his knee, I hope he's durable enough to take the hits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhschamps04 15 Report Share Posted March 13, 2012 well now the skins have atleast 5 more tough years they gave up everything to get RGIII and then everyone thought maybe they can do something in FA and now they cant even make a move LOL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bhs7695 185 Report Share Posted March 13, 2012 I sent this over to my Dad and he said if they were cheating the cap, you would have thought they would have fielded better teams! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great City 210 Report Share Posted March 13, 2012 We HAD to trade with the Rams to draft RGIII. Cleveland wanted to trade with the Rams as well. Us trading with the Vikings would have only allowed Cleveland to trade with the Rams and then draft RGIII. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futbolking 766 Report Share Posted March 13, 2012 Daniel Snyder, you are worthless. WORTHLESS. And Jerry Jones is right there with him.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bhs7695 185 Report Share Posted March 14, 2012 And Jerry Jones is right there with him.... Jerry Jones still has Super Bowl rings no matter how much involvement he had with decisions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulldogs52 484 Author Report Share Posted March 14, 2012 Jerry Jones still has Super Bowl rings no matter how much involvement he had with decisions. 20 years ago! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.01bb665814ffc257795fe158cb2045c7.png.8a531ac878a82772b21014d7a6167582.png){kind=logo}
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.