Why Would You Draft Another QB ?

Talk about the Washington Redskins here. Do you bleed burgundy and gold?
kazoo
Posts: 10254
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Kazmania

Postby KazooSkinsFan » Sun Apr 29, 2012 2:29 pm

Mississippiskinsfan2 wrote:Most of us hopes RG3 starts the season as the starter so we all must be willing to deal with up and down play that comes with having a rookie QB starting. Knowing there will be up and down play with RG3 I would be fine with a rookie QB backing him up "IF" he can show he can play just as good or better than Rex. We put up with Rex's up and down play last year so why not just keep two rookies who should get better with playing time. Maybe I'm just thinking crazy but I think it would work out just the same.


It's not just having a veteran to back up RG3 but having a veteran to mentor the two kiddie poos. No way we go with two rookies. You can bookmark this post and nail me if we do. No freaking way. None. Zero.
Groucho: Man does not control his own fate. The women in his life do that for him

Proverb: Failure is not falling down. Failure is not getting up again

Twain: A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way

Hog
Posts: 2355
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 10:56 am

Re: Why Would You Draft Another QB ?

Postby RayNAustin » Sun Apr 29, 2012 2:30 pm

funsho2 wrote:
chiefhog44 wrote:
funsho2 wrote:Did Indy draft another Qb?


ROTFALMAO uh yes they did actually. Is this post not the dumbest thing?


Indy is the one that actually needs a backup....name the qbs on their roster right now without googling?

Plus the colts didn't send 2 future first round picks and a 2nd round pick to get a QB...did they?


Actually, they did. Both Indy and the Rams had the #1 and #2 overall ... Indy could just as easily traded that pick for AT LEAST as much as the Rams got from the Redskins. So, by using their pick to take Luck, Indy (in effect) gave up two extra #1's and a 2 .... and Indy has far more holes to fill than the Redskins do.

funsho2 wrote:You already lost 3 future picks on a guy you want to build your future around...why not sign quality veterans to back him up...why waste the few picks you have left on another qb....when u can fill some holes on your team.


We lost NOTHING. If RG3 becomes the player that everyone believes he will be, he's worth all that and much more. Only if he winds up a bust have the Redskins "lost" anything. (And there is no guarantee that those extra picks would be super stars either).

Besides, we already have a veteran QB with three years experience in OUR offense on the roster as a backup ... so there was no need to go get one in FA. A quality developmental QB to serve as a long term backup was a hole in the roster that needed to be filled ... and Cousins was projected as a 2nd rounder that fell to the 4th ... a steal at that spot.

funsho2 wrote:How nobody is saying if andrew luck gets hurt....nobody said that last year about cam newton....but he was stella right?.....You are already thinking injury....what a f'd up mentality we have on this board.


Indy majorly fouled up by not focusing on having a capable backup groomed to fill in for Peyton .. evidenced by the fact that they couldn't compete with their cheer leading squad last year without him. If there is ANY MODERN EVIDENCE of the extreme need for a starting quality backup QB ... Indy's experience with Peyton is the perfect example.

Besides, you don't draft 4th rounders with a high expectation of being starters ... that type of player is generally gone in the first 2 or 3 rounds! Picks in rounds 4-7 are expected to compete for a chance to make the 53 man roster as depth ... and like any other position, you need depth at the QB spot. So, drafting a player in the 4th round that you know will be on the roster is a winning pick for the 4th round.

There's a lot more that goes into these selections than you apparently consider .... 1) was there another player available at that spot that they had rated higher and that filled a need? Apparently not, else they would have picked that player instead. 2) when your turn comes up, you don't always know ahead of time who will be there ... so you have contingencies ... and you have a board of players ranked .... if they had Cousins ranked as a late second round pick on their board (as some boards did), and he fell to the 4th, conventional wisdom is that you snatch up a player like that, especially if it also fills a need. It would have been stupid not to make that pick.

Was it a surprising pick? Yes ... to most onlookers (including myself) that just assumed that RG3 was the beginning and end for the Redskin QB activity, it was unexpected. But to the Shanahan clan, they obviously hadn't forgotten just how disappointingly atrocious Beck proved to be, He was a major miscalculation on their part, since they gave him every opportunity to show his stuff. Not only was he given the express lane to become the starter ... his performance showed him to not even be a viable option as a backup, so there was no reason whatsoever to waste anymore time, effort or money on him (or have him around as a reminder of that "I stake my reputation on it" mistake. So they addressed it with Cousins.

If you have a chance to rectify a previously disastrous mistake with a 4th rounder, especially one that was rated as a 2nd round talent, you do it. It's as simple as that. In retrospect, it makes perfect sense, and a sign that the FO is really thinking on their feet and addressing both short and long term needs ... while replacing that bad taste (Beck) in your mouth that you'd rather not have lingering around any longer.

**********
User avatar
Posts: 16744
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 1:45 pm
Location: If I knew ... it would explain a lot but I've seen Homerville on a map, that wasn't helpful at all

Postby 1niksder » Sun Apr 29, 2012 2:35 pm

RayNAustin wrote:
funsho2 wrote:
chiefhog44 wrote:
funsho2 wrote:Did Indy draft another Qb?


ROTFALMAO uh yes they did actually. Is this post not the dumbest thing?


Indy is the one that actually needs a backup....name the qbs on their roster right now without googling?

Plus the colts didn't send 2 future first round picks and a 2nd round pick to get a QB...did they?


Actually, they did. Both Indy and the Rams had the #1 and #2 overall ... Indy could just as easily traded that pick for AT LEAST as much as the Rams got from the Redskins. So, by using their pick to take Luck, Indy (in effect) gave up two extra #1's and a 2 .... and Indy has far more holes to fill than the Redskins do.

funsho2 wrote:You already lost 3 future picks on a guy you want to build your future around...why not sign quality veterans to back him up...why waste the few picks you have left on another qb....when u can fill some holes on your team.


We lost NOTHING. If RG3 becomes the player that everyone believes he will be, he's worth all that and much more. Only if he winds up a bust have the Redskins "lost" anything. (And there is no guarantee that those extra picks would be super stars either).

Besides, we already have a veteran QB with three years experience in OUR offense on the roster as a backup ... so there was no need to go get one in FA. A quality developmental QB to serve as a long term backup was a hole in the roster that needed to be filled ... and Cousins was projected as a 2nd rounder that fell to the 4th ... a steal at that spot.

funsho2 wrote:How nobody is saying if andrew luck gets hurt....nobody said that last year about cam newton....but he was stella right?.....You are already thinking injury....what a f'd up mentality we have on this board.


Indy majorly fouled up by not focusing on having a capable backup groomed to fill in for Peyton .. evidenced by the fact that they couldn't compete with their cheer leading squad last year without him. If there is ANY MODERN EVIDENCE of the extreme need for a starting quality backup QB ... Indy's experience with Peyton is the perfect example.

Besides, you don't draft 4th rounders with a high expectation of being starters ... that type of player is generally gone in the first 2 or 3 rounds! Picks in rounds 4-7 are expected to compete for a chance to make the 53 man roster as depth ... and like any other position, you need depth at the QB spot. So, drafting a player in the 4th round that you know will be on the roster is a winning pick for the 4th round.

There's a lot more that goes into these selections than you apparently consider .... 1) was there another player available at that spot that they had rated higher and that filled a need? Apparently not, else they would have picked that player instead. 2) when your turn comes up, you don't always know ahead of time who will be there ... so you have contingencies ... and you have a board of players ranked .... if they had Cousins ranked as a late second round pick on their board (as some boards did), and he fell to the 4th, conventional wisdom is that you snatch up a player like that, especially if it also fills a need. It would have been stupid not to make that pick.

Was it a surprising pick? Yes ... to most onlookers (including myself) that just assumed that RG3 was the beginning and end for the Redskin QB activity, it was unexpected. But to the Shanahan clan, they obviously hadn't forgotten just how disappointingly atrocious Beck proved to be, He was a major miscalculation on their part, since they gave him every opportunity to show his stuff. Not only was he given the express lane to become the starter ... his performance showed him to not even be a viable option as a backup, so there was no reason whatsoever to waste anymore time, effort or money on him (or have him around as a reminder of that "I stake my reputation on it" mistake. So they addressed it with Cousins.

If you have a chance to rectify a previously disastrous mistake with a 4th rounder, especially one that was rated as a 2nd round talent, you do it. It's as simple as that. In retrospect, it makes perfect sense, and a sign that the FO is really thinking on their feet and addressing both short and long term needs ... while replacing that bad taste (Beck) in your mouth that you'd rather not have lingering around any longer.

+1
:hail: Top to Bottom...

\:D/ Next :?:
..__..
{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-

When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot in it and hold on....

If the world didn't suck we'd all fall off

Hog
Posts: 2355
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 10:56 am

Postby RayNAustin » Sun Apr 29, 2012 2:39 pm

the poster wrote:what I don't understand, is during the lead up to their first 4th round selection, how come ZERO people on this website have any posts saying "boy, I hope they take Kirk cousins with this pick, it would be a smart move."

no one said that. note. you all did mention other players you wanted....only after the pick do you mention it as good .

what good sheep you are.


If you're such a smart guy ... why waste time arguing with mindless sheep? Why not put that brilliance to use, and get yourself a job in an NFL front office instead? Surely someone besides yourself will recognize your grand wisdom.

Seems to me, none of us sheep are capable of recognizing your true genius, so no sense in continuing to waste your pearls of wisdom here! :wink:

kazoo
Posts: 10254
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Kazmania

Re: Why Would You Draft Another QB ?

Postby KazooSkinsFan » Sun Apr 29, 2012 3:02 pm

RayNAustin wrote:Actually, they did. Both Indy and the Rams had the #1 and #2 overall ...


Bam, excellent Post Ray. Word.
Groucho: Man does not control his own fate. The women in his life do that for him

Proverb: Failure is not falling down. Failure is not getting up again

Twain: A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way

the 'mudge
Posts: 14380
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 10:15 pm
Location: Curmudgeon Corner, Maine

Postby Countertrey » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:55 pm

RayN be knockin dem outta de park today... +1
"That's a clown question, bro"
- - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman
"But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man
That he didn't, didn't already have"
- - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America

Hog
Posts: 2145
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 2:05 pm
Location: Midland, VA

Postby Kilmer72 » Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:05 pm

RayNAustin wrote:
the poster wrote:what I don't understand, is during the lead up to their first 4th round selection, how come ZERO people on this website have any posts saying "boy, I hope they take Kirk cousins with this pick, it would be a smart move."

no one said that. note. you all did mention other players you wanted....only after the pick do you mention it as good .

what good sheep you are.


If you're such a smart guy ... why waste time arguing with mindless sheep? Why not put that brilliance to use, and get yourself a job in an NFL front office instead? Surely someone besides yourself will recognize your grand wisdom.

Seems to me, none of us sheep are capable of recognizing your true genius, so no sense in continuing to waste your pearls of wisdom here! :wink:



I want to LMAO but promised I wouldn't. I hope I am forgiven. :)

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 291
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 3:51 pm

Postby Mississippiskinsfan2 » Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:00 pm

KazooSkinsFan wrote:
Mississippiskinsfan2 wrote:Most of us hopes RG3 starts the season as the starter so we all must be willing to deal with up and down play that comes with having a rookie QB starting. Knowing there will be up and down play with RG3 I would be fine with a rookie QB backing him up "IF" he can show he can play just as good or better than Rex. We put up with Rex's up and down play last year so why not just keep two rookies who should get better with playing time. Maybe I'm just thinking crazy but I think it would work out just the same.


It's not just having a veteran to back up RG3 but having a veteran to mentor the two kiddie poos. No way we go with two rookies. You can bookmark this post and nail me if we do. No freaking way. None. Zero.


I didn't say it would happen just saying I would feel fine with it if that's the way it turned out. The players get paid to play and the coaches get paid to show them how to do it. Us fans make more out of the mentoring stuff than there really is. And yes I know it helps to have someone there who has being doing it for a few years but in the end its the coaches job to make sure the players are ready. I think we will have 3 QB to start the season but if they needed a body somewhere else I would feel just as good with two rookies QBs as I would with RG3 and Rex

Hog
Posts: 2145
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 2:05 pm
Location: Midland, VA

Postby Kilmer72 » Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:18 pm

Mississippiskinsfan2 wrote:
KazooSkinsFan wrote:
Mississippiskinsfan2 wrote:Most of us hopes RG3 starts the season as the starter so we all must be willing to deal with up and down play that comes with having a rookie QB starting. Knowing there will be up and down play with RG3 I would be fine with a rookie QB backing him up "IF" he can show he can play just as good or better than Rex. We put up with Rex's up and down play last year so why not just keep two rookies who should get better with playing time. Maybe I'm just thinking crazy but I think it would work out just the same.


It's not just having a veteran to back up RG3 but having a veteran to mentor the two kiddie poos. No way we go with two rookies. You can bookmark this post and nail me if we do. No freaking way. None. Zero.


I didn't say it would happen just saying I would feel fine with it if that's the way it turned out. The players get paid to play and the coaches get paid to show them how to do it. Us fans make more out of the mentoring stuff than there really is. And yes I know it helps to have someone there who has being doing it for a few years but in the end its the coaches job to make sure the players are ready. I think we will have 3 QB to start the season but if they needed a body somewhere else I would feel just as good with two rookies QBs as I would with RG3 and Rex



Maybe. I want to say look at Matt Flynn and Rogers but they might not have had real mentoring. Just real coaching.

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 291
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 3:51 pm

Postby Mississippiskinsfan2 » Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:33 pm

It helps when you have a group of the WR like packers do too.

Hog
Posts: 2145
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 2:05 pm
Location: Midland, VA

Postby Kilmer72 » Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:38 pm

Yes and it takes a real QB to make it happen. We now have two young guys with some promise. There was no one else outside of Flynn that had promise as a veteran.

Hog
Posts: 2145
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 2:05 pm
Location: Midland, VA

Postby Kilmer72 » Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:39 pm

This has been the best draft with less picks than I remember for a long time.

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 4609
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:31 pm
Location: D.C.

Postby Red_One43 » Sun Apr 29, 2012 7:10 pm

Kilmer72 wrote:
Mississippiskinsfan2 wrote:
KazooSkinsFan wrote:
Mississippiskinsfan2 wrote:Most of us hopes RG3 starts the season as the starter so we all must be willing to deal with up and down play that comes with having a rookie QB starting. Knowing there will be up and down play with RG3 I would be fine with a rookie QB backing him up "IF" he can show he can play just as good or better than Rex. We put up with Rex's up and down play last year so why not just keep two rookies who should get better with playing time. Maybe I'm just thinking crazy but I think it would work out just the same.


It's not just having a veteran to back up RG3 but having a veteran to mentor the two kiddie poos. No way we go with two rookies. You can bookmark this post and nail me if we do. No freaking way. None. Zero.


I didn't say it would happen just saying I would feel fine with it if that's the way it turned out. The players get paid to play and the coaches get paid to show them how to do it. Us fans make more out of the mentoring stuff than there really is. And yes I know it helps to have someone there who has being doing it for a few years but in the end its the coaches job to make sure the players are ready. I think we will have 3 QB to start the season but if they needed a body somewhere else I would feel just as good with two rookies QBs as I would with RG3 and Rex



Maybe. I want to say look at Matt Flynn and Rogers but they might not have had real mentoring. Just real coaching.


Hey, that's what Brett Favre said. :)

piggie
User avatar
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 6:46 pm
Location: Subarctica

Re: Why Would You Draft Another QB ?

Postby SkinFan63 » Sun Apr 29, 2012 8:54 pm

funsho2 wrote:
SouthLondonRedskin wrote:
funsho2 wrote:After trading three 1st round picks for RG3? Does that make any sense....why not sign veteran Qbs to surround your young QB? Did Indy draft another Qb?

If i was RG3 i will ask for a trade right now


Then you'd be a complete doughnut*. What's the matter, scared of a little competiton...????



*Please note the proper spelling


This is not about competition but our priorities....We don't need a stockpile of Qbs ...we need defensive help and other positions.


This is not about competition but our priorities....We don't need a stockpile of Qbs ...we need defensive help and other positions.[/quote]

We don't have a stockpile of qb's. This was an AWESOME decision to take Cousins in the 4th. A. he was speculated to go in the 2nd round but still available in the 4th. B. Who do you want to be our long term back up qb....Grossman?? C. If needed he can be traded for a #1-2 in the future just like Kevin Kolb. It's called insurance and we need some.
"Fortune Favors The Bold"

Hog
Posts: 2145
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 2:05 pm
Location: Midland, VA

Re: Why Would You Draft Another QB ?

Postby Kilmer72 » Sun Apr 29, 2012 9:02 pm

SkinFan63 wrote:
funsho2 wrote:
SouthLondonRedskin wrote:
funsho2 wrote:After trading three 1st round picks for RG3? Does that make any sense....why not sign veteran Qbs to surround your young QB? Did Indy draft another Qb?

If i was RG3 i will ask for a trade right now


Then you'd be a complete doughnut*. What's the matter, scared of a little competiton...????



*Please note the proper spelling


This is not about competition but our priorities....We don't need a stockpile of Qbs ...we need defensive help and other positions.


This is not about competition but our priorities....We don't need a stockpile of Qbs ...we need defensive help and other positions.


We don't have a stockpile of qb's. This was an AWESOME decision to take Cousins in the 4th. A. he was speculated to go in the 2nd round but still available in the 4th. B. Who do you want to be our long term back up qb....Grossman?? C. If needed he can be traded for a #1-2 in the future just like Kevin Kolb. It's called insurance and we need some.[/quote]


Hey we need QBs,,, Rather they are from mortgaging our future or getting lucky. Last really good one we had was Johnson. We now have a potential saver.

Return to Hog Wash - Washington Redskins Football