Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am a strong believer in being proactive to get your future franchise QB. A team and GM should have a strong conviction that they will be the leader of their team for years to come. That means take the QB early or trade up if you have to. And when you have two first round picks, you take the QB you believe in first regardless of BPA on your board. That's exactly what the Browns and Bills both did in the draft last year. And what the Giants did this year.
The Redskins did the complete opposite of this. How strong are your convictions that Haskins will be a great QB if you are willing to sit at 16 and take him if he falls to you? I saw a similar thing with my Bills in 2013 when we traded back from 8 to 16 to take EJ Manuel.
Giants are getting heat but I prefer their method of selecting a franchise QB over Washington's.
Since the 2016 draft and up till this draft, 10 out of 11 first round QBs were selected via a trade up. Baker Mayfield is the alone exception who was taken #1 overall.
Sam Darnold, Josh Allen, Josh Rosen, Pat Mahomes, DeShaun Watson, Mitch Turbitzky, Carson Wentz, Jared Goff, Paxton Lynch, Lamar Jackson
Only Lynch and Jackson were taken after the top 12. At 26 and 32 respectively. I would contend that all of the QB's taken in the top 12 are promising franchise QB's with the exception of Rosen. So that is 7/8. Lynch is a bust and his being drafted all the way down at 26 helps explain that. Yes, the Broncos traded up from 32 but the fact that he was still available at 26 tells us all most teams did not have a high grade on him or strong convictions on him. We can say the same about Lamar Jackson who despite some limited success last year I would say he is the most likely of the listed QB's to fail outside of Lynch and maybe Rosen.
I am a strong believer in being proactive to get your future franchise QB. A team and GM should have a strong conviction that they will be the leader of their team for years to come. That means take the QB early or trade up if you have to. And when you have two first round picks, you take the QB you believe in first regardless of BPA on your board. That's exactly what the Browns and Bills both did in the draft last year. And what the Giants did this year.
The Redskins did the complete opposite of this. How strong are your convictions that Haskins will be a great QB if you are willing to sit at 16 and take him if he falls to you? I saw a similar thing with my Bills in 2013 when we traded back from 8 to 16 to take EJ Manuel.
Giants are getting heat but I prefer their method of selecting a franchise QB over Washington's.
Since the 2016 draft and up till this draft, 10 out of 11 first round QBs were selected via a trade up. Baker Mayfield is the alone exception who was taken #1 overall.
Sam Darnold, Josh Allen, Josh Rosen, Pat Mahomes, DeShaun Watson, Mitch Turbitzky, Carson Wentz, Jared Goff, Paxton Lynch, Lamar Jackson
Only Lynch and Jackson were taken after the top 12. At 26 and 32 respectively. I would contend that all of the QB's taken in the top 12 are promising franchise QB's with the exception of Rosen. So that is 7/8. Lynch is a bust and his being drafted all the way down at 26 helps explain that. Yes, the Broncos traded up from 32 but the fact that he was still available at 26 tells us all most teams did not have a high grade on him or strong convictions on him. We can say the same about Lamar Jackson who despite some limited success last year I would say he is the most likely of the listed QB's to fail outside of Lynch and maybe Rosen.
Wasn't Dan Marino like #29? Ok.. 27.
So.. There's no telling. RG3 was #2. So was Ryan Leaf.
I'm certainly not sold on Haskins.. But, thankfully.. If he doesn't work out.. It's basically 4 years of a problem. It's not like the killer contracts that were signed back in the Shuler days.
As for this being a better offense next year.. I don't overly see that. You get Guice back, who has not played a down in the NFL yet, so.. That's questionable. Nothing has been done to upgrade a horrible WR corps. Trey Quinn and Paul Richardson are your biggest stars there. In fact, WR has gotten even worse since the season ended. Not overly sad to see Crowder go, but.. He was probably the top WR we had. Then there's an OL that can't play 16 games.
There's still 6 rounds to go. Hopefully some of the other needs are filled in. And they have a goodly number of picks to do it with.
And Brady was 199th, Tony Romo undrafted. None of which means you should just let the QBs fall to you in my opinion. There are always exceptions to every rule but that doesn’t necessarily mean the rule is a bad one to follow in general.
Ripping the Giants and praising the Redskins is ridiculous given the recent history of round one QBs selected in the three previous drafts. Who saw Turbitzky being selected 2nd overall? Many of these QBs still have a lot to prove but they are off to good starts.
Location: Huntersville/Charlotte, NC and Washington, DC
26,700 posts, read 41,718,665 times
Reputation: 41376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill the Butcher
I disagree with most here.
I am a strong believer in being proactive to get your future franchise QB. A team and GM should have a strong conviction that they will be the leader of their team for years to come. That means take the QB early or trade up if you have to. And when you have two first round picks, you take the QB you believe in first regardless of BPA on your board. That's exactly what the Browns and Bills both did in the draft last year. And what the Giants did this year.
The Redskins did the complete opposite of this. How strong are your convictions that Haskins will be a great QB if you are willing to sit at 16 and take him if he falls to you? I saw a similar thing with my Bills in 2013 when we traded back from 8 to 16 to take EJ Manuel.
Giants are getting heat but I prefer their method of selecting a franchise QB over Washington's.
Since the 2016 draft and up till this draft, 10 out of 11 first round QBs were selected via a trade up. Baker Mayfield is the alone exception who was taken #1 overall.
Sam Darnold, Josh Allen, Josh Rosen, Pat Mahomes, DeShaun Watson, Mitch Turbitzky, Carson Wentz, Jared Goff, Paxton Lynch, Lamar Jackson
Only Lynch and Jackson were taken after the top 12. At 26 and 32 respectively. I would contend that all of the QB's taken in the top 12 are promising franchise QB's with the exception of Rosen. So that is 7/8. Lynch is a bust and his being drafted all the way down at 26 helps explain that. Yes, the Broncos traded up from 32 but the fact that he was still available at 26 tells us all most teams did not have a high grade on him or strong convictions on him. We can say the same about Lamar Jackson who despite some limited success last year I would say he is the most likely of the listed QB's to fail outside of Lynch and maybe Rosen.
I think your premise is flawed a little bit. Aaron Rodgers was a QB that fell and so was Russell Wilson. Sometimes in the right situation the right guy falls to you. Kirk Cousins who helped stabilize the situation for a little. He fell.
And Brady was 199th, Tony Romo undrafted. None of which means you should just let the QBs fall to you in my opinion. There are always exceptions to every rule but that doesn’t necessarily mean the rule is a bad one to follow in general.
Ripping the Giants and praising the Redskins is ridiculous given the recent history of round one QBs selected in the three previous drafts. Who saw Turbitzky being selected 2nd overall? Many of these QBs still have a lot to prove but they are off to good starts.
Anyone is a risk. RG3 looked great in college, but couldn't develop as a pocket passer and had too many injuries. Vinnie Testeverde was #1 overall and was thought to turn the Bucs around. He wound up being a decent QB.. But not what you expect out of a #1 overall. Aaron Rodgers had the big fall.. and, had he been drafted earlier, would he have been "Aaron Rodgers" if he was playing for the Bills?
If you turn this on its ear.. Look at what the Raiders did getting Ferrell. Who is likely going to be a good, if not great player. They got ripped for drafting him at #4 rather than trading down. Redskins got who they wanted, and it cost them nothing. Lucky? Maybe so. Obviously we wouldn't have seen what would happen, but had the Redskins traded up.. let's just say they worked a trade with Oakland to swap #1's.. Probably would have cost them next years' number 1 or a couple of picks this draft..Would this pick have been smarter and better had they made that trade?
No. It'd be the exact thing it was right now. A (hopefully calculated) risk on the guy set to be your next franchise QB.
Flawed that we shouldn’t be flaming the giants and praising the Skins? Absolutely not. Giants have done exactly what most other teams have done in recent years to grab who hey think with strong conviction will be their franchise QB.
And let me clarify. It’s not that the Redskins have definitely gone about it wrong or that Haskins will bust. It is simply that I like the Giants approach to their QB situation more.
Flawed that we shouldn’t be flaming the giants and praising the Skins? Absolutely not. Giants have done exactly what most other teams have done in recent years to grab who hey think with strong conviction will be their franchise QB.
And let me clarify. It’s not that the Redskins have definitely gone about it wrong or that Haskins will bust. It is simply that I like the Giants approach to their QB situation more.
Well, I don't like the Giants' approach, but it has nothing to do with who they drafted this year. They really should have moved on last year.
Where my argument lacks steam is who they got last year.. Pretty hard to argue with Barkley. And.. If we even go back to "Shoulda in 2016 or 2017", which I also agree with.. Pickins were pretty slim when their picks rolled around. Yeah, they coulda had Dak in 2016, but.. Not really a fit with their offense and.. admittedly.. It's rare that a lower round pick works out.
Lost in all this argument(And I'm not really arguing with you, just a mild disagreement at best).. The trade with Indy for Montez Sweat. Should be a good player.. That heart thing is a concern, but not huge. I just wonder.. Alot of WR's came off the board after that, which no question is a much more pressing need. Along with the secondary. Best use of picks?
Not against it, just.. Concerned about it.
And.. McLaurin.. Don't know much about him. Does seem like a good pick in that he will be a deep threat, which is SORELY needed.
The Redskins did the complete opposite of this. How strong are your convictions that Haskins will be a great QB if you are willing to sit at 16 and take him if he falls to you? I saw a similar thing with my Bills in 2013 when we traded back from 8 to 16 to take EJ Manuel.
Skins knew they would get Haskins or Jones. Perhaps they were content with either and saw no value in trading up. Perhaps they were going elsewhere but rolled with Haskins when he fell. The teams between the Giants and Skins weren't going after QB's and other teams wouldn't be trading up. Smart move by the Skins to not lose other picks.
Skins knew they would get Haskins or Jones. Perhaps they were content with either and saw no value in trading up. Perhaps they were going elsewhere but rolled with Haskins when he fell. The teams between the Giants and Skins weren't going after QB's and other teams wouldn't be trading up. Smart move by the Skins to not lose other picks.
I still disagree here. You never know what other things are thinking. Even a team with an old veteran QB could have easily traded up. Like we saw with KC when they took Mahomes. Chargers, Patriots, Steelers, Saints all could have been candidates to jump in. Then you got teams like Miami, Denver who clearly needed to address the position no later than day two. They could have took a swing for Haskins.
Perhaps the Skins got their guy. Hopefully they have more conviction in him than the Bills had on EJ Manuel.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
