Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
pittnthat

RG3 to the Skins

Recommended Posts

2012 - 1st Round (2nd pick)- WASHINGTON

 

2012 - 1st Round (6th pick)- ST LOUIS //FIXED

 

2012 - 2nd Round - ST LOUIS

2013 - 1st Round - ST LOUIS

2014 - 1st Round - ST LOUIS

 

And all this bs about moving up in the 1st round, you give one to get the other. Otherwise, how do we know they didn't give up 3 1st rounders and swap their 2nd for Rams 1st? Cause holy ###### then they gave up 3 good apples, and moved up/ swapped from a decent apple(39pick) to a good apple(2nd pick). And if you didn't give up 3 1st's and a 2nd, I can't belive you idiots gave 3 1st round picks to swap ur 2nd with our 1st rounder.

 

Please read this very slowly. They did not give up three firsts but RGIII did cost them three firsts and a second. HTH :dunno: Do the math!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see the huge downside risk.

 

The risk is enormous.

 

Let's look. If the Colts, as expected, take Luck, and he flops, they risked one first round pick, and lost. They can try again next year, or the year after.

 

If the skins, as expected, take RG3 and he flops, they risked three firsts and a second. They will not have a real chance to draft a new franchise QB for several years.

 

See the difference?

 

Not to mention the fact that, even if both QB's are as excellent as advertised, the Colts will be able to HELP Luck suceed by using their (probably top 10) first rounders and a second this year to draft people to protect luck, to catch his passes, and to play defense on his team.

 

The Skins will not have that option.

 

Then there are cap implications... since the Colts will be DRAFTING top end talent (they hope) they will get young players locked down to a cheap contract for several years.

 

The skins, since they will have no meaningful draft picks, will have to attempt to build around RG3 in free agency, which will cost them more for older, perhaps not as good (since teams rarely let their studs walk) players. For example, Pierre Garcon, a mediocre talent at best, is costing the Skins a fortune. The colts will be able to draft a more talented receiver, who is younger and has less injury history, for far less money in next year's draft, should they choose to do so.

 

So not only are the skins risking better than THREE TIMES as much as the colts on their new franchise QB, in doing what they did, they are also making it LESS LIKELY that he will enjoy long term success.

 

If I were RG3, I would not be happy the way things have shaken out, and would be doing all in my power to convince the Colts to take me instead.

 

The draft has always been the only way to build a team. The new CBA makes that even more so. High draft picks are gold in today's NFL... that's why you don't see the smart, successful teams trading them away willy-nilly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not the point. The point was what did the Skins pay to the Rams to get their pick. The paid 2 1sts and 1 2nd, and swapped 1sts this year. RGIII was worth a first round pick to EVERYBODY in the draft if he was there at their spot...he was worth 2 firsts and a 2nd to guarantee he would be there at Washington's pick.

 

I think that people are getting hung up on semantics. Here is the dumbed down version:

- To move up 2 spots in the 2012 draft, the Redskins gave up 2 firsts and a 2nd

- To get RGIII on their team (or Luck if the Colts go nuts), the Redskins had to use 3 firsts and a 2nd

 

Does that help everyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that people are getting hung up on semantics. Here is the dumbed down version:

- To move up 2 spots in the 2012 draft, the Redskins gave up 2 firsts and a 2nd

- To get RGIII on their team (or Luck if the Colts go nuts), the Redskins had to use 3 firsts and a 2nd

 

Does that help everyone?

 

:cheers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The risk is enormous.

 

Let's look. If the Colts, as expected, take Luck, and he flops, they risked one first round pick, and lost. They can try again next year, or the year after.

 

If the skins, as expected, take RG3 and he flops, they risked three firsts and a second. They will not have a real chance to draft a new franchise QB for several years.

 

See the difference?

 

Not to mention the fact that, even if both QB's are as excellent as advertised, the Colts will be able to HELP Luck suceed by using their (probably top 10) first rounders and a second this year to draft people to protect luck, to catch his passes, and to play defense on his team.

 

The Skins will not have that option.

 

Then there are cap implications... since the Colts will be DRAFTING top end talent (they hope) they will get young players locked down to a cheap contract for several years.

 

The skins, since they will have no meaningful draft picks, will have to attempt to build around RG3 in free agency, which will cost them more for older, perhaps not as good (since teams rarely let their studs walk) players. For example, Pierre Garcon, a mediocre talent at best, is costing the Skins a fortune. The colts will be able to draft a more talented receiver, who is younger and has less injury history, for far less money in next year's draft, should they choose to do so.

 

So not only are the skins risking better than THREE TIMES as much as the colts on their new franchise QB, in doing what they did, they are also making it LESS LIKELY that he will enjoy long term success.

 

If I were RG3, I would not be happy the way things have shaken out, and would be doing all in my power to convince the Colts to take me instead.

 

The draft has always been the only way to build a team. The new CBA makes that even more so. High draft picks are gold in today's NFL... that's why you don't see the smart, successful teams trading them away willy-nilly.

 

Its all risk though. The Skins could've kept their picks, stayed at 6, played this season with Rex Grossman, and blown the next three draft picks on bad players. Then where are they?

 

RGIII means the future. All picks are a risk. Was this the right risk? I think so.

 

Also, if RGIII is actually a stud, then he'll make the WRs look better. He'll make everyone on that offense look better. Tom Brady has had years with mediocre talent at WR everywhere. But somehow they all have great years.

 

You've got to have the QB first. Its a passing league now. If you're going to take risks now, its with QBs in the first round of the draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've got to have the QB first. Its a passing league now. If you're going to take risks now, its with QBs in the first round of the draft.

Nicely said! RG3 is a difference maker and most analyst say he is 1a to Luck's 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nicely said! RG3 is a difference maker and most analyst say he is 1a to Luck's 1

 

Just think of all the bogus flags he'll draw since the league will tell the refs, "Protect RGIII.". You think they care if Rex Grossman gets blown up? The refs are extra careful around franchise QBs. The refs know the big value QBs, and they get special treatment, which goes without saying. Tom Brady gets brushed and flags fly. Its a joke, but now the Skins get to take advantage of the insanity. You can't hit high on the QB. You can't hit low on the QB. Good luck stopping RGIII in todays NFL. Even if you do stop him, flags will light up the sky. FIRST DOWN WASHINGTON! The NFL has issues that Washington can finally take advantage of.

 

Andrew Luck is going to get so much love...defenders should just place him on the ground.

 

The only guy that got no love was Vick, and a HUGE stink was made about it, and he started getting bogus flags too. Its a joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've got to have the QB first. Its a passing league now. If you're going to take risks now, its with QBs in the first round of the draft.

 

But isnt he a running QB?

 

Also Brady has had some awesome WR's. I would not call Moss and Welker average, even thier big TE now is above avg.

 

With what the Skins used to get RG3 he HAS to be a stud now. He can not just be decent. The presure is on.

Last year Vick was not a disappointment to some FFL owners because of his numbers. He was a disappointment because of his number for where they picked him top 15. He would have been great 4 rnd or later.

 

RG3 now has to be great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But isnt he a running QB?

 

Also Brady has had some awesome WR's. I would not call Moss and Welker average, even thier big TE now is above avg.

 

With what the Skins used to get RG3 he HAS to be a stud now. He can not just be decent. The presure is on.

Last year Vick was not a disappointment to some FFL owners because of his numbers. He was a disappointment because of his number for where they picked him top 15. He would have been great 4 rnd or later.

 

RG3 now has to be great.

 

No he doesn't. All the offensive weapons he has are young. Helu, Hankerson, Morgan, and Garcon are all really young. Fred Davis is still pretty young too. This team doesn't need to win now by any stretch of the imagination. And RGIII is a QB that can run. So is Luck. RGIII's completion percentage in college was unreal.

 

Teams that are looking for that final piece of the puzzle need to win now. The Redskins are going young and are building around youth.

 

You know who needs to win now? The Ravens, because that defense is getting old fast yet they are close now to Super Bowl visits.

 

So much BS thrown around about the Redskins needing to win now. So much BS about the Redskins in general. The perception of the Skins is so far removed from the reality, I'm getting tired of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So much BS thrown around about the Redskins needing to win now. So much BS about the Redskins in general. The perception of the Skins is so far removed from the reality, I'm getting tired of it.

 

the trade would have actually been a decent move if the skins needed that last puzzle piece to win now. it's a really questionable move to try to build for the future by giving away all those future draft picks. it's going to create serious cap problems because they're going to have to add legitimate talent via FA instead of the draft (which costs a ton of money). i've watched my team--the cowboys--do this twice: 4 1st rounders for 2 FA WRs that never panned out (galloway and williams). it completely killed them WRT talent development for a long time.

 

seriously, i think the skins diddled themselves for the next 10 years over this. their defense is going to be good for another 2-3 years, but then is going to start dissolving into the FA market right as the offense starts rounding into shape. IOW, when the offense is finally ready, the defense will be falling apart. and because of the hole created by those missing picks, it's going to be hard to synch them back up.

 

look, i'm not happy about having RG in the division--i think he'll be a very dangerous player. but i just don't know that washington is capable of putting together a fundamentally sound football team after blowing all those picks on one guy. my prediction is this: the skins will finish 2012 with a better record than indy, but by 2015, indy will be a serious contender while washington is still trying to claw their way to a wild card berth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the trade would have actually been a decent move if the skins needed that last puzzle piece to win now. it's a really questionable move to try to build for the future by giving away all those future draft picks. it's going to create serious cap problems because they're going to have to add legitimate talent via FA instead of the draft (which costs a ton of money). i've watched my team--the cowboys--do this twice: 4 1st rounders for 2 FA WRs that never panned out (galloway and williams). it completely killed them WRT talent development for a long time.

 

seriously, i think the skins diddled themselves for the next 10 years over this. their defense is going to be good for another 2-3 years, but then is going to start dissolving into the FA market right as the offense starts rounding into shape. IOW, when the offense is finally ready, the defense will be falling apart. and because of the hole created by those missing picks, it's going to be hard to synch them back up.

 

look, i'm not happy about having RG in the division--i think he'll be a very dangerous player. but i just don't know that washington is capable of putting together a fundamentally sound football team after blowing all those picks on one guy. my prediction is this: the skins will finish 2012 with a better record than indy, but by 2015, indy will be a serious contender while washington is still trying to claw their way to a wild card berth.

 

The Skins still have two 3rds and a 4th in this draft.

 

The league is no longer about stopping people. Its about outscoring people. I don't really care what happens to the defense anymore. When teams with ZERO Defense like the Saints, Patriots, Packers and Lions roll into the playoffs, its pretty clear where all the attention needs to go.

 

The Patriots had statistically the worst defense in league history. I'm pretty sure they went to the Super Bowl last year.

 

Guys, the NFL is set up for Offenses to destroy defenses. The rules are actually unfair for defenses now. I've never seen worse defensive teams in my life have such great success like the teams listed above. Build through the offense or forget it. And it all starts with the QB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The Patriots had statistically the worst defense in league history. I'm pretty sure they went to the Super Bowl last year.

 

 

actually, they were in the top half for scoring defense in the regular season--the only team defense stat that really matters (amusingly, they were significantly better than the redskins in this department).

 

what about the playoffs? who had the best scoring defense? yep--the super bowl champs. who was #3? the patriots. teams with great offenses but poor scoring defenses? lions and saints, both bounced early.

 

2010 SB champ? green bay, with the #5 scoring defense in the regular season and #2 the playoffs. who did they beat? the #2 regular season scoring defense.

 

2009? here's one that actually doesn't contradict you--neither the saints nor the colts were very good.

 

2008 SB champ? pittsburgh: #1 for the regular season and #2 for the postseason.

 

2007? giants and pats again--the #1 and #2 playoff scoring defenses.

 

2006? colts...#2 playoff scoring defense.

 

2005? steelers again, #4 in both the regular season and the playoffs.

 

2004? pats again again. #2 in both the regular season and the playoffs. they played the eagles--#1 scoring D.

 

2003? pats again again again. #1 RS scoring D.

 

 

so you're 1 for 10 in recent history. super bowl teams consistently have good scoring defenses, even in the pass-happy modern NFL. they might give up a lot of yardage, but they keep opponents out of the end zone. washington can't even do that now. how are they going to get better at it if the front offense only focuses on the RGIII show?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, when the Skins go 3 and out with Rex Grossman, it tends to get old for the defense.

 

The Skins now have RGIII. It can't be worse than Rexy. The bar isn't set real high at the QB position.

 

Last year the majority of the teams that made the playoffs had bad defenses. You keep going back in time with the defensive stats. I'm saying the NFL is going the other direction each year with penalizing defenses. The trend is for offenses, and not defenses. You get into the playoffs and try to man up for two or three games now. You don't get a playoff stat if you don't make the playoffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The risk is enormous.

 

Let's look. If the Colts, as expected, take Luck, and he flops, they risked one first round pick, and lost. They can try again next year, or the year after.

 

If the skins, as expected, take RG3 and he flops, they risked three firsts and a second. They will not have a real chance to draft a new franchise QB for several years.

 

So not only are the skins risking better than THREE TIMES as much as the colts on their new franchise QB, in doing what they did, they are also making it LESS LIKELY that he will enjoy long term success.

 

See the difference?

Of course it's riskier than the Colts...but the Redskins were not in the Colts' position. My point was sitting lower in the draft and not trading up for a heavily-thought-of dynasty QB is just as or riskier than taking another Brian Orakpo and Laron Landry (need a QB).

 

Not to mention the fact that, even if both QB's are as excellent as advertised, the Colts will be able to HELP Luck suceed by using their (probably top 10) first rounders and a second this year to draft people to protect luck, to catch his passes, and to play defense on his team.

 

The Skins will not have that option.

 

Then there are cap implications... since the Colts will be DRAFTING top end talent (they hope) they will get young players locked down to a cheap contract for several years.

 

The skins, since they will have no meaningful draft picks, will have to attempt to build around RG3 in free agency, which will cost them more for older, perhaps not as good (since teams rarely let their studs walk) players. For example, Pierre Garcon, a mediocre talent at best, is costing the Skins a fortune. The colts will be able to draft a more talented receiver, who is younger and has less injury history, for far less money in next year's draft, should they choose to do so.

 

The draft has always been the only way to build a team. The new CBA makes that even more so. High draft picks are gold in today's NFL... that's why you don't see the smart, successful teams trading them away willy-nilly.

so many assumptions here that I believe just aren't true. the packers built through draft. the saints didnt (brees acquired, pierre thomas UFA, m.colston 7th rounder, vilma free agent, darren sharper free agent). you don't have to build a team with signing big name, expensive and overpaid free agents like pierre garcon. i don't like that move at all and that IS how the redskins have worked recently. but they didn't have to sign or overpay him. for example...

 

Also Brady has had some awesome WR's. I would not call Moss and Welker average, even thier big TE now is above avg.

Thanks, perfect. None of those guys were 1st round picks of the Patriots. They were later round picks or astute values in free agency.

 

it's going to create serious cap problems because they're going to have to add legitimate talent via FA instead of the draft (which costs a ton of money).

more assumptions, just not true. the Bills (my team who isnt nearly as saavy as the Pats) started off 4-1 and were looking great (including beating Tom Brady/Pats) mostly because of great QB play. who were all the studs on that offense?

 

fred jackson - undrafted free agent

steve johnson - 7th round pick

david nelson - undrafted free agent

donald jones - no idea how he was acquired, prolly undrafted free agent

scott chandler - no idea how he originally came into NFL, prolly undrafted free agent

the entire offensive line except for eric wood? cast-offs from other teams and UFAs

oh and the defense really wasn't all that great either

 

just sayin... if you don't have top notch QB play, you probably aren't winning the Super Bowl anyway. not going for one is probably just as 'risky' as giving up a couple 1st rounders to 'go for it.' if you want to say its risky because it's the Redskins and their talent evaluation sucks and owner is a spending fiend...in that context, i agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course it's riskier than the Colts...but the Redskins were not in the Colts' position. My point was sitting lower in the draft and not trading up for a heavily-thought-of dynasty QB is just as or riskier than taking another Brian Orakpo and Laron Landry (need a QB).

 

 

so many assumptions here that I believe just aren't true. the packers built through draft. the saints didnt (brees acquired, pierre thomas UFA, m.colston 7th rounder, vilma free agent, darren sharper free agent). you don't have to build a team with signing big name, expensive and overpaid free agents like pierre garcon. i don't like that move at all and that IS how the redskins have worked recently. but they didn't have to sign or overpay him. for example...

 

 

Thanks, perfect. None of those guys were 1st round picks of the Patriots. They were later round picks or astute values in free agency.

 

 

more assumptions, just not true. the Bills (my team who isnt nearly as saavy as the Pats) started off 4-1 and were looking great (including beating Tom Brady/Pats) mostly because of great QB play. who were all the studs on that offense?

 

fred jackson - undrafted free agent

steve johnson - 7th round pick

david nelson - undrafted free agent

donald jones - no idea how he was acquired, prolly undrafted free agent

scott chandler - no idea how he originally came into NFL, prolly undrafted free agent

the entire offensive line except for eric wood? cast-offs from other teams and UFAs

oh and the defense really wasn't all that great either

 

just sayin... if you don't have top notch QB play, you probably aren't winning the Super Bowl anyway. not going for one is probably just as 'risky' as giving up a couple 1st rounders to 'go for it.' if you want to say its risky because it's the Redskins and their talent evaluation sucks and owner is a spending fiend...in that context, i agree.

 

Nice post.

 

With regard to talent evaluation sucking, this isn't even on the Redskins since the entire football media/scouts/world has evaluated RGIII as a can't miss prospect. Even hearing football media say RGIII should be taken 1st, which I don't agree with, but its out there.

 

I like RGIII's military background/upbringing/smarts almost as much as his ability on the field. Heath Shuler was the dumbest QB ever and the highest QB the Skins have ever taken. Total bust. I just can't find anything wrong with RGIII. The Skins had to go for it.

 

Talking about risks...what's the Cleveland risk? Is it higher or lower than the Skins?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking about risks...what's the Cleveland risk? Is it higher or lower than the Skins?

 

Much lower. Of course, their potential reward is commensurately lower too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skins gave up too much to get RGIII -- he's a gamble not a lock to be a great QB like Luck -- granted he could turn into another Cam Newton or even better Warren Moon or could be a Russell or a Akilli

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skins gave up too much to get RGIII -- he's a gamble not a lock to be a great QB like Luck -- granted he could turn into another Cam Newton or even better Warren Moon or could be a Russell or a Akilli

 

So better to play it safe with Rex Grossman and hope you have good 1st round picks for the next two years instead of just this year.

 

Rex Grossman.

 

Rex Grossman isn't a risk. He's franchise suicide.

 

He's never gonna be the next Russell. RGIII has a crazy work ethic and he's really smart, and most importantly he's accurate. Akili....I don't know but that's scary. Don't say that! :overhead:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So better to play it safe with Rex Grossman and hope you have good 1st round picks for the next two years instead of just this year.

 

 

I'm not sure why those are the only 2 options. Obviuosly the best option would be to not acquire Rex Grossamn in the first place, but maybe a 3rd option is getting a decent QB via FA or a trade that does not require so many top picks.

 

I agree with the person who said that if they were one piece away this makes MORE sense. Either way, I can see what the fans are excited about, RG3 can be huge and Rex sets the bar pretty low. Godd Luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skins gave up too much to get RGIII -- he's a gamble not a lock to be a great QB like Luck -- granted he could turn into another Cam Newton or even better Warren Moon or could be a Russell or a Akilli

Why do you only compare black QBs with black QBs.

RGIII - 6'2" 220 4.3 speed former track star

Cam Newton - 6'5" 250 4.5 speed

JaMarcus Russel - 6'6" 260 is NOTHING like RGIII

Akili Smith - 6'3" 220 4.66 40 yard dash

 

RGIII is nothing like Cam Newton, their size, speed, mechanics, footwork are all a lot different. Could Warren Moon ever run a 4.3 40? Was Warren Moon a track star? Did Warren Moon ever rush for over 300 yards in any of his NFL seasons?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please read this very slowly. They did not give up three firsts but RGIII did cost them three firsts and a second. HTH :dunno: Do the math!

 

 

Dang! I think St. Louis will end up being really good again in a few years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Not so fast on your Not so fast...

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/04/03/griffin-tells-colts-no-to-private-workout/

 

Griffin tells Colts “no” to private workout

Posted by Mike Florio on April 3, 2012, 10:08 AM EDT

 

OK, where’s my popcorn?

 

As the Colts prepare to put Stanford quarterback Andrew Luck through a private workout, the other potential first overall pick in the draft has declined an invitation to do the same thing.

 

Colts owner Jim Irsay says via Twitter that Robert Griffin III has declined an invitation to work out for the team. Irsay specifically blames the decision on Griffin’s agent, Ben Dogra. But if Griffin wanted to work out for the Colts, Griffin would be working out for the Colts.

 

So what does it mean? Apparently, Griffin has no interest in following Peyton Manning as the quarterback of the Colts. Instead, Griffin wants to play, apparently, for the Redskins, who hold the second pick in the draft.

 

And so the power play comes not from the quarterback who went to the same school as the last high-profile quarterback who dissed the Colts. Instead, the guy who possibly is in position to leapfrog Luck doesn’t want to go to Indy, even if it means being the first overall pick.

 

It’s also possible that the Griffin camp is completely convinced that Luck will be the pick, regardless of what Griffin would do at a personal workout, and that Griffin isn’t interested in wasting his time.

 

Either way, Griffin is more than willing to yield the top pick in the draft to Luck, something that under the rookie wage scale means a lot less than it used to.

 

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical Skins.. I like the kid but, seriously...

 

 

If he ends up being Cam Newton-like, it will be worth it. Of course, if RG3 can't live up to expectations... then ouch to the Redskins next few years.

However, the Redskins defense is looking very good!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why those are the only 2 options. Obviuosly the best option would be to not acquire Rex Grossamn in the first place, but maybe a 3rd option is getting a decent QB via FA or a trade that does not require so many top picks.

 

since the late 80's, off the top of my head, I can think of these guys (i'm leaving out the re-treads...like kitna or k.orton...these are guys I think people at least thought were decent or had a chance...and some cost 1st rd picks like rob johnson, bledsoe, kolb):

 

j.montana (chiefs)

b.esiason (jets)

w.moon (vikings)

s.mitchell (lions)

b.favre (packers)

r.gannon (raiders)

t.green (chiefs)

rob johnson (bills)

d.bledsoe (bills)

j.plummer (broncos)

k.warner (giants, cards)

d.culpepper (dolphins)

d.brees (saints)

m.schaub (texans)

m.cassell (chiefs)

b.favre (viks, jets)

j.cutler (bears)

m.vick (eagles)

m.hasselbeck (titans)

 

more recent QBs changing teams (not much here unless you really think highly of flynn which I don't):

d.mcnabb (multiple)

r.fitzpatrick (bills)

k.kolb (cardinals)

m.moore (dolphins)

c.whitehurst (seahawks)

t.jackson (seahawks)

c.palmer (raiders)

m.flynn (seahawks)

t.tebow (jets)

 

I would say the two bolded guys are the real long term successful ones over the past 20 years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×