DC Examiner: Kiper says Redskins must fix OL

[Terry]

But Terry, you only take the QB that high if he is more of a sure thing than anyone this draft has to offer. I am not sold on Bradford, even though his injury is said to be healed. Clausen has huge question marks and many have him slipping like Quinn did. The argument that you take a QB that high because you have a pick that high is not valid in my opinion.

http://www.bgobsession.com/showthread.php?t=14343

I couldn't begin to tell you what a sure thing is when it comes to college QBs. But I'm hoping that our new brain trust can, and if they think this is the best shot at getting one in the next few seasons, then I don't mind them pulling the trigger on using that #4 to get one, even if it means trading up.

If there is no consensus QB near the top of the draft (like in 2000), then sure, don't stretch. But how often does the confluence of events occur where we have a top 5 pick and one of the available QBs is ranked as a top 5 player, in fact most have him ranked #1 overall?

All I'm saying is that these opportunities really don't come by that often and absent reaching, you have to pull the trigger when they do, IMO.

 

[Alaskan]

Well as I said elsewhere, having McNabb + Shanahans + Haslett and our D probably means that we wont be picking any higher than say, 12 for the next few seasons. In that you probably need a top 5 pick in most drafts to grab one of the 'sure fire' QBs.

So we build up the line and fix the holes in the defense over the next few years and out of Thomas/Kelly/Mitchell we have a couple very productive wide receivers, We still have Davis and a young Shanahan system back we picked up in the late rounds. Then about the time we are perusing medical equipment catalogs for Mcnabb’s walker we trade up for the sure fire quarterback.

 

[Terry]

So we build up the line and fix the holes in the defense over the next few years and out of Thomas/Kelly/Mitchell we have a couple very productive wide receivers, We still have Davis and a young Shanahan system back we picked up in the late rounds. Then about the time we are perusing medical equipment catalogs for Mcnabb’s walker we trade up for the sure fire quarterback.

And maybe it will happen that way. I just don't want us to have to wait a half decade or so, after we finally decide to reload, in order to have a decent shot at a quality young QB, and putting it off now might mean exactly that.

This is rare moment in our history. The last time we were this close, we took Landry at #6 in 2007, and apart from Russell going to the Raiders #1, no other QB was taken until Brady Quinn at #22. We also took Taylor at #5 in 2004 after Manning and Rivers were already gone. Roethlisberger was taken later at #11.

Before that there was the 2000 draft (Lavar/Samuels and no QBs taken until Pennington at #18), and we had the #4 pick in 1995 - a year after we had taken Shuler.

We can't wait until McNabb is drawing social security to look for and develop a QB.

 

[Alaskan]

So we agree to disagree. I feel that if you use a high #1 on a QB you really need to start them right away (second year at the latest) and either endure a lousy record while they develop or first surround them with talent so their development is easier and less painful. I.E. Let the team carry the rookie QB until the QB can carry the team.

You think there can be a longer development time and so it makes sense to pick up McNabb and use our #4 select on the franchise QB.

So we disagree. But I'm sure glad you are here to disagree with.

 

[Terry]

I think it's more than just about the QB. There are players ob the team that we've either paid good money for or expended valuable draft picks for, and who's window of opportunity for us is ~4 years. By grabbing McNabb, you tell those guys that we are about winning now, and they won't have to waste a couple of precious years of their career enduring the growing pains of a rookie QB.And we don't throw away money on a 4 year contract for a name player when the club will be treading waters for 2+ years of that contract waiting for the QB to learn his trade.

One final point: Aikman was used as the example of a club enduring the early portion of a QBs career, but as I recall, Aikman was drafted before the current free-agency and cap structure was put in place. So I'm not sure he is the QB to reference in this discussion.

We'll see. We're discussing predictable options and differences, and if Shanahan has shown us anything so far, it's that he's far from predictable.