ESPN: Skins a 2012 Contender?

One of many experimental iterations ...

McD5

The Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
14,948
Reaction score
10
Points
318
Location
Orlando

Florida State


A pretty decent Q and A article with Shanahan. I found this particulary interesting, for those who believe we would offer the farm to move up for a QB:


Finally, I asked if he thought his team was close enough to contending that he could afford to give away a big trove of draft picks for one player he really wanted.

MS: No. In fact that's why, when we went from 10 to 16 [in last year's draft] and we were able to get that extra second-rounder from Jacksonville, we were able to parlay that where we got [Leonard] Hankerson, we got [Roy] Helu and we got [DeJon] Gomes. So by going from 10 to 16, not only did we get Jarvis Jenkins, but we were able to get those three players. And those are three starters for us.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfceast/post/_/id/34645/shanahan-mailbag-skins-a-12-contender
 

Canadian Hog

2019 BGO Ballers Champ
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2009
Messages
1,266
Reaction score
64
Points
48
Location
Ontario, Canada


I recently ran across that article as well, and quite frankly, it was refreshing to hear.

I'm as big a fan of RG3 as the next guy. With that being said, there still are major holes that need to be filled throughout the roster, and I don't know how comfortable I'd be with losing picks to acquire his rights, or any other draft pick's rights for that matter.

Many of us said a year ago when Bruce and Mike continuously traded down to acquire more picks that we arguably need to do that in the draft for another season or two. That's how bare the cupboard was.

Based on this season's performance, there is plenty of evidence suggesting that the cupboard is by no means full yet, and that it just might be of more benefit to take a smart approach, as opposed to trying to make a draft splash via a trade-up situation.

Looking back, winning meaningless games at Seattle and New York might really have thrown a wrench in the plans to acquire a franchise quarterback.
 

Fear The Spear

The Legend
Joined
Sep 28, 2010
Messages
19,626
Reaction score
126
Points
343
Location
BGO's Official Resident "Tech Dummy"


Kent Senter of Falls Church, Va., wanted to know why Shanahan has been preaching that the Redskins' rebuilding project must take time while a coach like Jim Harbaugh can come in and turn the San Francisco 49ers around in one year.

Mike Shanahan: We had dealt a lot through free agency and not the draft. San Francisco did a great job through the draft, they did a great job with their organization.
In fact that's why, when we went from 10 to 16 [in last year's draft] and we were able to get that extra second-rounder from Jacksonville, we were able to parlay that where we got [Leonard] Hankerson, we got [Roy] Helu and we got [DeJon] Gomes. So by going from 10 to 16, not only did we get Jarvis Jenkins, but we were able to get those three players. And those are three starters for us.
Mike - you totally contradicted yourself there.
On one hand, you re primarily building through free agency, and on the other hand you did it through the draft. Can't be both. What a senseless interview.
 

DieselPwr44

The Owner's Favorite
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
5,745
Reaction score
187
Points
143
Location
Sparta,NC


I think Mike's talking about the franchise's past..dealing mostly through free agency and less attention to the draft, which is true and which is why we've sucked for so long.
 

Bulldog

The All-Time Great
Joined
Jul 19, 2009
Messages
15,399
Reaction score
352
Points
363
Location
Bethesda Md


Which is why looking at Tannehill and perhaps dropping down from #6 would be a smart move.

Get extra picks and the qb for the future.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device
 

Elephant

The Commissioner
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2009
Messages
24,810
Reaction score
453
Points
1,113

Florida State

Which is why looking at Tannehill and perhaps dropping down from #6 would be a smart move.

Get extra picks and the qb for the future.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device
Yes! This is exactly how I feel.
 

KDawg

The 1st Round Pick
Joined
Jul 24, 2009
Messages
590
Reaction score
0
Points
0

College at Brockport

Mike - you totally contradicted yourself there.
On one hand, you re primarily building through free agency, and on the other hand you did it through the draft. Can't be both. What a senseless interview.
Shanahan meant the 'Skins have been built primarily through free agency in the past, and complimented San Francisco's draft first mentality.
 

fansince62

The All-Time Great
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
16,349
Reaction score
156
Points
343


Which is why looking at Tannehill and perhaps dropping down from #6 would be a smart move.

Get extra picks and the qb for the future.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

well..he and his son have done a wonderful job picking QB folks to develop so far!!!!!! why not gamble on an unknown with no real resume? can't be any worse than Butterball!
 

fansince62

The All-Time Great
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
16,349
Reaction score
156
Points
343


Shanahan meant the 'Skins have been built primarily through free agency in the past, and complimented San Francisco's draft first mentality.

he must have forgotten about Nate Clements!... all $80 million of ole Nate!
 

KDawg

The 1st Round Pick
Joined
Jul 24, 2009
Messages
590
Reaction score
0
Points
0

College at Brockport

I would advocate trading down if RG3 isn't ont he board. I think RG3 is a guy you can't pass on if you need a quarterback, and we do. If he's not there, I agree with this approach.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Private conversations
Help Users
    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Chat 0
    Top