In a tie for the 6th Pick with the Jaguars, the tie-breaker goes to.......

[Ax]

There are stories that go the other way. Schaub, Farve, Brees, Doug Williams, and Steve Young being notable guys who excelled on their second club.

Just a couple nit-picks here.

1. Brees was already starting to excel in Diego. But, they had drafted Rivers. No way they would pay them both. Brees dislocating his shoulder made it even easier for them to choose. The only gamble with Brees was whether or not the injury would linger. His play was not really in question.

2. Doug Williams holds a lofty spot in Redskins, and, NFL history. But honestly, he excelled during one postseason, that's it. He was a below average QB during the majority of his career. But he showed up big when it counted most. For that, he gets a lot of well deserved credit.

 

[fansince62]

El.....my man....I'm not opposed to signing Flynn. the reality is I'm trapped between competing goals: drafting to improve the talent level....drafting/signing the franchise QB. problem is...the greater the certainty of having that franchise QB....the more it will cost. The Flynn idea is actually attractive......RGIII would look great in B&G...but two firsts and...let's say a 3rd? that's on the edge for me.

My point is only that...should Shanahan decide Flynn fits his system....the team not bet the farm on signing him. sign him for a high salary is fine by me.....but a trade that is gonna cost picks and players? not so sure on that one.

 

[Elephant]

And we agree, I don't want to acquire any QB that is going to cost us more picks. That is why I am so adamant about RGIII or Luck. I like RGIII, if he drops to our pick, I say go get him! But that is very unlikely.

While I do not see Flynn as a future "super star", I think he is more than serviceable and will not cost us anything more than money. If Green Bay tags him, I will be opposed to any compensation for him. The risk outweighs the reward in that situation. As it is, when he becomes a FA, the risk is significantly lower.

 

[servumtuum]

El.....my man....I'm not opposed to signing Flynn. the reality is I'm trapped between competing goals: drafting to improve the talent level....drafting/signing the franchise QB. problem is...the greater the certainty of having that franchise QB....the more it will cost. The Flynn idea is actually attractive......RGIII would look great in B&G...but two firsts and...let's say a 3rd? that's on the edge for me.

My point is only that...should Shanahan decide Flynn fits his system....the team not bet the farm on signing him. sign him for a high salary is fine by me.....but a trade that is gonna cost picks and players? not so sure on that one.

fansince, I completely understand and agree that would have to make a cost/benefit judgement on the idea of grabbing Flynn contingent on how things might play out in terms of what price he might carry especially with competition from other QB-needy teams but the same will hold true for RG3 as you mentioned

Rght now, however, as long as the cost isn't too exhorbitant in either case, I wouldn't be unhappy with either option. Defining "exhorbitant", however, is another can of worms to be worked out. Perhaps surprisingly, I share your distaste for watching Rex Grossman-I have developed a nearly automatic "cringe" reflex with nearly every snap. He does indeed look...well..ugly to me as a QB (Tebow does too, BTW but he has an upside potential and Rex doesn't and Tebow runs nicely). I'm right now just looking for the Redskins to make a move away from the Grossman/Beck experiment in a decisive way, and by that I mean a move that demonstrates a commitment to "Somebody else" at the QB position but it's too early for me to settle on a preferred scenario.

 

[Oldfan]

El ~ ...Oldfan, you want some?

You’re on, Amigo! Let’s see what we can get going with your #118.

See this is the line of thinking that always baffles me. While many of you bring up Matt Cassell and AJ Feeley types as proof that backups don't work, you swoon over a young draft choice who has never seen an NFL defense first hand. It's all about risk/reward. Andrew Luck should be a good one, but he's never played at the NFL level. RGIII should be a solid NFL QB, but if he depends on his athletic ability then he will get crushed with the level of athleticism in the NFL at the LB and DE position in today's game.

I am more inclined to take a 26 yr old QB who has shown that he can thrive in a certain scheme in the NFL without making tragic errors. Hell, Rex has shown he can do great things in the offense, his problem is he doesn't know how to adjust when plays break down and Matt Flynn has shown against a couple of good teams he can do that in the NFL. He has some mobility, more arm strength than credited, critical thinking when things break down, and intuition to scan a defense from the line of scrimmage and adjust the play accordingly.

Do I believe Matt Flynn is Tom Brady? No! He is Matt Flynn. Is he a product of the scheme? Well yes! But he is taking full advantage of his opportunities. Could he succeed in Washington? Well if Matt Schaub can succeed under Kyle (#1 offense in the NFL) then there is no reason Flynn shouldn't be at least better leadership than Rex Grossman in Washington.

Goal, you mentioned time, well I suggest to you that Shanahan does not have time to go with a rookie at QB. If we don't, that means Rex gets the nod. Why on earth would we not sign a QB who we know can come in and start, or at least has greater chance of reward than a rookie who has never seen an NFL defense or Rex who has?

It seems to me that the foregoing post attacks a couple of weak opposition arguments with one almost as weak.

You argue that the not-very-athletic Flynn, a pocket passer with one very productive game in four years as a backup is as safe a bet as Matt Schaub was. The mistake here is that you are looking at Schaub with a hindsight bias. When Houston traded for Schaub, most knowledgeable NFL watchers did not doubt that he could start in someone’s offense, but there was considerable doubt whether he would fit the Kubiak/Shanahan scheme. We have that same doubt that Flynn’s skillset will transfer well.

Some team will likely pay Flynn a lot of money based on one outstanding performance with a super supporting cast. You said that Flynn isn’t Tom Brady, but he could probably do a much better impersonation of pocket passer Brady than he could of Jay Cutler in a Shanahan scheme. In terms of skillset (the tangibles) Cutler is the exemplar. That’s what you look for in a QB to run Shanny’s scheme.

You want to put it in terms of risk and reward? The risk with Flynn is that you will get locked into an expensive long-term agreement with a QB who is misfit for the scheme and not as good as he appeared to be while performing in a green and yellow uni.

 

[Elephant]

You’re on, Amigo! Let’s see what we can get going with your #118.

It seems to me that the foregoing post attacks a couple of weak opposition arguments with one almost as weak.

You argue that the not-very-athletic Flynn, a pocket passer with one very productive game in four years as a backup is as safe a bet as Matt Schaub was.

Where are you getting this information? It is futile to discuss anything further until you provide sources that suggest Flynn is not athletic and cannot perform in Shanahan's scheme.

I will agree there are questions that need to be answered, the most glaring is if he can perform without the supporting cast as you go on to suggest, but "non-athletic"? Pocket passer only?

As for the surrounding cast... That's why it is important not risking numerous draft picks to pick someone who has not seen an NFL defense. Any QB brought in right now is going to need a much improved supporting cast! We need every draft pick we have, more if we can get them.

Use the draft picks to beef up our O-line, draft a 2nd tier QB (Nick Foles), WR, CB and ILB.

 

[Oldfan]

El ~ Where are you getting this information? It is futile to discuss anything further until you provide sources that suggest Flynn is not athletic and cannot perform in Shanahan's scheme.

I will agree there are questions that need to be answered, the most glaring is if he can perform without the supporting cast as you go on to suggest, but "non-athletic"? Pocket passer only?

Here are the first four scouting reports on Matt Flynn my search found. One says Flynn is “not a supreme athlete.” All four classify him as a pocket passer, a classification which, by inference, says he is not a gifted athlete with great mobility.

Pros: Prototypical size, played against top competition with top players. Pocket passer.

Cons: Split time with perilloux in senior year. One year starter, and is not a supreme athlete.

http://www.fantasyfootballjungle.com/nfl_draft_prospect/us/877?id=877

Flynn is a pocket passer with the height to see over the line.

http://www.fcaarecruiting.com/MatthewFllynnScoutingReport.html

Flynn is a fiery, competitive leader that is undersized in terms of height and bulk, but is a sound pocket passer.

http://espn.go.com/colleges/georgia/football/recruiting/player/evaluation/_/id/33077/matt-flynn

Looking at Flynn himself, he is a prototypical pocket passer with good, but not elite arm strength and above average accuracy, as well as good size for a starting NFL quarterback

http://2ndand3.wordpress.com/2012/01/02/should-a-quarterback-needy-team-make-a-move-for-matt-flynn/

This was my statement which prompted you to demand sources to back it up.

You argue that the not-very-athletic Flynn, a pocket passer with one very productive game in four years as a backup is as safe a bet as Matt Schaub was.

I’ve provided links to support my statement. Now, it’s your turn. Please provide scouting reports to the contrary, those describing Flynn as mobile and athletic, or words to that effect, so that we might continue this debate.

 

[Skinsfan76]

There is absolutely a risk in picking up Flynn. However to El's point it would be nice to have another draft like last year while already having an upgrade at QB. In this situation we would probably bring Rex back to be the backup. To me I can see some similarities between Flynn and Matt Schaub, who did very well in a similar system in Houston. I can also see why people are nervous about Flynn. Kevin Kolb is an example of a backup who "showed potential" but was a disappointment in Arizona in his first year. What about Scott Mitchell? He never lived up to the "potential" that he had after coming in for Marino. My question is, how much of a contract will Flynn demand? That will certainly have an impact on whether he is a Redskin or not. Another point is if we draft a Justin Blackmon and then improve that O-line, plus if Hankerson can be what we all hope he can be along with Cooley, Davis, Moss and Gaffney and Helu and Royster continue to be good in the running game then our offense will be much improved. We won't need Peyton Manning back there just an improvement on Rex will be a good start. And I already think Flynn is an improvement over Rex. Could you ever see Rex having the type of game Flynn did? I don't care if he had the Hogs as his offensive line and Calvin Johnson and Art Monk at WR. I just don't see that kind of game in him.

 

[burgold]

I never really saw what everyone else did in Kolb. In 2010, he looked very much like Beck. He loved the dumpoff and couldn't complete a pass over 10 yards. He was terrible. Remember, that team was losing and looking hapless until he was benched for McNabb.

Now, I agree that Flynn has a sample size of two. Two regular season games (plus meaningless preseason tape) and so we just don't know about him, but I think that people really misread Kolb last year.

He really didn't give any reason for anyone to believe in his first year of starting that he'd be great.

 

[Oldfan]

There is absolutely a risk in picking up Flynn. However to El's point it would be nice to have another draft like last year while already having an upgrade at QB. In this situation we would probably bring Rex back to be the backup. To me I can see some similarities between Flynn and Matt Schaub, who did very well in a similar system in Houston. I can also see why people are nervous about Flynn. Kevin Kolb is an example of a backup who "showed potential" but was a disappointment in Arizona in his first year. What about Scott Mitchell? He never lived up to the "potential" that he had after coming in for Marino. My question is, how much of a contract will Flynn demand? That will certainly have an impact on whether he is a Redskin or not. Another point is if we draft a Justin Blackmon and then improve that O-line, plus if Hankerson can be what we all hope he can be along with Cooley, Davis, Moss and Gaffney and Helu and Royster continue to be good in the running game then our offense will be much improved. We won't need Peyton Manning back there just an improvement on Rex will be a good start. And I already think Flynn is an improvement over Rex. Could you ever see Rex having the type of game Flynn did? I don't care if he had the Hogs as his offensive line and Calvin Johnson and Art Monk at WR. I just don't see that kind of game in him.

Justin Blackmon is impressive. I see Terrell Owens potential.

I see a similarity between Flynn, Schaub and Grossman. They are all pocket passers with limited mobility which means that the OCs are limited to calling about 80% of the offensive plays in the Shanahan offense. It also means that the team needs more talent on the O-line to protect them.

In 2008, Broncos' rookie LT Ryan Clady allowed 1.5 sacks on the season. In 2009, he allowed 8.5. Clady's talent didn't drop off. The difference was that in 2008, Clady benefited from Shanahan's ability to use Jay Cutler's great mobility in his pass protection scheme. In 2009, Clady had to protect pocket passer Kyle Orton.

 

[Elephant]

Oldfan, your exact words were, "not very atlehtlic". You provideed one link that suggests he is "not a supreme athlete". You have failed to support the lack of athleticism you suggest he has. You have admitted that you have seen nothing more than highlights so you have nothing but a blurb to suggest he is "not a supreme athlete", but nothing to support that he is "not a gifted athlete with great mobility." Huge difference. Pocket passer yes, but the rub is that you said not very athletic and you have nothing of substance to base that assertion.

And you call my argument weak?

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

ok a couple things, 1- he hasnt gotten on the field much because hes playing behind aaron rodgers ffs, WHEN hes gotten on the field he has been very impressive against decent defences. 2-how is it that its bad to compare Flynns performance and draft status with brady, yet people are basing RG3 on cam Newton rather than Vince Young? neither one is applicable, truth is we dont know enough about either one to base those things one, BUT one is risking a #6 pick and one is risking cash. I know which risk I prefer.
3-Flynn gives us a first round pick to use to fill holes and we can draft Tannehill as a developmental guy in the second or third in case flynn busts. simply put I like those chances far better than RG3.

the reason I brought this guy up a few months back wasnt because he had at the time played one great game, but because he has been sitting behind one of the top qbs in the NFL and he has had some great coaching, more importantly he has played well when given a shot. I dont think he will want crazy money because with the new salary cap for rookies, it will limit what guys get in free agency unless they are obvious pro bowlers.

 

[Ax]

Didn't Flynn play against us when Orakpo knocked Rodgers out?

 

[Oldfan]

Oldfan, your exact words were, "not very atlehtlic". You provideed one link that suggests he is "not a supreme athlete". You have failed to support the lack of athleticism you suggest he has. You have admitted that you have seen nothing more than highlights so you have nothing but a blurb to suggest he is "not a supreme athlete", but nothing to support that he is "not a gifted athlete with great mobility." Huge difference. Pocket passer yes, but the rub is that you said not very athletic and you have nothing of substance to base that assertion.

And you call my argument weak?

When scouting reports classify a QB as a "pocket passer," the inference is that he is not a gifted athlete with great mobility. You were silent in response to that point. Are you denying that also?

And where are the links to support your claim of Flynn's outstanding athleticism and mobility? Did you find anything at all online to support you? There are probably a dozen or more scouting reports online for Matt Flynn. Can you find even one that supports you?

 

[Ax]

Didn't Flynn play against us when Orakpo knocked Rodgers out?

No, he didn't. Rodgers finished the game, and afterwards, it was revealed that he suffered the concussion.

 

[servumtuum]

Didn't Flynn play against us when Orakpo knocked Rodgers out?

I checked the boxscore at ESPN for that game because my memory wasn't good on that one. Flynn doesn't show up anywhere in the boxscore stats and all the commentary said was that the Packers said after the game that Rodgers suffered a concussion so I infer from that that Rodgers didn't leave the game after the Orakpo sack.

 

[Elephant]

When scouting reports classify a QB as a "pocket passer," the inference is that he is not a gifted athlete with great mobility. You were silent in response to that point. Are you denying that also?

And where are the links to support your claim of Flynn's outstanding athleticism and mobility? Did you find anything at all online to support you? There are probably a dozen or more scouting reports online for Matt Flynn. Can you find even one that supports you?

Nice try, I have seen the man's mobility with my own eyes. I am not trying to convince you of his mobility, I know he has some. You can take it for what it's worth.

As for your assertion about an immobile pocket passer fitting in this scheme, I am not sure you're off base. But Matt Flynn is not an unathletic QB. He does not have RGIII ability, but you don't need that to be successful in this scheme, just enough...i.e, Matt Schaub. Hell, even Brian Griese had some success with Shanahan.

I really don't think we're that far off base, you're just arguing off your perceptions instead of any reality. And my friend, that is a very weak argument. It's ok, I have been known to be guilty of that myself.

 

[Om]

Seems to me you guys need to narrow down your definitions of "mobility" when it comes to a QB. There's a lot of gray area between, say, the freakish athletic ability of a Mike Vick and the lead feet of a Rex Grossman.

To my mind a QB doesn't have to be able to break off Cam Newton-like 50 yard TD runs to be considered "mobile". A guy who can simply slide a couple of steps in the pocket at the right instan to avoid an onrushing LB, give himself an extra second or two, and use them to turn a potential sack into a critical 15-yard 3rd down completion on 3rd-and-12 in the 4th quarter of a one-score game, is every bit if not more dangerous.

Romo has KILLED the Redskins with that kind of "mobility."

Obviously you'd like to have a guy who can do both over a number of years...but this is still reality we're talking about.

 

[NavyDave]

The theory that drafting higher will net better players, resulting in a better team, looks and sounds good, on paper.

A blurb from the Washington Post's notebook today, carves the theory up quite nicely.



Now, I realize that this means little. Many factors go into the results. But as many times as we hear the cries of "Duh! Picking higher is always better!"

This simply, and indisputably cries, "No! It doesn't!"

Well if a team has an incompetant GM who ignores the fact the Rams needed to upgrade their O line, have a backup RB and give their Franchise QB a gamebreaking WR, then yeah high draft picks can be wasted.

 

[Ax]

Well if a team has an incompetant GM who ignores the fact the Rams needed to upgrade their O line, have a backup RB and give their Franchise QB a gamebreaking WR, then yeah high draft picks can be wasted.

The fact of the matter is, every GM that ever held the position has wasted picks. It never has been, nor will it ever be, an exact science.